The Evolution Will Be Digitized

Something’s missing. Simple as that. I feel like my priorities have been all askew, that I’ve focused too much on the accumulation of things and not enough on the cultivation of the soul, as it were. So I did a search on my brand-new iPad Mini for ways to become less materialistic…

Okay, that’s not true. It’s an anecdote I thought would be humorous, but I haven’t had the chance to use, since I don’t have an iPad Mini (yet – I’m saving my nickels already). The rest of the stuff above, though? Totally true.

I enjoy collecting things. All sorts of things. I’ve got bookshelves groaning under the weight of bargain-priced paperbacks and thick, hardcover art books alike. My T.V. stand is packed from one end to the other with DVD cases for films I haven’t watched in years. I have board games stuffed in my closet, waiting for the day I decide to finally start socializing again. I like stuff, and I spend most of my time trying to figure out how to get more of it.

And that makes me a terrible person, I’m sure.

But getting back to the iPad – and yes, there is a connection. I read a while back an article on a bit of controversy surrounding e-readers in the comics collecting community. Both Marvel and DC comics (and I assume all the little publishers no one but me cares about) have apps that allow the digital connoisseur to access and browse years, maybe decades, of old material. However, people who have e-readers don’t own these books. In fact, the terms of service for using these apps state that the big publishers can revoke a person’s access to the material they paid for for any reason.

Comics fans, of course, got upset. The comics community is one that has thrived limped along for years on the backs of the collector. Comics fans spend tons of money on collected volumes of their favorite stories, or alternate printings of individual issues with variant covers, or action figures of the most iconic characters. So, while the e-reader revolution provided these individuals with unprecedented access to the material they loved so much, it simultaneously revoked their right to own said material.

Honestly, I’m not sure that’s such a bad thing.

Let’s look at another, similar situation. The film industry seems to be trying to find a way to make a person pay for every time they choose to watch a movie. While home entertainment systems and streaming video have crippled big theaters, they have also granted movie studios a way to nickel-and-dime extra income out of their potential audiences. A person pays a dollar every time they get a movie from Redbox. Netflix has their charges, as well. Even someone who chooses only to stream movies and. T.V. shows through Netflix is still paying a monthly rate for that privilege. And, at the end of the day, the consumer owns nothing.

I’m a frequent patron of the city library system here in Salt Lake. On their front screen, a rotating image often displays the following quote:

The first time I read that quote, I bristled a bit. After all, I’m someone who loves his books. I like browsing the titles, gloating over every one I’ve read and looking forward with great anticipation to those I haven’t. Maybe the books are just the plate and not the food, as Adams says, but aren’t there people out there who collect plates?

Heh. I’m really not sure I want to be one of those people.

I think it’s possible that the digitalization of media removes a lot of the motivation to own things. Renting, or streaming, or whatever the @^$% you call it, seems to be cheaper, convenient, and hardly an inconvenience at all. Is it possible, then, that this new age of media distribution could cultivate a less materialistic attitude among the consumer population?

Heck if I know. I’m still saving up for my iPad Mini.