Apparently the point of this whole book is nothing more than, 'hey man, style and subtance are both important.' Maybe I'm missing something, maybe that's an oversimplification, but it seems like that's what Lanham's whole 'attention economy' idea boils down to, and I don't know that I believe it deserved a whole book on the subject. The text never offers a very close interrogation of 'style' and how it can lead us to information but also mislead us. What about the downside of style? What about when style is used to drag our attention to worthless content? Or Lanham he arguing that the style itself has enough intrinsic worth that we shouldn't worry too much about the content?

All in all, the book raises some interesting ideas, but ultimately does little with them. ( )

an English professor makes giant leaps to make grand statements about writing and information representation in history and in the future. Just too much a stretch to make a coherent point. ( )

Lanham has been a university professor for about 40-years, Yale-educated, English lit and rhetoric. He came of age pre-computer revolution, when writing meant manual type-writers and white-out and transcription. This series of connected essays are his ideas about what the digital revolution means for the future of books, universities and what he calls "the economics of attention" - how the world operates when information is plentiful and the scarce resource are "eyeballs" (attention). We are flooded with high-quality art, news, books, movies, data of every type - it is not an "information economy" because information is as plentiful as air - the scarce resource is peoples attention. In that environment, style (the wrapping paper, the ornamentation, packaging, literary style, etc..) becomes more important than substance - style is the substance (think for example all the crazy cultural things that come out of Japan - all style, no substance). He also discusses how we interact with things: we look "at" them, or we look "through" them - ie. we enjoy them for what they are, or we analyze them. We read a novel/movie on a literary level and dissect how it was created or and historical context, or we "get lost in the book" and enjoy it for what it is. These two forces are in a constant tug of war with every object we own - cars for example, utilitarian or style (or some combo usually). In the end Lanham concludes it is the liberal arts that will save the day for they are the ones who are trained to filter (critics) and create design and style (the new substance). He also provides the most detailed and lucid explanation I've seen on why paper books have not been replaced by the digital medium. ( )

Not yet published