I’ve been thinking about my television viewing. I moved into a new apartment six months ago, and I chose not to set up cable. There was only one currently-running show I actually cared about watching, and it didn’t seem worth the cable company’s monthly fee for a single show (which I can get on DVD by next summer anyway).
So I got Netflix instead. When I say I don’t have cable (or even broadcast, thanks to the digital switch), that doesn’t mean I don’t watch television–I average about an hour a day, sometimes more on weekends. But it’s mostly Netflix, sometimes something borrowed from a friend (or the, at present, two shows I really like that are currently on and which my dad puts on VHS tapes for me!)
I’ve found it feels incredibly freeing to not have cable. No temptation to just mindlessly put the TV on. And I’m convinced the quality of what I watch has gone up. (And Netflix is not paying me to say this!) It’s a difference between seeking and browsing. With Netflix, I seek out shows and movies I really want to see. I browse their suggestions, but usually to save things to my queue and watch later, when I decide to seek them out. If I had cable, not Netflix, I think I’d do much more browsing through whatever was on. And since I like to refer to television as a vast wasteland, I think I’d often end up with very mediocre shows. A thousand channels…and nothing on.
In all of this, I see an analogy to ebooks and paper books–or more specifically, “brick and mortar” bookstores and libraries. It’s easy to browse through stretches of physical bookshelves. With ebooks, or online booksellers like Amazon, you have to know what you’re seeking. There’s some browsing ability, but not to the same extent.
I’m a seeker for television, but a browser for books. Most of what I read I find by wandering through my library’s shelves. I’m not sure why there’s this divide in how I handle entertainment, though maybe it has to do with the quality of what I find in my browsing. I have browsed television some in the past–I can only think of two shows I started following that I just stumbled on, and even those are probably not in my top ten of favorite TV shows. But I’ve found many favorite books and authors by happening across them on the shelves: Juliet Marillier, Patricia C. Wrede, Gordon Korman, Helen Cresswell, Lois Duncan, even Tamora Pierce (actually, my mom browsed and found her for me, but same principle). I just happened to pick up The White Darkness, Silver Woven in My Hair and The Squire’s Tale.
My favorite story about browsing: I’ve mentioned my character, Sam Jones. One day I was at the library, wanting to find a new author, and on a whim decided to see if any authors named Jones looked good. And that’s how I started reading Diana Wynne Jones. I’ve read over twenty of her books, and she’s really top quality fantasy.
Anyway, the point: browsing books seems to work for me. But I’ve also never really tried being a serious seeker of books. So I’ve decided to experiment in that area: go for a month, only reading books that I specifically seek out. Now is a good time for it, since I have a long To-Be-Read list of books I’ve seen recommended on other blogs, plus I just brought home a stack of unread books from a book swap my Book Club did.
I’m curious to see if the quality of what I read goes up if I start seeking instead of browsing. It worked for television. I have more doubts that it will work for books. But…I’ll see! And I’ll let you know.
But even if I decide I like seeking, I do hope ebooks don’t mean an end to browsing as we know it. Because where would I be without all those books I just happened to bump into at the library?
How do you find books? Are you a browser or a seeker? Have you ever switched from one to the other?
Tales of the Marvelous 
I used to browse for books, but those days are pretty much gone now that I have kids. Now I always find books recommendations online, put them on hold at the library and pick them up when I take my kids to pick out their books. browsing shelves is a lot of fun, but I’ve also had fun browsing for recommendations online. I think some of both would be ideal.
I’m curious, what was the one cable show you were watching? We’re no cable netflix users too.
I do find myself starting to transition to a mixture of browsing and seeking, since I started following more book blogs. I’ll see if I end up sliding all the way over to being a seeker, but I think more likely I’ll find a good mix.
The one show I was/am (thanks to my Dad recording it for me) watching is The Big Bang Theory, which isn’t even on cable…but my TV doesn’t get reception at all without cable, so network is out too. Wonderful show, but not worth paying for cable to watch just that, especially when I expect the current season to be on Netflix by this summer.
I’m a seeker for television, as I don’t watch very much and I tend to watch programs that I’ve chosen to view, rather than just seeing what’s on at a certain time of night (though I do “browse” through Turner Classic Movies and watch whatever they are showing if I feel like watching T.V. and the film catches my interest).
I’m a browser for books and, while I have no problem with e-readers, I do worry that soon I won’t be able to go somewhere (a bookstore) and just see what’s presented so I can find something new to read. Amazon et. al. require you to pretty much know what you want when you go to those sites. I suppose I will have to start reading things like “The New York Times Review of Books” to get ideas of books I’d like to read, or use Amazon’s service of pointing out other books similar to the one you’ve bought as ways to find new books in the future. But that’s not as fun, by any means, and it is limiting compared to what would be presented in a large bookstore.
I suppose reading the NYT Book Review or other sources is browsing in a sense…but certainly requires a lot more thought and planning!
I had cable for a while, but ditched it. I’m much more of a seeker, I suppose, when it comes to television, and I’ve never been one to just turn on the television and see if there’s anything on. I usually only watch if there’s something I know I want to see. I have Netflix, and most of the shows I like are put online for free by the networks, so I can still see my shows in a timely manner if I want. I also got an antenna from Radio Shack so I get about 60 broadcast channels (most in Spanish and Vietnamese or something, lol). The only thing that’s really to miss about cable is sports. I think cable companies really need to get with the changing landscape and offer some flexible packages or online viewing options. Some enterprising company could really take advantage of that.
I think the difference between browsing the channels and browsing the shelves is in the nature of presentation. Say, for example, there’s this really awesome show on Wednesdays at 8:00 that you would totally love. But if you’re channel flipping on Sunday afternoon, you’re not going to find it. There are certain times of day when the quality of programming takes a plunge and there are certain times of day when you find better shows on. Whereas a library or a store doesn’t have that limitation. You can walk into the building on a Sunday afternoon or a Wednesday evening and the selection will be (more-or-less) the same.
As for how I find books, I would say I’m a seeker. If I have time to kill, I’ll wander around a library or store, but hardly ever pick something random up and take it home.
Love your point about the time factor! Cable is very limited by only being able to present certain shows at certain times–which I suppose is the idea behind adding more and more and MORE channels, but it still doesn’t seem to solve the problem of nothing being on when you happen to want to watch. A DVR or (if you’re going to be old school about it) a VCR helps, but still only to a limited extent.
If I could purchase cable on a channel by channel basis, I might do that–because there are probably only about five channels I’d really want to have. Some company needs to clue into that option.