Jonathan Franzen: E-readers are 'damaging to society'
Jonathan Franzen doesn鈥檛 want you to read his bestsellers on e-readers. The acclaimed novelist of 鈥淔reedom鈥� and 鈥淭he Corrections鈥� launched a tirade against e-books at a recent literary event, calling them 鈥渘ot for serious readers鈥� and 鈥渄amaging to society.鈥�
Franzen was speaking at the Hay Festival in Cartagena, Colombia, when he sounded his battle cry against e-readers, harsh shots at technology now heard 鈥榬ound the book world.聽
鈥淭he technology I like is the American paperback edition of 鈥楩reedom,鈥欌�� Franzen said at the Festival. 鈥淚 can spill water on it and it would still work! So it's pretty good technology. And what鈥檚 more, it will work great 10 years from now. So no wonder the capitalists hate it. It鈥檚 a bad business model,鈥� said the novelist who famously cuts off all connection to the Internet when he writes.
鈥淚 think, for serious readers, a sense of permanence has always been part of the experience. Everything else in your life is fluid, but here is this text that doesn鈥檛 change.鈥�
鈥淲ill there still be readers 50 years from now who feel that way? Who have that hunger for something permanent and unalterable? I don鈥檛 have a crystal ball.鈥�
鈥淏ut I do fear that it鈥檚 going to be very hard to make the world work if there鈥檚 no permanence like that. That kind of radical contingency is not compatible with a system of justice or responsible self-government.鈥�
Franzen isn鈥檛 the first to come out against e-books, but he may be the first to have attacked them so damningly, as incompatible with justice or responsible self-government. He went on, explaining that he felt reassured by paper books鈥� permanence and distrusted the constant possibility of change in an e-book.
鈥淢aybe nobody will care about printed books 50 years from now, but I do,鈥� Franzen said at the event. 鈥淲hen I read a book, I鈥檓 handling a specific object in a specific time and place. The fact that when I take the book off the shelf it still says the same thing - that鈥檚 reassuring.鈥澛�
鈥淪omeone worked really hard to make the language just right, just the way they wanted it. They were so sure of it that they printed it in ink, on paper. A screen always feels like we could delete that, change that, move it around. So for a literature-crazed person like me, it鈥檚 just not permanent enough.鈥澛�
This isn鈥檛 the first time Franzen has spoken out against technology, . He鈥檚 known for sealing off his computer鈥檚 ethernet port to prevent himself from connecting to the Internet while he writes, 鈥渋t鈥檚 doubtful that anyone with an Internet connection at his workplace is writing good fiction.鈥�
He seems to have injected that critique of technology in 鈥淔reedom,鈥� too, voiced by character Walter Berglund. 鈥淭his was what was keeping me awake at night,鈥� Walter says in the novel. 鈥淭his fragmentation. Because it鈥檚 the same problem everywhere. It鈥檚 like the Internet, or cable TV 鈥� there鈥檚 never any center, there鈥檚 no communal agreement, there鈥檚 just a trillion bits of distracting noise鈥ll the real things, the authentic things, the honest things, are dying off.鈥�
Not surprisingly, his comments have elicited pushback.
Responding to his complaint that 鈥淎 screen always feels like we could delete that, change that, move it around,鈥� , 鈥淒oes he think that e-publishers will surreptitiously edit classic works? Perhaps sprinkle Beowulf with Starbucks adverts, or weave party political messages subtly into the text of Jane Eyre? In all honesty, I suspect that this is an example of a very clever man using his considerable brainpower to dress up unconscious prejudice in what sounds like reasoned argument. Mr Franzen doesn't like e-books; he prefers reading books. But he can't simply say as much, so he wraps it in a layer of talk about 'permanence' and 'responsible self-government'.鈥澛�
We tend to agree with Chivers. Franzen seems to be masquerading his own relative Luddism by disparaging technology and those who use it, including many serious bibliophiles, as 鈥渄amaging鈥� and 鈥渘ot serious.鈥�
What do you think? Does Franzen have a point?
Husna Haq is a Monitor correspondent.
Join the Monitor's book discussion on and .
