How to use this Page

No prescription needed.
xanax no prescription
xanax for dogs
ultram and ultracet
propecia without a prescription
percocet without prescription

Isn't the backlighting what usually makes reading electronic books fatiguing? Maybe they're finally on to something that will support hours of continued focus, like the wonderful page.

So they say, but I have always felt like I was looking at something dead when reading passive-light screens (or whatever they're called). And I do enjoy being able to read in the dark.

Try a GP2X. It's a Korean gaming device with a Linux operating system. Does almost everything - music, movies, games and books.
I've read a ton of e-books on mine and love it! (Reading War & P. right now.)

I posted about it a while back:
http://riddleburger.wordpress.com/2007/09/16/what-im-reading-on-now/

Actually, the Kindle, the Sony Reader and the iLiad don't have screens at all. They use a new technology called e-ink or electronic paper, which is supposed to be very close to the resolution and experience of reading paper and thus not cause eyestrain like the screens of most digital devices. And just like you can't backlight paper, you can't backlight electronic paper either. Although it's not exactly like paper, you can think of it like paper with dots made from charged particles rather than ink. If you're interested, there's an explanation of how it works at:

http://www.eink.com/technology/howitworks.html

(Yes, I am a geek who likes to read about these things)

I do agree that the Kindle is ugly and it looks like a kluge. I'd rather lose the keyboard and have a larger display area. Of the e-book readers available today, my favorite is the iLiad., Unfortunately, it's 2 - 3 times as expensive as the others.

Call me a romantic, but can anything really beat a piece of paper with ink on it? I mean, really, if you're going to cut down a tree, at least do it for a good purpose, like making a book. Though, I wouldn't mind having some of my text books on something like that. You know, those things I don't read very often anyhow.

I can see a lot of advantages to something like this.

- I often carry around more than one book if I'm going to be gone for any length of time. This would be more convenient.

- As you say, Stella, it would be a big advantage for textbooks. There's been a lot of concern over children lugging around heavy backpacks and causing back strain; this would alleviate that problem.

- I could load it with books that are previous or related volumes to the one I'm reading, so that I can refer to them if I want to.

- I've become accustomed to having search at my fingertips, and sometimes when I'm reading a book I wish I had the capability to search it when I want to look back to find something I've read earlier. Also, when I'm reviewing a book, I frequently want to look back to find a particular passage. Yes, I can usually skim through and find what I'm looking for, but an e-book reader with search capability would be useful.

- It would save a lot of trees (and it uses very little power).

I would love to have an e-book reader with an i-ink display, but I haven't seen one yet that meets my expectations. I'm waiting until the technology is a little more mature.

love it or hate it, and i have mixed feelings, it's here and we need to deal with it, and it's probably going to be big


I think books will never go away but we need to deal with amazon and kindle and live with them like some kind of noisy neighbor

Does anyone know how much of each download payment gets back to the publisher? I'm wondering about royalties for this thing.

I thought they'd be nice for vacation in that it would solve my never-ending "which books to pack" issues, but a friend just pointed out that as an electronic device, you can't use it at the beginning and end of your flight! I'd still have bring at least one book for those times!

Can you really not back-light e-ink? Because I was thinking that an optional back-light would be nice. It would ease eye strain during normal use, but then you can use it in the dark.

As far as I know, you can't backlight it because it isn't a screen. You could use a regular book light, though. And there's no eye strain with e-ink because it's not a screen. The resolution is nearly the same as paper, and there's no need for screen refresh, which is what tires out the eye on a regular screen.

As for flights, I don't know about the Kindle, but I believe that the Sony Reader only uses power when "turning a page." So maybe you could load a page before takeoff, and then read veeerrrrrrrrry slooooooooowly, LOL.

Jeanne, I'm guessing that the royalty rate for authors depends on their contracts with their publishers, not with Amazon. I see that authors who self-publish with Kindle (which, if I'm reading correctly, allows anyone to do so for free with anything, possible leading to a nightmare Amazon has not foreseen) get 35%.

Kindle wouldn't solve the problem of carrying large numbers of books around for me, as going from one book to another while holding the same thing and looking at the same typeface doesn't feel like enough of a change. I'd feel like I'd just switched chapters. Amazon and other e-book publishers are assuming that only content makes a difference, not form, but I've never seen this to be true. I don't know about you all but I read a rack-size paperback differently from a trade-size paperback differently from a hardcover differently from an audiobook differently from an e-book. I love 'em all, and I love the variety, but form is definitely part of the experience.

I recently ordered two Sony Readers for my 3rd grade classroom. This was before I knew about the Amazon Kindle (which has WAY more children's lit. titles available than Sony's e-store) The nice thing about Sony's e-reader is that pdf files can be uploaded for free, so all public domain works are instantly in our library in a usable form (think Alice in Wonderland, etc.) I can also upload my own created materials (Alice in Wonderland discussion questions, etc.) and store them for future use.
Obviously this can all be accomplished with paper. My comment is I believe Sony, Amazon and others have a big opportunity in the children's chapterbook-reading set. I believe these will be a big motivator with my students! I am hoping the catalogue of children's e-literature will continue to grow.

Roger, I too "read a rack-size paperback differently from a trade-size paperback ..." Last week I started to reread The Once and Future King in a rack-size paperback, and it felt so wrong that I traded up (pun intended) to a trade-size paperback. It's really a book worthy of being read in a hardcover, so even now I'm a little dissatisfied. Reading about Wart on an e-book would be a travesty.

Although I and all my friends at college are computer savvy and spend hours on-line on our laptops, we all read books. And we all perfer real paper books, likely because of the nightmare known as NetLibrary. Not only that, but we all like the feel and smell of books, being able to turn pages, write on pages, and bookmark our favoriate passages. Alot of us go to used bookstores, and we love finding old books, books with pyschedelic covers from the 70's, books with notes made from previous owners, books with dated forwards about some 'new' devlopment. I love finding old folklore books the were printed before World War II. I once found a Norse mythology book in my university library that was about a hundred years old and everyone I showed it to thought it was the coolest thing ever and wanted to check it out after me. Really its the older adult crowd that loves e-books and e-readers; we Millinals are into retro: vinyl records, thrift shop clothes, farmers market and organic food, flea market objects, and dumpster diving decor (I kid you not, and I found some nice silverware and bowls by a trash can once, thank you very much)are all popular and getting more popular with my generation. We like technology, we like the internet, but old school is the way to go, if its old, if its got cracks, chipped paint, handworn spots, or yellowed paper that crackles when its turned, it is cool and the thing to show-off. Books are completely retro and completely cool and I don't think my generation will fully embrace e-books; I think it becasue the older generations was told 'technology will solve everything' and we hear 'the planet is in peril of _fill-in-the blank_ because of _fill-in-the-blank_ misused technology' news blasted in our ears.
Sorry, I started philosophizing.

I have a Sony Reader, and I love it. Before, I used to read text files on my PDA, but the backlight was just too tiring on my eyes. I adore the Reader's e-Ink technology and I like the sleek design.

But will I give up on paper books? No. Not yet. Eventhough I find the concept of a Reader good for the environment (I wince at the thought of the numerous books being pulped because they couldn't be sold), I know that right now it is not viable because the demand and supply isn't there. Yet. But I hope for a future where kids will bring their textbooks in their ebook readers and commuters will read their papers on them while getting to work...

I'm clearly in the Christmas shopping mode with a husband who loves the Sony Reader but mentioned Kindle because, and I'd love to be sure here, one can listen to music while reading.

Personally, I want the pages, the variety of heft and weight, and no music at all, but this method of reading is but one difference the two of us have.

I'd love some advice here.

You can also listen to music while reading on the Sony Reader as it gives you the ability to upload music. You just have to connect the device via a special USB cable to transfer the files.

I think with the Kindle, you have the option of downloading selected magazines and newspapers free - I'm not very sure - via wireless. But only if you have Sprint.

With the Sony REader, if you're out of the US, at least you have the option to get your own reading materials and transfer to the reader.

And the Reader is US$100 cheaper ... always a plus!

Betty, you can download mp3s onto Kindle via your computer and a usb connection, audiobooks and other documents too, depending on format. Of course, Don could just turn on the radio or stereo or iPod while reading, too. He's a bright boy ;-)

I'm loving Tina Brown's biography of Diana right now on my Palm TX.

Sony was stupid and short-sighted not to include search and highlight capabilities in their eReader. I wonder what moronic group they used to get their input.

"...we pay for the product not the process..."

Huh? Obviously, one could not exist without the other. It would be silly to say that when you go to purchase a car, you are only paying for the vehicle itself, not for the cost of its maunfacture. Certainly, I get your point that you would want to see the finished product before handing over your money, but I also agree with your friend that the product may never exist without funding for its research and development. To extend the metaphor too far.

I'm not sure what I think of the project, but I do like the notion of calling into question some of our assumptions about the market place, particularly as they relate to art. And, by your argument, our tax dollars-- the resources of us comsumers-- shouldn't go to fund grants supporting artists in their creative endeavors... not without first having seen the finished result.

I don't think I could live with that kind of economy.

Ruth

Perhaps it would work if you combined the two ideas: a dollar a word and help my child live.

Something along the lines of: Doctor Bleathertags walked away from Little Curly Grintooth's sick bed and said:

"There's no hope." > $25

"She needs to visit the seashore." $26-$49

"The fever's broken!" $50 to $99

"She's fine AND this good luck charm she was holding is a priceless antique. Now we can get Mr. Grintooth out of debtor's prison!" $100+

I see your point about grants, etc., Ruth, and hadn't thought of it in that way. But I don't think your car analogy holds up very far--obviously the consumer is paying for all the r&d and labor and materials that went into the thing, but the manufacturer would never ask us to pay on the basis that we might like the car when it's finished.

What you are speaking to instead is funding via sponsorship (fellowships, etc.) as opposed to funding via investment (there's a thought for writers!) or sale. I guess I can see that. I am fairly lukewarm on the idea of public monies being distributed to individual artists, not because I have any particular faith in capitalism but because I don't trust the government's taste in art.

This is a truly fascinating question...I was thinking about the Renaissance to give myself some historical perspective on the whole question.

Artists then had patrons, the church, rulers of this and that domain, wealthy merchants; it was more of a mixed bag then maybe, rather than just ye olde U.S. Government dishing out the bucks, although when push comes to shove, investment dollars come from folks with investment dollars!!! Seems to have been that way through the years.

I think the greatness of some of those artists was how much many of the truly great ones pushed against the barriers, limits, confines of their patrons and yet still satisfied their patrons but also did their thing, too, expressed what they ultimately wanted to express AND what is so fascinating to think about they CREATED so productively, so magnificently within those confines! The conflict between Michaelangelo and the Pope in the painting of the Sistine chapel is classic.

Sometimes, I fret when I feel I don't have time to complete something, especially when I'm quilting, about the limits, lack of equipment, materials there I have compared with my guild members sometimes, and yet, and yet, it is within the very limitations that I again and again find myself expressing myself with the most intense pleasure, getting the best "stuff" out. Would I do better stuff if I were being invested in? Maybe, I would start catering more to others' wishes and tastes and end up with not so good stuff rather than you know really expressing myself and what I deeply, most ardently want to "say." And being happy deep down when somethting comes out well.

And I'm saying this with scraps of expensive materials all in pieces and a lot of it "wasted" in the process..sigh, sigh, sigh... on the floor in the waste bin, so I don't say this at all lightly. What if I die before I say what I wanted to express in a quilt because I didn't have enough time to complete it or enough materials?
Rather haunts me a bit. The unfinished work.

If Mike's work was good enough, I don't see why he couldn't convince a publisher to invest in his writing a book on spec. It seems to me if his work was selling, publishers would be eating up the prospect of more words...I mean hasn't some famouns author here and there done that already....

Okay, now off to the quilting...I really, really have a deep desire to do a Madonna of the Roses somehow...deep blood reds...but soft curves....all sort of violence and sweetness and sensuaousness all together somehow, someway....bye! For a bit....

there are already adventuruous editors who will give an advance to a promising writer even is he does not yet have a manuscript

I think your definition of "adventurous" is pretty generous, Anon.

On the topic of money and art:

I can't help noticing that a certain percentage of my peers in books [I am an author] don't need to support themselves. Not to get all Class War about it, but the labor intensive and mostly low paying field of children's books favors people with strong monetary support from sources such as family or partners.

Nothing new about this, I know, and it is certainly not unique to children's books. Though I can't help but wonder about how insidiously the advantages play out in terms of allowing some people a continual edge throughout their careers, and also how it impacts who will be able to stay in the business in the first place. What I mean by an edge are things like time, resources, materials, workspace, overall environment, and so on.

I was thinking about this the other morning when I got woken up by a neighbor screaming "he stole my paycheck to buy crack!"

R

well, "adventurous" but also with a good track record and the trust of their employers

Okay, everybody, R has been a valuable contributor to this blog and I think we all need to chip in and give her a fellowship to move to a better neighborhood!

Thanks!

Well, on the bright side, at least it wasn't me screaming that someone stole my royalty check for crack!

Seriously though, I think I'll be able to get out of here soon.

R

in the children's book field, it is the artists who support themselves with their work - the writers have private incomes

and the artists' materials are much more expensive than the writers'

Oh God, where to begin?

I’m intrigued with the idea of these adventurous editors who will give contracts to unknown authors who haven’t written a word. Assuming the author isn’t someone in the national news, on what is the editor basing the contract? Charm of the sales pitch? (Ask me to tell you my Paul Michael Glaser story.) Cuteness of the author? Having gone too long without getting laid?

And even more intriguing, who are the generous bosses of these editors? And how did the editor get a good a good track record and trust of his boss while buying unwritten manuscripts from unpublished authors?

I think the bosses must be those relics of a bygone publishing era: the trust fund publisher. I’ve never noticed the children’s authors who don’t need money that anonymous refers to, but I’ve always heard rumors about the gentleman’s profession that publishing used to be. Though I never saw it, even at Viking in the mid 80s when I started. In those days we were all going across the street on the Wednesday before payday to get the $1 slice of pizza.

But back to the idea of children’s writers not needing to earn money the way children’s illustrators do. All I can say is, after 22 years in the business I don’t see any evidence of that. Off the top of my head I can think of 20 children’s authors who were able to give up their day jobs once they started earning enough from their writing (Bruce Coville has a great story about that). But I believe we’ve all seen the opposite problem from time to time. A favorite writer becomes very successful, perhaps gets a big movie made or wins a cash prize, and their output slows to a trickle. Every house has a few bestselling or award-winning authors with long overdue contracts, and I suggest that in some cases, its because the author no longer has the motivation of needing to make the mortgage payment.

re "adventurous editors": Their credibility is based on numbers of previously acquired successful complete mss. (Bosses say, "well, he was right about X and we only paid xx dollars for that, so let's take a chance ...") Sales pitch does of course include the new writer's physical appearance and TV viability and maybe smart agent. And, as you say, the bosses are saving a lot of $$ on editorial salaries ( that of this particular editor AND all his fellow workers) Remember what Freddy Warburg's mother asked!

Can I get a clarification here? Are there actually editors who will sign up an unpublished writer without even a partial manuscript in hand?

TV viability? He must not be a children's author then.

didn't this whole discussion begin with the plan of a novelist to find subsidy. why has it ended up with the assumption that only JUVENILE writers are involved. or perhaps RS is being sarcastic? George Tenet? Paris Hilton? etc etc. actually it was Mrs. Warburg's friend who uttered the immortal query: "Is publishing an occupation for gentlemen, or is it TRADE?"

Children's books or not, I wouldn't call George Tenet or Paris Hilton "promising writers" not their acquiring editors "adventurous." Unwritten celebrity books--whether for children or adults--don't get signed because the editor thinks she has a hold of something "promising"; it's because they are meant to sell on the basis of the celebrity's notoriety or insider knowledge. That can be profitable publishing, to be sure, but I would hardly call it adventurous.

Yes, please make the bouncing ad stop. It makes it ever so distracting to visit the entertaining Ms. Fuse.

Katherine

Hear! Hear!

Oh, GOD do I agree.

I thought it was my computron!

And Fuse, we love you, too. I can't read your blog over there now but I remain confident that SLJ will see the error of its ways soon, and/or start handing out Dramamine to its readers.

I've just been working on my speech for the Newbery/Caldecott/Wilder banquet and wondering how everyone would like it if I delivered it while bouncing up and down with an ad for the Horn Book on my shirt.

Yes, so true! I can't even tell what the ad is for. How ridiculous.

Me too! I almost posted a begging note to Fuse to please kill that thing! I will never buy that wretched book.

Well, hallelujah that someone spoke up! I second, third, and quadruple that vote! I hate that ad thing so much. I am still visiting Fuse, but it is not nearly as pleasant and you can bet I get the heck out of there pronto.

So SLJ - STOP IT!

I'm joining your boycott, Roger. I won't go to SLJ until someone tells me that ad and ads like it will never appear again.

I hope that lots of other people also boycott and that SLJ notices. It will be interesting to see if they do, or if I find, within the month, a banner ad on your site and on every other site I visit.

Wow, that is super annoying. Especially if you still use an old 466 MHz Processor G3 that falls half a step behind in rendering Javascript. Or Flash. Or whatever they are using. Accessibility issues, what-what?

That ad is beyond the pale, I've felt tormented by it all week. Who would think a place like SLJ would have an ad that makes a red lobster inn popup look like a model of respectful restraint?

Only if it was for a book like FEED could I take it, and then only as a temporary joke.

Of course I went to the site to see the ad--it does make me feel like I'm doing something wrong when I scroll, which is one more piece of self-criticism I don't need.

But forget that, are we all going to be blase about Roger using the word "fucking" in his blog entry? At my computer I swear like Christopher Moltisante, but until now I have tried to contain myself in public. But if the Horn is doing it, then Katy bar the door.

If you use Mozilla as a browser and download their wonderful plug-in that blocks flash animation, you won't see that annoying ad -- or any other bouncing, blinking, flashing ad -- ever again. And all you have to do if you do want to see an animation for some reason is to click on the arrow overlay that replaces the flash image.

I don't work for Mozilla or anything, but have found surfing much more pleasurable since I made the switch. Both are free.

There is an alternative to ignoring SLJ and Fuse8. I'm just sayin'

That ad? Sucks. Big time.

The sad thing? I actually liked Atherton (the book that the Ad From Hell is advertising). I was going to review it. Now there's no way in the world I'm touching that puppy with a ten foot pole. Sorry, Little Brown & Co. Atherton is now the bane of my life.

That shows how ineffective the ad is, though. I've seen other ads for Atherton and even attended a party where the original art was shown, so the book is very high on my radar. And yet I didn't even realize that Atherton is what the ad was for. All I remember is that I couldn't get the stupid thing off the screen.

Amen, brother!

My Fuse habit had gotten pretty strong but this is killing it quick. I look at a lot of web sites with ads on them but I draw the line at the flashing and the bouncing and the twitching. SLJ either doesn't know ugly from attractive, much less tolerable; or they have no respect for their readers; or no interest in keeping them; or all, ah, what was I up to? Or all three!

And as for RS's language, there are ads, and there are fucking ads, and this is maybe the most fucking fuckingest of all fucking ads.

I didn't even notice what book was being advertised--I only noticed that it was yellow and annoying and it wouldn't go away--but it made me go away from the SLJ website!

tsnmb,

yes you're right, there is a mozilla answer, but rather than getting into an arms race where SLJ keeps trying to get their annoying in past my defenses, I would really rather that they just STOP IT RIGHT NOW.

SLJ... SLJ... SLJ... Are you listening? Act quickly! Next step is a call for reparations!

Betsy, I've been trying to read your Fuse #8 blog since about 10 pm tonight (June 14) and it's just not there. not there at all. Just white blankness.

Either SLJ is trying to remove that bouncing banner and has temporarily shut you down, or else hhhmmm. I don't know what.

You might tell SLJ that I never did figure out what the ad was advertising -- no book name showed on my Mac. The quote showed, but I had no idea what it was referring to. So, as advertisement, this bouncing idea seems to have flopped. (flipped and floped?)

p.s. it didn't bother me much because it kept skooting to the bottom of the screen, nicely keeping itself away from the part of your blog I was reading at the time.

-wendie old, librarian, writer, mom

Wendie, if you click on the ad, it will tell you and your Mac all about Atherton, etc. But then you will have only encouraged it.

Please, please, blame the messenger not the book. Atherton, a science-fiction/dystopic story for middle graders is worth reading.

That last message was from me (just so you know that it wasn't from the author or publisher).

I found that if I started at the bottom of the screen and scrolled up it didn't seem as annoying but eventually I had to scroll down again & it bounced along with me. Very irritating.

There have been 26 comments here devoted to the ad and the book which means that the ad has managed to bounce its way over into Horn Book's blog without Little, Brown having to pay for it. Meanwhile, Horn Book blog readers rush over to SLJ's blog to see what all the fuss is about while SLJ pockets the money Little, Brown paid them for the ad.

I'd say that's one successful ad, for both SLJ and Little, Brown. Don't look for it to disappear any time soon.

Not so! I've worked in advertising, and that would not be considered a successful ad! People at an influential and well read website talk of boycotting a whole site because of one ad? People in the book business claiming to never want to read the book or review it? People didn't just pop over to see because of Roger's comment, many of the commenters had already seen it and had already been avoiding it or developing negative feelings about it all all their own.

Public controversy and the resultant attention do often work in the favor of things like this, but this is clearly an example of something backfiring.

I have received word (and I may or may not blog about it) that SLJ has heard the cries of pain and is promising never ever ever to do this kind of an ad again. That said, the ad is still there. So.... huh.

Oh, please, people boycotting a site or refusing to read or review a book just because Roger Sutton voices his disapproval of an ad on a competitor's online journal?

Could it be that he's just pissed that SLJ's now got Fuse8, and he's no longer the hippest blogger in kidlit rags?

Fuse has always been hipper than I, o craven Anonymouse; keep up.

As I leave the office at last I offer this humbly:

I repent in dust and ashes. I tried something new. It ddin't work. I will not do it again. Please don't anyone come to my booth during ALA to hurt me.

My head is hung.

My face is pink.

OK. I'm done.

Victoria Stapleton
Manager, Library Services
Little, Brown Books for Young Readers
Sinner.

No, Victoria, YOU are the latest Blog Laureate, crow-ned with the sacred wreath for your honesty and good humor in the face of scorn and adversity. All hail Victoria!

I hope you set aside your ban to read Brian Kenney's post on SLJ explaining the ad today at http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/blog/850000285/post/1810010781.html?nid=3366
I confess the ads drive me crazy, but I have been tolerating them to an extent because the bloggers, myself included, are trying to do something new. Please don't throw out the baby with the bath. Give the bloggers a break.

I did go over to Brian's blog and leave a comment there; thanks for the heads-up, Diane. But I'm not going to lump this one in with the "give the bloggers a break" breaks. At least two of the bloggers (Fuse and Brian) said they too found the ad annoying and were as surprised as the rest of us to see it. Their ignorance of the ad is completely correct--as editorial contributors, they should be kept as far away as possible from the department of SLJ that solicits ads. I think you inadvertently expose yet another dimension of the blog-book-reviewing issues: the prospect of the same person reviewing books and soliciting ads for the same blog. That's a potential fuck-up far more serious than the SLJ business, which was really just an example of a bad ad.

Exactly my point. Either consciously or unconsciously I'm going to find myself avoiding reviewing any title that has an ad on my site. This shouldn't be too difficult if I'm able to review books long before they get to the ad stage of things, but Atherton is a case in point. I may still review it (I mean, I actually did like it) but maybe not for a couple months when the fresh pain of the ad has subsided a little.

By "hip" I am going to assume that you are referring to the relative size of my actual physical hips. Which, truth be told, are magnificently wide and able to carry small children without the use of hands. So yes. I am, in this sense alone, more "hip" than Roger. In terms of being cool, however, the man wipes the floor with me.

If Roger wants to swear on his blog, it's his blog, and if you don't like it, you can just skip over the swear words if they raise your blood pressure or if they bore or otherwise annoy you...

It's VERY difficult to nicely ignore an online ad that follows you around...next time around, they'll have the awful thing SPEAKING to you...and I have every popup blockup thingie I can think of in operation on my browser..but it's still not enough, enough, ENOUGH of the bibbity bobbity boo!

These creepcrawly ads give me NIGHTMARES! I wake up in cold sweats thinking they've stolen my idendity!

Am very pleased to see the mention of Sherman Alexie's new book. I admire him greatly and am eagerly anticipating reading this new book of his. YA have been reading his books for years, though the books are not shelved, in my local library, on YA shelves for some odd reason?? He's done a lot of work with Indian young people in schools that people don't seem to know about as much as his books. I watched both of his films, too.

Amen! Why do you think I'm visiting here rather than hanging out with Betsy? I can't stand that thing!

That said, how awesome is Victoria?! Now THAT is how you do PR! Try something new, find that people loathe it, and then make an apology. All is forgiven! Huzzah!

So why hasn't SLJ taken it down?! Let's go over there with pitchforks and flames!

it is gone!

Though I'll miss the indignation it allowed me, hallelujah and praise be!

Makes my eyes water.

I'll take the Barry Moser "Moby Dick", thanks.

What a fascinating notion-- that the presentation of text in "cascading phrases" can make something more readable, more understandable-- and suddenly poetry. I'm not sure I agree, but it certainly is intriguing, particularly in this text-filled medium of online reading. It seems to me that the novelty of it is part of the appeal. If all text were presented this way, then unbroken lines of language might seem refreshing! Interesting stuff, any way you slice it. Thanks for sharing.
Sylvia

Mock if you like, but sports reporting has never before touched me quite like that New Jersey Blues story:

I felt good

I had control

And then wham
... they just crushed it.

Isn't this just Frog and Toad for grown-ups?

h

Does it help with politician speech?


I’m not
in favor
of his religion
by any means
But
he wrote a book
called
‘Battlefield Earth’
that
was
a
very
fun
science-fiction book.

think of the paper costs to a publisher! or will they now print on adding-machine tape?

How do they do poetry?

"so

much

de
pends

up
on

a

red

wheel
bar
row

glazed



with


rain

wat

er

be

side


the

white
chick


ens."

I found it intriguing, so went from the samples to the explanations. I quickly noticed that most of the conventionally formatted information was white type on black backgrounds, one of the very worst ways to read, print or screen. I suddenly couldn't help but wonder if they were trying to induce temporary eyestrain so when you get to the samples they read better simply because your eyes have ceased to spasm.

I do think
Without a blink

It's all due
Entirely to

Website words
Edited by nerds

Who can't rhyme
In metered time

Or catch a star
With metaphor.

Yes, yes, yes....doggerel, I know, but isn't it so much more fun to read....what do you expect for three minutes' work? Poetry?

I not only read one word at a time, I walk one step at a time and you don't even want to know how I put my pants on.

I think it'd be akin to learning to read as a child. So when you get a sentence that's more than four or five words long, you can be so focused on the words that you can't truly follow the story, sort of a case of not seeing forests for the trees.

Heaven

forbid!

I suppose if you can get the rate right it would be no different from watching a movie, in which you see only one frame at a time but your brain puts them together. I'm having trouble, uh, visualizing it, though. I wonder how I could find a site that offered a demonstration.

Unlike Anonymouse, I don't read a word at a time on the page. I scan, skip, notice words and paragraph formations that show up when I turn the page, and sort of loop down through a paragraph while I'm reading through it linearly. In my head it looks like a knitting diagram.

Whew! Somebody scans and skips like me; I thought I was the only one....although, alas, it never ends up looking like a knitting pattern for me...more like a huge, very jumbled messsy warehouse...in which I sometimes can't find what I read or even was looking for...probably it's best that I do have a private reading room...

I thought the phone thing would work very well as a poetry exercise though...

Welcome to our website for you World of Warcraft Gold,Wow Gold,Cheap World of Warcraft Gold,cheap wow gold,buy cheap wow gold,real wow gold,sell wow gold, ...
Here wow gold of 1000 gold at $68.99-$80.99 ,World Of Warcraft Gold,buy wow gold,sell world of warcraft gold(wow gold),buy euro gold wow Cheap wow gold,cheapest wow gold store ... buy euro gold wow wow gold--buy cheap wow gold,sell wow gold.welcome to buy cheap wow gold--cheap, easy, wow gold purchasing.World of Warcraft,wow gold Super ...

I'd be willing to bet that the one. word. at. a. time. mode. scrolls even more slowly than a 300-baud modem. Back in the '80s, that's what CompuServe ran at. I could read faster than the messages scrolled across the screen of my 40-column, 7-line Radio Shack Model 100.