Cites & Insights 11:8 (September 2011) available

Cites & Insights 11: 8 (September 2011) is now available for downloading at

The 32-page issue (PDF as usual, but each essay is available as an HTML separate) includes:

Bibs & Blather (pp. 1-2)

Requests for help if your public library uses Facebook, Twitter or both, and a quick note about another tweak to C&I.

Writing about Reading: A Future of Books and Publishing (pp. 2-32)

The Diigo tag for the items discussed here was "eb-vs.-pb," but that's not quite right. The bulk of this lengthy Perspective considers items that, to one extent or another, either favor ebooks over print books, vice-versa, or--better yet--compare the two complementary textual forms of book (not that there aren't others, e.g., audiobooks).

As lagniappe, the first 3.3 pages offer a future of books and publishing (not the future, but a future)--one set of possibilities that I might personally find desirable, looking ten years out and "while I'm still alive"--say 35 years out.

Taxonomy upgrade extras: 


Page 29 of Cites and Insights mentions an essay by Alan Kaufman in the October
2009 Evergreen

Here is a response to Kaufman's essay:

Really? Burning a book and subjecting folks to more than three minutes of pointless video of it burning is somehow a response?

Yes, the comparison of increased use of ebooks to the Holocaust is offensive.

Also yes: burning a book is offensive--but, hey, whoever took the video presumably paid for it, so that's his or her choice.

A coherent and meaningful response to Kaufman's essay? Maybe if you believe video is inherently more meaningful than text. Otherwise, meh. (And you can read my whole commentary on Kaufman in a lot less than three minutes...)

How were you subjected?

Did someone hold your eyes open in a Clockwork Orange fashion and tie your hands so you cannot click stop on the video?

I was subjected to the damn thing because some Anonymous person recommended it here as a, presumably serious, rebuttal to an essay. Thus, I watched it, wondering when there would be anything that served as any sort of argument or even discussion.

If I simply said "Screw it. Anonymous recommended it and it's a YouTube video," that would be the end of it, but a rather cavalier attitude toward exploring viewpoints. There was no viewpoint in this video, however, just a cheap stunt.

If you advance the video to 2:40 the fuel is added and things really get going.

Add new comment

Plain text

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.