I finish reading a book on my iPad — one by Ed McBain, for instance — and I shelve it in the cloud. It vanishes from my “device” and from my consciousness too. It’s very odd. THE BLOOM HUNCH THAT READING ON PAPER IS VASTLY SUPERIOR TO READING OFF SCREENS WHICH BLOOM CALLS SCREENING AND WHO SAYS THAT FUTURE MRI AND PET SCAN STUDIES WILL SHOW THE READING ON PAPER IS SUPERIOR TO SCREENING THE SAME TEXT FOR THREE MAIN THINGS: INFO RETENTION INFO ANALYSIS AND CRTIICAL THINKING OF WHAT WAS READ

      

When I read a physical book, I remember the text and the book — its shape, jacket, heft and typography. THE BLOOM HUNCH THAT READING ON PAPER IS VASTLY SUPERIOR TO READING OFF SCREENS WHICH BLOOM CALLS SCREENING AND WHO SAYS THAT FUTURE MRI AND PET SCAN STUDIES WILL SHOW THE READING ON PAPER IS SUPERIOR TO SCREENING THE SAME TEXT FOR THREE MAIN THINGS: INFO RETENTION INFO ANALYSIS AND CRTIICAL THINKING OF WHAT WAS READ When I read an e-book, I remember the text alone. The bookness of the book simply disappears, or rather it never really existed. Amazon reminds me that I’ve already bought the e-book I’m about to order. In bookstores, I find myself discovering, as if for the first time, books I’ve already read on my iPad.

All of this makes me think differently about the books in my physical library. They used to be simply there, arranged on the shelves, a gathering of books I’d already read. But now, when I look up from my e-reading, I realize that the physical books are serving a new purpose — as constant reminders of what I’ve read. They say, “We’re still here,” or “Remember us?” These are the very things that e-books cannot say, hidden under layers of software, tucked away in the cloud, utterly absent when the iPad goes dark.

This may seem like a trivial difference, but that’s not how it feels. Reading is inherently ephemeral, but it feels less so when you’re making your way through a physical book, which persists when you’ve finished it. THE BLOOM HUNCH THAT READING ON PAPER IS VASTLY SUPERIOR TO READING OFF SCREENS WHICH BLOOM CALLS SCREENING AND WHO SAYS THAT FUTURE MRI AND PET SCAN STUDIES WILL SHOW THE READING ON PAPER IS SUPERIOR TO SCREENING THE SAME TEXT FOR THREE MAIN THINGS: INFO RETENTION INFO ANALYSIS AND CRTIICAL THINKING OF WHAT WAS READIt is a monument to the activity of reading. It makes this imaginary activity entirely substantial. But the quiddity of e-reading is that it effaces itself.

In the past several years, I’ve read nearly 800 books on my iPad. They’ve changed me and changed my understanding of the world, distracted me and entertained me. Yet I’m still pondering the nature of e-reading, which somehow refuses to become completely familiar. THE BLOOM HUNCH THAT READING ON PAPER IS VASTLY SUPERIOR TO READING OFF SCREENS WHICH BLOOM CALLS SCREENING AND WHO SAYS THAT FUTURE MRI AND PET SCAN STUDIES WILL SHOW THE READING ON PAPER IS SUPERIOR TO SCREENING THE SAME TEXT FOR THREE MAIN THINGS: INFO RETENTION INFO ANALYSIS AND CRTIICAL THINKING OF WHAT WAS READBut then, readers are always thinking about the nature of reading, and have done so since Gutenberg and long before.

There is a disproportionate magic in the way black marks on white paper — or their pixilated facsimiles — stir us into reverie and revise our consciousness. Still, we require proof that it has happened. And that proof is what the books on my shelves continue to offer.