IMO, it depends entirely upon the type of book. For works of fiction, or biographies, or for other books laid out in linear fashion, there's a tangible benefit to reading linearly. (And on through to the end).
For reference works, or almost any type of nonfiction these days, nonlinear consumption makes a lot of sense. How many of us have read a dictionary or an encyclopedia from cover to cover? How many of us have read a collection of essays in a perfectly linear manner? Any sort of book that does not confer a specific benefit upon linear consumption offers no real incentive for such. Linearity is largely a convention to which we've grown accustomed, and I would argue that the era of software and hyperlinks -- cross-references at the click of the button -- is steadily eroding that convention. And authors will start to intend for, and eventually optimize for, newer modes of consumption.
Comments
IMO, it depends entirely upon the type of book. For works of fiction, or biographies, or for other books laid out in linear fashion, there's a tangible benefit to reading linearly. (And on through to the end).
For reference works, or almost any type of nonfiction these days, nonlinear consumption makes a lot of sense. How many of us have read a dictionary or an encyclopedia from cover to cover? How many of us have read a collection of essays in a perfectly linear manner? Any sort of book that does not confer a specific benefit upon linear consumption offers no real incentive for such. Linearity is largely a convention to which we've grown accustomed, and I would argue that the era of software and hyperlinks -- cross-references at the click of the button -- is steadily eroding that convention. And authors will start to intend for, and eventually optimize for, newer modes of consumption.