I thought of Bob when I read this article in the NY Times since they started with the quote from Alice, "What is the use of a book without pictures or conversation?": Link.

The article was about electronic children's books (on iPads and the like) that are interactive and animated, responding to touches or clicks. The author wondered if this in some way would stunt imagination. On the other hand, some do think it important to "develop the muscle of reading online." It could be, the author observes, that the electronic books will actually help to increase reading and decrease television watching.

I don't know. I've always loved the pictures in children's books, and I'd hate to see too much digital interactivity. I could see that the clicking could be all the kids would think about. "What should I click next?" What do you think?

I've seen the interactive iPhone version of Alice but even I draw the line at buying a piece of expensive technology that I don't actually want just so that I can control Alice's fal down the rabbit hole by tilting my phone in different directions.

OTOH I am in favour of any and all different versions and forms of that particular book being produced. Why, only this afternoon, I am intending to sit in front of the TV for a couple of hours watching ballet - the new Royal Ballet production of Alice In Wonderland is on.

Yes, I agree, Bob. I am not that bothered by it.

Chiming in late as I catch up. I collect early-20thc illustrated children's books, & teach young children.. but I haven't found interactive tech to affect children's experience of reading/listening to stories one way or the other. These things have been with us a while if you include push-button/sound-effect books since the '80's, & choose-your-own-plot-twist books since the '90's.

Observing the generation coming now into young adulthood it would seem computer use in general has cut passive tv-watching way back. I assume that is all about interactivity. But reading/listening to a story IS interactive.

I would give huge credit to the interactivity of computer research in corralling a new generation of readers. There has always been a sector of school kids who are curious and intelligent yet not really book people-- not what we think of as 'readers.' Being able to instantly gratify that curiosity, hop from article to article comparing results etc causes them ultimately to read a great deal.

Consider Alice.
In my collection I have all of the following.

Audio adaptations.
Live TV and film adaptations.
Animated TV and film versions.
Puppet TV and film versions.
Interactive versions.
Video game versions.
Board game versions.
Rock music versions.
Classical and operatic versions.
A ballet version.
A jazz dance version.
Comic book and graphic novel versions.

And some books.

And that's before we start to get into things influenced by the Alice books rather than direct adaptations of them. One more format for it is just one more format. I can't see that there is anything to be concerned about unless you are a Daily Mail reader in which case it's a given that the world is going to hell in a handbasket and everything is bad.