Kindle Conflict

Heffernan's piece for the Sunday Magazine makes no sense at all to me. She seems to find great charm in the Kindle's lack of sophistication, and essentially posits that its existence makes sense because it is just a little hooked in to technology's web, but is otherwise comfortably remote, drawing one in with its non-backlit pages and, um, words. Most of the significant postives she names for it, though, concern it being as close as possible to an actual book. You can get absorbed in it! It doesn't emit any garish electronic light! I try to remain at least neutral about eBooks and Readers, but this argument for them, ironically, only makes me want to decry their existence--or the Kindle's, anyway. Nothing that she says about the Kindle make me think it is a good replacement for an actual book, and several things she says make me quite wary of it. Clumsy design, ugly casing, awkward internet hookup, and general failure to take advantage of its nature as an ELECTRONIC device to make the reading experiene richer in some way. Really, as far as I can tell, the only reason she likes the Kindle at all is because she likes reading, and most readers aren't going to be motivated by the Kindle's charming backwardness to give up their yummy, easily manipulated books. This article only reinforces my feeling that eReaders still have a ways to go before there can be any good reason for buying one--and certainly any good reason for a passionate reader to leave the world of paper behind.