A Thunk is a beguilingly simple-looking question about everyday things that stops you in your tracks and helps you start to look at the world in a whole new light. © Ian Gilbert.
Thunk 23:
Is burning a book the same as deleting a digital version of it off your Kindle™ or your laptop?
111 comments:
Hmmmm...
This is a tough one to comprehend.
To be honest, I LOVE BOOKS. To me burning a book is like burning a part of your ability to read and appreciate. I have no idea if that made any sense though. People can say that 'its just a book' and that we can get another one at the store. Its the same thing with the digital version. You can always download it again.
Books are more important then that though, they are so much more valuable then a digital version on your laptop. The paper used, the design of the cover, the way the book was put together takes so much more effort compared to just reading words of the same font and scrolling down with your mouse. Preferably, I like the way the pages feel when i flip them. I appreciate these little things that you can't have with a digital version. But that's just my opinion, that's just how I see things.
Conclusion? It would be that NO it is not the same at all.
It's all about the symbolism, in my opinion.
What incentive would you have for burning a book? Do you want to get rid of it? Then you'd donate it to a second-hand bookstore, or give it to younger cousins or other family! You don't BURN a book, that's like setting fire to your clothes because they don't fit you anymore.
The only sense behind burning a book, as far as I can see, is pure disrespect. For the author, for the literature, for the story itself...
I mean, as much as I dislike Twilight, I would never burn a piece of literature that has been worked upon :/ That's an insult.
On the other hand, a digital book is just that - digital. Intangible. It's black words on a white screen, beautiful words maybe, but that's just what it is. It'll be there on the internet for a long long time, whereas a book, the pages will become yellow and frayed, the text will slowly dissolve, and that is what makes actually books so beautiful and different from any ordinary pdf; the pure perishability of it.
And besides, like Eliqa said, you can always download it again. It's the little things that come with holding a book in your hands that make reading so enjoyable and books so precious.
I guess this is not about the reason behind doing it, but about the effect- is it the same?
Well I agree with Neiha & Eliqa- Reading a solid book is much more satisfactory than reading off a screen. Also, if you delete a pdf file, you can download it once again in the flash of a second. But it's not the same with a book- somehow burning it would seem like ending it's life. & it's not as easy to obtain books as it is to download a file:
Firstly, there's the money factor. Even though you do pay for some books on your Nook, Kindle, laptop etc, it wouldn't cost as much as buying an actual book. Then, there's the time to consider. Travelling to a book store, looking for the exact same novel, can be quite time consuming, whereas downloading a file is so quick and effortless.
Owning a paperback (or hardback) would feel alot more precious than having a digital version of the book. Thus, burning a book cannot be regarded as the same as deleting a dig. file, as the book would be alot more meaningful to a person- and getting it back is not as easy.
I would definately say no. Burning a book is just unacceptable. Books have existed even before computers and technology did, therefore it is a way more precious innovation. I believe books are more valuable and must be appreciated, thus burning a book cannot be regarded as the same as deleting its digital form.
If you think of all the effort put in to produce a final version, it is indeed a great accomplishment. Think of all the trees that have been cut to make all these papers the book has used. Do you think its worth setting it on fire? I mean, you wont get any benefit out of doing this, hence its pointless.
If you think 'it's JUST a book' which can be replaced, then i must say you're definatly mistaken. Personally, i prefer reading a paperback version of a book. Just like most regular readers, i like the way the pages feel when i flip them! :)
No, but only beause it doesnt have the same symbolism. Because Neiha's right, its all about the symbolism. Burning a book on a street corner is extrememly symbolic, but holding up a Kindle and pressing the 'delete' button doesn't have the same effect.
Being first language classes, I'm sure there will be a large amount of people who drastically opposed burning any book, how it's offensive to literature and the effort that has been put into it by the author. But thats quite comical, for its the same people who would gladly pirate a musician/artist's songs off the internet.
Deleting a digital book means something, but nothing compared to the sheer magnitude of burning, a proper paperback book.
But thats quite comical, for its the same people who would gladly pirate a musician/artist's songs off the internet.
...shush, Duwane >.>
It somehow just doesn't have the same effect when you burn a book, and bring it down to ashes, when someone, when the author, sat hours after hours typing out word by word, through groggy eyes and coffee rings..
And when you're deleting a digital version, which would feel like merely clicking a button, and/or moving a file to the Recycle Bin.
Concluding that, no, it isn't the same, simply because the significance of deleting a digital version isn't half as meaningful as burning a book.
As Neiha said, It's all about your incentive and symbolism. If you delete a PDF file you can always re-download it or retrieve it. Burning is something that seems disrespectful, and selfish.It is a truly disgraceful act to burn anything that was worked so hard on by somebody else. Why not give the book away? Donate it to a library. Give it to a homeless person.
There are people all over the world who would cherish a luxury such as a book. Besides, reading a PDF file is not the same classic feeling and anticipation we get when reading a hardcover or paperback.
Bottom line, It's not the same thing.
Personally, I would never be able to burn a book since i love books even more than i love reading them. <3
Deleting a digital version of a book is nothing but erasing it off a tiny memory chip. Whereas, when we burn a book, we're not exactly "deleting" something, we're destroying it.
Books are much more precious than e-books since it takes extra power and endeavor to make them.
So many trees, of which numbers are restricted, sacrificed themselves to provide us with papers, and it would be a ludicrous way of paying them back.
Besides, What do we obtain from burning a book? Why not give it away for a good cause or maybe recycle it?
Personally, I'd NEVER burn a book. (I still have every single book I ever bought since grade 3). However, I've deleted several digital books.
That said, the question that could be raised, is why do people burn books? Book-burners are either hate-filled bigots or government-sponsored censors. They do it mainly to show their disapproval of the book and the author. People have burned religious books and people have burned books that criticise holy books. They've burned science books and philosophy books.
However, they can burn as many books as they want, the ideas and thoughts expressed in the book can never be destroyed. (You can jail the singer, but never the song :)
But coming back to the thunk - isn't the essence of burning a book and deleting a digital version of it the same? In both cases we are erasing the words.
Also, to those of us who maintain we wouldn't burn books, would we burn a newspaper? Is there a difference between burning a book and burning a newspaper?
Can we compare burning books to burning flags? People burn flags, but the country still remains.
Essentially, the same thing is happening; a copy of that book is being erased.
But I guess the reason why I would not burn a book is because its like what Mehvash said- it DOES feel like we're ending its life. No matter how weird dat sounds.:P
And a digital version can always be retained, unlike the hard copy.
And to answer Mr. Roberts question - i still wouldn't burn a newspaper. I'd rather recycle it.
^Aha Leah, but would you burn a newspaper to start a camp fire? :)
Well as everyone's already stated, it's not since burning a book symbolises something else. It's disrespectful to the author and is pretty much an insensitive thing to do, you can just sell it or give it away. Why burn it?. Plus reading a book's different from digital versions. For starters you don't get the excited feeling with PDF's everytime you turn a page from your book.
I think that burning a book would have more meaning than deleting it off your Laptop or Kindle. Burning a book is more of a symbol than just hitting the delete key and it would have more meaning in it too. So I Believe that burning the book and deleting a digital version are totally different.
I love books and I would dislike the person who burnt one and I don't think that burning a book is the same as burning a digital copy of it.
As already stated, reading a book as a hard copy is much more satisfactory than reading it off the screen.
Moreover, if you burn a hard copy of a book you can still buy a new one from the book store but it will still be like burning away the effort put in by the author and the publisher in writing and printing that book. The digital one can be downloaded as many times as possible without doing any of the above in as much magnitude as burning a hard copy.
So NO IT IS NOT THE SAME.
Aisha Bashir.
11g2.
According to me, burning a book is just so morally incorrect. I'd never do such a thing; especially since I love books and keep a collection of them.
Personally, I hate reading digital versions of books; it feels much more natural and well, delightful, to be reading the paperback version itself. Like the others above, I don't believe it's the same thing. Lets take for instance an actual photograph; you wouldn't burn one, but you wouldn't hesitate to delete a digital picture (that consumes disk space) off your laptop.
Deleting typed words that you can re-download seems like way less of an issue to feel wavered about than BURNING a thousand sheets of precious paper binded together. Though, either way of course, the thought behind the book remains no matter what.
In answer to your question, Mr Roberts - burning a book is absolutely disrespectful and just as virtuously wrong as burning the flag of a country. The country may still remain, but it is, no doubt a sign of contempt and immorality. The author too still remains; and burning a book is not courteous towards him/her. Basically, it's all about symbolism - a flag symbolizes a country wheres (the paperback version of) a book, symbolizes hard work and thoughts on paper. So yes, they can be compared.
Well I think we’ve all established that the majority of us would NEVER burn a book simply because of its sole purpose... and personally I agree. Which leads to everyone’s common question: why would we want to burn a book? Yes, it did take a lot of effort to publish it, trees were sacrificed to make it and its very disregarding to the author. Its nothing compared to merely clicking the delete button on your computer/laptop plus symbolically speaking, in my opinion someone who burns a book seems illiberal or just plain heartless...
That in mind, I would say (and I think everyone would agree with me) that burning a book is COMPLETELY different from deleting a digital version of it.
Burning a book is not the same as deleting a digital version of it, because a book consists of paper and ink. Paper is made up of trees and when it's burnt it produces carbon dioxide. Carbon emission into the atmosphere results in global warming. A simple, yet horrible action results in lots of consequences, however while deleting a digital version, the content and effort will be lost, though it can be retrieved if archived.
the principal of them both are still same as your destorying the writers creation. personally i wouldnt burn a book but delete a copy off my laptop yes as it dosent have the same effect.
Burning an actual book is in no way equivalent to deleting the digital version of it.
The digital version of a book does not seem as significant as the real thing. Considering the fact that when deleting a digital version, you merely need to click a button and even then, it can be easily restored or simply downloaded again. Burning a book, thinking about the sleepless nights, how much effort the author put into it, picking the most perfect words, structuring his story, seems incredibly disrespectful.
What is the purpose of burning a book? What would one acquire? To me it feels like a malignant effort to demoralize an author and for what? Self satisfaction? Seems rather pathetic to me.
Burning a book is definatley not the samething as deleting a digital version of it.
Nobody burns books just because they think it'll be fun, or they don't need it anymore.If that was the case, they'd sell it, or even give it to someone else.They burn a book to show hatred towards the author, or even hatred towards the subject of the books - burning a book is symbolic to them.
Deleting a digital version of a book, however, is done to get more computer space,not out of malice or passionate hatred.
Personally, I wouldnt DREAM of burning a book- I had a tear in my eye when I had to give my old Enid Blyton books to my 7 year old cousin.
Burning a book and deleting it on your laptop? Not the same thing.
In the end of the day it's the same thing, your getting rid of the words but to me deleting something digital isn't as important or valuable than burning a book, actually I like keeping my books in the best condition possible to the extent that I hate writing on them, even for analysing :P but that's just me, there's something to it, burning books seems worse, as i've said, because it's more valuable, it's pyhsical contents make it more better to read then reading it digitally. When you read a book you sort of attach yourself to it, so burning it would be more horrible than deleting something digital, something you can't even touch.
In literal terms, No burning a book would not be the same as deleting a digital version. By burning a book, you are completely erasing the knowledge from it, but by deleting a digital version you can restore it or download a new one. Some might say that you can just as well go buy another copy from a store, but as a thorough recycler, I ask why kill more trees?
But the broader thought is that one is entirely getting rid of the knowledge that the book or digital version offers, so I think that indeed deleting a copy and burning a book is one and the same.
To be honest, I'm not much of a reader. But I do think that it's wrong to burn a book. It's just wrong, and why would any one do such a thing is completely beyond me.
No, burning a book, is not the same as deleting as a digital version of it. Because, you can always retain a digital book or you can download it again.
Whereas you can't do that with an actual book. Plus, i believe that reading an original book is better than reading a digital version of it. I love flipping pages :) and honestly, I find digital books quite annoying, for no reason in particular :P
So no, I think, burning an actual book is not the same as deleting a digital book.
I dont feel that burning a book is the same as deleting a PDF file. Technically, in both the cases the "information" is being detroyed but burning a book can be quite unpleasant than just deleting a file which can be retrieved later on if needed.
Firstly because books are considered to be the primary source of knowledge. Though these ideas are changing now due to technology, books are the way through which most of us get educated and enhance our knowledge. Therefore, burning a book can be quite cruel because you're the depriving the next generation of valuable knowledge that can be imparted as there are certain books which are clearly outmatched.
Secondly, it shows disrespect towards the author and the information he/she is trying to convey through their works.
Therefore books have a better stand and value than a file.
I love books, and are very protective of those under my possession.
Even just a tiny fold on a brand new book of mine can irritate me, so imagine what the concept of burning books does.
I do not think they are the same, for a variety of reasons- some of which, everyone else has already said.
Burning a book isn't just about the obliteration of the book itself; it sends out a very strong message.
Books are treasured due to the fact that they create a certain atmosphere, even if it hasn't been read.
The crisp pages against your fingers, the sound it makes as you turn every page, even the smell of the paper - these put books above their digital versions. If these weren't so special, human beings would have abandoned book publishing into extinction decades ago.
Burning a book reduces the work to ashes, and you WILL be unable to bring it back. People may say that of course, you can buy one again, but something about the book-burning leaves a scar.
Deleting a digital version on the other hand, does not make that much of an impact, since you can always download a replacement, or restore it from the recycle bin.
The principle is the same, but I think that way we value or appreciate each of them sets them apart. We pay more money for the actual hard copy of the book so we tend to treasure it a bit more, as opposed to 'point and click' and get the online downloaded version.
Besides, when our laptops batteries die or when the power goes out,we can still read the good old fashioned, page turning, REAL books.
its not going to be the same thing...one is just deleting to make space on your pc after reading it,*or whatever or reason could be behind deleting it of your pc* and the other one is actually destorying the book....which can't be restored...cause it would became ash...where as with a digit version you can always get it back.*it would be in your recycle bin*...
Going back to the question why would someone burn a book that they were once interested in ?? i might be the biggest book worm out there but i strongly disagree with anyone who thinks it will be any sort of entertainment burnng a book...theres other sorts of entertainment for teenagers now days !!
In conclusion i think its definftly not the same thing by deleting a digital version and burning a book !!
Well burning a book and deleting a digital version of it are completely two different things. To be honest I’m not really a fan of reading of books, but if they seem interesting then sure why not, and plus I love browsing through the books I used to read when I was younger.
Like I said before I’m not a fan of books but I still think burning them will definitely be terrible because it’s a insult to the author who has spent maybe months or years to write the book. But as for deleting the file off your laptop it will never be the same as burning a book, because you can always get it back from any friend or restore it from your recycle bin.
Moreover someone might want to read a book while in the bus, car or any type of transportation they will need a book (made of paper) and not everyone can carry their laptop, so if we burnt the books people won’t be able to read books anywhere but at home. I’m sure that won’t be pleasing for most people.
In conclusion I believe that burning a book is a ridiculous thing to do and if you do burn it you will never get it back. Unless you buy a new one :P
Burning a book is like burning an album or record. Do we really think twice when deleting the song from the laptop? we go for it, we know it takes less than a minute to bring it back.
I think I speak for everyone when I say that books are definitely a preferred choice for a good read. I mean, when someone recommends a book to you and you get the feeling where you can't wait to read it, reading it off the internet is just a mouse click away, but why would we still rather go to the shops and buy one or wait patiently for a friend to lend it to you?
Simply because there's something more gripping,thrilling or appealing when reading the actual book.
So of course, if we all prefer and love reading the book to reading it on a screen, why wouldn't we hate the thought of it being burnt? If websites for reading books online got deleted, would we really show our opinions of 'Act of disrespect' just as we would for books?
I think we can all agree that it's far from being the same.
The process of burning a book and deleting a digital version of it is somewhat similar- you're erasing or getting rid of the book's contents. However, I think it's the motive that differs here.
When you are burning a book,old or new, like everyone said, you are incinerating millions of trees, uncountable amount of effort exerted by its author and the publisher,but I'd also like to put across one point; you are also burning the opportunity where an underprivileged could have relished and gained the knowledge the book had to offer.
Also, people burn books up in flames as a way of displaying their discontent or disapprobation of a certain book or its author. But how much can a person burn? 10? 100? Thousands? They may burn books as much as their hearts desire to,but they can't erase the ideas or thoughts expressed-- it's in the air. Burning up books just because you don't like it, only exhibits how demoralized,narrow-minded and childish you are. There's a Tamil proverb where my mum often tells me- “You cannot stop a wedding by hiding a comb.” (May sound a bit kiddish but I tried my best translating)
Burning books can mean so many things, but deleting a pdf file, usually has no strong intention. You may delete a file just for the mere reason of lacking of space.(Speaking from personal experience)
When you delete a digital book,the process is reversible—you can redownload it or restore the file. But,by burning a book, it's equivalent to bringing a dead back to life.
So yes,it's different.
Well a book seems more personal to me its hand made.You can feel it, smell it, touch it..
Once you burn it there's no way to get it back to it's original form
whether with a digital version its just a click a way.you can undo it.
well a book seems more personal to me its hand made.You can feel it, smell it, touch it..
Once you burn it there's no way to get it back to it's original form
whether with a digital version its just a click a way.you can undo it.
NO!!!
I would never burn a book because I simply Adore reading... and if you dont want to read the book anymore, why should you burn it??? you can donate the book instead... and burning a book is equal to burning trees. A writer takes so much effort to even write a single page of the book and if you burn the book it brings disgrace to the hardwork of the writer.
whereas deleting a digital version is just clicking the delete button... and you can download it back whenever/where ever you want.
so, in conclusion burning a book is something completely different as deleting a digital version of it off your kindle.
The process of burning a book and deleting a digital version of it is somewhat similar- you're erasing or getting rid of the book's contents. However, I think it's the motive that differs here.
When you are burning a book,old or new, like everyone said, you are incinerating millions of trees, uncountable amount of effort exerted by its author and the publisher,but I'd also like to put across one point; you are also burning the opportunity where an underpriviledged could have relished and gained the knowlegde the book had to offer.
Also, people burn books up in flames as a way of displaying their discontent or disapprobation of a certain book or its author. But how much can a person burn? 10? 100? Thousands? They may burn books as much as their hearts desire to,but they can't erase the ideas or thoughts expressed-- it's in the air. Burning up books just because you don't like it, only exhibits how demoralized,narrow-minded and childish you are. There's a Tamil proverb where my mum often tells me- “You cannot stop a wedding by hiding a comb.” (May sound a bit kiddish but I tried my best translating)
Burning books can mean so many things, but deleting a pdf file, usually has no strong intention. You may delete a file just for the mere reason of lacking of space.(Speaking from personal experience)
When you delete a digital book,the process is reversible—you can redownload it or restore the file. But,by burning a book, it's equivalent to bringing a dead back to life.
So yes,it's different.
I don't agree, burning a book is much different from deleting a digital version. A book has more sentimental value to it. Having the actual book brings a sense of ownership yet a file on the internet or a downloaded one is shared between you and many others. You can write your notes or thoughts on the side pages of a book in memory of it, something you can't do with something on the internet. Also once you have deleted digital version it can easily be restored from your recycle bin yet once you have burned a book there is no trace of it. Unless you are able to buy the book again (that is if it's still in stock).
Is it, is it not? Well, personally, it depends on what book it is. I know, cruel as it sounds, I have burned many a useless notebooks/old text books to start up bonfires with my friends. But that's because after the year is over, your old text books and note books from primary become quite useless to you! So in that sense, I really don't see what's wrong in burning them to roast my marshmallows. :)
Classic pieces of literature, on the other hand, are a different issue altogether. If it's a book, you can feel its weight in your hands, flip the pages, keep it on your desk as a part of your book collection. It's physical presence just somehow makes it more significant. Plus, you probably paid for it unlike a digital version and so it wouldn't make sense for you to juts BURN it! :P
So no, I guess burning a book is not the same as deleting the digital version off your computer...
While it is obvious, that in both the situations, replacements are at arms reach, agreeing with more than half the comments, I also believe that burning a book is a lot more harsh.
The feel of pages, the musty smell all add to the mood. I mean sure, the e-Reader makes things a lot more convenient but reading from an actual book is an experience in itself. Therefore, it's not the same thing.
I've tried too long to put off commenting on this thunk because i find it slightly offensive to think about, but it has to be done sometime.
The one thing everyone HAS to know about me is that I LOOOOOVVVVEEE READING!!!! To burn a book in front of me is sacrilege! A book-worm is a part of who I am, and that will never change. Since I was a toddler I've read whatever I could get my hands on, from eloquent novels to the backs of shampoo bottles (do not judge me:P).
A book is a book, whether there are millions of copies worldwide or a limited-edition-100-copies-ever-printed title.
Now compare this piece of art:
-Hundreds of pages - each filled with hundreds of words, all containing several letters, as a tribute, a conveyance, an intriguing plot - carefully glued or bound together to last for years to come, handed down from generation to generation...
-...with a white screen containing nothing stark black words that stand out unnaturally from your e-reader, words that you can delete with a click of a button and can recover equally as fast and can copy and share endlessly with no effort whatsoever.
As you can tell, by the sheer length of my post, I feel extreme emotion on this topic so don't you DARE oppose me:P *wink*.
Like most of the bloggers here, I also believe that burning a book is not equivalent to deleting an e book, but I do not think that our respect for the authors or love for books plays a big part in the difference. This is the English departments BlogSpot so we are already biased to keep books on the shelves. I believe that the difference comes from the value of a book, an e book and our perception of what is value.
Well the value of a book is obviously higher, trees are used, printing, emotional attachment as they are physical (not a file on a computer). E Books on the other hand, are cheap and once you have made one e Book, to make another cost nothing. The software can produce millions for nothing. So basically there are an infinite amount of cheap e Books on the internet, and when you delete one, you can easily get another one (for free if you illegally download it) and continue doing so until your bored of sitting in front of the computer. When you burn a book, you have to go to the shop and buy another, continue the process and you would have spent quite a bit of money and have to go to the next shop to buy the same book.
Basically a book has a higher value than an e Book and a book has a higher value than a newspaper, so you would chuck a newspaper in the fire to start it up. If there was an infinite number of a certain book available at low cost and not that many newspapers, or other mass produced inexpensive papers around you, may be you would chuck the book into the campfire.
For example, in 1923 to 1924 after World War 1, there was hyperinflation in Germany and people were lighting up their fires with money. You could say that it is disrespectful to burn money because someone elsewhere would sweat like mad for it, but there was a massive amount of money which had no value so it was simply used to light up a fire.
I believe that we are all a small proportion of fortunate individuals who are privileged enough to afford books, actually be able to read them and have respect for the author’s creativity. However if we were in the position of many others who are illiterate and would like a warm room to sleep in, if we were to come across a book, would we think twice about burning it?
Lots of interesting points being made above.
I don't think burning a book is the same as deleting it's digital version.
Now, no matter how many times you delete a file off your computer, there is always a way for you to get it back (possibly download it again or even recover it). In the case of a book, if you burn one, you may be able to buy another, but it will eventually come to a point where there will be no more copies of the book left.
Also, burning a book is quite physical and requires as much time and effort as printing one. Waiting for a download, moving your cursor and right clicking is not.
No i disagree because just as you burn a book, you are disrespecting somebody's hard work and creativity. Though deleting a digital version of a book is not the same as you can retreave it back. I love reading and would personally never think of burning a book. I cherish and take care of all of the books that I have and would despise a person who would who would destroy or treat a book in an ill manner.
Burning a book is showing some serious disrespect. What I mean is that if I don’t agree to the ideologies or the concept of the book I would NEVER burn it. Burning a printed copy of a book is like demolishing a soul. And it’s definitely, without a doubt incomparable to deleting a digital copy.
Erasing a digital copy isn’t as offending and discourteous as burning a book.
And I believe that burning a book is exactly like burning a flag. Even if a flag is burned the country remains and the same thing goes for a book. If a book is burned it won’t lose its value, it won’t be forgotten.
Well if the truth is to be known i dont read that many books, so to me it makes no difference.
On the other hand, books are seen to be more precious and people get more attached to a book. Books are sometimes seen as a best friend, for the simple fact that they always give and dont take. A book will always give you information but it never takes your information away from you. So in other words i think burning a book is a lot worse.
I think it depends on what type of person you are. If you are a bookworm, then obviously books would be religious for you but if you aren't then it wouldn't make a difference. If you like reading but not particularly books then you are a lot like me. I think everything happens for a reason even if you can't find that reason at that time. It's not a crime is it?
I agree with the point of it being based on symbolism. The only time someone would have the incentive to burn a book would be a make a strong point and one of which to offend or shock other people. Burning a valued book is not the same as deleting a popular PDF file.
Also, books hold sentimental value. Not every book can be found online and many people value their childhood storybooks just for the memories that they hold.
Well, to be honest, I'm not much of a reader. I do however disagree with the fact that burning a book would be just like deleting it off of a digital device.
With all the books I've read that are physical copies, it seems like I've had a sort of connection with them; I can't really explain what sort, but the sort that would not let me burn it...ever. If I'm done with book, I just keep it around, probably stack 'em up somewhere on desk or something; it gives me something of a satisfactory feeling that they're around, although I know I'm not going to look at them again. I guess its because each book has a different story, and the stack in the corner would just remind me of vivid self-imagined memory flashes derived from those books every time I looked at the titles, or maybe perhaps just to help me keep track of how much I've read so far? It could be. In short, burning it would not be viable.
On the other hand, If I'm done with a digital copy I would probably just keep it on the device, but if memory were low or for some other reason, I wouldn't mind deleting it off. I somehow feel that digital versions are less valuable than the physical ones, because I've never felt the same way while reading digital versions as I have with books.
In conclusion, deleting it off would be much easier that even thinking about burning a physical book.
It seems that nowadays we're very careless when clicking the 'delete' button, be it on our Facebook posts, on our pictures, and on our eBooks. |
The good thing about purchasing or downloading on the Internet, is a guarantee that you can retrieve it. The Internet records that you've made a purchase and on many app stores you can download the book again through your account no matter how many times you delete it.
On the other hand, burning a book is a completely different story. Its irretrievable once you've thrown it into the fire.
Its also about how you choose to dispose of the book. On your device, deleting it is the only way. However, in reality, you can dispose of a book by giving it to someone else, throwing it away (there are, obviously, more ways to dispose of the book but the former are the most common ways) and burning it.
All the aforementioned ways are different from one another because we've been socialised to believe that they are.
Burning a book seems so much more violent than simply throwing it in the bin, giving it to someone else, or deleting it off your technological device.
So, the answer (in my opinion) is no, burning a book is not the same as deleting a digital version of it on your technological device.
It seems that nowadays we're very careless when clicking the 'delete' button, be it on our Facebook posts, on our pictures, and on our eBooks. |
The good thing about purchasing or downloading on the Internet, is a guarantee that you can retrieve it. The Internet records that you've made a purchase and on many app stores you can download the book again through your account no matter how many times you delete it.
On the other hand, burning a book is a completely different story. Its irretrievable once you've thrown it into the fire.
Its also about how you choose to dispose of the book. On your device, deleting it is the only way. However, in reality, you can dispose of a book by giving it to someone else, throwing it away (there are, obviously, more ways to dispose of the book but the former are the most common ways) and burning it.
All the aforementioned ways are different from one another because we've been socialised to believe that they are.
Burning a book seems so much more violent than simply throwing it in the bin, giving it to someone else, or deleting it off your technological device.
So, the answer (in my opinion) is no, burning a book is not the same as deleting a digital version of it on your technological device.
I like to think of physical books and manuscripts as having "infinite" shelf life. Many have lasted for a great number of years surviving the surrounding conditions.From the drawings on the walls of a cave, to the papyrus script writings, to the books in form of printing. These are all highly preserved and carry great significance. However, considering the difficulty of these being created, burning them would be a horrendous act against humanity, as their valuable content is priceless, even the resources we take for granted today must be preserved for future generations. Furthermore I would like to comment on the feasibility of the creation of digital files. It is extremely easy to "copy" an ebook, send, delete , edit etc.. yet a book isn't as easily altered or even copied. Burning a book would be a useless action since many people are struggling to learn and would make good use of it, namely those who can not afford a digital reader per se. I personally do not think deleting an ebook is the same as burning a book. Deleting an ebook could be due to numerous reasons such as lack of storage or distaste as they can't be passed on, even if passed on, it would simply be a copy which is redundant. If books are unwanted, a much more appropriate solution would be to pass it on to someone else.
No, it isn't the same. Burning a book is a lot more final and permanent than deleting a file on a Kindle. Not only is a book more valuable because it takes more resources to make it, but a book, especially an ancient one, has an intrinsic value to it that an ebook could never hope to achieve. Even though we can all download Principias on our iPad and subsequently delete them when we can't get past the foreword, destroying the book itself is almost unthinkable. So no, its to the same thing.
Definitely not. Burning a physical book compared to deleting it's virtual version off your kindle or laptop, are entirely poles apart in my opinion. When you burn a book, you don't just burn paper. You burn the feelings which were the bases of its purchase from a bookstore or a library. The reader's attempt to walk down that corridor to pick that book out, are brought to ashes. When I buy a book, I'm not just paying money in exchange of a hard cover object, I purchase a world, a new place where I can be and I can be all by myself, new memories, new emotions and new excitements. The essence of the inked pages, the font of the author's creation and the pleasure of holding a fraction of knowledge that is present in this universe in my hands is not comparable to a piece of technology with an uploaded version of it. I highly doubt that all these emotions will play part if I were to delete a virtual version from a laptop or kindle. Therefore, I would say, definitely not.
Being an avid, voracious reader I have always loved books. Books are something that allow me to see a whole new world; they allow me to feel new emotions, have new experiences, and thoughts all in a matter of pages. Having said that, I personally think that burning a book would be absolutely, undoubtedly TRAGIC and is definitely not the equivalent to deleting an ebook off your kindle; I think anyone that would burn a book must be – well to say the least – crazy and inhumane. Think of the amount of time and effort the author must have poured into that book; how he or she must have sat at their laptop screen or typewriters almost endlessly spouting their experiences, emotions and thoughts; and for someone to just frivolously burn hundreds, possibly even thousands of pieces of paper binded together would just be unacceptable. Moreover, what incentive do you have for wanting to burn a book? Getting rid of it? Well then go donate it to someone who is not as privileged as you are to afford a book; don’t burn it and subsequently waste paper and trees.
On the other hand, an ebook is just black and white words, beautiful words maybe, on a screen. Yes there may be emotions in those words but it’s just not the same feeling as a physical book with its printed pages, that will eventually yellow with age and its whose words will dissolve into paper, unlike the ebook which will remain forever on your hard drive (and which by the way I can delete and download again and again and again).
In conclusion, it’s the little things, like holding the book, flipping its pages, the fact that it will eventually perish, that make it so much more precious and valuable to me that subsequently do not lead me to think burning a book is the same as deleting an ebook.
For me, a book is not merely words printed on a paper. I'm not sure how everyone else feels , but I definitely form an emotional connection with the books I read. It gives me the same sensation as meeting a new, interesting individual and spending hours talking to them, getting to know everything about them. Majority of the time i undergo depression after finishing a good read. With all the advancements in technology , i still have not got my head wrapped around the idea of a digital book. It hurts my eyes and I cannot concentrate on it, therefore deleting a digital version of the book would have no effect on me. As many people have pointed out, it is a lot simpler to just re-download the digital version than go out to buy the book all over again.
Book-burning dates all the way back to CE 325 - and perhaps even earlier - when Saint Constantine of Constantinople, Rome stated that "if any writing composed by Arius..." (who was pretty much a minister of the Christian Church gone rogue by the emperor's standards) "should be found, it should be handed over to the flames".
Thus, the spark was lit (pun intended): Book-burning became not just an act of distaste, but a symbol of hatred and oppression of free thought, furthered through systemic and legal persecution. Criminalized for introducing new opinions, Arius was exiled, and even speculated to have eventually been poisoned by his opponents, his intestines emerging from within his body and spilling out across the floor (as recounted by an observer).
Since then, book-burning has became less gory but still stands for the same symbols, and has been used for the same purposes by oppressive groups all around the world during numerous points in time; most famously in Nazi Germany during World War 2.
It is this act of hostility-fueled symbolism that differentiates burning books to deleting digital copies of them. Deleting a novel from your Kindle lacks the ulterior motive of spreading hate and oppressing disadvantaged groups, as, most likely, you're only trying to free up space for a new book - not demoralize an entire demographic of people.
Therefore, I disagree, it simply just isn't the same.
Life is temporary. We’re born, we live, and one day, we die. We as a human race have come to terms with that. However, the imprint you leave behind is as real and permanent as wind, water, earth and fire.
There are many ways to touch people’s lives and maintain your permanence. Innovators, CEO’s, teachers, spokespeople, politicians, musicians, athletes and actors: these are the inspirational people that shape who we are. We associate our very identities with the music we listen to, the television we watch, and most importantly to me, the books we read. Aside from my parents and teachers, books have had the largest impact on my thoughts and interests. From thought-provoking scientific philosophy and number theory, to John Greene’s tear-jerking masterpieces, to the 500 pound brick that is Douglas Hofstadter’s ‘Gödel, Escher, Bach: An eternal golden braid’, no book has ever touched me the way J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series has. I cannot explain in enough words how much of an impact her books have had on me, so much so that my visit to Harry Potter World in Florida literally brought tears to my eyes.
While books may not allow us to maintain our physical realness, our thoughts and opinions remain. Books are something sacred, something to be cherished and kept well. When the ‘kindle craze’ occurred, I really didn’t understand it on most levels. Yes, I realize that its very convenient and portable, but the only thing I could say in retaliation to the ‘kindle people’ was “don’t you get it? Its just not the same!” Technology is great. Its revolutionized communication, shaped our world in unprecedented ways, and made things better. But there are some things that technology cannot improve. The feeling of physically reading a book with pages, feeling its spine, smelling its familiar pages and memorizing its creases is something that cannot ever be matched by simply reading of a thin, lifeless kindle.
A bookshop is a wonderland. You can go into the same bookshop your whole life, but every visit will entail a different adventure. Again, it all boils down to this idea of permanence: one day, a kindle’s battery will die, and you will need to buy a new and improved one. You feel no pain when your kindle dies because it’s probably a great excuse to ask your parents for the latest edition. Alternatively, you feel no pain if you delete a book off your kindle.
The library of Alexandria in Egypt is one of the most significant libraries in the ancient world. It was a hub for scholars to meet and share ideas, and it was burnt down. Almost every book was destroyed, and the library was in shambles. It hurts me to think that all those books were never read by any human being again. If you don’t like a book, you don’t burn it. You give it away, in hope that someone else likes it. It starts a chain: books are passed on, borrowed from one friend to another, shared with family and given away to charity. A book is permanent, and burning something that precious and valuable is nothing like deleting a book from your kindle.
This can easily be answered by looking at the physical resources a book requires vs. those a digital version of it requires.
A book requires, first and foremost, paper. Our method of producing paper involves cutting down trees that allow us to breathe. We are not planting nearly as fast as we're cutting. Every book burned literally burns away the amount of oxygen we have as a species. This resource wastage is photocopied for every book photocopied, and each burned wastes equal amounts of valuable resources.
Conversely, a digital copy does not require nearly as many resources. It takes a few seconds to copy, as opposed to the effort required to print and bind a typical book. Even one copy can be backed up a thousand times on one hundred thousandth of most computers' memories. And ultimately, they're nothing more than the words you're reading from me right now. On a screen, after a few seconds of effort ;)
Books require a lot more than that. They have a rich, deep history, and a rich, deep reverence attached to this history. Most of them chronicle history. But even rudimentary resource analysis reveals its... just stupid. Delete this comment if you will - there are many ways to recover it. Don't burn books.
This question can be answered in so many different ways! I like reading books and I find that even reading a physical book is a very different experience from reading an online copy; physical books have that traditional charm, are much less strenuous to read and feel more authentic, whereas online copies or kindle books are more a thing of the 21st century. A kindle book or online book all of a sudden doesn’t feel like a book anymore because there is no joy of using fancy bookmarks, you can’t physically turn the page and I find it much less exciting than an actual book; I understand that online books are much easier to find and cost nothing most of the times but even in today’s highly technologically advanced world, I still don’t think there is a need to digitalize good old paper books. To answer the question, either way, the memory of the book and story will remain with the reader forever, regardless of whether the book has been deleted or burnt, however doing either means that the person is cutting ties with the book; marking the end of a relationship, but not its memories. Environmentally, its not the same because burning a book will cause pollution due to the smoke. If we are talking of first editions, burning the book won’t be the same as deleting it off a laptop because first editions are extremely rare so firstly, the book would be valueless as ashes, and secondly it is more likely for you to find an online copy again than it is for you to find another first edition/volume. That is the thing with digital copies, it will remain online forever, so it doesn’t matter if one person deletes it off their laptop, it will still remain on the Internet. The thing with burning a book is that if one person burns it, there is one less copy of it in existence, for others to read, and it’s a lot worse if the book isn’t being printed anymore. I don't know how authors would feel, but I would be more upset if my book is burnt, in comparison to if a copy of my book is deleted off somebody's laptop, and it all comes back to the nostalgia of reading physical books and being associated as a writer of paper books as opposed to online copies.
So overall, I guess the two ideas are different that they are similar.
A book is not just the words that it is made of, it is the entire essence that comes along with the cover page, the smell of the paper, and the various inputs which are provided when it is read. There is a difference between reading off a kindle, pressing a button to turn the page, and having to keep the content entirely to yourself than it is to read a book, flip pages, be able to add notes, and save it in your bookshelf forever. Burning a book is NOT the same thing as deleting it off your kindle. You can always reinstall a deleted item, but you can never retrieve what has been burnt. In some ways, yes, you are deleting/burning the same content, but along with burning a book you are ridding yourself of all the memories which were created in the experience you had reading it. Did you take to the beach where it got wet and sandy? Did you accidentally rip a page? The following are all things that are part of the experience of reading a book, all of which cannot be encountered with a kindle.
'Everything is a copy
of a copy
of a copy
of a copy
of a copy
of a copy
of a copy
of a copy
of a copy."
I don't believe deleting a download of a book off your kindle is the same as burning a book.
Your Kindle received that 'book' through a 'click download' button on Amazon.com your kindle possesses a digital copy of a copy of a copy of a copy. Deleting "War And Peace" from your kindle will not deprive the world of a digital copy of Leo Tolstoy's work. Because, it is just a copy. That same 'click download' button is hit by millions, and they all receive it. You deleting the copy off your kindle will not remove it from Amazon.
Sadly, this isn't the case for actual books. Firstly, it is totally barbaric to want to burn books like whateven, w h y would you do that.
Deleting a a digital version isnt the same as burning as all the burnt books from the library of Alexandria will forever remain ashes. All books ever burnt will remain ashes. Unobtainable.
You are depriving the world of knowledge when you set a book on fire.
Even if it is just a copy of a copy of a copy.
Don't like it? Give it away, donate it to a charity, because even though it's your property ( assuming that it is your book) you should have the morals to want to spread the knowledge.
If you still feel like burning it, read it again.
The words didn't work on you the first time.
Let’s establish that burning books is, essentially, bad. It’s not cool. Books give us some awesome insight, perspective, information, and skills that make them really important tools for social education. The question differentiates between online (soft copy) books and hard copies. When we burn a book, what really happens?
Well, primarily it’s symbolic, like when ‘that crazy dude in America’ tried to burn religious texts, or ‘that other crazy guy’, again in America, burnt and urinated on religious texts. They mean to make a statement of disagreement. It’s primitive, but it’s not uncommon. So, in that context, burning books is pretty bad.
Deleting a book of your Kindle however…I don’t know whether that has the same symbolism - a key word I picked up on while briefly sifting through the other comments. I just can’t imagine deleting a religious text off your Kindle is really going to affect someone ideologically.
The physical, written (or printed/typed) word holds more significance in society. So, quite frankly, I don’t think it’s the same thing, but I think there may be a lot less pain if people viewed it as such.
Personally, I prefer reading off my iPad because of the convenience. However, there is no doubt that a book has more sentimental value, simply because it is a physical entity. For example, if a book was given to me by a friend, I would cherish it much more than if they bought it for me in the Kindle store. Books can be personalised, signed and physically altered by cracking the spine and bending the pages. This gives a book character. However, a book on my iPad is not as sentimentally valuable because I have not made a personal impression on it in any way. If I deleted it, I could just download it again. This is not the same case with a hardcopy version of a book because of the simple reason that a brand new copy could simply not replace the sentimental bond you formed with the burned copy.
The burning of books has historically been a form of active protest against something, typically to stop the progression of certain ideas and opinions. In the past the Vatican burned Galileo’s publishings and today we see Boko Haram burning school books as they protest Western influence.
Conversely, the act of deleting something off your digital reader is far more personal; yet it is also far more passive. It symbolises what today is the laziness and detached nature of individual action.
There is clearly a massive distinction between burning and deleting books. However, this distance between a digital reader and expression of opinions is not all bad. The action of burning signifies a definite finality of a situation, whereas a delete is more a person expressing their own personal opinion in a more tolerant society, for example, if you delete a book, you are not restricting another person’s ability to read it. When you destroy copies of books, it is akin to sending the message that nobody should access them; the act of burning is far harsher, with wider and more public consequences.
The difference between the two acts can be illustrated by saying that burning books conveys the idea of total oppression of ideas, in contrast to deleting books which allows for a more open forum where everyone has the ability to voice their individual opinions without threats.
When pastor Terry Jones burned a Quran, he essentially declared to the world in a very threatening and brash manner that he believes Islam to be wrong, igniting massive problems and repercussions. If this never happened, if the pastor had simply deleted the Quran from his Kindle, the message he would send would be far muted and contained, as he would express his opinion that he prefers being Christian, but that others could go ahead and be Muslim if they wished.
The action of deleting allows greater diversity of views and personal beliefs to exist - a more open minded approach where people are more tolerant of others’ respect for certain things - even if they personally don’t support it.
To get rid of a book is something and to burn it is something else. Thus, deleting it from your kindle is certainly not like burning it since they symbolize different feelings or thoughts.
Burning books is a result of extreme emotions towards them. Extremists may feel the need to burn a book if it offends their beliefs or attacks them, because they'd find it the only way to express their anger to the world and make sure it would be noticed. Being noticed brings us to another factor which is provoking others, burning a valuable piece of information in front of someone who values it may cause extreme anger resulting in a feud that would last for years, decades or even centuries. I doubt a deleting the same exact book from your kindle would cause the same commotion, it's nothing but an act of taking something out of your list silently maybe because you didn't like it or you weren't that interested any more.
Another reason why is burning a book is different from deleting it, is that in some religions like Islam, throwing out a holy book or any book that contains religious text is highly detested. Because it's seen as an act of degrading the supreme god. Though deleting a Quran app from your phone or a copy of Quran from your kindle is a completely normal action because in the end that virtual copy will dissolve into nothingness.
Books are a source of knowledge to humans. Even though the book is same, whether it is a hardcopy or a softcopy, there is still a difference, and erasing either of them has a difference
.
A hardcopy is tangible and solid. Hours and hours of work goes into printing it, designing the covers, binding it, etc. When you burn a copy of the book, you burn away all of that hard work and the whole essence of existence of a book.
A digital version of a book is only the text and this copy has a trace on the internet that can never be deleted. No matter how many times you delete the copy off your laptop, its digital trace will always exist and the deleted copy can always be downloaded again or retrieved. The knowledge embedded in the book has not really gone away.
But a particular hardcopy once burned, cannot be brought back from the ashes. In a sense, the knowledge in that particular copy has been erased forever. Thus burning a book would be permanent, but deleting it off your Kindle or laptop has a temporary effect of sorts.
It is seemingly apparent that all of us value a physical copy of a book over the digital kindle format. Although a handful will argue about the convenience that is paired with digitizing literature, 'deleting' a hard copy is far more stressful a task than erasing its soft copy counterpart. Ignoring the aspect of your new carpet becoming a bonfire; why is it that we feel emotionally distressed when loosing an old book we like? As if a small part of us was scorched out of existence along with it?
In a more abstract context, one may think about the work in all its arduousness that has gone into manufacturing a book, especially in the case of more ancient scriptures. From acquiring paper by cutting down trees to printing and binding, making a book consumes both natural and physical resources. However, this isn't why loosing a book might tear(both meanings) you up.
You may be familiar with an unusual feeling of satisfaction that stems from the vanilla/almond like aroma of an old book. A feeling that is particularly amplified if it is a book you owned as a child. Whenever you open an old book, volatile organic compounds are released into the air. These are products of the breakdown of substances such as cellulose and lignin, which are found in plant cells, that stimulate the sensory receptors on your nose.
It turns out that your olfactory lobe, the area of the brain processing smell, sits in the limbic system, which is also the center of emotions and memories. Upon stimulating these receptors, a nervous impulse travels through the limbic system thereby triggering old memories to be replayed and the release of endorphins (happy chemicals). These are the foundations of what we all know as nostalgia, but that's another story.
The limbic system however can also be stimulated by other sensory inputs as well. This may explain why physical books have a special place in our hearts (well the brain but..you know). It could be the smell; the texture and solidity of its cover; the picture that teases you about its contents; or even the sound it makes as you turn each page. All these are unique properties which a digital form of the book can never provide in the same way. Hence, as social creatures we are emotionally tied to something as simple as a collation of papers, which makes it all the more difficult to burn.
Deleting a book from a Kindle is not the same as burning one.
I am not saying this because of how much I love reading,which I do,or because of my appreciation and love for the hard copies of books. In fact I don't understand why people tend to romanticize the idea of a "real" book so much. I would understand if someone preferred vinyl records to the you tube music video, because the sound quality is infinitely better, but a digital copy is far more convenient and is way more environmentally friendly than a hard copy.
That said, I would feel bad burning a hard copy of a book, where as I wouldn't think twice about deleting a digital copy if I were running out of space on my library. I would feel bad for the planet, for the fuel I am using to burn the book, for the carbon dioxide I am releasing into the air and for the poor trees that were cut down to make the paper that this book is made of. 3 to 6 billion trees per year are cut down to make paper, and to me this is a terrifying number, think of how better off our ecosystem and planet would be if we were to move away from books and copybooks and paper and into the future.
In essence, burning a book and deleting a digital version of it both achieve the same end product: the removal of the literary content inside the book.
However, burning of a book usually is treated with more importance (signifies more of a malicious intent) than simply deleting its digital version. This is because (sometimes), more than the content inside the book, it is the book per se that is romanticized; the idiosyncratic aroma and the rough texture of the wooden pulp, the oft-repeated act of manually flipping through pages, and the attraction of the cover of the book. Such features attach to the long-term memories of humans, and such features are not experienced to as great an extent in electronic devices.
Another reason could be the ease by which a digital version could be deleted, in comparison to a book. Simply by a couple of taps, one can erase a digital version into oblivion, whereas one may have to undertake the effort of torching a hardcopy. Hence, those who choose to burn a hardcopy have a much stronger intention to do so, and are more likely to have done it in full conscience, in comparison to deleting a digital version (which could be done so for such trivial reasons as increasing storage space available, for instance). To provide a specific instance, bigots against a particular belief system would rather burn the hard copy of a holy book than delete it off a digital platform. This is because the act of burning a physical copy symbolizes their intent more so; the thought of a sacred collection of verses being engulfed in flames is an evocative one, and one that is more likely to cause controversy and bring about attention.
Before the printing press was invented, the act of burning a book would have been considered to be a much more emphatic act than it is today, because it was usually the sole manuscript to be extant, and hence the burning represented the ruin of years’ of work of its author. However, after the printing press came into being (alongside the phenomenon of technological advances enabling bulk-buying economies of scale), there could be thousands of hardcopies being distributed, hence negating the possibility of ruining an author’s hard work.
To summarize, the act of deleting itself may be the same, however the underlying intentions between both acts are the differentiating factors, and it is such intentions that are of more importance, than the deletion in itself.
As a huge fan of audiobooks and ebooks, I am not necessarily part of the cult who are forever loyal to the physical copies of books. I love having the ability to read my one book not only on my laptop but also on my phone, ipad and devices like a kindle. The fact that 50 years down the line, this very book will be in the same condition truly exemplifies why so many are making the switch from physical books to ebooks.
The fact that I usually don't think twice before deleting a book off my kindle but take hours or even days pondering over whether I should donate one of my favourite childhood books to the local library really shows how much sentimental value we place on the physical nature of books. Its not simply the carbon dioxide that will be released by burning this physical book but its also the fact that once this copy is gone, there will never be the same exact copy anywhere around the world. Out of the thousands or more copies of this book that have been printed, one will be destroyed through the act of you burning this book. Yes, there may be similar copies with the same cover, but there will never be the same exact copy. The same copy with the same places you have creased the edges as a bookmark and the same places with the coffee stains you created that one day when reading it at the airport. Your very own personalised copy of this book will be gone forever hence why we place so much emphasis when even thinking about the idea of burning this physical copy of a book we own.
To a certain extent it depends on what lifestyle you live.
As a hardcover book fan myself, I'd be absolutely crushed if I had to burn a book. And I wouldn't mind deleting a Kindle book, as it can just be redownloaded with great amount of ease.
Of course a Kindle book's benefits cannot be undermined in their convenience and accessibility, but for someone who doesn't travel for 8 months of the year, and has their one favourite reading spot every time, I have no reason to undervalue the convenience of my hardcover book.
Also holding a book in your hand, turning each sepia page, occasionally sniffing the rusty book smell, adds a lot more emotion and intensity to a novel. Once I've finished a novel, I can always walk past and glance at the cover, or feel it under my skin and flick through some pages when Im cleaning up my shelves, and that feeling rushes back.
I wouldn't feel that emotion when I click that right arrow on my laptop to turn the page. The same right arrow to play a game. The same right arrow to write the next word of an assignment. The same right arrow to read an educational manuscript.
I wouldn't get the same goosebumps of emotion with that right arrow on the keyboard, as I do with that book smell in my nose, and hardcover against my fingertips.
Online books vs physical hardcovers, which one is more difficult to get rid of?
Personally, I enjoy reading, and I don't really obsess over pages or electronic libraries - if it is readable I use it, depending on the situation I'm in. I own books and am a proud E-reader, despite that I believe that burning a hardcover book is more challenging to accomplish than deleting the electronic version of your E-library.
A book holds sentiment: the copious creases on the spine of the book, the stains on the pages, the musty smell of the ageing sheets all contain memories, which makes it almost sinful to burn it. But the click of a button, or the swipe on the screen can be done instantaneously with no remorse or regret. Watching the pages of a book burn, on the other hand, can be quite painful to watch, losing all the knowledge and imagination derived from the book, and then extinguishing it with flames. That's quite harsh, don't you think?
The difference between a hardcopy book and a digital version of it is the fact that a digital version of the book can never be erased from existance . On the other hand a hardcopy book is finite in number and painstakingly long to reproduce.. Hence it is easy to completely remove from existance and cannot be retrived . So when we burn a book we loose not only the tree we sacrificed to make that book but also the labour that went into making it and most importantly the ideas conveyed and stored in it . The book is a treasure house of wealth and cannot easily be replaced for while u can kill and man you cannot remove his influence , memory and ideaologys so long as his ideas exist and remain through the ages ,influencing the generations to come But if you burn the book ,you burn everything the man is and he returns to dust .Hence deleting an infinte digital book which can never be lost is poles apart from burning a hardcopy book
Is eating an ice cream the same as drooling over an image of it? Admittedly an analogy a bit too extreme – yet it elucidates the hardcover fan’s argument that a physical book is the “real” thing. Which is not entirely true, objectively speaking. In terms of information, what you get from a hardcopy would be more or less entirely the same as what you get from a digitalized e-book. Burning and deleting each, respectively, would therefore lead to the similar destruction of information.
But it isn’t the same.
The differentiation occurs when you consider the subjective value of the medium that stores this information, and the effort involved in obliterating the same. Indeed, the leaves of a manuscript are revered by some. Even when this is not the case, people acknowledge the value of the physical material and manpower involved in producing a paper-back. Therefore, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to burn a book with the same nonchalance that one would delete an e-book with.
I'm not a big fan of hardcover books but burning a copy of a book is not the same as deleting an e-book from your Kindle.
If someone were to delete a copy of an e-book from their tablet, it doesn't cause much harm to society. E-Books have soft copies stored usually in clouds, people's personal devices and their own storage devices. While on the other hand burning a hard copy, it's heartbreaking for society to witness. Let's say someone were to burn the last copy available of a particular book, it would be a tragic loss for the community and all the bookworms out there. It's also a big loss for our future generations, as they may neglect the significance of hardcover books and slowly our beloved hardcover books which we take care of with all our heart, will soon become a thing of the past.
Due to the ever-changing nature of the world and rise in globalisation, technology is constantly evolving and accommodating to our needs, an example of this is the creation of the Kindle™.
In order to evaluate the difference between deleting a digital version of an e-book from a device and burning a book, references to the consequences must be made. In a way, yes, they are the same action, both resulting in a book being removed purposefully however both lie on a different plain of existence now.
Due to the Law of Conservation of Mass which states that no mass can be destroyed or created, it is apparent that in both instances the remnants of the book must go somewhere. In the instance of burning the book’s legacy is left faded in ashes with the possibility of retrieval impossible due to the physical change. Any attempts to gather the charred remains to assemble a coherent book simply end in failure.
On the other hand when one deletes a digitized version, there is still the possibility of retrieval due to the nature in which it is stored, the metadata remains and the tech savvy can restore it.
To conclude, the act of burning a book has a heavier symbolic meaning to it as well as a greater sense of finality.
There is that familiar scent that drifts off each crisp page as you flip it. The rib of the book cracks, your fingers resting on the newly formed breaks and ridges. There are those feelings again. Attachment. Serenity.
A tangible book is a physical entity. And it is but natural, as humans, that we value physical entities the most.
So when that sleek, black electronic-tablet rests in your hands ; no scent drifts off it. There is no mark of pressure left behind as you swipe to the next page. But those feelings. There they are again.
Because no matter the medium, it is the content that truly touches the heart, the soul. But in the process of romanticizing the packaging of the book, the author’s long hours and inspired thought processes are not given due credit.
So, do I mean to say that burning a book is the same as deleting a digital version of it off the Kindle™? Ofcourse not!
There is the physical and there is the digital. And we have not reached that point in time where we’ve managed to eliminate the difference between the both.
If I were to dispose off a book I could do so by donating it or selling it. Burning a book is an environmentally harmful and extreme way of disposing a book. The action is generally performed if one wishes to show hatred for the book and the ideas penned in it. Once the book is burnt it is gone forever. Thus there is negative connotation attached to burning a book.
Whereas one can only dispose off a digital book by deleting it. The process is rather simple and it doesn’t result in any visible damage. Further a deleted digital book can always be retrieved easily. Therefore, deleting a digital book doesn’t evoke the negative emotional response that burning a book does.
Hence burning a book is not the same as deleting a digital version of it off your Kindle™ or your laptop.
Burning a book and deleting it have completely different connotations in today's society. Deleting a book is a matter of convenience and need, why waste precious space on our devices ? when we go to delete an e-book we do it for ourselves, either we don't need it anymore, or we are bored by it,or it takes too much space,whatever the reason it is to do with personally preference. Burning a book on the other hand is taken as a statement against the book, author or associations of the book, due to the nature in which we treasure books. as well as this burning something when you could just as easily dispose off it is much more flamboyant than pressing a button, which is why burning a book is just as good as making a societal statement.
I personally could never burn a book no matter who much I disliked the author/plot/writing style, simply because there is so much that they offer, each in its own way
Books are one of the most important sources of knowledge and are extremely valuable to society as a whole. Why would someone want to burn a book instead of simply donating it, giving it away or even throwing it away ? Although I prefer the ease of use and functionality of a digital platform for books, I could never imagine myself burning a book, but if I had to answer the question – No, burning a book is not the same as deleting it.
Objectively speaking, yes they are the same; in both cases, a copy of the book is being erased and the information in the book is lost. However, this is only the case in a world without emotion and subjectivity. The act of burning a book has some pretty bad connotations to it in society, burning a book is considered a symbolism for hatred towards the author or the narrative of the book because disposing of a book by burning requires more physical effort. This is simply not possible on a Kindle™ .
In my opinion, what makes a physical book so valuable is it's impermanence and fragility and if you were to burn a book, no matter how many more are left, that particular copy ceases to exist. On the other hand, the book is stored digitally in the cloud which is not a physical entity and hence cannot be permanently erased.
The instinctual reaction to the question is a sharp no. But the real interesting part is when one ponders why?. Why is it not the same?
I am that traditional person who is an advocate for reading ‘actual’ books and not digitised copies, thus to me the act seems a bit too barbaric to not be offended by such an act. The biggest difference between the digital and real world is the ease at which thing can be done and the permanent fact of actions. When you delete a book off your kindle it takes about a millisecond and all the energy it take to lift a single finger. This ease makes the action almost seem negligible. Also the fact that even if the book is deleted, it exists in a virtual cloud and can be revived instantaneously makes the action seem so frivolous compared to the latter. Burning a book seems more like a statement that anything else. That is literally what the Nazis did. It is like putting up an actual example of destroying information. Firstly, the action has to have a time and place. It also requires a lot of work. Moreover, when burning a book, there is no way of reversal or going back. That bundle of learning and information is gone forever. The question ends up being, how much does the physical book mean to you and it is all about perspective. I am very unjustified in the importance I place in a physical copy of a book but that is my own love for having an actual physical book not a device.
But, if the question was phrased more extremely, perhaps I would be forced to reconsider the selfish answer. What if I were to choose between deleting a book from the digital cloud and burning a book? I would be obliged to advocate for the thing that I in fact would never want. However, deleting a large population’s access to such information just for one physical copy seems ridiculous no matter how it is seen.
I truly believe it is all about the kind of eyes you see this topic with, I am part of the group who will almost always side with paper copies of books but I honestly think it is the more stubborn side. Thus in the situation, I hold the fire extinguisher and disregard the kindle.
While the cloud and the digital universe weren't even thoughts imaginable or to be dawdled upon, books or any written form of information was considered to be the store of all things recorded and were the boon that helped man advance, ponder, change previous ideas and spark new ones.
With the age of technology at its current growth, the thought of gaining information from often lengthy books have now been frowned upon. People now prefer that same book online where its easier to read, understand and store. Gone are the days when the world cherished having a physical book as its knowledge dispenser.
Now is burning a physical book the same as deleting a digital book from a kindle. The answer is simply No. Firstly, because the digital version is still stored in cyberspace where it will remain forever, or atleast until its operational. Secondly, the paper used to print these books are going to complete waste and burning these books would only result in harmful emissions being released into the atmosphere. Thirdly, the money and hardwork used to produce that book would be burnt away for no apparent reason which just shows an individual's lack of appreciation for someone else's hardwork, an obvious blight on someone's moral conscience. Lastly, this act of burning this book for no beneficial reason is straight up stupidity and can be best likened to the behavior of a madman.
Hence, I believe that they aren't the same as digital versions are still stored while the books are forever lost.
I'm no voracious reader. I don't cuddle my books and roll in the scent of freshly printed paper. Although, I do find a certain sentiment attached to having a series of books stacked on shelves - books you can carry around with you and actually feel like you're reading a book.
A kindle, is a step forward than your regular, plain, orthodox books. Books do, contribute negatively to the environment, take up loads of space & they're heavy etcetera. A kindle is a small portable tablet that stores how many ever books you'd like, they're not usually back-lit which means your health and eyesight is in check HOWEVER, I personally still cannot consider them books, perhaps it's irrational but I don't.
One could call it backward thinking, ignorance of whats more convenient and efficient and I'd agree with them. But the emotion and attachment I share with books is something that cannot be replicated with a file on a kindle.
Speaking as someone who owns both books and kindles (Yes, plural) I can describe various ways in which burning a book and deleting a kindle are different.
Most people would argue that there are several copies of a book on a Kindle stored in cyberspace and that if it's deleted it can always be retrieved however books usually have multiple copies too. Can't you get another book? -perhaps not as easily as purchasing or downloading a file- although it is not irreplaceable in today's day and age.
To contradict myself- The Gutenberg Bible was the first ever printed book. It represents the dawn of the age of reason. As far as i'm concerned the written word is mankind's greatest achievement.
Imagining that someday eventually, Western Civilization comes to an end, I would do anything to save a piece of it, however little. That is what I mean when I say that deleting a file that is a copy of a copy of a copy and burning the Gutenberg that can never be replaced is poles apart.
A book with the exact same content yet presented in two different bodies: one, being the traditional book and the other, the newfangled Kindle™. To smoulder that particular book in its physical state could've possibly caused riots back in the day. Unquestionably though, in any era, the book has more value, as well as being evocative for certain people. Although, you can just find the same constituents in the same cover for the same price at the bookstore. Even then, book-lovers aren't pleased. They're fixated with so much as even the scent of the dust lying upon the cover, (understandably) seeing how we humans value the physical entities the most. Nevertheless, it's indubitably blatant we simply shouldn't burn books, at least to acknowledge the author and his ideas.
Alternatively, is it the same if you expunge the Ebook off your kindle? You can simply download a countless number of them back onto it. It's up there, the cloud. However, it's still effacing virtual information. It just has no real matter.
To simply see it, you're just throwing away data in either way, it makes less of an impact in real-time.
Not only the Kindle but of the inevitable technologies will cross against the materialistic paraphernalia we sentimental beings are extremely compassionate about. And we must be ready for the foreseen changes on our way.
The difference between the book and the eBook is the fact that books have a limited existence due to its physical form. However the eBook is digital and in computers, they are nothing more than a combination of 1’s and 0’s. While the initial effort of the author is there, it doesn’t possess the labor, resources and time taken to make the book.
While deleting the book might remove it from your online library, it doesn’t remove it from existence, but burning the book removes the physical continuation of the book itself.
Books themselves are incredible creations, whose importance and value doesn’t decline even after a thousand years. Even though it can’t physically last a thousand years.
E-books are digital copies and not separate physical objects like books. Comparing burning a book to deleting an eBook is like comparing smashing a light bulb to blocking out the sun with an umbrella or such.
Alternatively, burning newspapers are another thing. Ignoring the harmful effect to the environment, newspapers have no particular symbolism to it. Its value diminishes after reading it once. After the day it was printed for. It has progressively less and less value progressively. It literally becomes old news.
So, bottom line? Burning books is definitely not the same as deleting an eBook off your kindle.
Books and E-books both hold a fictional or non-fictional story or information. In both forms you are deleting knowledge you can gain from the writings of an author. The difference between them is one is a physical copy, by burning the physical copy the action of this is much more extreme as you can’t re-download it. Book are creations whose importance shouldn’t be declined by destroying them as the ideas in them are important. If a person doesn’t like the book they may donate or give to someone else as it is a piece of art which is very subjective to the thoughts that a person may associate it with. By deleting a book of your kindle or other devices, the book still exists and you can still download it. Sometimes, many people may delete a book after they have finished reading an e-book because of the amount of memory space it may consume on their devices. This shows that this is a less extreme action then burning a physical book which can not be restored.
Considering the resources that are poured in to produce a physical copy of a book, burning a book can absolutely not be considered the same as deleting a digital version off your kindle or laptop.
Furthermore, another important factor is the historic value of a book. Burning off an ancient tome would be a momentous loss, even if an ebook was produced. The ebook, in this sense, is just a copy produced to spread its content so holds marginal to no value compared to the original.
Even if it were an ordinary book, the burning of it would be largely different from deleting an ebook. For one, burning a book is irreversible, as there would be no way to acquire the knowledge within or recover the resources invested once it is burnt. On the other hand, you could simply re-download the ebook back onto the kindle, and it's as if you never deleted it.
In order to avoid the general answer to this question whereby burning a book is worse than deleting the book, I must look at this question differently. Burning a book is better than deleting a book off of a kindle. There are many reasons why I believe this.
Firstly, I believe that a kindle e-book and a physical copy of a book are almost the same. They contain the exact same information. Those who argue that a book has a ‘feel’ to it that a kindle cannot replace are people who focus too heavily on aesthetics. Some argue that a book has a cover with images that may aid the reader. I believe that a book should provide all images by the merit of just the text. What I mean by this, is that the words in a book should paint an image in the readers’ head. An image on the front cover of a book would be a limiting factor, to the limitless possibilities of images that could be created in the readers head regarding things such as what the main character, or a specific setting may look like.
In conclusion, to answer the question, kindle e-books and physical books contain the same information. If one was to delete a kindle e-book, they would be losing the same information as if they were to burn a book. However, by burning a book, one would be provided with warmth temporarily, and for this sole reason, I believe that burning books is not the same as deleting a book off of a kindle. It is better.
Well, I would say it’s not the same thing, for the following reasons:
Firstly, burning a physical copy means wasting the effort put into assembling the book in the first place; paper is produced from wood, and then copies of the book are made using that paper. This is very time-consuming. In that sense, burning a book would hold more significance compared to deleting it from a kindle. The strongest feeling from deleting the book from kindle, that I can think of, is the feeling of not needing the book anymore.
Secondly, burning a book may signify hatred for the author and/or the ideas expressed in the book. So, in a way, we could say that burning a physical copy has an emotional side to it as well. When it comes to deleting a copy from kindle, the same scenario mentioned above applies: Having no use for the copy.
Finally, burning a physical copy of the book means that that certain copy of the book will be destroyed and inaccessible to us, whereas deleting a copy from kindle doesn’t delete the book. This is because the book is stored in cloud, therefore creating the possibility to obtain it again in your kindle.
In kindles and laptops, data is stored in different ways. But the general concept is that there are microscopic objects on the storage device that can take on two forms (0 and 1) and data that makes sense is produced when a particular order of 0s and 1s is achieved. When you delete an e-book, all that happens is that the order or 0s and 1s is changed. If you arrange the 0s and 1s back to their original order before deleting the e-book, it would return in its exact same form as if nothing has ever happened. On the other hand, when you burn a book, the material of which the book is made changes irreversibly into a form that can never be a book again.
Another thing to consider is the incentive behind deleting e-books and burning books. When you delete an e-book, you've probably finished reading it and you just want to empty some space for another book. However, you don't BURN a book when you finish reading it. Most people would simply give it to someone else. Burning a book signifies disrespect and hatred towards the book or author. Which is not the case when it comes to deleting e-books.
I would like to think that deleting e-books is more like erasing ink completely off a book in order to print another book on the same paper. And burning books is more like crushing the part of the storage device that carried e-books. Basically, deleting an e-book is NOT the same as burning a book.
This is like asking if killing a person is the same as blocking them on Facebook. NO! Who in the right mind would burn a book? But the more I look into this thunk, the more I ask myself, ‘Why not burn a book, Gimani?’
A book contains so much love in its carefully selected designs, fonts, illustrations, but then again, isn’t the only difference between an eBook and an actual book it’s solidity?
A book, when burned another can be bought, just like how another eBook can be downloaded when deleted.
A book, a place where the author has put in their heart and soul into, is a precious object for sure, but didn’t he/she type it out and print it? It isn’t like the author actually wrote it by hand.
So why do we feel so much attachment into the actual book? It’s like asking how we know it’s bad to kill another.
Nevertheless, burning a book would cause harm in many more ways than deleting an eBook.
Most obvious reason being: pollution, wastage of trees and money. Secondly, already many bookworms are switching to eBooks as they are simply easier in every manner, if we burn hardcovers, how will the future generations understand the importance of non-digital books? Thirdly, what if the book was of great importance? (Although there is a low chance of there not being a digitally stored copy of such a book in this time) You burning it is an irreversible reaction. There would be no going back after that act of stupidity.
All in all, burning a book is foolish (without a reason that is solider than a Diamond). Do not do it.
Well, I believe that deleting an e-book off of your Kindle could probably be the modern and less drastic measure of burning a book. However, I believe that burning a book in general is a bigger thing, as you’re literally destroying a physical object. Moreover, it’s a waste of paper and resources that went into producing the book. When it comes to deleting an e-book off of your Kindle, the process is easily reversible. Many online stores such as The App Store save an account’s purchases to Cloud Storage. This is usually used when a user would like to download the application he bought onto another device as well. Therefore, if a user deletes his e-book, he can easily download it again in mere seconds. You can’t download a book again, neither is there cloud storage for physical books. If you burn a book, it’s gone, the process is irreversible. Of course, you can always spend money and buy a copy of the novel, but that book, that specific book, from its small bends and tears, to the refreshing smell from that one time your friend with cologne picked it up; it’s all gone.
There is a huge difference between burning a book and deleting its digital copy. For one, a book is something that is physically in front of you. It has a characteristic smell, a feel, maybe even a taste, if that’s a thing you do. The whole point of buying the hard copy instead of downloading it is the sentiment behind owning your own book. On the internet you can download it and delete it as many times as you like and see no difference. But to burn a book, whose pages you’ve turned with your own fingers and spine you’ve creased is after reading too many pages at a stretch, is an entirely different thing.
I feel that to hold a book in your hands is to really have it; because a digital file can be deleted with the click of a button, but the effort and time that goes into making books and even destroying them is what makes keeping them so much more worthwhile.
If you ask any avid reader they will always tell you that nothing compares to the feeling of having a book in your hand physically. The smell, the look and the feeling of just flipping the pages even is something that can't quite be synthesized with an online book. However the story stays the same but the experience doesn't. Burning the booking would count for much damage than deleting a file on your iPad.
For a long time burning a Holy Book such as the Bible was illegal, however it isn't the same with possibly deleting your Bible app. However one could argue now since the digital age it is easier to store information therefore deleting a book would be much less significant than burning one as the file would be easier to replace than the book.
Therefore in terms of significance or importance burning a book would be relatively a bigger deal as in some ways it is a piece of intellectual property that is gone to waste.
In the times before our generation, books were the only way of storing a ton of information and being able to share it easily. Books were almost extremely valued, as they held the keys to the knowledge of the world, and libraries were almost sacrosanct. It is due to the importance placed upon books during these times that a majority of our generation values books a lot; the sentimental value is a majority of why we prefer the hard copies over the digital ones. For instance, there is always one person who gifts me a hardcover book for my birthday every year. Having the physical copy of this book -- and they sometimes include a cute little note on the front page -- is what reminds me of the person or ocassion in which I obtained the book, and this is what makes my love for books so strong. Additionally, my childhood consisted of me spending most of the time reading physical books, since technology like iPads and Kindles was not widely known or used, if they even existed. Hence, I have a strong bond with physical copies of books.
Burning a physical book has to be one of the most absurd ideas ever proposed. Not only due to the reasons I outlined above, but also because of the actual consequences -- pollution increases, the paper and money is wasted, and the process is irreversible. Sure, you may be able to acquire a copy of the book online but it does not contain the same sentimental value mostly because it is so easily available. This is similar to a concept in economics: if a resource is largely available, its value decreases, which is why money is such a valued commodity. A pdf or epub version of a book is so easily available these days that if it accidentally got deleted, not much effort is required in downloading it again. But when it comes to a physical copy of a book, there is no "Recover item from Recylce Bin" button. Those pages have been chemically changed their form to ashes; there is no process -- at least known to man at this time -- that can undo this change, and so whatever information those pages were retaining would be obliterated. It may not seem like such a deal, but emotions and sentimental values play a significant role in a person's life, although it may not be logically explained.
The bottom line is, no, deleting a digital book is most definitely not the same as burning the physical copy of a book.
In the times before our generation, books were the only way of storing a ton of information and being able to share it easily. Books were almost extremely valued, as they held the keys to the knowledge of the world, and libraries were almost sacrosanct. It is due to the importance placed upon books during these times that a majority of our generation values books a lot; the sentimental value is a majority of why we prefer the hard copies over the digital ones. For instance, there is always one person who gifts me a hardcover book for my birthday every year. Having the physical copy of this book -- and they sometimes include a cute little note on the front page -- is what reminds me of the person or occasion in which I obtained the book, and this is what makes my love for books so strong. Additionally, my childhood consisted of me spending most of the time reading physical books, since technology like iPads and Kindles was not widely known or used, if they even existed. Hence, I have a strong bond with physical copies of books.
Burning a physical book has to be one of the most absurd ideas ever proposed. Not only due to the reasons I outlined above, but also because of the actual consequences -- pollution increases, the paper and money is wasted, and the process is irreversible. Sure, you may be able to acquire a copy of the book online but it does not contain the same sentimental value mostly because it is so easily available. This is similar to a concept in economics: if a resource is largely available, its value decreases, which is why money is such a valued commodity. A pdf or epub version of a book is so easily available these days that if it accidentally got deleted, not much effort is required in downloading it again. But when it comes to a physical copy of a book, there is no "Recover item from Recycle Bin" button. Those pages have been chemically changed their form to ashes; there is no process -- at least known to man at this time -- that can undo this change, and so whatever information those pages were retaining would be obliterated. It may not seem like such a deal, but emotions and sentimental values play a significant role in a person's life, although it may not be logically explained.
The bottom line is, no, deleting a digital book is most definitely not the same as burning the physical copy of a book.
No, simply because of the damage done. Burning a book is a waste of hundreds of pages of paper, whatever amount of ink is used to print out the words, the material used in the binding of the book. While you can easily just acquire another book, that material is gone. It can never be used again. All the effort taken to build that book has been wasted, burned to a crisp.
Deleting a file off a kindle has no wasteage, as a simple re-download can replace what was lost. No materials are destroyed, no effort is honestly wasted. No damage is done in the same way that burning a book does.
Book burning has been with us in every age. Books were burned to protect the faith, or to protect the nation, or to protect the regime. The burning of books has a long history as a tool wielded by authorities both secular and religious, in efforts to suppress disagreements or nonconformist views that are perceived as posing a threat to the prevailing authority. In the digital age, we don't burn physical books. Instead, we delete data. Another thing to consider is the incentive behind deleting e-books and burning books. Speaking from personal experience, the only time I delete books off my version library is to create more space, it is not done in protest. However, I do not burn a book when I finish reading it. Burning a book signifies disrespect and hatred towards the book or author, which is not the case when it comes to deleting e-books.
Objectively, it is the same, in both cases you are getting rid of the object either digitally or physically. If you burn get rid of either the book or digital book there will always be a backup since it is in your Kindle's cloud and another copy of the physical book is always available at the library, bookstore, or archives.
However they differ in connotation and symbolism as book burning has a much more negative connotation than simply deleting your digital book. In the middle-ages books were burnt because they defied authority, the Church, King/Queen, etc. Book burning was therefore associated to the connotation of censorship and controlled thoughts. That is not the case for kindle books as they are a relatively new invention which does not carry this historical connotation and does not involve the physical suppression of the object.
To answer this question, we need to look at what it means to burn a book. Physically, to burn a book would mean to create a fire and 'burn' the book until it is ash. Burning a digital copy of the book on a Kindle would therefore not mean turning a book to ash. That's the simple answer to a question taken at face value. However, I feel that the prompt implies what it is to burn a book in the sense to leave no trace of knowledge of the book. To remove any trace of information the book could have provided to anyone. In that sense, deleting a version of digital copy of a book on Kindle would mean the same. We would still lose out on information and remove any trace of information the e-book could have provided to us. In conclusion, I think the point of this prompt was to discuss the symbolism behind burning a book and deleting an e-book on Kindle, which is the same.
Let me, before I begin my evaluation on the ways in which burning a book and deleting its virtual counterpart are not the same, first concede the one way in which they are: in either case, you can no longer read it until you get it again.
The manner in which you retrieve it, however, is already quite different. In the process of burning a book, you are irreversibly turning a block of dried wood pulp, ink and – depending on the book – either leather or more paper into a pile of fine ash. In deleting its digital counterpart, you turn some 1s and 0s into 0s and 1s, respectively. The former is irredeemably lost, and you will need to purchase another copy (whether you deserve another one is entirely questionable) while the latter is quite easily regained. It’s not just the physical components you lose when you burn a book, though; at the risk of romanticizing them, I’d assert that books have a great deal more character than a digital book is capable of having by the simple merit of being physical, tangible objects. Most virtual books can be highlighted and made notes on, but no note you make on a virtual book will carry the same distinctiveness that comes with your specific handwriting, nor can you look at a Kindle and see the dents, creases and tears that bring to mind the various events in your life that caused them. Even the characteristic texture of the paper, the crispness in the turning of each page, the reassuring weight of it in your hands allow a book far more in the way of identity than digital books can ever aspire to, right now. True, a Kindle is more economic and environment-friendly but, beings of emotion and sentiment as we are, we cannot deny the deep personal loss suffered in burning a well-read book.
On a symbolic level, there is again a wealth of difference between the two, owing to the great deal of history between books and human civilization. The latter stretches back 12,000 years, and the former has been with us for around the last 4000. Over the millennia, the book has come to represent all the concepts it entailed; the recording and transmission of knowledge and erudition, learning, wisdom, freedom of expression and diversity of thought – the act of burning (a symbol in itself of destruction and hatred) a book represents the rejection of all those ideals and values and, indeed, has been used throughout history for those very same intents. From the burning of books and the burying of scholars during the Qin Dynasty circa 210 BC, to the Nazi regime’s public incineration of various books that ‘struck at the foot of German thought’, the deed of burning books has been a destruction of knowledge or a threat to those who’d partake in its creation or perusal.
Deleting a digital book, on the other hand, is only symbolic of the fact that you’re running out of space on your Kindle.
Technically, burning the book should have the same significance as deleting a digital book off your kindle or laptop, however, the sentimental value of a physical copy of a book over weighs that possibility. A physical copy of the book undergoes the wear and tear of normal use and holds as a memory of all the moments that caused the wear and tear. Due to the increasing resilience of technology, the same isn't the case with a book on your device. Since we can now make all sorts of edits online and easily share and access the books 24/7, it isn't that hard to download or delete books as soon as we're done reading the ones in our library, but as technology becomes flexible traditional methods become more outdated. It is much easier to download books on my online library than buy a book for my physical library and hence it would hurt me much more when I burn a physical book instead of deleting my online one.
While they both dispose of your books, it can easily be said that the two are completely different actions.
1.) They both have different ways to retrieve/replace the book back
When you delete something off your device, you are still reassured that you can always download one back again, maybe pay a small fee. With a physical book, however, you will have to purchase a new one at its original price.
2.) They both have different levels of effort involved
Deleting something takes far less effort than burning something. In fact, most times, we delete things without a second thought. Burning, on the other hand, is a premeditated action that requires far more effort to execute.
3.) We hold different weight to the two actions
There is a difference in having something physical to attach ourselves to; which is why burning books is difficult to many. The creases and folds, dents and tear, are physical representations of our “journey” into the book. Burning the physical evidence is therefore different from simply deleting a copy that we aren’t physically attached to.
Burning a book and deleting a digital version of the book from your kindle or laptop is not the same thing as the book is a physical copy of the book where as the digital version can be redownloaded or processed. Another major difference between the two, is that the book has been through a lot of processing in comparison to the digital version – to reach to you as the reader, the book is worth a lot more although it has the same text and everything, the book has been processed at a factory, made out of paper, coming from the trees; from our environment, in comparison the digital book has been taken from the physical copy and has had far more less processing than the printed out copy. Even with the same text – burning a book, which was derived from the environment, is giving off carbon dioxide emissions by burning it harming the environment even further more, although the physical features of the book are the same – the content is the same, but the process it has taken to get to you – is completely different.
In complete objectivity, burning a book should have the same significance as deleting a digital book off your kindle or laptop, however, the sentimental value of a physical copy of a book extends much deeper than technology has reached out to us in modern day. Printed hardcopies date back 12,000 years, and their digital counterpart has been with us for around the last 4000. Maybe that’s why we haven’t accustomed to appreciating e-books, no matter how real they look or sound. Most virtual books allow you to make notes, but no note you make on a virtual book will carry the same distinctiveness that comes with your handwriting or your unique spelling mistakes. Personally, I can trace back every dent and crease on my books to a significant life event. I like the idea of a tangible object, its reassuring weight of it in my hands allow for far more identity than digital books can ever aspire to, right now.
Moreover, retrieval being a major issue in the process of burning a book, you are irreversibly paper into a pile of fine ash. In deleting its digital counterpart, you erase it off your device, but not off the internet. Burning a book is a waste of hundreds of pages of paper, endless amounts of ink, and the material holding it together. It can never be used again. All the effort taken to build that book has been wasted, burned to a crisp. Deleting a file off a kindle has no wasteage, as a simple re-download or re-purchase can replace what was lost.
I’d say no. While they are functionally the same, as they both remove your access to a piece of literature, book burning has historically been a symbol of censorship. Burning a book is less about getting rid of it, and more about making a statement. Books have a tangible cost of time and effort associated with them, which is what makes burning copies of a book a powerful statement. Once a digital copy of a book is created, thousands more can be made at no expense, which makes deleting them a simply a way to clear up some memory.
Post a Comment