Automaton City

Jake & Ian’s Great iPad Debate by Jake Kilroy

I met my friend Ian in college. He was the editor-in-chief at my school newspaper, where I held the positions of reporter, columnist and Internet & Multimedia Editor Space Age Hybrid. Before he was in charge, however, Ian was the Multimedia Editor and he taught me a lot about Apple media (which makes the following debate so much more intriguing).

When Ian bought the iPhone, we joked that he would find any possible and plausible reason to use it in front of us. This seems to be a running gag between most iPhone owners and non-iPhone owner friends, I’ve learned. But Ian seems to know more about the iPhone than anyone I know (that has never worked at Apple). Ian covers business for The Orange County Register. He’s exceptionally techno-savvy, meaning he knows how to use the technology, but he also understands the industry itself, it seems.

I thought this debate was relevant for two reasons: 1) the iPad has been all over the news since it was announced last week, 2) I think we, as a society, are soon to be at a crossroads and, in these always changing times, it’s interesting to hear both sides of a rather quiet culture war. The debate just seemed relevant, as everyone seems to have an opinion on the subject.

Now, over the two and a half years I’ve known my friend Ian, we’ve had several debates, ranging from things such as the role and responsibility of journalists to other topics like violence in film. None of these debates have ever ended with either of us heated. They’ve been passionate and articulate, but never remotely furious. We both really like hearing the other person out. Ian’s an extraordinarily patient and thoughtful debater and I’m always excited for when we disagree on something. He’s a good listener and he debates academically.  Also, he’s very reasonable and brings about logical points.

So, naturally, I was overjoyed when we got into an argument about the iPad, last week when the new Apple tablet was announced.

It all started when I posted something on my Twitter about Steve Jobs and ink on his fingers. Then we had a limited 140 character debate over Twitter.

JAKE:
I’m starting to get pretty bummed out on Apple’s war on printed books. I bet it’s been a long time since Steve Jobs had ink on his fingers.

IAN:
It’s been a long time since anyone has had ink on their fingers. That’s why this will be so huge.

JAKE:
Anyone who reads paper newspapers and printed books has ink on their fingers. It’ll be huge for the “digitals,” not the “paperists.”

IAN:
My point is that you’re in the minority. Few people read. This device could bring the majority back to the written word.

JAKE:
I feel like that’s the attitude that killed newspapers. Also, readers have always been a minority, but “few” is marginalizing it.

IAN:
You misunderstand. I’m suggesting a lot of people want to read, just not in your preferred format.

JAKE:
Non-readers will stay non-readers and I don’t think a gadget will change that as much as everyone thinks it will.

IAN:
People spend a ton of time in front of computers. Reading books on computers sucks. Solution: make it not suck. Enter iPad.

JAKE:
They’ve always wanted to read, but they’ve never liked books, so they’ve been waiting on the Kindle and the iPad to read digitally?

IAN:
People like reading, but they like multitasking more. That’s why iPad could revolutionize the written word.

JAKE:
Watching television and cleaning is multi-tasking. If you’re reading a book, then you’re reading a book, whether it’s digital or not.

Later, the debate continued when I updated my Facebook.

Status Update:
Jake Kilroy and his army of dead authors ain’t that impressed by the iPad.

IAN:
You had to go to Facebook, didn’t you? People will read books the iPad. I don’t understand how that’s a bad thing.

JAKE:
In the limited battle of Twitter, in 140 character arguments, I think communication got all screwy. I’m not saying Kindles or iPads are bad. Definitely not. If people are reading more that way, I’m for them. But, on a personal level, I can’t ever see myself getting either, as I see them as cold and futuristic instead of romantic and old world. I remain unimpressed by the Kindle and iPad.

IAN:
Ah, we have an understanding now.

Still, this strikes me as short-sighted. The same could be said about any new technology. Why would I use a bike when I have two legs to take me from one place to another? Why would I use a cell phone when I have a perfectly good landline?

Do you refuse to listen to MP3s because vinyl records are just so much more classic?

Now you can carry a thousand books with you wherever you go and have a decent reading experience too.

JAKE:
You may think I’m short-sighted, Ian, but I think you’re just generally impressed with anything that comes from Apple. If Steve Jobs pooped on his hand and called it the iBrush, you’d tell me why I should consider getting one.

You use a bike instead of your legs because it gets you places faster. An iPad doesn’t make you read faster.

You use a cell phone instead of a landline because it allows you to talk to people outside of your house. The iPad didn’t just allow me to read wherever I wanted, as I’ve always been able to do that.

I listen to an iPod because I can’t carry my record player or stereo with me.

Also, the way you read is way different from the way you listen to music. Shuffling songs doesn’t change the beginning, middle and end to your ultimate listening experience. But can you shuffle sentences or chapters of different books? No. No, you can’t, dude.

Oh, I can carry thousands of books now with an iPad. So what? So I can read a page of a different book at a time? No, a book is a full commitment. You start it and you read it until you finish it. The only practical use of that is if I was being launched into space indefinitely.

IAN:
I recognize the emotion attached to a stack of CDs or vinyls or a bookcase filled with dusty old novels. There is romance in that, just as there’s a wonderful heft and crinkle to the newspapers nobody reads anymore.

But you need to recognize that our collective culture is changing.

With every new technology that comes out there are the naysayers who grip their old ones and say, “I don’t need that.” That’s fine, that’s your personal preference, but it’s nothing more than a nostalgic and individual connection to something you grew up with.

I get filled with a sense of wonder and possibility when I see new technologies that can change the way we eat, live, read, watch or communicate. It just so happens that Apple seems to be really fucking good at shipping those technologies.

Where you’re filled with a sense of tragedy at the loss of old media I see hope in the possibility of a renaissance. You’re looking backward with sadness. I’m looking forward with hope.

I don’t want to overstate the potential of the device, but in five years the laptop will likely be dead and my tablet will be filled to the brim with my favorite authors, musicians and directors. It’ll all be at my fingertips, just a few taps away.

I’m not asking you to abandon that feeling of romance you have for old media. I’m asking you to recognize there might be some promise in the new ones.

JAKE:
Ian, this is the problem with debating technology with technophiles. Since it’s digital, everything becomes black and white to them. Meanwhile, us artists can see the gray areas and the color spectrum. To assume that my being under whelmed by ONE item from ONE company represents me being anti-new technology is so very flawed in so very many ways, dude. Because I don’t care for the iPad, that becomes me refusing to see “hope” in technology?

Damn, dude, I think DVDs are superior quality to VHS, I listen to audiobooks in the car because I can’t read during that time and I understand the natural order of radio to television to the internet. I don’t need to go on, right? I’ve made the flaw obvious, yeah? You can be selective, man. You don’t have to hate or love all new technology.

And to suggest that everyone who isn’t jumping on the bandwagon along with you doesn’t recognize a changing culture is so stunningly bogus. That makes it sound like we have the incapability of observation instead of what we do have: the thoughtful process of choice. You’re making our changing culture sound like a tidal wave and making it seem like those of us who are choosing books over the iPad have decided to drown. Well, that’s wrong. It’s a different analogy. You can swim if you want to. That’s how I see it.

No, I don’t see this revolution at all in the iPad. How does that possibly suggest that I don’t see “hope” in new media? I’m listening to my iPod (instead of my record player) as I write this from a laptop (instead of a typewriter) right now. Look, maybe you want the renaissance of science and I want the renaissance of art, and this whole debate are dueling shots missing each other. But I know that I’d rather have a colorful bookshelf instead of a single lone briefcase.

And then, what, any of us who’d rather read books instead of screens become pack rats to you? “Oh, they’re just holding onto the past,” you and the other Apple junkies say. And then to tell me that it’s nothing more than nostalgia? No. No, dude. You don’t get it. If you think that anyone who isn’t interested in the iPad (like you are) isn’t interested because they just can’t get over what they grew up with, you are so badly mistaken. For a guy who is all about new technology, you sound out of touch. You just can’t figure out why the hell any of us are more interested in books than iPads. You don’t understand why we’re not joining some bogus iRevolution and then you put it all off of us being emotional pack rats unable to give up nostalgia.

Look, I like looking at a colorful bookshelf instead of a briefcase, I like the sound of flipping pages, I like what it feels like to buy individual copies and decide which cover I prefer, I like loaning books to people, I like the vulnerability of books. I like a clean new book, knowing that it can get damaged over the coming years. I like the scars of books. I like that the more screwed up they get, the more history they have. And when they’re worn and weathered, I never have to take my books in to get them fixed. I like wandering through libraries. Would you prefer to wander through a forest or would you rather take a virtual tour on your computer? Because I’ll tell you right now that one of those two options is way fucking better and more genuine than the other.

It’s not a matter of looking back with tragedy or looking ahead with hope. You can do both. I assure you that it’s not as hard as you make it out to be. What it’s more about is choosing what you prefer, choosing what feels right, choosing which better represents you. And, again, I’m a bookshelf while you’re a briefcase.