I was just trying to remember every book I have read cover to cover in 2007. I figured: hey, great blog post idea! I did this last year as well.
1. Discipline and Punish – Michel Foucault
2. Pascalian Meditations – Pierre Bourdieu
3. Reassembling the Social – Bruno Latour
4. Cyberculture Theorists – David Bell
5. Linked: The New Science of Networks – Albert-Laszlo Barabasi
6. Empire and Communications – Harold Innis
7. Essential McLuhan – Marshal McLuhan
8. Propaganda – Jaques Ellul
9. Impure Science – David Epstein
10. The Body Multiple – Annemarie Mol
11. Internet Society – Maria Bakardjieva
11. The Wounded Storyteller – Arthur Frank
12. Virtual Methods – Christine Hine
13. Pierre Bourdieu – Michael Grenfell
14. Managing to Nurse – Rankin & Campbell
15. Theory, Sport and Society – Maguire & Young
16. The Pasteurization of France – Bruno Latour
17. The Road – Cormack McCarthy
18. 1984 – George Orwell
19. The Stand – Stephen King
20. The Walking Dead – Book 5
21. The Walking Dead – Book 6
22. The Zombie Survival Guide
Working on or to be finished by the end of the year:
23. Brave New World – Huxley
24. Neuromancer – William Gibson
25. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact – Ludwik Fleck, . University of Chicago Press.
26. Science and an African Logic – Helen Verran
27. The Social Construction of What – Ian Hacking
28. The Gum Thief – Douglas Coupland
In other words, my goal to read one book a week this year was off target. By half. I read countless papers over the summer for my prospectus, so maybe that makes up for it? Or perhaps I am putting too much emphasis on the “book” in the digital age?
There is just something about reading a book from cover to cover that makes me feel well read, what ever that means. Just because I read articles all day (both related to my work and not), it still feels like these don’t add up in the same way. I can quantify my book tally; telling you how many articles I read, magazines devoured… who knows?
Does it make any difference? What keeps us measuring our time in this way? Is it an antiquated notion to associate books with literacy?