Great writing is predicated on no technology

At the Guardian, Tim Adams writes about how e-books are going to be the downfall of good writing. The article is a diatribe against technology in general, and how the internet is bad for our brains. He drives this home by comparing Don DeLillo writing on a typewriter to reading classics on the DS.

I'm sorry. Maybe it's my internet addled brain but: what? I think the intended point is that reading on a screen is different than reading on a paper page, that the physicality of typing on a typewriter is somehow holy, and that if you read too much internet you become incaple of literary creation. But then, how is this the fault of the e-reader? Well:
For the time being the Kindles and the rest are standalone devices, but it will surely not be long before they and the thousands of books they contain are bundled up with all the other must-have applications into a single computer which will mediate our lives: more undifferentiated text to match our own mood.
Oh. So...it's not the fault of the e-reader at all. But it could be their fault in the future.

Can someone please explain this to me?


  1. Idiocy is unexplainable. Stop, before you give yourself a migraine.

  2. It makes perfect sense.

    See, writing technology evolved in one direction, toward better efficiency and greater usefulness, but then STOPPED with the creation of the typewriter, the holy, perfect vessel of our creative beings.

    Computers tempt authors to edit, since it's easier than breaking out correction tape. And we all know what editing does to books.

  3. Sweet Jesus, not the edits! It's like the bends, but worse.