Print and Pixel by Nancy Levinson / Response

Print and Pixel article

I don't really understand the point of this article. I feel like the topic is similar with past articles we've had to read which relates to 'the future of publishing' or what the "future of publishing entails'.

This article also follows a similar format to those past articles we've had to read for class. What I mean by format is that is that some of the articles give an introducing to the value of books and reading, then somewhere in the middle, the articles refer to or giving a short history lesson of what publishing was like in the past, and then it summarizes or explains currently trending or available publishing methods Then the articles conclude with what publishing would be like in the future (which involves some sort of open ended statement, theory and what if's? situations).

Overall, my main immediate response was that this was dry read, and it felt somewhat similar in content to past articles I've had read in the past.

While reading this, I also felt bad for this author:

"More than a century earlier, in 1851, Herman Melville published Moby-Dick — which appears on the top-ten lists of Steven Holl and Tod Williams/Billie Tsien — to mixed reviews and weak sales. The poor reception devastated the 32-year-old author, and by the time he took a humdrum job as a customs inspector in New York City, a decade and a half later, his writing career was wrecked; when he died, in 1891, the New York Times obituary described him as "an absolutely forgotten man."  Not until the Melville revival of the 1920s would the author's magnum opus be rediscovered. "

It is very unfortunate that his book was poorly received and ultimately ended his writing career. I felt bad for him. I've never actually finished reading Moby Dick myself, but I remember trying a long time ago and getting bored.

I also can't imagine "from news to periodicals to books" being a non profit enterprise in the future.