For my final paper, I’m exploring the idea
of format when it comes to books. The readings that I’ve done so far have
really made me consider textuality beyond the book, specifically regarding the
phonograph during the late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century. Both the
Ruberry article and a fascinating book by Lisa Gitelman, titled Scprits, Grooves, and Writing Machines,
highlight the utter grip on the cultural and intellectual imaginations that the
phonograph held. It’s my fascination with cultural narratives and influences on
popular imaginaries that I would chose to return to late nineteenth- and early
twentieth-century America.
What really stands out to me about this
period is the quickness of mainstream imagination in eschewing the traditional
textuality of the book for an aural experience. The ability to “read” in bed
via phonograph enthralled people. Prior to the phonograph, insufficient
lighting and fire hazards made bedtime reading a rarity. Throughout his adult
life, Thomas Edison received thousands of letters from diverse people about
ideas for inventions and particularly applications for the phonograph. In some
circles, it would appear that the traditional book would soon become
passé. Or that paper records of meetings
would not longer be necessary, as aural recording would fulfill the need to
archive records. And to an extent, in the early twenty-first century, the
success of the audiobook and the increasingly paperless (e.g. digital)
repositories for records is a reality explored at quite some length during
Edison’s time.
In my time travels back to this era, I’m
not sure if I’d want to say anything about the future of the book. Rather, I’d
be more interested in learning more about ideas about the future, and impart
how these ideas about new writing, hearing, and reading inventors impact ideas
of textuality at the turn of the twentieth-century America. Perhaps the one
thing that I would mention that all these ideas about the future of the reading
didn’t lead to the extinction of the traditional book, but rather complemented
it through different forms (such as the audiobook). Just as there was a great
diversity of ideas for inventions at this time, I think that it would be
important to empathize that excluding the traditional book (e.g. a format that
is actually read, not heard) leads to an oversimplification of the future of
the book.
Gitelman, Lisa. Scripts, Grooves,
and Writing Machines. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1999.
Ruberry, Matthew. "Canned Literature: the Book After Edison." Book
History 16 (2013): 215-45.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.