Kindle (not a book)

Through signing up for a bar exam preparatory course I wound up with a Kindle. I had no plans to purchase one, but it was free. So, as this is a blog about books I read I figured I'd write a little bit about medium.

First, I like having a book in my hands. Some bindings are not great and you have to wrestle with them, but most of the time I like the substantial feeling. That said, they can get bulky when you have a lot of them (books that is). This is especially true when you have a preference for hardcover books. I prefer hardcover because they seem to last longer.

Second, I like to be able to loan out and borrow books. While the wizards at Amazon and so on are working at making that more of the Kindle experience (I think), I think it is overly complex with copyright laws and profit motives and I much prefer just handing someone a book. Also, borrowing books from friends and returning books to friends is a fun excuse for a social visit and generally provides good discussion. This is lost when it is just done by a click.

Third, I like building a library and I like having bookshelves full of books. Digital books are not the same.

As to the Kindle...

It is quite readable and pretty similar to paper. I do not like that the screen saver is an advertisement, but I've also been too lazy to change that.

I enjoy access to free books on the Kindle, particularly ones I am considering buying in hardcover and can read first.

It is small and light and comfortable to hold. It's not a book, but it's not horrible. And so far I've dropped it once and it seems undamaged.

In terms of interface, the menus are okay. Having the basic (non-touch) version I am unimpressed by the keyboard and searching.

What I would really like is for books that I purchase on Amazon to come with something like a $1 option where any book I buy a physical copy of can also come with a digital copy for the Kindle. Kind of like DVDs and Blu-rays come with now. I could have a copy for my shelf and an easy to carry copy in the Kindle. So yeah, that would be absolutely wonderful!


Off topic, kind of...
From here on I will designate if I read the book on my Kindle or not. If friends read this and would like to borrow a book, so long as you do not abuse them, you are welcome to do so. As for the ones that are on the Kindle, I cannot loan those out, though some I will likely acquire in hardcover.

Anthem

“Anthem” is a novella by Ayn Rand.

It is a dystopian book in a future where the last great invention was the candle. This is after some hinted at, but not discussed, apocalyptic war.

The most striking part of the book is perhaps the use of the pronouns “we” and “our” when spoken by individual characters. There is no “I” and there is no sense of ownership outside the collective. The book involves the main character’s discovery of “I” and the individual “ego” and self-realization.

The story did not really speak to me. It spoke to the dangers of an all-encompassing collectivism devoid of individual thought. The status quo is maintained because consensus on change is difficult, and so therefore advancement is not made for all.

Rand also focuses on the collective work, which is simple and manual. She also focuses on the inventive nature of her individual hero. I wonder what Ayn Rand would write about a future in which humanity essentially no longer needs to do manual labor because we have done so well with robots and automation such that skilled or unskilled labor is no longer needed.

Also, two things strike me in this book. One is how subservient the love interest, The Golden One, is to the main character. For an independent woman in a world of people bowing themselves to the collective, to me, it appears that The Golden One trades a collective master for an individual one. The book is written as a journal from the main character’s point of view. The main character, self-named Prometheus, writes about The Golden One, of her beauty, innocence, and seeming independence. Any time Prometheus quotes The Golden One it essentially includes her bowing to or consenting to his will. It just does not fit.

Secondly, the start of the book discusses Prometheus’ childhood. Names were word and number designations. He asked too many questions as a child. Another child drew art while not authorized or permitted to do so. It is indicated that due to these outlying / misbehaviors these two were made to be street sweepers for their professions. The way it is phrased and discussed by Prometheus makes it sound like there was a conspiracy to keep the independent thinkers low and subdue them. This contrasts later with the utter incompetence and group think / collective submission of the council in power. Essentially, there appears to be no independent thought in society as a whole, and without any independent thought or distinctions made anywhere then it makes no sense to persecute the more independent thought. To me it seems like you need some sort of independent body to prejudice or persecute someone, while society could be set up to oppress any independent thought, basically but not rewarding it and indoctrinating through collectivism and only existing for your fellows (which is what happens in this world) it does not then make sense that such a society would target certain individuals. Essentially, it seemed like there was a complete lack of competence in the presented society, so much so that there was no competence or ability to persecute any individual. Again, it did not fit.

As for a suggested reading, I’d say the novella is probably forgettable.

(Read on Kindle.)