New things are exciting. And in the physical world, new things carry clues that they are such. They are shiny, unweathered and sometimes come wrapped in cellophane, like the above magazines.
Digital things offer less obvious clues as to their newness. Basically you have to look for a date, which is often in size 10pt. This lack of a sense of newness online can be both good and bad. Bad, because you don’t get the same sense of excitement that happens when a new object is wrapped in cellophane. But good, because when newness is less obvious, so is oldness.
The above picture is of three of the latest Economist magazines that I am yet to unwrap. OK – I just this moment unwrapped the one on the right. The sight of these unappreciated magazines really bugs me. It’s a reminder that I didn’t enjoy these things when they were new. Their faux-newness now haunts me. They look new, but the content inside is not. Damn them. Damn me.
Browsing the same (now old) content online does not bother me. But the idea of thumbing through a dated news-related magazine is not the same. It is one of many examples of the battle between the romance of our relationship with physical artefacts and the fluidity and invisibility of our connection with digital ones.
Right, lunch.
