I am significantly better off, so I don’t think I have a say in that side of the argument (albeit fully agreeing, ofc) but the idea that there is something that makes you ‘better’ when reading a physical book is such an incredibly stupid opinion. Just like art, there is no hierarchy to reading. Financial issues and accessibility to physical media put a huge burden on the majority of people around the world.
For example, let’s take the average chain bookstore in the US, Barnes & Noble (AKA the UK’s Waterstone, Canada’s Indigo, or Fully Booked from the Philippines). The average price of a book there amounts to $10-$12; the same price as my favorite pair of shoes, or two takeout meals.
Now, on the topic of access. Bookstores themselves are uncommon, especially in rural areas. Ordering online is more expensive, and secondhand bookstores are both even harder to find and usually don’t contain any newer books (on top of often being ‘against’ what people pushing for physical copies want).
“Go to a fucking library,” I hear you saying. And sure, in the US, that’s a valid point: 99% percent of the population has access to a library. But the moment you go to any rural area in Asia, Europe, South America, Africa, Canada, or any other area with more space and less skewed statistics, that number can drop down to even 4% of children, and even less of adults. You get my point.
Buying books online (still not cheap)
Pirating books online (very grey area, depending on who you ask)
Actively stealing physical books (significantly more illegal)
Finding free books online (very little within the past century)
Now, which seems like the best idea to you?
I’m tired, so I’m gonna leave it there. If anything, have my last stupid point:
Pirating books is just as morally correct or incorrect as implementing a class system to literature enjoyers. Pull that motherfucking stick outta your ass, bitch.
theartofmadeline
vaporwave
yousharknotpass
pixelskylines
tangentwithtanner
prguitarman
discoholicmusic
