The mobile world is a fragmented world. Because we want to support as many users as possible we decided to build three versions of the application: an iOS version, an Android version and a mobile website to support other platforms. The goal is to make these versions almost identical to each other, although target platform differences will have to be respected. It is important to note that while iOS and Android may have relatively large user bases, the number of people potentially using the web version is probably bigger.

Many development frameworks are available to facilitate (multi-platform) mobile development. In order to choose the development framework that is most suitable for this project, I have investigated several of these development frameworks. For each platform, I indicate what it does, as well as its advantages and disadvantages.

Note: these frameworks are free, open and/or open source.

Technology frameworks analysis

1. Molly Project

URL: http://mollyproject.org/
What: The Molly project aims to provide “a framework for the rapid development of information and service portals targeted at mobile internet devices”. It is used at a number of higher education institutions, among which Oxford University. It supports the library query protocol Z39.50 out-of-the-box, and internally uses Python [http://www.python.org/] to generate a Django-powered [https://www.djangoproject.com/] website project.
Advantages: A lot of functionality (supposedly) out-of-the-box.
Disadvantages: Web only, needs additional technologies: Python (dependencies), Django (framework), relatively difficult to configure.
Useful in the project: No.
Additional resources:
Download: https://github.com/mollyproject/mollyproject/archives/master
Documentation: http://docs.mollyproject.org/molly1.2.2/

2. iMobileU / Kurogo Mobile Framework / Mobile Campus

URL: http://modolabs.com/framework.php
URL2: http://imobileu.org/
What: Modo Labs offers their Mobile Campus service platform to higher education institutions. They also offer the framework behind this service, the Kurago Mobile Framework as a free download. It is a PHP based framework containing Data Controllers (RSS, ICS (Calendar), LDAP, Database, HTML, JSON, INI) to handle external data and a Template Engine to generate the User Interface.
Advantages: Targeted at libraries, powerful Data Controllers, out-of-the-box available modules.
Disadvantages: Web only, no real code examples? Needs PHP backend, not standalone, probably not very PhoneGap compatible.
Useful in the project: Candidate only if it works with PhoneGap.
Additional resources:
Download: http://modolabs.com/kurogo/latest.php
Developer’s Guide: http://modolabs.com/kurogo/guide/
Examples: http://imobileu.org/community-users

3. Mobile Web OSP

URL: http://mobilewebosp.pbworks.com/
What: Mobile Web OSP is a framework focused on delivering mobile web solutions for higher education institutions. It is a PHP/MySQL server based framework. There is little documentation and there seems to be no active community.
Advantages: Targeted at higher education institutions.
Disadvantages: Project seems to be inactive.
Useful in the project: No.
Additional resources:
none

4. Sencha Touch

URL: http://www.sencha.com/products/touch/
What: Sencha Touch is “the world’s first app framework built specifically to leverage HTML5, CSS3, and Javascript for the highest level of power, flexibility, and optimization”. It is a JavaScript framework containing a large amount of UI Controls, Icons, Animations and other Components. It scales well to different screen sizes and can be themed with a house style. It does mainly front end User Interface generation, and may therefore require some additional back-end platform.
Advantages: very powerful, synergy with PhoneGap.
Disadvantages: Doesn’t target iOS and Android natively by itself (works together with PhoneGap), chart framework costs $99
Useful in the project: Very good candidate for web, possibly also for
Additional resources:
Download: http://www.sencha.com/products/touch/download/1.1.0/
Quick Start: http://www.sencha.com/learn/sencha-touch-quick-start/
Learning Center: http://www.sencha.com/learn
API Documentation: http://dev.sencha.com/deploy/touch/docs/
Examples: http://dev.sencha.com/deploy/touch/examples/
Sencha Touch with PhoneGap: http://www.sencha.com/learn/a-sencha-touch-mvc-application-with-phonegap

5. jQuery Mobile

URL: http://jquerymobile.com/
What: jQuery Mobile is a mobile variant of the very popular jQuery framework. Its aim is to provide “a unified user interface system that works seamlessly across all popular mobile device platforms”. It delivers a large library of Mobile UI Components and builds upon jQuery’s existing core framework.
Advantages: Strong framework with active community, synergy with PhoneGap
Disadvantages: Needs PhoneGap for native applications.
Useful in the project: Very good candidate for web version, in combination with PhoneGap also option for native versions.
Additional recources:
Demo: http://jquerymobile.com/demos/1.0b2/
jQuery with PhoneGap: http://wiki.phonegap.com/w/page/36868306/UI%20Development%20using%20jQueryMobile

6. jQuery Touch

URL: http://jqtouch.com/
What: jQuery Touch was made by (one of) the creators of Sencha Touch, but is a plugin to the normal jQuery framework. In a way jQuery Touch is a predecessor to both jQuery Mobile and Sencha Touch. jQuery Touch is optimized for WebKit-based browsers, while jQuery Mobile tries to support all mobile devices. jQuery Touch and jQuery Mobile use progressive enhancement to make HTML pages mobile friendly, while Sencha Touch is JavaScript based and therefore more software engineering oriented than web design oriented.
Advantages: Small and fast.
Disadvantages: a bit older and smaller community than jQuery Mobile and Sencha Touch
Useful in the project: Good candidate, but jQuery Mobile and Sencha Touch seem more powerful and sophisiticated.
Additional resources:
none

7. Less Framework

URL: http://lessframework.com/
What: Less Framework is “a CSS grid system for designing adaptive web­sites”. It is basically a CSS template that helps content that is intended to be shown on large screens to also look good on smaller and small screens.
Advantages: Just CSS
Disadvantages: Just CSS
Useful in the project: Maybe, probably not.
Additional resources:
none

8. PhoneGap

URL: http://www.phonegap.com/
What: PhoneGap is a wrapper framework that bundles a HTML/JS/CSS website into an semi-native package (iOS, Android and other targets). It doesn’t compile the application to native code, but instead just shows the web application in a dedicated browser, making the application indistinguishable from a real native application. It uses the target platform’s native browser. However, for each platform that is to be a publishing target, a separate publishing workflow is required.
Advantages: Provides a clear method to deploy one application to multiple target platforms with a single web design codebase.
Disadvantages: Access to native features (such as NFC or QR) in the future may be more difficult. Possibly not all parts of the app will work offline.
Useful in the project: A serious candidate in combination with jQuery Mobile/Touch or Sencha Touch.
Additional resources:
Get Started Guide: http://www.phonegap.com/start/
Developer Tools: http://www.phonegap.com/tools
Developer Wiki: http://wiki.phonegap.com/w/page/16494772/FrontPage
API Documentation: http://docs.phonegap.com/
Tutorial series: http://hiediutley.com/2011/03/14/phonegap-tutorial-series-1-project-structure-and-internals/
Tutorial: http://mobile.tutsplus.com/tutorials/phonegap/phonegap-development/

9. Appcelerator Titanium Mobile

URL: http://www.appcelerator.com/products/titanium-mobile-application-development/
What: Like PhoneGap, Titanium takes a web application and transforms it into a native application. But unlike PhoneGap, Titanium actually compiles the HTML/JS/CSS to native byte code. Titanium is a Cloud-based service, which means that all(?) compilation is done on Appcelerator’s servers.
Advantages: Native code might be faster
Disadvantages: Documentation seems a bit chaotic.
Useful in the project: No.
Additional resources:
Example tutorial: http://mobile.tutsplus.com/tutorials/appcelerator/titanium-mobile-build-a-pizza-ordering-app/
Another example tutorial: http://boldr.net/iphone-app-with-titanium-mobile

10. Unify

URL: http://unify.github.com/unify/
What: Unify is a meta-framework built to “improve the development efficiency of apps for smart phones”. It uses other technologies such as PhoneGap, QooXDoo, Sass and Adobe AIR.
Advantages: A complete workflow for app development.
Disadvantages: A lot of technologies involved (metaframework).
Useful in the project: Maybe, but other frameworks seem to be more useful.
Additional resources:
none

11. Flex Mobile

URL: http://www.adobe.com/products/flash-builder/features.html
What: The Flex Builder 4.5 IDE makes it possible to compile Flex/Flash/ActionScript3 based applications to native iOS and Android byte code.
Advantages: Gigantic existing ActionScript3 community.
Disadvantages: The Flex Builder IDE is not free. Relatively new technology, some performance problems reported.
Useful in the project: Maybe, other options seem more stable.
Additional resources:
none

12. Android SDK (native)

URL: http://developer.android.com/
What: The Android SDK (using the Eclipse IDE) is the native framework for building applications targeted at Android smart phones and tablets. Applications are coded in Java and XML, and are compiled to byte code. The Android SDK features its own application architecture design patterns (Activities, Services, Content Providers, Broadcast Receivers, Intents, etc.) and a set of standard mobile UI Components. Other frameworks that build to native android (PhoneGap, Titanium, etc.) make use of the Android SDK.
Advantages: Native source code guarantees future maintainability and updatability. Best performance and user experience.
Disadvantages: Only targets Android.
Useful in the project: Yes.
Additional resources:
Download: http://developer.android.com/sdk/index.html
Developer Guide: http://developer.android.com/guide/index.html

13. iOS SDK (native)

URL: http://developer.apple.com/
What: The iOS SDK (containing the Xcode IDE), is the native framework for building applications targeted at iOS devices (iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad). Applications are coded in Objective-C and user interfaces are built using the Interface Builder application, using a set of standard mobile UI Components, and using a few Objective-C/IB specific design patterns such as Delegation, Outlets and Object Messaging.
Advantages: Native source code guarantees future maintainability and updatability. Best performance and user experience.
Disadvantages: Only targets iOS devices.
Useful in the project: Yes.
Additional resources:
iOS Developer Center: https://developer.apple.com/devcenter/ios/index.action

14. Primo template

URL: http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/category/PrimoForMobile
What: The Primo For Mobile template is a mobile version of the Primo library search system (that is used by UBVU).
Advantages: Synergy with existing UBVU systems? Adaptability (web based).
Disadvantages: Web only, will need changes/replacement for native applications.
Useful in the project: Yes.

Summary and conclusions

Summary / observations:

Molly, Kurogo and Mobile Web OSP are ‘old style’ frameworks, running centrally on a server. Frameworks such as Sencha Touch and jQuery Mobile are more modern frameworks, running de-centrally on the user’s phone, while of course getting content data from external sources. These modern frameworks better separate UI and data (View and Content) than the server-based frameworks. As a result, the more modern frameworks are more compatible with PhoneGap.
Because the older style frameworks are specifically targeted at higher education institutions, they do provide valuable information and examples in the area of User Interface design / best practices.
PhoneGap seems to be the best choice for converting web applications to semi-native applications. Titanium and Unify are possible but more complex alternatives.
The Less framework doesn’t offer much more than CSS presets and will probably not of much value by itself.
Flex Mobile is a powerful outsider, performance, support will be ok, future changes might be more difficult because the code base might be less stable. The Flex IDE is not free.
Of course the native frameworks provide the best native integration, the most clean code base and the best code maintainability in case of future changes and updates.
Most likely, the Primo template will be of use when making the library search functionality available on mobile phones.

jQuery Mobile vs. Sencha Touch

jQuery Mobile: ‘easier’ to develop (more like web development)
jQuery Mobile: faster loading (smaller)
Sencha Touch: better performance (JS core)
Sencha Touch: more UI Components

PhoneGap vs. Native

Native: better access to native functionality
Native: most stable framework
Native: better performance
PhoneGap: easier code base (any web developer can edit)
PhoneGap: more complex development process
PhoneGap: possibly less development time (share with web version).

Preliminary conclusion:

Web application: use Sencha Touch or jQuery Mobile
iOS application: use native iOS SDK (unless PhoneGap builds the web version really well into an iOS application).
Android application: use native Android SDK (unless PhoneGap builds the web version really well into an Android application).

Other resources

Technologies:
RippleEmulator: http://ripple.tinyhippos.com/ (to test mobile applications)
Sass: http://ripple.tinyhippos.com/ (Ruby based CSS extension allowing faster and more powerful CSS).

Web resources:
• http://9-bits.com/post/723711597/jqtouch-and-sencha-touch
• http://www.quora.com/Were-deciding-between-jQuery-Mobile-currently-in-alpha-and-Sencha-Touch-What-are-the-pros-and-cons-for-each
• http://interfacethis.com/2011/adventures-in-html5-part-one/
• http://jquerymobile.com/strategy/
• http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3446186/sencha-touch-vs-jqtouch
• http://beautyindesign.com/blog/titanium-phonegap-sencha-touch-jquery-mobile-clearing-up-confusion/
• http://www.the4thdimension.net/2011/07/sencha-touch-vs-jquerymobile.html
• http://www.petefreitag.com/item/781.cfm — Distributing a test application on iPhone/iPod/iPad

I have to say I do like Edge, although it has some performane and productivity problems (changing properties on a large number of similar items is both slow and cumbersome). Still, HTML5/Edge has a long way to go before it will be able to really compete with Flash/ActionScript’s featureset and ease of development.

Check out the new website: www.uitgeverijolthof.nl

A game starts out with a certain individual situation, an opportunity of the user or player to do something. This situation can for example be the detection of a certain pattern in what was previously apparent chaos, a ‘cognitive dissonance’ or an aesthetic peculiarity. Often, this situation has some external meaning or reference to reality. The situation can also be a metaphor for an event in real life.

But a situation is never alone. It is surrounded by preceding and following situations, by situations that occur at a slightly different place, and, thanks to the fantasy of the human mind, by situations that are not actualized and may never be actualized. In other words, the situation is integrated within a spatio-temporal world. In most games, the notion of a game world is mainly one of topology and projection. The game world is shown to the player as a 2D (top or side view), 3D (isometric or frustum based), virtual reality or immersive projection. But more importantly, it is shown as a world that can be explored, navigated, mapped and possibly expanded.

For the user to be able to be in a situation implies that the user is able to act in a situation, which means to not just passively observe, but to ‘actually’ do something. Doing something requires the skill to do something. Doing without skill is doing anything, not something. Skill can for example be aiming, timing, concentration, strategy allocation, agility, forcing, moving or another activity, and associated with skills can be affordances and features like size, speed, power, strength, memory, knowledge, territory, intuition, etcetera. Within computer games, skills are usually enforced with the help of game mechanics, user interface design and virtuality (immersion). If the player can leave the game, his freedom is absolute. If he cannot, his freedom is control within a situation. Most computer games can be left. Life cannot be left.

Activity implies development, and a player will gain experience with every act. Experience may come in the form of power, superpower(s), magic, evolution, progress, rewards or increasing skill level(s). Acts are executed with a certain goal or objective in mind, which may or may not be accomplished. It is important to note that experience is not just gained when goals are successfully accomplished, but that failing also brings experience, a fact that is often forgotten. The best objectives are those that are not too easy and not too difficult for the player, and in serious games, the difficulty of objectives can often be matched to individual players. Experience is the primary learning component of games, and the most important educational part of game experience is feedback such as failure costs and success rewards. Of course, fairness is important here, for a game that unjustly punishes players will be tossed aside quickly.

Interactive narratives

Narrative is the link between the absolute and the concrete, as narrations and stories are registrations of series of concrete events, but at the same time contain absolute situations that reoccur in new concrete situations again and again. Narratives compare abstract acts (ethics) with concrete acts (praxis). It is no surprise that narratives are often about good versus evil.
But when reading, listening to or watching a story, the audience can not really act itself. Consequently, classic narratives are more about ethics than about praxis. Interactive narrative changes this, by adding ‘actual’ situations to storyline. In a sense, movies and books are (just) worlds, while interactive narratives are worlds with situations. While experience from watching movies is only experience with actions of other people and characters, experience from interactive narratives and games is experience with personal responsibility.

It is important to align the responsibility of the player and the game character (avatar), and that the personal goals of game characters are realistic even if the goals are to be achieved by the player. The goals should be justified by the (supposed or projected) internal motivation of the game character, but also become the personal goals of the player. This is an absolute requirement for creating ‘involvement’ of the player and the game character.

(excerpt from my master thesis in Computer Science Dynamic Graphics in Serious Games (2010))

Update (2 sept 2010):
Thanks to great work by Peter, the Xbox Live Stats Widget now has a lot more functionality and uses the official Xbox Community Developer Program information feed. The widget was already downloaded 16700 times!
Recently I created a few other GUI test applications. We are also looking at possibilities to create tablet applications, for example for the upcoming Notion Ink Adam and the iPad.

Update (29 dec 2010):
The Xbox Live Stats Widget has now been downloaded over 55000 times! Thanks everyone!

Click here to view the embedded video.

For more information see NiftySystems.nl

Click here to view the embedded video.

Now that the software and hardware of ebook reader devices is becoming more mature, ebooks really have the potential to take over the publishing industry. In this literature study I first present an overview of the advantages and disadvantages of ePublishing. Next, after I have discussed the key aspects of the ‘reading activity’ as distinct from other information activities, I will describe how ebook reader devices could support this activity in different usage settings (educational, office, entertainment). I conclude with a discussion of the competition between eBook readers and tablets. In the appendix a review of the current state of development, including a technical dissection of the ePub format and an evaluation of the eReader devices that are currently on the market, can be found. Finally I include an annotated bibliography of important articles, as well as a regular bibliography of all sources used.

Introduction

eBook reader devices (eReaders) have been the great promise for the future of (digital) publishing for at least a decade now. Back in 2000, these devices used regular LCD screens and storage was still an important limiting factor. These days, eReaders use specialized eInk displays and storage is so cheap that it is no longer a relevant problem: in 2000, eReader devices had about 2MB to 32MB storage capacity. Today, gigabytes of flash storage only cost a few euro.

The difficulties with normal LCD screens are that they are often very reflective, which makes reading in sunlight difficult, and that they are back lit, which is hard on the eyes in case of long reading sessions. In contrast, eInk displays deliver much better readability because they are less reflective and don’t use back lighting. eInk works as follows: every pixel is a small plastic capsule filled with a liquid that contains a small amount of ink that is electrically charged. By changing the polarity of a current running behind the capsule, the black ink can either be attracted or repulsed, which makes it possible to show either a black or white pixel. The disadvantages of eInk are that color is currently not possible and that page transitions are relatively slow (about 1 second per page transition, where a normal LCD screen often refreshes around 50-100 times a second).

Both storage and screens have been improved, but despite these serious technological advancements and overal functional improvements, eReaders are still not omnipresent. Of course a few devices have sold quite well, but overal the market was only about 1 million units big in 2008, of which the Amazon Kindle sold about 45%, Sony sold 30%, and the other device manufacturers about 25%.¹

ePublishing

The potential market for books and publishing in general (magazines, periodicals, journals, documents, etc.) is enormously bigger than one million readers. How can we explain this failure of eBook reader devices to really break through and become the standard for publishing in the 21th century? After all, the advantages of eBooks and eReaders are obvious.

Promises

For one thing, ePublishing is more sustainable than classical publishing. We have become so used to paper, that we often forget how inefficient and wasteful it is. Most printed material (such as for example newspapers, advertising and magazines) has a short lifespan. Even many books are only read once or a few times and spend most of their life standing on the book shelves.

A recent report² concludes that the CO₂ reduction that could be achieved with the help of ePublishing is potentially enormous. Already in the current market state, the total amount of CO₂ reduced by the use of eBooks is equal to the amount of CO₂ that is produced by the production of eReader devices (463 million Kg). According to this report, the total savings in CO₂ emissions (extra production minus extra reduction) could already grow to 2.85 billion Kg by 2012, because of the fact that less books have to be printed. With ePuCO₂blishing, to read any amount of books, only one device is needed. The report concludes that in terms of CO₂ emmissions, the break even point is already reached when 22.5 books are read on one device (they used the Amazon Kindle). Read at least one book more and save the planet.

Of course, not all factors of sustainable publishing can be measured in terms of CO₂ emission. Sceptics have for example pointed out that building eReader devices requires all kinds of special metals and plastics, which are harder to acquire than trees, and that these devices also use more energy than paper.³ However, they forget that printing books also requires a lot of technical devices (which use metals, plastics and energy), as does the distribution of physical books. In addition to this, physical publishing requires a lot of ink. Most eReaders are very energy efficient, only using energy when a page is changed. Also, since people are buying elektronical devices anyway to use in other activities and if these devices would also be usable as eBook reader devices, the added consumption would relatively lower. Finally, energy consumption can potentially be made completely ‘green’ with the help of sustainable energy sources like solar and wind energy. What all this shows, is the need for a complete analysis and comparison of the entire production cycles of both classical and digital publishing. Of course we will also have to work on a better recycling process for used technical equipment, in which we recover scarce metal elements and plastics.

Another important advantage of eBooks and ePublishing is concerned with the availability of information. Many books that have been printed in the past are now out of print, and because of relative low customer interest, it is not economically feasible for publishers to reprint those books in small quantities. If you want to read one of those books that are out of print and won’t be reprinted, eBooks can be your solution. Because eBooks have (almost) no storage costs and don’t require a large investment to be reprinted (as normal books do), they can be sold on demand and for a low fee. At the same time, all works that are in the public domain (which means copyright has expired for these works) can be downloaded and read for free in eBook format.

In general, because the internet reduced publishing costs (creation, production, advertisement, storage and distribution costs) to almost nothing, publishing isn’t something for the elite any more. Anyone can create a text or ‘book’, present or sell it on a website and advertise it using social media networks. The publishing industry has shifted from being very vertically organized, top-down and elitist to a horizontal and more egalitarian organization. Of course this also leads to a lot of bad works (as we see for example in the numerous quick rips of public domain works), but in the end the better works will be appreciated most and get the most attention, because social media enables very quick and direct feedback.

A third advantage lies into the integration of the activity of reading into the overal human communication process, and possible extension and improvement of the ‘reading activity’. Reading has always been a very distinct activity, separated from playing, browsing and direct communication for example, because books just don’t allow for many different use cases. Books are good in one thing: to be read. However, electronic books can possibly become more diverse. Features such as a touch screen and connectivity (Wifi and cellular networks), allow for an extension of the reading activity with for example advanced annotation and crossreferencing options and real time updates (of errata for example). It may however also be the case that the activity of reading is deterioriated by these enhancements. We will examine this issue in more detail later in this essay.

Problems

But first we also have to take a look at the problems of ePublishing, because they are most likely the reasons for the fact that ePublishing has not become the publishing standard of the 21th century yet.

The most important problem with ebooks has been the reluctance of the publishers themselves against ePublishing. This is both a political and an economical problem. Because ePublishing allows almost any person to publish almost anything by him or herself, it introduces the risk of the publishers themselves being not that necessary anymore, and this of course implies a loss of power and possibly income for the publishers. Still, if the publishers do not make the same mistake that the music (and at another scale) the movie bussinesses have made (that is: trying to enforce outdated bussiness models onto a market with a completely different, more open, organization) there will most likely be room for the professional experience that publishers have. However, it will probably be the writer ‘hiring’ the publisher instead of the other way around. Of course this will also mean that power will shift from the publisher to the writer. But for the creative market, this is no problem. The economic aspect of this problem lies in finding new bussiness models that work. This will probably be models in which admiration of and support to the artistic genius will be more important than advertisements. In these models, copyright will have to be enforced not by means of copy protection, but by means of copy integrity, which ensures that someone may be able to copy a work, but it will still be the work of the original author, who will get the credit, fame and admiration.⁴ History has shown that users will pay for quality content that is theirs to keep, exactly because they can keep it and they want to support the artist they admire.
Currently, eBook pricing is nowhere near optimal. Often, digital versions cost almost as much as their physical ‘originals’, because of the fear of copying.

Another disadvantage of ebooks stems from the fact that they simply are not real books. According to the famous german culture critic Walter Benjamin, mass production of art works leads to the ‘shattering’ of their ‘aura’. The ‘aura’ of a work of art is determined by it’s uniqueness (restricted exhibition, authenticity, etc.). In the case of mass production, there is no uniqueness, and thus no aura. This is the reason that viewing a mass produced poster of Kandinsky’s ‘Composition VIII’ can never match standing in front of the real painting. And likewise, downloading mass ‘produced’ (or illegally ripped) eBooks can never match holding the real first edition manuscript of some great literary work. However, the influence of this problem on the use of eBooks should be minor, because regular publishing is also mass reproduction. It is only in the case of rare (and especially beautiful) editions of books with low print runs, that currently published books can be said to have aura. In addition to this, while ebooks themselves may not have aura, hardware gadgets (although also mass produced) such as eReaders may have aura themselves, if they are particularly well designed. Also, ‘digital aura’ may lie in feeling more ‘connected’ to the author. The part of physical books that may be the most difficult to recreate digitally may very well be their ease of use. Paper books are among the easiest objects in the world, exactly because they only have a very limited number of uses.

Finally, standardisation is an important issue. Paper books are static, and it doesn’t matter if different books have different paper sizes, or different physical contructions. However with eBooks, different eReader devices should be able to make the same book available for reading. Since these devices often have different manufacturers, different hardware and software capabilities, and different screen sizes, eBooks should be adaptable to these different eReaders. This could be done either by reformating eBooks on the actual device itself, or by publishing a separate preformatted version of the eBook for every possible device. This last solution is obviously very inefficient, given the high number of different devices available on the market. This means that reformating on-the-fly is the only viable option to solve device differences. However, there are also multiple eBook file formats, of which some (for example ePub and MobiPocket) support reformating, and some (for example PDF) don’t. Most devices support a list of different formats, but there is not one standard format yet, although the open ePub format is becomming more and more widely used. See the appendix for a technical evaluation of the ePub eBook file format.

From the standardisation problem follow a few smaller problems that have to deal with uniformity. With paper books, referencing and citing are easy, because there are physical page numbers that are the same in every copy. However, with reflowable eBooks, text may end up on different pages on different devices. Therefore, the classical method of referencing (naming an edition and page number) is unusable, and a new alternative method of standardised referencing is needed for eBooks. Here lies an important research opportunity. The same problem also occurs when you want to add a marker or bookmark on a page and want to continue reading on a different device. Also, because eBooks will most likely have more editions and revisions than paper books, a universal system of identification and version management is needed, for example some digital equivalent to the ISBN system is, possibly web or url based. Such a system would at the same time offer a lot of possibilities for users to review, rate and crossreference works, as well as store metadata.

Information Activities

Now that we have seen what the promises of and problems with eBooks are, we can divert our attention to an analysis of the ‘reading’ activity, and distinguish it from other information activities (activities that have to do with the creating, transporting, transforming or processing information).

In the last decade, digital information technology has radically changed the way we deal with information. Compared to the time when text on paper was the main information storage and communication technology, digital communication has not only made our information processing more interactive, multimedial and direct, but has also over time shortened the length of text we read, from books, to blogs, to microblogging, and increased the speed in which we create information. We have gone from a certain number books per year to many tweets per second. Social media and the use of mobile devices and social networks have stimulated the writing and reading of short messages, contrasting the books, articles and background articles of ‘old’ media.

If we distinquish different ‘information processing activities’, how does the activity of ‘reading’ compare to other activities like ‘playing’, ‘browsing’, ‘direct communication’. Here we are only concerned with activities of information processing that use existing information, not with those that for example create information. Of each activity, a ‘classic’ (analog) example and a digital example are given.

The activity of Reading

The activity of reading, for example reading the daily newspaper or Homer’s Odyssey, is a primarily solitary activity, that is focussed on the content of (mostly) text(s). Often these are long or very long texts in which a narrative unfolds or in which a certain argument is made. In other words, the content is heavily structured and goal-oriented. Reading is a mostly passive activity (the content sets the goals and fullfills them (or fails to do so)), except maybe for some optional annotation or bookmarking by the reader. The digital equivalent of reading (a book) is eReading (an eBook).

The activity of Playing

Playing a game, for example a card game, is either a solitary or (virtual) multiplayer activity, that is focussed on the experience of playing, and only seldom on the content of the game. It is often multimedia based (for example the use of cards, dices, textual questions/dialogues and other game objects). Some games are short (for example rock, paper, scissors), some are longer (for example adventureous role playing games). Most games are moderately passive (the game creates the goals, the player fullfills them (or fails to do so)). The digital equivalent of playing (a board/card game) is playing a videogame.

The activity of Browsing

The activity of browsing is a mainly solitary activity that is focussed on content, not specifically on the experience of acquiring the content. Browsing is generally text-based, although some multimedia elements like images, data visualizations or even more complex multimedia interactivity can be used. Browsing consists mostly of skimming short texts or annotations, and following references to others. Browsing is moderately active (the person browsing sets the goals, the content fullfills them (or fails to do so)). The digital equivalent of a library visit is browsing the internet.

The activity of Direct communication

Direct communication is an inherently multi person activity, that is often more focussed on the experience of communicating than on the content of the conversation (”how do you like the weather today?”). It is a short message based multimedial (the use of bodily and facial expressions, sound, movement and images) activity, that is very unstructured, and mostly active (all participants set the goals, and fullfill them (or fail to do so)). The digital equivalent of a face to face conversation is instant messaging.

It seems that the activity of reading is an ‘oldfashioned’ activity, because it deals with longer texts. Just like normal books, eBooks are about the distribution of longer texts. Activities like playing, browsing and direct communication deal with shorter texts, and as such fit better into the new media workflow. It might be the case that reading (in the sense of reading longer texts) will be completely obsolete in the future, but most likely there will be a lot of tasks where reading will still be necessary. This means there will be a market for eBooks.

Scenarios for the use of eReaders

In contrast to paper books, eBooks are also cost effective for shorter text. But there will also most likely remain a big market for longer texts, and thus for eReaders and eBooks, because there is a sufficient number of tasks that benefit from reading. What are the most important requirements for eReader devices to support these tasks?

eReaders could for example be very effective in educational and academic environments, where student papers (and corrections) as well as academic journals are very easy to acquire, read and process digitally. For this usage, excellent annotation and better citation and referencing mechanisms are needed in eReader devices.

A second scenario where the usage of eReaders could work very well is office or bussiness use. eReaders could be used for such diverse activities as generating and presenting bussiness offers, real time management reports and statistics, internal documents and administration, external publications (ads, catalogues), and customer feedback. In all these cases, the use of eReaders can cut costs dramatically. To make eReaders a viable alternative to normal paper in this scenario, they need to be as reliable and easy to use as normal paper and books, and the initial purchase costs of the device should be covered by savings in paper and ink (and increased productivity) during the device’s lifespan.

Finally eReaders can be used to replace entertainment books. People still read books and newspapers with longer articles. Availability of DRM-free content for a fair price (a few euro per title) is the most important succes factor for this category of eReader usage. Of course, eReaders will have to compete with the ease of use of a paper book as well.

eReaders and tablets

The discussion has risen whether eBooks should be developed as successors of paper books, or that they are completely different works. Mark Carden has written an excellent article about the possible use cases of eBooks,⁵ and he argues that eBooks are not books, because the new possibilities that digital books offer allow for new reading experiences that go much further than the traditional ‘passive’ reading experience. I agree with him that we should embrace the new forms of interactivity and communication these new reading experiences offer. Yet, I would like to add that those new experiences are not reading in the sense of the classical ‘reading activity’ and that we therefore should not call them eBooks. In order for eBooks and eReaders to finally take over the market from paper books, eBooks should be more like books, and eReading should me more like reading.

There is a clear separation of reading from the other activities in terms of the screen: because the reading activity is concerned with reading longer texts, screen readability is the most important requirement, and screen update speed (refresh rate) can be sacrificed in favor of readability. However, for the other activities, the refresh rate of the screen is more important than readibility of longer texts. Devices optimized for playing, browsing and direct communication, so called ‘tablets’, are appearing more and more frequently on the market.

Tablets often feature high resolution, high refresh rate LCD screens and high speed networking capabilities and are as such very well suited for playing, browsing and direct communication. However, when reading a book, you don’t want to be distraced every time a new email or instant message arrives. Even direct hypertextual links to referenced books or documents and the lookup of citations in their original context probably are big distractions when reading a longer text. To a certain extent, annotation is also a distraction, but because you don’t leave the context of the reading activity, it often increases productivity in non-entertainment use case scenarios.

Ideally, given the completely different screen and connectivity requirements of reading and the other activities, a user would want to have multiple devices: a tablet for playing games, browsing the web and communication with other users, and an eReader device for reading books and articles. More ideally, because carrying two devices at the same time might not be something users want to do, one hybrid device that functions both as a tablet and eReader should be developed. This could be a device with either one high resolution, high refresh rate ePaper screen or two screens of which one is an ePaper screen for reading and the one is an LCD screen for the other tasks. The two-screen approach is already applied by a few manufacturers (see the appendix for details). For the (more ideal) one screen version however, a lot of progress in screen technology is needed. Of course this ideal one screen tablet/eReader hybrid could at the same time also replace the laptop, personal mp3 and video player, gaming console and mobile phone (possibly with a separate bluetooth headset).

Conclusion

The eBook reader device (meant for reading) has to be distinquished from the (internet) tablet (meant for playing (games), (internet) browsing and direct communication), because (especially the screen) requirements are very different for these different activities. eReaders should be optimized for reading longer texts without distractions by using ePaper and limited (or disableable) network functionality, while tablets (in order to satisfy the requirements of the other information activities) use LCD screens and high speed networking capabilities. Ideally those two devices should be combined into one device, so users don’t have to carry multiple devices.

To be able to replace books and paper, eBooks and eReaders will have to compete with the ease of use of normal books and paper. Besides screen readability, there are a number of other important improvements that need to be made to eBooks and eReaders to succesfully compete, such as fast and easy annotation functionality, low boot times and high page turning speeds, high quality reflowable content format that can be viewed on devices with different screen sizes, a universal standard for citing or referencing certain parts of eBooks and other texts. Finally, eBook content should have a fair price.

Eventually, eReaders will also offer improvements to the classical book and reading activity: better annotation (and more annotation space), automatic errata updates, hypertextual referencing, interactive examples or exercises in educational books, multimedia, multi-reader bookmarks. However, these are all improvements that can to be applied succesfully, only after the classical reading activity has been digitized.

If eReaders and tablets do not converge into a hybrid device that satisfies both reading and the other activities, it may also be the case that the activity of reading will not be exercised anymore in the digital era. People might use paper books for the longer text they do read, and continue reading more and more shorter texts instead of longer ones.

In the appendix, an evaluation of the current state of eBooks can be found. First, the open ePub format is analyzed, after which an overview of currently available or announced devices is presented. Finally, an annotated bibligraphy reviews some of the important articles on eReaders, eBooks and ePublishing, and a resources section lists informative resources.

[appendices removed, updated summary: buy the Sony PRS-650 or wait for the Notion Ink Adam]

All hot100 participants were asked to create a short introduction video about themselves, so I created this video:

Click here to view the embedded video.

tOMS was used in collaboration with Siebe Bluijs to power www.siebebluijs.nl and www.allartsareequal.com

Read more at NiftySystems.nl

de eerste frase van Chopins Nocturne in Bes klein, Opus 9 - 1. Larghetto

1 inleiding – Schopenhauer

Arthur Schopenhauer werd in 1788 in Danzig geboren als zoon van een rijke koopman. Arthurs vader overleed op jonge leeftijd, en van de erfenis die tussen Arthur, zijn zus Adele en zijn moeder Johanna verdeeld werd heeft hij zijn gehele leven in zijn levensonderhoud kunnen voorzien. Dankzij deze erfenis heeft Schopenhauer zijn leven aan de filosofie kunnen wijden terwijl hij eigenlijk was voorbestemd zijn vader op te volgen als koopman.

Schopenhauers proefschrift Over de viervoudige wortel van de wet van de toereikende grond (Ueber die vierfache Wurzel des Satzes vom zureichenden Grunde, 1813) handelt over de wet van de toereikende grond, de theorie dat niets in de wereld zonder grond is: voor alles wat gebeurt is een oorzaak aan te wijzen.

Na een tweede kortere verhandeling (over de kleurenleer) verschijnt in 1819 Schopenhauers hoofdwerk: De wereld als wil en voorstelling (Die welt als wille und vorstellung). Het werk wordt aanvankelijk vrijwel niet verkocht en gelezen, en de colleges die Schopenhauer aan de universiteit van Berlijn over zijn eigen boek geeft worden vrijwel niet bezocht, terwijl bij Hegel de zalen bomvol zitten.

Schopenhauer brengt in totaal drie drukken uit van zijn hoofdwerk, waarbij hij teksten uitbreidt en zelfs een tweede deel toevoegt dat het eerste nader moet uitleggen. Ook de andere werken die Schopenhauer in zijn verdere leven schrijft zijn gericht op het uitleggen van De wereld als wil en voorstelling. Pas in de laatste jaren van zijn leven krijgt Schopenhauer langzaamaan de erkenning die hij zo lang zocht. Wat is De wereld als wil en voorstelling? ¹

2 een filosofisch systeem

In De wereld als wil en voorstelling geeft Schopenhauer een beschrijving hoe de wereld in elkaar zit. Het is een compleet en samenhangend systeem gebaseerd op de tegenstelling voorstelling — wil.

De voorstelling, de wereld zoals wij die in het dagelijks leven kennen, is volgens Schopenhauer slechts de buitenkant van de wereld. De wereld als voorstelling is de wereld als materie en oorzakelijkheid, de wereld waarin alle dingen binnen de wet van de toereikende grond vallen. De voorstelling valt uiteen in een subject (datgene wat alles kent en door niets gekend wordt) en object (datgene wat gekend wordt): de wereld als voorstelling bestaat enkel als object voor een subject, dat in die zin de drager van de wereld genoemd kan worden.

Maar, zegt Schopenhauer, we moeten niet vergeten dat de wereld ook wil is. De wil is de eeuwige oerkracht, waarvan de voorstelling slechts de spiegel is. De wil is de ‘binnenkant’ van de wereld, dat wat Kant volgens Schopenhauer bedoelde toen hij over het ding-an-sich sprak. Van de wil kunnen we via de voorstelling geen kennis hebben.

Omdat de causaliteit alleen geldig is binnen de wereld van de voorstelling kan bij het onderzoeken van de relatie tussen wil en voorstelling niet gesproken worden in termen van oorzaak en gevolg. Maar wat is dan de relatie tussen wil en voorstelling? Geen van beide is volgens Schopenhauer fundamenteler of echter dan de ander. Er kan dus niet gezegd worden dat de wil ten grondslag ligt aan de voorstelling of omgekeerd, hoewel dit precies is wat vele filosofen voor en na Schopenhauer hebben gedaan. Schopenhauers radicale vernieuwing is dat hij geen kant kiest voor de voorstelling of wil: het idealisme (dat de voorstelling als afhankelijk van de wil beschouwt) en het realisme (dat de wil als afhankelijk van de voorstelling beschouwt) zijn volgens Schopenhauer beide incorrect, want er is geen afhankelijkheidsrelatie tussen wil en voorstelling mogelijk. Volgens Schopenhauer bezit de wereld zowel empirische realiteit (de wereld is als voorstelling volkomen reëel) als transcendentale idealiteit (de wereld van de objecten is voorstelling en dus door het subject bepaald).

3 één enkele gedachte

De wereld als wil en voorstelling is Schopenhauers oplossing van het wereldraadsel. Schopenhauer presenteert de lezer steeds opnieuw een uitwerking van ‘één enkele gedachte’, zoals hij het in het woord vooraf bij de eerste druk noemt.

Deze gedachte wordt in elk van de vier boeken van het eerste deel onder een ander perspectief uitgewerkt. Het wereldraadsel houdt in dat we via de wereld van de voorstelling nooit het wezen van de wereld, de wil, kunnen kennen, iets dat door alle eerdere filosofen is geprobeerd. We worden volgens Schopenhauer misleid door de sluier van maya, een term die hij uit het Hindoeïsme overneemt.

Maar kunnen we dan helemaal niets zeggen over de wil? Volgens Schopenhauer in ieder geval niet met behulp van de wetenschappen, want deze houden zich alleen bezig met de wereld als voorstelling, wat Schopenhauer hen overigens niet aanrekent.

Er is, zo zegt Schopenhauer, een uitweg uit deze impasse, wanneer we de filosofische waarheid bij uitstek (Schopenhauers ene gedachte) inzien. Deze waarheid houdt in dat lichaam en wil één zijn, en het we het lichaam niet alleen als voorstelling kennen, maar ook als onmiddellijk object. Elke uiting van de wil is meteen en onherroepelijk ook een beweging van het lichaam. A priori is het lichaam wil. A posteriori is de wil lichaam.

De wil is volgens Schopenhauer geen teken voor een onbekende grootheid, zoals in de negatieve theologie, maar datgene waarvan wij ons onmiddellijk bewust zijn. De afstand tussen wil en voorstelling is schijn. Via het lichaam als onmiddellijk object kunnen we het wezen van de wereld op het spoor komen, omdat er een analogie mogelijk is met onszelf en de gehele wereld van de voorstelling: de voorstelling is de wil. Alle objecten zijn aan één kant voorstelling en aan de andere kant wil.

4 een literair kunstwerk

Wat kan er nu gezegd worden over de relatie tussen wil en voorstelling? Schopenhauer noemt deze relatie tussen wil en voorstelling objectivatie. De wil toont zich in verschillende gradaties als de objecten van de wereld van de voorstelling. De voorstelling is echter onvolmaakt, en nooit de volledige, adequate objectivatie van de wil. Om de onmiddellijke, adequate objectivatie van de wil aan te duiden neemt Schopenhauer Plato’s term Idee over.

De Ideeën zijn de trappen van objectivatie, een soort tussenvormen tussen wil en verschijnselen. Op de allerlaagste trap is er de Idee van de natuurkracht of causaliteit: de anorganische natuur. Daarboven vindt men in steeds hogere trappen van objectivatie de planten, dieren en tenslotte de mens. Iedere hogere trap van objectivatie veronderstelt de lagere trappen.

Maar de Ideeën zijn niet voor ieder mens zichtbaar, want de gemiddelde mens is gebonden aan de wil en kan zijn blik slechts richten op objecten die de eigen wil kunnen bevredigen. Het aanschouwen van de Ideeën is voorbehouden aan geniale individuen, de kunstenaars. Waar Plato een lage waarde aan de kunst toekent, omdat het in de kunst gaat om het maken van een kopie (het kunstwerk)

van een kopie (de wereld), kent Schopenhauer juist een hoge waarde aan de kunst toe, omdat het kunstwerk het resultaat is van het aanschouwen van de Ideeën, die de volmaaktere objectivaties van de wil zijn dan de voorstellingen zijn. De kunstenaar leent zijn geniale oog aan de toeschouwer, die niet het vermogen bezit om de Ideeën te aanschouwen, maar om kunst te kunnen waarderen wel een vaag besef van het bestaan van de Ideeën moet hebben.

Schopenhauer sluit zich aan bij een traditie van esthetische beschouwing die kunst met contemplatie verbindt. Bij het aanschouwen van de Ideeën ondergaan zowel het subject als het object een transformatie, waarbij het subject zich door het laten varen van de alledaagse manier van beschouwen losrukt van de wil en een zuiver subject van het kennen wordt, het object een Idee wordt, en er een eenheid ontstaat van kenner en gekende.

Vervolgens geeft Schopenhauer zijn indeling van de kunsten analoog aan de trapsgewijze ordening van de Ideeën: op de laagste trap zijn er de bouwkunst en de hydraulica die zich bezighouden met de esthetische ordening van de meest ruwe materialen. Analoog aan steeds hogere trappen van objectivatie volgen vervolgens de tuinarchitectuur, landschapsschilderkunst, dierenschilderkunst en -beeldhouwerkunst, de historieschilderkunst en de beeldhouwkunst waarbij mensen worden afgebeeld, en tenslotte de dichtkunst met de tragedie als haar summum, omdat daarin de hoogste Idee, de Idee van de mens wordt uitgebeeld. De uitbeelding van de Idee van de mens is dus het hoogste doel van de kunsten.

Een bijzondere passage in De wereld als wil en voorstelling is die waarin Schopenhauer de status van de muziek bespreekt. De muziek heeft volgens Schopenhauer geen plaats binnen de hiërarchie van de kunsten, omdat zij geen reproductie van de Ideeën is, maar een directe kopie van de wil zelf:

‘

“De muziek is namelijk net zo’n onmiddellijke objectivatie en kopie van de hele wil, als de wereld dat zelf is, ja als de Ideeën het zijn, de Ideeën waarvan de menigvuldige verschijning de wereld van de afzonderlijke dingen vormt.” (WWV, p389)

Dat de muziek net als de wereld als voorstelling de wil zelf afbeeldt en niet zoals de overige kunsten de Ideeën, zorgt er voor dat de muziek ons veel meer aangrijpt dan alle andere kunstvormen:

‘

“Juist om die reden is de uitwerking van de muziek zoveel krachtiger en indringender dan die van andere kunstvormen, want die laatste hebben het alleen over de schaduw, terwijl de muziek over de zaak zelf gaat.” (WWV, p389)

Nu duidelijk is dat de wil zich objectiveert in zowel de Ideeën als de muziek stelt Schopenhauer de volgende analogie op tussen de voorstelling en de muziek:

‘

“Ik herken in de laagste tonen van de harmonie, in de grondbas, de laagste trappen van de wilsobjectivatie, met andere woorden de anorganische natuur, de massa van de planeet. [...] Deze massa is dus tegelijkertijd drager en oorsprong van heel de natuur; welnu, de hogere tonen staan in precies dezelfde relatie tot de grondbas.” (WWV, p389/90)

want

“Zij klinken altijd zachtjes mee wanneer de grondtoon wordt aangeslagen” (WWV, p389)

Schopenhauer herkent in de grondtoon de pure materie die de basis vormt van al het andere leven. Net zoals de grondtoon de boventonen laat meeklinken is het hogere leven opgebouwd uit de pure materie. De hoogste vorm van dat leven is de mens, die analoog is aan de melodie:

‘

“In de melodie ten slotte, in de hoge, zingende, eerste stem, die het geheel leidt en met ongebreidelde vrijheid, in ononderbroken, betekenisvolle samenhang van één gedachte van begin tot einde voortschrijdt en één geheel vormt, herken ik de hoogste trap van de wilsobjectivatie, het bedachtzame leven en streven van de mens.” (WWV, p391)

In deze analogie verraadt zich het literaire vakmanschap van Schopenhauer. De wereld als wil en voorstelling is niet alleen een filosofisch systeem gebaseerd op één enkele gedachte, maar bovendien zeer helder geschreven en doorspekt met allerhande schitterende citaten uit de wereldliteratuur. Schopenhauer vervolgt de analogie door het gehele menselijke leven met een muziekstuk te vergelijken:

‘

“Het wezen van de mens bestaat hierin dat zijn wil streeft, vervolgens bevredigd wordt, en weer opnieuw streeft, en dat in voortdurende herhaling; ja, zijn geluk en welzijn is niets anders dan de snelle overgang van wens naar bevrediging en van bevrediging naar nieuwe wens; het uitblijven van bevrediging betekent immers lijden, het uitblijven van een nieuwe wens uit zich in een ijdel verlangen, languor, verveling.” (WWV, p392)

Het leven is een voortdurende overgang tussen lijden, verveling en weer lijden, en dat in een eeuwige herhaling. Op dezelfde manier dwaalt ook de melodie van de grondtoon weg en er weer naar terug. En is een muziekstuk waarbij enkel de grondtoon herhaald wordt niet enorm saai? ²

‘

“In diezelfde zin is het wezen van de melodie een voortdurend afwijken, afdwalen van de grondtoon op duizend verschillende wegen, niet alleen naar de harmonische intervallen – de terts en de dominant -, maar ook naar elke andere toon, naar de dissonante septiem en naar de extreme intervallen; maar steeds volgt er een uiteindelijke terugkeer naar de grondtoon.” (WWV, p392)

Volgens Schopenhauer komt al het willen voort uit behoefte, maar zodra de behoefte bevredigd wordt ontstaat er een nieuwe behoefte of vervelen we ons. Echte rust kan er pas komen wanneer we de dingen los van de wil beschouwen. Kunst kan ons volgens Schopenhauer helpen aan de dienstbaarheid aan de wil te ontsnappen, maar uiteindelijk verlost de kunst ons slechts tijdelijk omdat de contemplatie ook weer ophoudt, bijvoorbeeld omdat lichamelijke behoeften opspelen en de wil weer in beweging wordt gezet.

5 een handleiding

Wat moeten we dan doen? De wereld als wil en voorstelling is geen handleiding voor de deugd, want de deugd is volgens Schopenhauer niet te leren: we kunnen de wil niet veranderen, maar slechts leren kennen hoe de wil zich in ons eigen karakter manifesteert. In ons handelen leren we ons eigen karakter kennen. Dat we het willen op het kennen zouden kunnen baseren (zoals bijvoorbeeld Descartes en Spinoza doen) is volgens Schopenhauer onzin; we moeten juist leren kennen wat we willen.

Vrijheid is volgens Schopenhauer een negatief begrip: het is de afwezigheid van noodzakelijkheid. Omdat het individu, zoals iedere voorstelling, valt binnen de wet van de toereikende grond is er voor het individu dan ook geen vrijheid mogelijk. Vrijheid is alleen voorbehouden aan de wil. Het individu bezit wel keuzevrijheid: de mogelijkheid tot het afwegen van motieven in de vorm van abstracte gedachten. Uiteindelijk volgt de gemaakte keuze echter noodzakelijk uit de werkzame motieven.

Ook geluk is een negatief begrip, namelijk de afwezigheid van een gemis (en het daaruit voortkomende leed). Niet alleen volgen de verlangens elkaar in hoog tempo op, vaak blijken verlangens zodra ze vervuld zijn veel minder belangrijk te zijn dan ze leken te zijn toen ze nog niet vervuld waren. Het mensenleven is heen en weer geslingerd worden tussen leed en verveling, maar uiteindelijk heeft het leven niet voldoende te bieden om de wil te bevredigen. Daarom blijven er volgens Schopenhauer twee mogelijkheden over: bevestiging of ontkenning van de wil.

Bevestiging van de wil is bevestiging van de lichamelijke verlangens, het toegeven aan de lust. Het probleem hierbij is dat dit lijdt tot egoïsme, want terwijl het individu zichzelf onmiddellijk ervaart als de wil, kent hij de andere individuen slechts als voorstellingen. Dit lijdt tot onrecht wanneer de ene persoon in zijn wilsbevestiging de grens van andermans wilsbevestiging schendt, met als ultiem voorbeeld kannibalisme. De staat en het strafrecht dienen om het onrecht tegen te gaan, door grenzen aan de wilsbevesting te stellen. Gebeurt dat niet dan volgt onvermijdelijk een Hobbesiaanse oorlog van allen tegen allen. De paradox is dat het individu niet inziet dat hij in feite tegen zichzelf strijdt, omdat alle individuen de voorstelling van de ene wil zijn.

De andere optie is ontkenning van de wil. Dit vereist het doorzien van de sluier van maya: beseffen dat alle individuen slechts voorstellingen van de ene wil zijn. Daarna is het mogelijk om jezelf in de ander te herkennen, en je eigen lot in het lot van de wereld. Dit is volgens Schopenhauer de kern van de liefde, ofwel het medelijden. Alle liefde is medelijden: de kennis van andermans lijden begrijpen vanuit je eigen lijden. Liefde die geen medelijden is, is volgens Schopenhauer in werkelijkheid lust en dus egoïsme. Voor diegenen die niet in staat zijn de sluier van maya te doorzien, is deze waarheid vertaald in mythen en geloofsleer.

6 conclusie – niets

De werkelijke ontkenning van de wil gaat echter verder dan de liefde, die slechts het gezamenlijk ondergaan van het leed is. Het leven is een muziekstuk in mineur, dat volgens Schopenhauer het luisteren niet waard is en nooit een bevredigend einde zal hebben. Schopenhauer pleit daarom voor de ware heiligheid, de verlichting met als doel de verniet(ig)ing van de wil en daarmee verlossing van de wereld. Deze heiligheid is een vorm van ascese waarin een toestand van resignatie bereikt wordt. Het is het vrijwillig afstand doen, waarbij alles tot rust komt. Het resultaat is een tegenspraak van de wil met zichzelf, waarna deze in zekere zin ophoudt te bestaan. Zonder voorstelling geen wil, geen wereld en geen muziek. Wat rest is de stilte van het niets.

Lijst van gebruikte afkortingen

• WWV Arthur Schopenhauer (2008). De wereld als wil en voorstelling, vert. H. Driessen. Wereldbibliotheek.

Bibliografie

• Safranski, Rüdiger (2006). Arthur Schopenhauer. De woelige jaren van de filosofie. Olympus.
• Schopenhauer, Arthur (2008). De wereld als wil en voorstelling, vert. H. Driessen. Wereldbibliotheek.

Voetnoten