Hard Books

Via Chronicle of higher education, Peter Dougherty at Princeton University Press argues that there is a special place for scholarly publishing, or the university presses like the one he works for.

Hard ideas define a culture — that of serious reading, an institution vital to democracy itself. In a recent article, Stephen L. Carter, Yale law professor and novelist, underscores "the importance of reading books that are difficult. Long books. Hard books. Books with which we have to struggle. The hard work of serious reading mirrors the hard work of serious governing — and, in a democracy, governing is a responsibility all citizens share." The challenge for university presses is to better turn our penchant for hard ideas to greater purpose.

It is true, but I think he missed the point. He begins the essay with Shannon's influential book The Mathematical Theory of Communication and points to numerous other influential books published by university presses. It does not help either. If the society has no patience for anything longer than twitter's 140 character, there is no place for books, let alone hard books. It is not presses, but it is the readers. Newspapers only carry yesterday's news. Books become out-dated even before they hit the press machine, with exception to the Twilight series. Maybe not even the twilight, I don't mind waiting for the DVDs with oversized poster of Robert Pattinson.

There were no educated mass 100 years ago, so why worry if only a handful of people would like to read books and the so called educated no longer read seriously?

By the way, I think Shannon's theory of commucation has little, if anything, to do with destroying the press. It is not the hard form, paper or digital, makes the difference. It is the contents. A book in the form of PDF, html or KINDLE is still a book.