Bound for shelf space.

---

If what Carr claims is true, then perhaps we should be asking whether there's any point in writing a book if nobody is going to read it. I'm aware that I'm treading on rather shaky, and potentially offensive, ground here, but I've plunged into too many (non-fiction) books that give the distressing impression that they're too long at least by half. Often it seems as though substantial parts of them were written to flesh things out and convince us, and potential publishers, that it's really a book when a couple of articles could have covered the subject more than sufficiently.

So perhaps there really are two sides to this particular coin. It may be that our ability for sustained reading is being diminished by our web reading habits, but it may also be that too many people who should have left off with an interesting article on the web have decided that they want to expand that article beyond its natural bounds, into a bound, and on the shelf, book, and we the readers have to suffer the consequences.

---

Go to: If not actually read, or
Go to: A cyberspace hero is something to be, or
Go to: Why don't you write a book?