A: Probably not the way you’re thinking.
Today’s BoSacks email has this curious headline: “On PRIMEX and the Proven Haptic Power of Print.”
Haptic has to do with the sense of touch, and the lesson in the email is that touch does more than you think — on an interpersonal level, of course, but also with learning.
Not only is there a physical permanence to print, but also our brains perceive print as permanent. Both the fact and the perception of the physical permanence of printed products increases our ability to learn and remember.
By contrast, things online aren’t permanent, they’re just part of a flow. They go by and they’re gone.
He continues …
… the part that I don’t/didn’t understand is the haptic feeling regarding holding a digital substrate. … I am holding, touching and feeling the weight and presence of a physical product in my hands when I read on my smart phone or tablet.
That is, you touch print, but you also touch your smart phone, so why is the one more “haptic” than the other?
My guess is that it relates back to the perception of permanence. When something is carved in stone, you take it seriously. When it’s written on paper, less so, but there’s still a perception of permanence. When words are streaming by as lights on a device, they seem far less weighty.
If this is true, it raises interesting questions for publishers. Perhaps we shouldn’t view delivery method as simply a question of convenience. To some extent, the medium is the message.
A long time ago — before smart phones or any of that — I was studying to be a pastor in a small Presbyterian denomination. The church’s “book of order” was published in a 3-ring binder.
I like 3-ring binders. They’re very convenient, and I often use them. And at that same time I was studying to be a pastor, I was the editor of several loose-leaf services that were published in 3-ring binders. That format was incredibly convenient for the subscribers because we could change out the pages as new regulations came along.
It was precisely that lack of permanence that made me think it inappropriate to have a church’s books of rules published in a 3-ring binder. It sent a message that everything is up for grabs and likely to change.
As another illustration of the idea, you probably wouldn’t think much of a digital tombstone that flashed your final stats to the world. There’s something very fitting about having such information carved in granite.
Print vs. digital, hardbound vs. softcover, or … dare I say it … etched in stone …. It’s not a superfluous detail. It says something about the content and how seriously we should take it.
Newsprint is just for today, and it’s flimsy stuff. A paperback is a little more serious. A hardbound book with gilt edges is for stuff we cherish. So … what are we saying about our content when we publish it digitally?
I don’t mean to imply that there’s only one answer, or that serious things should never be published in a digital medium, but I do think it’s something to consider.
P.S. — I couldn’t find a link to today’s missive from Bo, but you can sign up for his email service on his website, bosacks.com.