e-history
The theory section of the readings was interesting. The question of censorship remains a potential problem, as it is considerably easier to block or alter items on the Net than than print (not to mention often leaving less of a trail). The recent attempts by the Chinese government to censor search results and wikis comes to mind. However, there is less finality to such attempts at censorship. They can in turn be altered. Firewalls and other blocks can be gotten around far more easily than one can find another print copy of a samizdat work. And such attempts at censorship must be by their very nature brazen rather than covert. There is no sneaking into libraries here. Open acts, though, are often more resented and protested than covert. The ability of history to remain “official” has in a large part been removed by its move onto the Net.
While electronic resources can create a more convenience store “grab and go” mentality towards the utilization of books and documents, when used entirely as a searchable item, they do provide a definite extension of reach when used like their paper counterparts. Archives are open without travel and books can be borrowed and read without leaving the house. Not to mention the amount of shelf space saved which can be turned over to favorite or needed print works. For example, in my bookmarks folder I have no less than three rather large dictionaries/lexicons (two foreign language, one technical), at least one of which would be multivolume in print. Instead of buying that half-shelf, there is a half-shelf of material in my field of interest. So, e-books can not only be of use as a reference in and of themselves, but allow one more freedom and money to stock a print library. After all, though the revolution towards a more electronic future for historical scholarship is coming, in the meantime, the likely book crash for most of us is from overstuffed shelves.