RIP: Encyclopaedia Britannica (in print)

[bad hammy]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... .DTL&tsp=1

Funny, I just bought one a few years back . . .

[dukehjsteve]

Your great grandchildren won't even know what a "book" is......

[Marlow]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/03/13/national/a164607D22.DTL&tsp=1
Funny, I just bought one a few years back . . .

EncBrit, BION, was my bedtime reading many nights in my unmisguided youth. Its demise was inevitable, but its passing brings a tear to my mind's eye . . .

[Conor Dary]

I once, for my dissertation, perused a copy of the first edition in the British Library near St. Pancras Station. Fascinating stuff.

One of my favorite breakfast eating diversions was reading the World Book Encyclopedia.
Kids these days really don't know what they are missing. Just opening, say the letter L, and reading about something you never knew existed.

Interesting that the peak sales year was only 22 years ago.

[gh]

I can think of far fewer saddest things in the history of higher civilization

[kuha]

This does mark a significant point in "modern" culture--the demise of a printed source of authoritative information which was, by definition, "permanent" and genuinely shared. We're left with the glories of the net: a kaleidoscopic mix not only of of fact and fiction, but of a nearly endless number of tribal enclaves and echo-chambers. One more nail in the coffin of any larger sense of shared, essential cultural knowledge.

[Fortius19]

Makes me want to buy a set for the grandkids. Probably not in the budget right now though.

I remember one summer as a kid when I bought an old "V" edition from a library sale for ten cents. Read that book all that summer.

[Marlow]

the net: a kaleidoscopic mix not only of of fact and fiction, but of a nearly endless number of tribal enclaves and echo-chambers.

May I quote you?

[dukehjsteve]

I was 8 years old ( 1951 ) when my parents bought a set of Compton's. I have vivid memories of that very first day, making a circle of the 15 volumes, and avidly reading/looking through
them. Suffice to say in the ensuing years my parents got their money's worth on their investment.

[bad hammy]

My folks bought a set of Funk & Wagnalls encyclopedia in the early 60s. It became a tad cooler later on thanks to Laugh-in.

[kuha]

the net: a kaleidoscopic mix not only of of fact and fiction, but of a nearly endless number of tribal enclaves and echo-chambers.

May I quote you?

Thanks for asking, but its not necessary; we're part of the same tribal enclave.

[Marlow]

the net: a kaleidoscopic mix not only of of fact and fiction, but of a nearly endless number of tribal enclaves and echo-chambers.

May I quote you?

Thanks for asking, but its not necessary; we're part of the same tribal enclave.

Ha - good point. I won't divulge the secret hand-shake if you won't.

[Halfmiler2]

My family had a used set of the Americana.

I read in one of the news reports that a digital subscription to the Britannica is only $70. If I had known that, I would have subscribed a long time ago. Their marketing department leaves much to be desired.

[26mi235]

I once, for my dissertation, perused a copy of the first edition in the British Library near St. Pancras Station. Fascinating stuff.

One of my favorite breakfast eating diversions was reading the World Book Encyclopedia.
Kids these days really don't know what they are missing. Just opening, say the letter L, and reading about something you never knew existed.

Interesting that the peak sales year was only 22 years ago.

When I was real little my dad was between jobs for a while and made some money by selling World Book Encyclopedias door to door. Thus, we got one, which we might not have been able to afford otherwise, and we got an update from the red to the new white one several years later. We also used to read it and we would turn pages and alternate who went first on 'picking' first among the pictures. In grammar school one of my classmates would volunteer to do an extra report and would copy them word-for-word from the World Book (why bother....).

[tandfman]

I was 8 years old ( 1951 ) when my parents bought a set of Compton's. I have vivid memories of that very first day, making a circle of the 15 volumes, and avidly reading/looking through
them. Suffice to say in the ensuing years my parents got their money's worth on their investment.

I was about the same age, perhaps a year or two older, when my parents bought Compton's. What a wonderful resource!

[Cooter Brown]

Growing up, I always looked forward to the delivery of the Book of the Year. Read it religiously. My grandparents had every edition going back to when they got their first set of EB in the 50s.

[dj]

I remember third grade for two major influences, both at my neighbor's house: television, particularly Mickey Mouse Club with "Spin and Marty" and "Swamp Fox," and the Brittanica. It was probably the beginning of multi-tasking for me.

As enjoyable as encyclopedias were, they instantly took a back seat when I discovered almanacs in the library the next year. Hooray for almanacs: fewer words, more numbers, easier to understand.

[lonewolf]

I bought a set of Comptons sometime in the 50s when my kids started school..kept the annuals up for several years... I think my childless elder daughter still has them... there have probably been some significant additions since

[cullman]

Speaking of neighbors and multitasking...they had a set of Britannica and a TV with an outside aerial which could pick up KOMO (ABC affiliate) on a good day. My first exposure to Track and Field was with volume of Britannica on my lap and Valeri Brumel setting the WR on ABC's Wide World Of Sports. I remember Brumel saying through an interpreter that he had jumped higher in practice.

We were a World Book family and the Annual Supplements were my only source at the time for Track and Field WRs.
http://img3.etsystatic.com/il_fullxfull.245130035.jpg

[Daisy]

there have probably been some significant additions since

Sounds like you just missed out on getting the one with the structure of DNA. And no wonder your kids think the moon landing hoax is credible.

[gh]

and sales have now exploded!

http://www.fresnobee.com/2012/04/05/278 ... ition.html

[Pelpa]

Good riddance to the enclopedia in print, I longed for its death. It served no other purpose than separating the rich kids from us poor kids whose parents could not afford to purchase the volumes which for many was a sign of affluence.
Can you imagine that; knowledge being a sign of affluence and your possession of such distinguishing you from those seeking to acquire it but couldn't because they were poor? Rich folks gloated in that separation.

The next thing is that, the dreaded printed version of the damn thing allowed selfish folks to go to the public libraries and rip the pages of interest to them especially if they couldn't afford photocopying. It made knowledge cost restrictive hence libraries in the poor countries could not provide more than one in main laibraries and smaller libraries had to forget about it.
(I still get nightmares when I remember completeing my research on the origins of the Olympics and had to battle for the scarce resource that was the Britanica)

Poor folks laugh at its demise and welcome the internet's online journals and the digital version of the encyclopedia.

[tandfman]

Good riddance to the enclopedia in print, I longed for its death. It served no other purpose than separating the rich kids from us poor kids whose parents could not afford to purchase the volumes which for many was a sign of affluence.

I am sorry that you felt, as a kid, that anyone who was not poor was rich. I'm even sorrier that you apparently still feel that way.

[Pelpa]

Good riddance to the enclopedia in print, I longed for its death. It served no other purpose than separating the rich kids from us poor kids whose parents could not afford to purchase the volumes which for many was a sign of affluence.

I am sorry that you felt, as a kid, that anyone who was not poor was rich. I'm even sorrier that you apparently still feel that way.

ugh!!!!?...just seems like something you planned to say for years now because it sounded smart to you and you jumped at the chance to say it regardless of how you may unjustifiably apply the statement...but you got to say it and I bet you feel smart that you said it.

[Conor Dary]

Good riddance to the enclopedia in print, I longed for its death. It served no other purpose than separating the rich kids from us poor kids whose parents could not afford to purchase the volumes which for many was a sign of affluence.

I am sorry that you felt, as a kid, that anyone who was not poor was rich. I'm even sorrier that you apparently still feel that way.

ugh!!!!?...just seems like something you planned to say for years now because it sounded smart to you and you jumped at the chance to say it regardless of how you may unjustifiably apply the statement...but you got to say it and I bet you feel smart that you said it.

I doubt it. My same reaction to your bitterness and over the top comment. But that is your problem.

[Pelpa]

Correction: my opinion, my reality, your problem. my comments stood as they were until you both took issues with them.

P.S. No part of my comments indicated a dumb position to think "if you are not poor, you then rich"....it would have been equally dumb to have discerned that.

[Pelpa]

Rather than taking away a flawed statement that there is a sharp divide between rich/poor why not take away that I was saying that in today's world poor people (yes they do exist) have easier access to information which in former years were generally only limited to printed encyclopedias.

Its like me assuming that both you guys are offended because you had encyclopedias in your households at some point so you took offense and that you could never relate to a poor scholar/academic as both you guys were neither...that assumption might be flawed.

[Dutra5]

Without attempting to police the board, I'd think this particular thread....and possibly some others....currently on the front page of the current events board belong elsewhere.

"Florida Relays" good
"Encyclopaedia Britannica" bad

[Conor Dary]

As for the internet being a great equalizer. I have seen books and encyclopedias in dirt poor villages in Nepal and Ghana where there wasn't even electricity and probably still don't have it. So something online is not going to be of much help.

[Pelpa]

As for the internet being a great equalizer. I have seen books and encyclopedias in dirt poor villages in Nepal and Ghana where there wasn't even electricity and probably still don't have it. So something online is not going to be of much help.

Now this is the above board, sober commentary and discourse I expect.

that said:
1) electronic information sharing is the way to go and here to stay...and I have seen dirt poor Masai people with specially adapted laptops for internet connection (by satellite)

2) if they (those Nepalese and Ghanans you state) are that poor then imagine their inability to acquire a britanica then and now.

I wont even begin debate whether or not as you roghtly coined; "the internet is the great equalizer"

[tandfman]

P.S. No part of my comments indicated a dumb position to think "if you are not poor, you then rich"....it would have been equally dumb to have discerned that.

It was you who created this dichotomy between rich kids and poor kids whose parents could not afford an encyclopedia. The obvious implication was that only rich kids could afford an encyclopedia. My parents were not poor, but they were far from rich. Yet they decided that they could afford an encyclopedia. I'm glad they did.

[Pelpa]

add to this fact that with Britanicas going out of print and as GH noted they are being soaked up bythe market, all available printed copies, especially those that would have been made available to the dirt poor, would have put further out of reach.

...as I said, good riddance to the printed encyclopedia. Ironically, it reminds me of having a satellite dish or a mainframe computer.

[Pelpa]

P.S. No part of my comments indicated a dumb position to think "if you are not poor, you then rich"....it would have been equally dumb to have discerned that.

It was you who created this dichotomy between rich kids and poor kids whose parents could not afford an encyclopedia. The obvious implication was that only rich kids could afford an encyclopedia. My parents were not poor, but they were far from rich. Yet they decided that they could afford an encyclopedia. I'm glad they did.

You don't have to use the word "dichotomy" to absolve yourself of a brainfart...join Conorday and myself in a sober discourse and all will be forgiven...your misgivings are in my rear view...next we know you start coughing up the entire Oxford Concise.

[Conor Dary]

add to this fact that with Britanicas going out of print and as GH noted they are being soaked up bythe market, all available printed copies, especially those that would have been made available to the dirt poor, would have put further out of reach.

...as I said, good riddance to the printed encyclopedia. Ironically, it reminds me of having a satellite dish or a mainframe computer.

As useful as the internet can be, and as useless also, it is pretty idiotic to celebrate the demise of any book.

[Conor Dary]

P.S. No part of my comments indicated a dumb position to think "if you are not poor, you then rich"....it would have been equally dumb to have discerned that.

It was you who created this dichotomy between rich kids and poor kids whose parents could not afford an encyclopedia. The obvious implication was that only rich kids could afford an encyclopedia. My parents were not poor, but they were far from rich. Yet they decided that they could afford an encyclopedia. I'm glad they did.

Same here. Our parents bought us a used encyclopedia that we used for many years. One thing, among others, I am very grateful for.