Tomorrow we are leaving to go camping for the weekend, which reminds me that I've seen a lot of posts about how camping without electronics for [insert debatable time frame here] will reset your biological clock. It's a pretty nifty concept and easily doable considering the Adirondacks limit cell reception. However, I heavily rely on my Kindle Paperwhite for my reading needs. That leads me to today's post topic- the old book debate of which is better: e-readers or physical books.
Now, before I fully get into this, I should say that I love physical books. The smell, the feel, the taste. Come on, I'm not the only one who has licked a book, right? There is something extra special about holding a book between your hands while relaxing in the sun and sipping your choice beverage.
But there's also something wonderful about not having to worry about where you're going to store said books (because you can't have just one shelf of them) or how to fit enough books into your suitcase while traveling. And how about reading at night? I'm a mother and the act of snuggling a child, holding a book, and balancing a flashlight puts a lot of stress on the arms, back, and neck. Trust me, I see a chiropractor. My e-reader solved these problems for me.
The only problem I'm not sure it solves is how I can still manage to read (at night) while camping and reset my biological clock, which definitely needs to happen. The book I'm currently reading--I have a physical copy at my disposal, as well as the Kindle and audio versions--is massive and my body will already be under a fair amount of stress from sleeping on an air mattress...
So, while I'm here debating what I'll be bringing to camp with me, which do you prefer--physical copy or e-reader--and why?
***WARNING: anyone who associates e-readers with free, illegal material use will receive the full wrath of this very passionate supporter of authors.