| ▲ | stuartjohnson12 3 hours ago | |||||||
I pre-empted this - my argument does not apply to texts where the physical object is a major part of the historical value of the thing. No, I'm not saying to destroy one of the four remaining Magna Cartas that were meticulously copied by hand. But even if I was, we're only dealing with texts here that are irrelevant enough to have never been digitised already - we tend to digitise most things of value and so the Mona Lisa and Magna Carta would never have been part of this discussion in the first place. I am however OK with destroying one of the remaining 50 children's books of which only 300 copies were ever printed in a small town in Ohio in the 1970s as a test run for a failed book which was subsequently never commercialised. | ||||||||
| ▲ | croes 2 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||
> I am however OK with destroying one of the remaining 50 children's books of which only 300 copies … What if the perception of those books change over time and are considered masterpieces later on? Moby Dick was out of print when Melville died 1891 and not a huge success until it got a revival in the 1920s | ||||||||
| ||||||||