Encyclopædia Britannica: R.I.P.

Perhaps you saw it in this morning's paper: The Encyclopædia Britannica has published its last edition. I saw it in the WSJ (the online version is here) but it must have been in all the dailies. It seems they can't sell them in the two-dozen-hefty-volumes format any more, so it'll be cds, online and tablet "apps" from now on.

The Britannica was the foundation of many a student paper in my school days. There were others; I remember Compton's and Colliers and wasn't there an Americana? Do any of them exist any more? (It occurs to me I could, ahem, look them up online. So I did. Collier's is no more but Compton's and the Encyclopædia Americana are hanging on. So says {{sigh}} Wikipedia.)

But never mind the others. The Britannica was the gold standard. I'm not sure why I thought that. I certainly had no scholarly discernment in high school. Maybe it was because the binding was classier and the articles were longer. Or perhaps it was just more fun to browse in. Did you ever get lost in the encyclopædia? You went to look up one thing and ran across an article on something you'd never heard of or something you'd always wanted to know more about and here were ten pages on the very topic. It was even easier to get lost in the encyclopædia than the dictionary. Only the internet seems to be better at leading the curious mind off on an unintended vagary, which Hilary was writing about just the other day but which I can't cite you to because she's gone on hiatus. Again. I wish she wouldn't do that. Some writers become addictive and she's one of them. I'm having mild withdrawal symptoms.

Where was I?

Oh, yes, the Encyclopædia Britannica. Alan Massie has a lament for the Britannica and a short history here that's worth a read.