Yeah this is what I do. I have so many books and I just can’t get through them like I used to now that I have a kid, so I use ebooks and/or audiobooks to help get through them. I have three library cards now and the selections are great!

The article literally opens with the following lines:

>The first and only time I visited Ukraine was in 2019. My book “The Possessed”—a memoir I had published in 2010, about studying Russian literature—had recently been translated into Russian, along with “The Idiot,” an autobiographical novel, and I was headed to Russia as a cultural emissary, through an initiative of pen America and the U.S. Department of State.

The author of the article did write an autobiographical novel called "The Idiot" and yes it is a reference to Dostoevsky's novel of the same name, as alluded to in the following paragraph.

The author of the article.

I think this is easy to dismiss based on the headline, but I thought it was actually an interesting presentation of thoughts and opinions on the matter that actually originate in Ukraine and other countries nearby. I think this stands in contrast to a lot of the quick, vapid reactions we saw around boycotting everything "Russian" last year as shows of bullshit solidarity. I think this actually does a decent job of at least presenting some explanation of people who do truly believe that (e.g. Ukrainians, Georgians), even if you might not find their reasoning convincing. And the author does attempt to address their own perception of those arguments in good faith, performing a literary and historical analysis of the prominence of Russian novels in our culture and with respect to what relationship if any they have to the current politics in the region.

If you'd read the story, you'd know that they did.

Stoner by John Williams.

Here is the second paragraph (sorry, I don’t know how to indent text):

“An occasional student who comes upon the name may wonder idly who William Stoner was, but he seldom pursues his curiosity beyond a casual question. Stoner’s colleagues, who held him in no particular esteem when he was alive, speak of him rarely now; to the older ones, his name is a reminder of the end that awaits them all, and to the younger ones it is merely a sound which evokes no sense of the past and no identity with which they can associate themselves or their careers.”

I don't think I could read an entire book like that, especially the grey backgrounds as it'd drive my eyes crazy. It's fine to do things like a page that does interesting things with the text as a visual metaphor, but what you describe sounds like it'd be too much effort to parse for long periods.

And yet it's a part of how humans process art and war, just as people became critical of the art of enemy nations in the world wars. Why shouldn't it be written about?

"When I stepped out into the bright sunlight from the darkness of the movie house, I had only two things on my mind: Paul Newman and a ride home."

The author could also write an autobiographical novel called "The Idiot".

This is a moron level concern.

E. This is like being afraid to read Brandon Sanderson novels because of 'let's go brandon'

> Many years later, as he faced the firing squad, Colonel Aureliano Buendía was to remember that distant afternoon when his father took him to discover ice.

The sentence summarises the nature of One Hundred Years of Solitude: the magical absurdism of 'discovering' ice; the fluidity of time moving from an unclear now to a future death then jumping to an innocent childhood; someone called Buendia.

I'll never make my readers work harder than they already do.

I thought that might be the case, but that’s not reading! Listening to a book is no different than listening to a documentary on TV. I do that when I’m cleaning the house.

I’ve tried listening to audiobooks while driving to a vacation spot, but my mind wanders and I find myself continuously rewinding. However, I never considered that reading in the true sense of the word.

In my opinion - and it’s just that - someone who listens to audiobooks and speeds it up to finish quicker- is doing it to pad their numbers. They are deluding themselves if they think it classifies as reading.

And before I’m downvoted by those who don’t agree, just look up the definition of reading: “the action or skill of reading written or printed matter silently or aloud.” Similar alternatives are “browse through, look through, glance through, leaf through, flick through, skim through” - but no “listen to.”

Far Out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the Western Spiral arm of the galaxy lies a small unregarded yellow sun.

>*Nonprofit educational. Degrading eyesight makes a digital copy with scalable text make sense. Individual has agreed to one personal use digital copy.

But the OP didn't purchase a digital copy with scalable text, they purchased a physical copy with the text set in one specific size. No agreement between the individual and the copyright holder regarding a digital copy has taken place.

>A physical book that I will boldly assume is available in one font purchased through a proper author to retailer chain.

That is indeed a bold assumption, and raises a good point: Many books are indeed available both in a regular font *and* in a separate, larger-type edition specifically for people who are visually impaired. If you purchase a book in a regular font and then your eyes go bad, do you believe you are entitled to go to the store and grab a large-type edition for free? If not, then why would you be entitled to do the same digital version with scalable text?

Also nothing in the OP mentioned educational use. As far as their post indicates, this is purely personal and for all we know the book could just as easily be just entertainment. There is absolutely nothing in the fair use code that mentions personal archives, and I'm very curious about where you got that stuff you were talking about as far as "three copies" and "as long as it doesn't leave the premesis" none of which appears in the law. What is your source for that stuff?

The second physical copy argument doesn’t hold up. A physical copy has variable costs(costs that increase alongside output), a pirated copy has no cost. Although, I agree it’s not a package deal. Still a ridiculous number pirate without buying a single copy, so relatively this seems noble despite being a lesser evil. In my opinion, it’s fine for a transitionary period whilst you get yourself sorted out but this behaviour shouldn’t be continued indefinitely.

There once was a boy called Eustace Clarence Scrubb, and he almost deserved it.

Doesn't sum up the whole book (Voyage of the Dawn Treader), but definitely sums up Eustace's early personality.

The night was humid.

I LOVE when authors do this, especially when it encapsulates the plot while setting the tone for the rest of the story.

Taylor Jenkins Reid’s One True Loves does this perfectly: “I'm finishing up dinner with my family and my fiancé when my husband calls.”

He didn't ask if it's illegal. He asked if it was ethical.

Well, they don't though. Whether they should or not is besides the point. It's still illegal.

Other forms of physical media often include a digital copy. Books should as well.

I try to aim for one chapter every day. It's really not a lot and keeps me reading and making progress. If I want to read more I will, but as I'm busy and try to balance my activities, a single chapter is better than not reading at all.

No. If you owned one physical edition of a book and wanted a second copy of the same book could you just go to the store and take one? No. You'd have to purchase it. Ebooks and audiobooks are no different. You need to pay for each format separately. They're not a package deal, no matter how much you try and justify it.

Try checking out books from the library. Many libraries have an ebook catalog.