• masterspace@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    They also weren’t destroying rare books. They were buying in-print books from major retailers, which means that while yes, that is environmentally wasteful, it’s not actually destroying books in the classical destruction of knowledge sense since the manufacturer will just print another one if there’s demand for it.

    • MrQuallzin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      1 day ago

      This as well. Growing up in a house of book lovers, myself included, destroying a book was akin to kicking a puppy. Realistically though, they’re ultimately consumables. They’re meant to be bought, used, and replaced as needed. With luck the destruction included recycling as much as possible, seeing as it’s mainly paper.

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Precisely, there’s a reason that these days, books made for libraries are made to an entirely different standard than books sold at your local book store.

      • MDCCCLV@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yeah, you have millions of old books that nobody wants not even collectors. It’s not just popular literature.