I don't take huge amounts of issue with your overall rant, Doug b, but I take issue with itty bitty bits of it.
I'm a record (well, some vinyl, mostly CDs) collector myself, so I definitely relate to the idea of physical collecting of artists I enjoy. And as for your comments about corporate entertainment, to say I'm right behind you would be putting it mildly. But this idea of rejecting iTunes buying as though it has to be one or the other is ridiculous.
There's tons of good selected material I have no interest in collecting, but enjoy hearing (even repeatedly) for a wide variety of non-collector reasons, and iTunes frees me to buy only those things I actually want. Not to even mention how great it is that nothing *ever* goes out of print on iTunes or becomes "unobtainium," or how incredibly easy it is to explore and discover new artists some of which I may end up collecting. iTunes has been a great benefit to up-and-comers and others who previously had to rely on endless touring or limited word of mouth.
As for books, again this is a fairly specious argument. I'm not "cheating" on real books if I read an e-book! I *own* a Kindle and I will be ditching that primitive POS as fast as I can for an iPad. There's no evidence *whatsoever* that the Kindle (or prolonged reading of a real book!) isn't causing eyestrain or eye fatigue also. People used to read books by CANDLELIGHT, you really think a sharp clear LED-backlit screen with resizable text is worse for your eyes than that? Seriously??
Somehow I don't think corrective lenses were called into existence after people started doing the majority of their reading on computers. The ability to instantly resize text to what's most comfortable for me with a pinch of my fingers (rather than locked into the limited font sizes of the Kindle or the "no options at all" size of a real book) is a huge benefit that will *encourage* more reading for pleasure. So will the automatic light adjustment sensitivity of the iPad. So will the wide range of free books, and the easy sampling of books I might then decide to buy. It encourages *exploration* of literature (and other art forms) in a way not seen since the last time public libraries were great social halls (when was that anyway? Your parents' generation? Your grandparents'?).
Trading my larger apartment to a smaller one with a killer view didn't kill my love of books, but it made it totally impractical for me to have very many on hand. I usually don't know the first time I read a book if it's going to be one that I will truly treasure forever or not, so no I don't mind at all buying the e-version and then, perhaps later, making it a permanent edition to my paper library. I love being able to have a good selection of potential reading material handy (and the option to get a great deal more) or worrying about where to store it, etc. It removes the need to obsessively "collect" and gets me back to what was important about it in the first place: the *content.*
You might think it foolish to contemplate buying the same book twice, but how many times have you re-bought your favourite music album or movie because it changed formats?
Records didn't kill radio, and TV didn't kill movies, but some aspects of those mediums adapted or died, and thus it will be with print and music in the digital age. For example, I don't think bookstores have much to worry about, but I think the idea of printed comic books will probably pass into history (and the sooner the better -- you want to talk about a manipulated market ruined by "collectors" ...).
Generally speaking, new technologies tend to benefits artists/events/ideas that were underserved by the previous business model, which actually means
good news for people of musical or literary taste like yourself -- the crap music/literature already has support, it's the artists who
don't want to pander to the plebes who needed more exposure and a more level playing field. iTunes, particularly via its free podcasts and iTunes U, have brought SO MUCH diversity and otherwise unavailable voices to the public square -- to rail against it in favour of "real albums" or "real books" reminds me of the short-sighted talk of the luddites who feared the machines of the Industrial Age.
Not only is there ROOM for both the traditional formats and the new, they DEPEND on each other. Shakespeare would never have lasted 500 years as a relevant voice if his works weren't continuously re-interpreted, redefined, given new relevance and rediscovered, first by the printing press and then by scholars and then by movies and then by daring theatrical directors who grew up absorbing all the "new technological" forms this material could take in their own histories, and building on that to keep Shakespeare meaningful.
iTunes and the iPad are no more of a "threat" to the content that you value than digital photography has been a threat to the art of memorable pictures; indeed, they are themselves part of what keeps the art alive and thriving.
