A biography of Marshall McLuhan, one of the smartest media thinkers ever, written by Douglas Coupland, one of my very favorite authors, was going to be pretty much a no brainer for me to pick up and read and enjoy. And I really did, although I think this book probably is only for a particular type of nerd. (Pretty sure you know who you are.)

As you’d expect from Coupland & the subject, the style of the book is sort of meta. Bits & pieces about McLuhan, mixed up with other bits and pieces. I didn’t love the style, but I did find a bunch of the book thoughtful & provocative. And it really is amazing how clearly McLuhan could see the future – I think he & Neil Postman figured out decades ago things we’re only just now figuring out together as we all converge online.

Here’s what Coupland had to say to start the book:

Life becomes that strange experience in which you’re zooming along a freeway and suddenly realize that you haven’t paid any attention to driving for the last fifteen minutes, yet you’re still alive and didn’t crash. The voice inside your head has become a different voice. It used to be “you.” Now your voice is that of a perpetual nomad drifting along a melting landscape, living day to day, expecting everything and nothing. And this is why Marshall McLuhan is important, more so now than ever, because he saw this coming a long way off, and he saw the reasons for it. Those reasons were so new and so offbeat and came from such a wide array of sources that the man was ridiculed as a fraud or a clown or a hoax. But now that we’ve damaged time and our inner voices, we have to look at McLuhan and see what else he was saying, and maybe we’ll find out what’s coming next, because the one thing we can all agree on is that the future has never happened so quickly to so many people in such an extreme way, and we really need a voice to guide us. Marshall identified the illness and worked toward finding ways of dealing with it.

Amazing. But here's the really odd bit:

And one must remember that Marshall arrived at these conclusions not by hanging around, say, NASA or IBM, but rather by studying arcane sixteenth-century Reformation pamphleteers, the writings of James Joyce, and Renaissance perspective drawings. He was a master of pattern recognition, the man who bangs a drum so large that it’s only beaten once every hundred years.

And any book like this would be incomplete without a little Canuckiana, so here's a quote from McLuhan: "Canada is the only country in the world that knows how to live without an identity." Interestingly, I think that while that would be considered pejorative to most in the US, I don't think that's how he meant it.

One very strange fact that floored me: McLuhan’s brain was supplied with blood through not one but two arteries at the base of his skull. In case you’re not up to date on your human physiology, that’s not normal. Sometimes happens in cats. Very rarely in humans. But you have to think that it had a real effect on how he thought and lived (and probably how he died ultimately, since he had many small strokes and blackouts throughout his lifetime).

Anyway, fascinating.

And one last thought to leave you with by McLuhan himself: “Our ‘Age of Anxiety’ is, in great part, the result of trying to do today’s job with yesterday’s tools– with yesterday’s concepts.”

I think we live in a complex, rapidly evolving, unfamiliar time now – so much – technology, mainly – feels like it’s changing so quickly that it’s hard to integrate all the changes in our lives, let alone to really understand them and their impact. It’s comforting to know that at least a few people felt the same way nearly 50 years ago.

Liked the latest from Neal Stephenson, but didn't love it. As per usual, he really needed a stronger editor for the last half of the book. The book was pretty fun, and a departure for Stephenson, in that it's not really science fiction, but something that can happen today (if a little, you know, cyber-y).

The first half reads a little bit like a World of Warcraft tutorial (believe it or not, that's actually a compliment, although I know it won't sound that way), and the last half is a bit of global chase.

Pretty good, very fast to read and I enjoyed it.

This book may not be for everyone. But if you're in the right frame of mind, it's laugh-out-loud funny. It's more or less the whole Twitter transcript of @MayorEmanuel, the fake chronicle of Rahm Emanuel on his quest to become the mayor of Chicago.

If you like sustained, over the top profanity and imaginary vignettes about Axelrod in a bear costume tailgating with Rahm Emanuel dressed as a bottle of Jack Daniels at Bears' games, but only in 140 character chunks (with some mild annotation), this one is for you. :-)

But I thought it was pretty damned funny -- Kathy thought I was losing my mind:

"@MayorEmanuel: My giant bottle of Jack costume is too tall to fit on the L. Fuck. If you see a huge bottle of whiskey walking down Milwaukee, that's me."

"@MayorEmanuel: I'm in my giant Jack bottle knocking people down Urlacher-style and yelling "YOU JUST GOT JACK'D." Then we do a fucking shot."

And if you're not into that kind of thing, then yeah, maybe not for you.

As I’ve written about a ton of times before, I’m a font nerd. Love them. Could talk about them forever. Could spend 2 days screwing around with my blog looking for just the right look. So I tend to read histories and essays about them whenever I can.

I liked this book, but didn’t love it, honestly. Told lots of stories about how fonts have evolved, the various points where things shifted, etc. As much as anything, I liked reading about some of the subtle letterform differences and breakthroughs that various designers made.

So I recommend this for fellow type nerds, but hard to recommend more generally than that, I think.

I really liked this look at Google by Steven Levy – I’ve always liked his insights about the company – he’s had extraordinary access, and I loved the stories about when Google was less gigantic & earth-encompassing. Was fun to read about the exploits of an awesome group of people just out and about and trying things.

Google’s obviously going through periods of intense change now, and I think that a few years from now this book will feel like it describes a completely different company – and, really, it maybe already does.

But it was fun to read about so many of my friends and colleagues and what they went through, and I’d highly recommend it to anyone in the industry.

I really enjoyed this book and really recommend it to anyone who grew up in the 1980 with D&D, Intellivision, War Games, Tempest, Rush, and on and on. It's great fun.

It's set 30 years in the future, and the premise is that we all spend a huge majority of our time in a virtual world called the OASIS -- a creation which netted its inventor billions of dollars. When he died, he set up a massive scavenger hunt across the OASIS -- the winner, who successfully navigates a series of quests based on the classic nerd fare from the Eighties, would inherit the founder's fortune.

Not the best work of literature ever produced, and some flaws & predictability in the book.

Still, I really loved it. So much of my childhood and coming of age is in the cultural references, and I read it greedily and quickly.

Fun book!

I generally like Moore's books, so was interested in this graphic novel of his, but found it sorta underwhelming. (Although reading it on the iPad Kindle app wasn't the best format ever for it, probably.)

2nd book in the series being billed as Harry Potter for Adults, although really it's more like the Narnia books in most respects. I thought it was much stronger than the first book, The Magicians, but really pretty similar. A modern retelling of Narnia books, this one more like Prince Caspian.

I recommend it if you read a lot and like these sorts of books -- you know who you are -- but probably not if your reading list is super highly constrained and you're trying to pick the very best books of the year.

I like reading a good space opera every once in a while, and really enjoyed this one. Or rather, it's a space opera in content and themes, but structured more as a noir + horror novel. Good mix of gumshoe and sci-fi.

This is sort of a tweener in science fiction -- not an immediate future type of book, and not a far future book like the Ian Banks books. It's set in our solar system after we've colonized Mars and the asteroid belt -- so the big political entities are the Earth and Mars, with the asteroid belt as a sort of frontier land.

Fun book, good pacing, entertaining. First of a trilogy.

I liked reading this -- gave a really strong point of view on one way to think about building fun & great games. Some of it is strongly supported by recent trends in gaming, other parts look counter indicated by some.

But (especially) the first half was really good in talking about how game mechanics work, how story elements layer on top of them, and how humans crave learning -- games are essentially pattern learning, and if the pattern is too simple, or too noisy, we're just not that interested.

Very good overview, I thought, and a super-quick read.

Okay, we'll get this out of the way to start: I would read/watch anything Tina Fey writes, ever, pretty much. So I was pretty much guaranteed to like this book, which I did. Pretty much what you'd expect -- memoir with a bunch of jokes and self-deprecating humor. Great stuff. Will leave you with a trio of gems from the book:

First:

"That feeling of 'I'm pretty sure this next step is wrong, but I'm just gonna do it anyway' is part of the same set of instincts that makes me such a great cook."

And:

"Saturday Night Live runs on a combustion engine of ambition and disappointment."

Then:

"...when Oprah Winfrey is suggesting you may have overextended yourself, you need to examine your fucking life."

So good.

I picked this book on the suggestion I saw on Twitter of @mikeyk (one of the co-founders of Instagram, and coincidentally an alum of Stanford HCI like me), and really liked it.

It's pretty straight-up high fantasy, but much better written and way more inventive than most. It's a thousand page book, the first in what's intended to be a ten volume series, so it's gonna take a while to get all the way to the end -- the second book isn't expected to be out until later in 2012.

Even so, I really recommend it. There's something really disorienting, but awesome, about the opening book in a new universe -- so much you don't know yet, so many interactions that have nuance and backstory that you only really start to understand as you go through -- lots of stuff just doesn't make any sense except out of the corner of your eye on the first reading. It's a confused feeling, but fun at the same time.

If you like this type of book (and if you don't know exactly what I mean when I say that, trust me, you don't like this type of book), I highly recommend it.

I've always found Professor Turkle, from MIT, to be both thoughtful and thought-provoking -- she's spent her career observing and learning about and thinking about how we interact with technology, and how that interaction shapes us as a society. It's interesting stuff that I wish more people paid more attention to, so I was happy to read this book about how a couple of types of technology are changing us.

The first part of the book I was a little ambivalent about; it focuses on how we interact with what I'll call robots: physical machines in our environment, more or less humanoid. Lots of good experiment-based reflection on how we interact with objects, and I think significantly deeper and more nuanced than, say, Cliff Nass' work a decade or so that he wrote about in The Media Equation. (Admittedly, we're a lot further down the road now than when Nass wrote that, but even when it had just come out, I found it to be an extremely superficial analysis.)

The second half of the book is what I really wanted to get into: how are we changing the way we relate to other actual human beings as we moderate more and more interactions through electronic media. In lay terms: how are digital social networks affecting the way we communicate, experience, and live our lives, both with those who are physically with us and those who aren't.

I thought Turkle did a good job with a bunch of this topic, with one proviso: the technology and products we use are now evolving so quickly that it seems to me that any clinical, experimental understanding of what's going on is going to necessarily be years out of date, even for highly motivated, diligent, and speedy researchers.

I think there weren't a ton of clear conclusions in the book, but much that we should all think about more deeply, so I'll leave you with a few of Professor Turkle's passages. If you care about understanding what's changing and why in our communications and interpersonal interactions, you should read this book. A few quotes:

"Networked, we are together, but so lessened are our expectations of each other that we can feel utterly alone. And there is the risk that we come to see others as objects to be accessed—and only for the parts we find useful, comforting, or amusing."

"The media has tended to portray today’s young adults as a generation that no longer cares about privacy. I have found something else, something equally disquieting. High school and college students don’t really understand the rules. Are they being watched? Who is watching? Do you have to do something to provoke surveillance, or is it routine? Is surveillance legal? They don’t really understand the terms of for Facebook or Gmail, the mail service that Google provides. They don’t know what protections they are “entitled” to. They don’t know what objections are reasonable or possible. If someone impersonates you by getting access to your cell phone, should that behavior be treated as illegal or as a prank? In teenagers’ experience, their elders—the generation that gave them this technology—don’t have ready answers to such questions."

"The networked culture is very young. Attendants at its birth, we threw ourselves into its adventure. This is human. But these days, our problems with the Net are becoming too distracting to ignore. At the extreme, we are so enmeshed in our connections that we neglect each other. We don’t need to reject or disparage technology. We need to put it in its place. The generation that has grown up with the Net is in a good position to do this, but these young people need help. So as they begin to fight for their right to privacy, we must be their partners. We know how easily information can be politically abused; we have the perspective of history. We have, perhaps, not shared enough about that history with our children. And as we, ourselves enchanted, turned away from them to lose ourselves in our e-mail, we did not sufficiently teach the importance of empathy and attention to what is real."

Great stuff. Read it. :-)

I'm a pretty committed Roman History Nerd. I really like reading about all periods of the civilization, and have been learning more and more since I first took Latin in high school. It's esoteric to a lot of people, but it's something that's always been fascinating to me. And I like both the "great man" aspect of histories which follow the named leaders, but also the accounts of what it was like to live in Rome itself, or in the provinces elsewhere.

But to be honest, I always start to lose the thread around the 3rd/4th century AD, after Constantine, with the continuous sacking of Rome and Italy going on by virtually everyone. And so most of the histories that I read, I gut it out until 476, when Odoacer beats Romulus Augustulus to declare himself King of Italy, and the Roman Empire dead.

So I was really interested to read this book, which is a history that goes from the establishment of the Roman capital in the East (Byzantium, to be later renamed Constantinople), initially by Diocletian, and consolidated later by Constantine, through the fall of the Constantinople in 1453 (when Mehmet II defeated Constantine XI).

I really, really liked this book. It suffers a little bit from over-focusing on emperors and generals, but I learned a lot about how to think about the parts of the empire, and later the relationship between the Crusaders, Islam, and the Eastern Roman Empire, led from Constantinople. I hadn't really thought too much about how the lineage from Rome affected how Constantinople viewed the world, or the nuanced way it sat between East & West. (And, to be honest, my geography of the region needed a bit of a refresher, as I always think that Turkey & Constantinople are further to the east than they actually are.)

Anyway, if you're a roman history nerd like me, and don't mind reading about 11 different Constantines over the course of a thousand years or so, this is a great book to pick up. ("great e-book to download"? how are we going to talk about books in our digital future??)

I’ve been super busy lately, and haven’t had a lot of time to write here unfortunately, but hoping to fix that in the coming few days. Lots to write about; wanted to put down a few placeholders of things I’m planning to write about.

On Scaling: spent some time talking with a professor friend of mine over the past few weeks about how organizations scale to have massive impact; realized that there are fundamental differences in approach. On one side, you assume that the core that you have – yourself, a small org, whatever – is the essence and you want to extend that to the rest of the world – but in some way, the new converts will always be pale reflections of the core. On the other side, you assume that you’ve figured out how to do something interesting, and want to enable lots of other people to do it as well as unexpected and new things – so the assumption here is that by scaling you increase diversity, increase quality, and you get better overall as you get bigger, not weaker & thinner.

Not Understanding Modern Technology & Products: In an NYT article a month or so back, HBS professor David Yoffee said this: ‘“The problem for both Firefox and Chrome is how are they going to convince customers that they have a significantly better product, worth the hassle of actually going and downloading something that’s new and different.”’ This was very surprising to me – it’s such old thinking, not really in line with the way technology products (Internet products in particular) spread in today’s world. I don’t know Prof Yoffee, but in my view, technology products spread today much more like political campaigns and memes, not as careful, considered evaluations of whether other alternatives are better than what someone has today. I’m not putting a value judgement on that phenomenon at all, just noting it, and think that it’s worth exploring a bit.

Living Inside Everyone Else’s Greatest Hits Albums: just some thoughts about how status feeds are changing the way we think about other peoples' lives, and our own. Maybe a profound observation, maybe a banal one, who can tell?

My First 4 Months in VC: I’ve been at Greylock full time now for about 4 months, have some initial observations and things to write about. Steep learning curve, very busy time (and also busy personally), but want to take some time to deconstruct the experience so far and share what I can. (I also have a post on why I joined Greylock in particular to write. Quick hint: it’s the same reason that Soylent Green tastes so delicious.)

Alone Together, by Sherry Turkle: Interesting book, finished it a while back but haven’t had time to write about it yet. Lots in there.

And then a few other odds & ends, including a great book I’m reading about the history of the Eastern Roman Empire from about 300 AD until 1500 AD. I get that this will be of incredibly limited and esoteric interest to even my nerdiest friends, but I’m loving it. Fish gotta swim.

Hopefully more soon. What else should I write about? :-)

This is a fantastic book about how information empires rise and fall -- everyone in technology industries should read it. Tim is a professor at Columbia Law School, and one of the most advanced thinkers about a number of technology network effects, but especially Net Neutrality.

It's a history of various information technology waves, from the telephone to movies to television to the Internet, some analysis of what's happening in today's landscape with Google and Apple and others, and some of Wu's suggestions for how to create more effective public policy in the future. I loved the first part (although I'm a technology history nerd of first order), and found the part about the current landscape interesting but already a bit out of date, and probably not as deep an analysis as I was hoping for. The prescriptions he outlines I thought weren't quite right. I had a hard time really understanding how to think about the remedies he was suggesting, and how they could really work.

But overall, fantastic book, and has changed the way I think about technology waves.

While I was at Mozilla day-to-day, when I talked about open and closed systems, I would say something like this: new technologies (e.g. the PC, the smart phone, the tablet, etc etc) nearly always start closed and proprietary -- it's easier to create something completely new that's innovative and disruptive if you control all the pieces, aren't trying overmuch to play nicely with others. But then over time, technology tends to open up, as the techniques become more widely undertsood, horizontal layers come in to drive costs down and increase variety of solutions, etc. The interesting variable in every technology wave, I said, was how long and messy the "middle" between open and closed is -- and of course, Mozilla's mission with respect to the Web was to make the proprietary phase as short as possible, and get to open as quickly as we could.

After reading Wu's book, I still think that's essentially true, but not really the whole story. I now think technology waves tend to go from closed/proprietary to open and then back to closed, based around the strength of network distribution. In other words, and especially with communications and information technology, you tend to go from proprietary invention to open innovation and then things settle down as a small number of players control the distribution of content on their own networks based on the open technologies. These networks then tend to be few in number, and overwhelmingly dominant in their control over how people experience the technology and content.

The only thing that really unseats these networks is the rise of the next technology wave -- that's possible because successive technology waves tend to be much larger than what came before. That's what's happening now, with mobile completely overwhelming the previous waves of computing, being available to more people, more of the time, with more touch points in their lives.

And that's why the fight between Apple, Google and Facebook is so, so fierce. Everyone is trying to move from the current wave of IT into the mobile one. Everyone is trying to become dominant, in order to take the wins from the network effects from the PC/Web battles and use them to win the next Mobile/Networked battle.

[As an aside, it's tough to imagine what technology wave will displace billions of people carrying smart phones (little network connected computers) around with them all the time, but what we do know is this: it will happen. Some giant new information tech wave will eventually make this mobile technology boom, which looks absolutely massive to us now, look small in retrospect. It's the nature of communications technology.]

Another thing that's clear as you look at historical technology waves is that they're getting shorter. Disruption is coming faster and faster. This, too, is an intuitive result. Each technology wave means that we're able to communicate and collaborate more effectively and more quickly.

Companies that are dominant in one wave do not tend to be dominant in those following. They can be relevant, and even extremely relevant, but they don't tend to dominate in the same way. Lots of reasons for that. They've got existing businesses to protect. They're built on previous models of efficiency optimized for previous waves. They get big and complex and tired. I'm beginning to think that companies don't dominate like this because not only are their innovators dilemma issues inherent in moving from one wave to the next, but also because you've got to not just jump waves, but also go through the closed-open-closed cycles of the new technology, and that's an unnatural set of transitions to go through.

What I find so interesting about our current context -- everyone who was dominant in the PC/Web era moving to the mobile era -- is that they're trying to jump directly to the closed network phase. Mobile systems right now look extremely vertically integrated, from services to servers to devices to content. I can't yet discern the really open phase of mobile. I believe it will come, but it's hard to see quite how right now, and I think this "open" battle between Apple and Google is really just prelude.

But who knows. It's an exciting time to be alive and working. Every day I wake up and meet people who are building technologies and products that promise to completely rework the way we interact with our world and with each other. It feels like so much open water here; everything seems up for grabs.

I can't recommend reading Tim Wu's book highly enough. Whether you agree or disagree with any particular bit of it isn't that important. Thinking about the technology waves that have come before help us think about what might come next, and how they might feel.

Fun science fiction book about alternate universes, based in Palo Alto & San Francisco. Some fun parts, including thinking about how small events shape our histories and even geographies. But I didn't really love it.

I did really love the title, which I think is just terrific.

Fun, crazy, near-apocalyptic novel centered around worship of giant squids. It's that sort of book. :-)

I'm a little on the fence about what to say about this book. Loved the first third. Was completely confused by the middle. And by the end, felt like a bit of a chore to finish.

Still, it's such an inventive story, with such memorable themes, and the characters are vividly drawn and unique, so overall I liked it -- enough to pick up another book by Mieville, The City and the City, to read next.

Great, fun book -- loved it, and read it in a couple of days. Joshua Foer is a journalist (and younger brother of Jonathan Safran Foer, one of my favorite novelists) who was covering the US Memory Championships one year -- an annual contest of around 3 dozen "Memory Athletes" who compete to see who can memorize the most digits in five minutes, the order of a deck of cards the quickest, and other contests like that.

While covering the event, he got interested in how memory itself works -- can it be learned & trained? -- and in the subculture of the memory athletes themselves. So he decided to train for the championship the following year, and to enter it himself.

I love books like this -- coverage of deep subcultures of our society that are funny, but without making fun of them. (Candy Freak, by Steve Almond, is one of my favorites.) Here's what he said about the contest itself: "The demographics of your average memory contest are pretty much indistinguishable from those of a 'Weird Al' Yankovic (five of spades) concert. An overwhelming number of contestants are young, white, male juggling aficionados."

Lots of interesting stuff in this one, including going through some of the systems for memorizing long strings of items. The millennia old Memory Palace technique, the newer (just a few hundred years old) Major Method, or the even newer PAO system (that the title of the book alludes to). A fair amount of coverage (but not all that deep) on how our memories work, what happens when parts of our brains are damaged, etc.

One of the funniest realizations in the book: "Not long after returning from England, I found myself sitting on a folding chair in the basement of my parents’ home at 6:45 a.m., wearing underpants, earmuffs, and memory goggles, with a printout of eight hundred random digits in my lap and an image in my mind’s eye of a lingerie-clad garden gnome (52632) suspended over my grandmother’s kitchen table. I suddenly looked up, wondering—remarkably, for the first time—what in the world I was doing with myself."

He also included a chapter on his conversations with Gordon Bell, early at DEC and of late trying to record and externalize all his experiences and memories, so he can recall everything that's happened to him with a few keystrokes. There are threads in the book that talk about how we read today compared to how we used to read (internalized versus externalized), and what memories are for at all. Some profundities for sure, like this one:

"So why bother investing in one’s memory in an age of externalized memories? The best answer I can give is the one that I received unwittingly from EP, whose memory had been so completely lost that he could not place himself in time or space, or relative to other people. That is: How we perceive the world and how we act in it are products of how and what we remember. We’re all just a bundle of habits shaped by our memories. And to the extent that we control our lives, we do so by gradually altering those habits, which is to say the networks of our memory. No lasting joke, invention, insight, or work of art was ever produced by an external memory. Not yet, at least. Our ability to find humor in the world, to make connections between previously unconnected notions, to create new ideas, to share in a common culture: All these essentially human acts depend on memory. Now more than ever, as the role of memory in our culture erodes at a faster pace than ever before, we need to cultivate our ability to remember. Our memories make us who we are. They are the seat of our values and source of our character. Competing to see who can memorize more pages of poetry might seem beside the point, but it’s about taking a stand against forgetfulness, and embracing primal capacities from which too many of us have become estranged. That’s what Ed had been trying to impart to me from the beginning: that memory training is not just for the sake of performing party tricks; it’s about nurturing something profoundly and essentially human."

But mostly just a fun journey through a subculture that most of us haven't ever experienced. Very quick to read; both fun and worthwhile.

Great book, and fun to read, like all of Lewis' books. Absolutely, 100% infuriating to read, as so many of the people involved in the financial system collapse were idiots at best and criminal at worst - but of course they took home big paydays. I really recommend this book -- it was easier to read than Sorkin's Too Big to Fail, which was good, but ultimately a little too chatty. While Sorkin's book focused mostly on the heads of the banks, Lewis instead focused on the guys on the outside who figured out early how busted the markets were and who were able to take out big bets against the system. They were all, by definition, outsiders and misfits -- and ultimately while they made the situation worse, they weren't really fundamentally responsible.

Anyway, everyone should understand what this book is about, and how profoundly we were let down by those in positions of power, again & again.

Great book on fundamentals of investing by David Swensen, who runs Yale's endowment investing. Recommended to me by a good friend and very smart investment manager -- it's a great, fundamentals-oriented look at investing. Nothing particularly sexy in it, but great stuff, and tremendously helpful.

This was an interesting read -- argument by Enriquez and Gullans that any number of indicators (not to mention, you know, millennia of history) suggest that humans aren't the endpoint, but just another point on the timeline of evolution. That main point is obvious, even though we probably don't really think about ourselves that way too much. The supporting arguments are all interesting -- will change the way you look at yourself.

On this one I was actually more interested in the format than the content -- it's one of the so-called "Kindle Singles" from Amazon now -- writings that wouldn't normally be long enough for a "real book" but obviously are no problem in digital form. it's a little like a longer essay than anything else -- lately I've been reading those more in Instapaper or Read It Later than on my Kindle. Not sure it represents too much of a breakthrough, other than giving the publishing industry fits.

Anyway, interesting essay, and a good warmup leading up to TED this week. :-)

One more post that’s (somewhat) related to books and that’s it for the morning.

I’ve written about the rise of eBooks and the disappearance of physical books from our home and other spaces before; as I’ve said, I’m worried that we’re losing some of the manifestations-in-the-real-world of our personalities – signals to ourselves and to others about who we are, what we care about, and what our values are. You might call the general category Social Artifacts or Cultural Artifacts.

Social artifacts are everywhere you look, of course. They’re the items we put on our desks, the pictures we put on our walls, the clothes we wear, the vehicles we ride in, etc etc. Lots of items we have in our lives show implicit values.

[aside: There is, for sure, a difference between what we imply by the choices we make and what others infer about us. I’m glossing over that distinction a bit, but maybe will come back to it.]

There’s a reason why books do such a good job of communicating values, though: there are a lot of choices, and they’re deep choices. While it’s likely that I might love a few books that are the same as the ones that you really love – but there’s just about no chance that in a collection of 20 or 30 that we’d have the same set. And so there’s a richness in the information you get from seeing what books someone has in their house, or that they’re carrying around to read on their lunch breaks over time. With books disappearing from our public and private spaces (we can argue about the pace that it’s happening at, I think, but not about whether it’s starting), we’re seeing different types of signals, but I think they’re more generic. What clothes you wear, what furniture you like, what smart phone you use. (Which, I have to say, is a bizarre social signal. We are not our computers.)

More and more of these social artifacts are virtual, absolutely, and there’s infinite richness there. But it’s pretty uneven. For some people, it’s pretty easy to see their collection of social artifacts because they’ve lived online for a long time and have often curated them. Joi Ito probably has the clearest set of signals, and he’s been working on that for years. Myself, I’m relatively knowable, between my blog, tweets, etc etc. I’ve been playing this week with my profile on Shelfari, too – it’s now got my 15 year media purchase history from Amazon on it – but it isn’t really right. It’s taking my old, physical artifacts and grafting them onto the virtual world.

But for people who aren’t wired a little funny like Joi or me, sometimes it can be hard to see their social artifacts spread around the web. Lots are in Facebook & Twitter. For some people, lots are in Flickr.

Anyway, no real conclusions here. Like every generation, the next generation will find their own ways to express themselves and to interpret others. I think while we’re in the midst of this transition towards more of our lives happening in the ether, we’ll see lots of weird juxtapositions like Shelfari showing collections on screens around the house, and they’ll always look a bit like misfits.

So I guess my takeaway here, in this post that’s a little all over the place, is that I’ll miss books as communicators of personality and values, but am on the lookout for emerging systems and am really, really interested in how we’ll all use them.

Young adult novel from the author of The Windup Girl , which I liked a bunch. I liked this one, too, but not as much. The plot is a little thin, I thought, and I felt like some of Bacigalupi's attempts to connect with younger readers were a little condescending. But a quick read, fun enough, and the pacing is really great, like it was in The Windup Girl.

The other night I just posted a quick question on Twitter: "What's your single favorite book of all time, based on any criteria you wish?" Here's the list I got back:

• Blindness, by Jose Saramago
• World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War, by Max Brooks
  
• Blink, by Malcolm Gladwell
  
• Complexity, by M. Mitchell Waldrop
  
• The Road, by Cormac McCarthy
  
• A New Earth, by Eckhart Tolle
  
• The Blue World, by Jack Vance
  
• Angle of Repose, by Wallace Stegner
  
• Moby Dick, by Herman Melville
  
• What Is Called Thinking?, by Martin Heidegger
  
• Catch-22, by Joseph Heller
  

Of those 11, I've only read 4, and there are 3 I hadn't even heard of, which is amazing to me.

But right after I asked the question, Kathy pointed out that that the criteria that you pick can be just about as interesting as the actual book you pick. Meta!

But she suggested: best written? most influential? most inflential now? when you were in high school but might be embarrassing now?

My own choice, The Road, I picked for just overall awesomeness -- incredibly written, high impact, memorable -- it just sort of towers over everything I've read in the last 10 years or so. But I could have picked Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance for its impact on me in high school (although I wonder how it holds up). Or The Black Swan for affecting how I frame world events. Or The Design of Everyday Things for lasting impact on what I do for a living. Or The Hobbit and the Narnia books for starting off my lifelong love of reading. Or, for that matter, the Harry Potter books for sustaining it and for my looking forward to reading them with SPL.

Anyway, I guess I've got some more reading to do. :-)

What are your favorites? Why?