As much as I try to be environmentally responsible, I pick paper over electronics almost all the time. Part of that is because I prefer the texture, appearance, and ease of paper. I would rather hold a book in my hand and read it than download it onto a Kindle and stare at another computer screen. I would rather fold back a newspaper and clip my favorite articles than scroll down a website and get mad at pop-up ads. And I would rather shuffle a stack of photos than run through a digital slide show.
I always attributed my choices to being technically-challenged and just plain old-fashioned. And that's partly true. But there's more to it than that. One of the biggest reasons I stay out of the electronic age is because I can't keep up with it. It seems as soon as an 'advancement' comes out, it's obsolete. Think about all those cassette tapes, VCR tapes, floppy disks and heavy, dense computer monitors. Garbage now. And I mean that, literally -- garbage.
I found it interesting when I listened to National Geographic photographer Joel Sartore talk about digital sustainability, or rather, the lack of it. While it's fine to take digital pictures, he still relies on printing them out so that he will always have access to them.
Joel says, “These days, I only use digital cameras. They're great because the feedback is instant, allowing me to experiment a little more than I might with film. The downside is that the equipment is more expensive, and digital files are costly to archive. The other problem with digital is that there is no surefire way to store the images. The only way to be absolutely certain you'll be able to view an image in twenty years or more is to transfer it to paper or film.”
That's exactly how I feel about books, newspapers, and every other electronic media that seems to replace paper. How do we know we'll still be able to read e-books on e-readers twenty years from now? How do we know we'll still be able to access newspaper stories, pictures and other documents that we've stored to obsolete forms?
Technology scares me. I've taken myself out of the running. I want to save the earth, but not at the expense of giving up paper. I need my books, my magazines, and hard-copy pictures of my family. It may not be the most earth-friendly option, but my paper trail is definitely sustainable.
Quick clarification: staring at a Kindle is nothing like staring a computer screen. That's it's #1 advantage over Nooks, iPads, Sony Readers, etc. It uses special technology that makes it almost like paper.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, though, that the pace of change of technology is ridiculous and can seem overwhelming. The thing, though, is that if you jump in and keep treading water, you'll find yourself swimming along with the current instead of against it. It's easier to keep up once you know where you are.
Also, as someone who has survived a flood, I can tell you for certain that paper is no more a guarantee of longevity than anything else. :P
Very, very good point about the flood, Kristan.
ReplyDeleteAnd I liked your analogy about treading water. At this point in my life, I'm still sitting on the beach, not sure I want to pay to swim at all.
I appreciate your clarification about Kindles. They're not for me, but I think they're great for people who do enjoy them. Ultimately, all that matters is that people read. How they access their reading material is simply matter of choice.