I dont get it.
Personally I find them uncomfortable to hold and read, they are unreasonably expensive, and in turn when eventually notice wear and tear I feel worse about it since I probably just dropped 15-30 dollars on this book. Paperbacks are easy to hold, easy to buy, and easy to travel with without worrying about damage.
It annoys the living hell out of me the often books are first printed in hardcover for MONTHS I have to wait for them to start printing paperbacks unless the price is great.
The only upside is I can take off the dustcover and discretely read romance in public.
Obviously this is just my opinion, but to be fair I fold my books while reading and dog ear my pages so I suppose im not the best source.
by I_like_broccli
7 Comments
I like them because I can be tough on books. I used to carry them with me everywhere, so they’d get really banged up. More than one time I lost pages in a paperback book before I finished it.
I like the way hardbacks look on my shelf more, as they don’t show wear on the spine as easily. I have a large bookcase that I design as the focal point of my living room, so it takes a pretty good selection of books.
If I think I’ll refer back to the book often, hardbacks are also less prone to having pages fall out with extensive handling.
wait 20-30 years and then you’ll find out yourself.
There are more differences between hardcover and paperback than just the covers.
The paper is different, the way the pages are attached is different.
Simply put, paperbacks will eventually fall apart and the pages will become brittle and crumble.
I have similar feelings to the OP about hardcovers, particularly related to being uncomfortable to hold, but I also get almost all my books from the library, which means I don’t care about collecting books or having books that will last a long time on my shelf (personally). For those who do like that, I can certainly understand the durability/presentation allure of hardcovers.
Is $15-30 unreasonably expensive?
I feel secure that a hardcover book wont accidently get bent or suffer other damages. Especially if the book is handled often by various people
I suppose we’re talking about books as an Experience vs as a Collectible vs as something to be consumed.
I used to absorb hundreds of books per year, almost all paperbacks. They were easy to have in my bag, and like you say I wasn’t too worried about how battered they got. My parents had 40 years worth of them on the shelves for when I ran out of my own – I had to be more careful with those of course.
I do remember the frustration of having to wait for things to come out in paperback – especially when money was tight. One hardback or 3-5 paperbacks? Easy choice.
Nowadays most of my “reading” is in audiobook form due to my health. When I do read it’s usually on an e-reader. I have long craved an e-reader which has turnable pages and the smell of paper.
I have some hardbacks; they were mostly gifts, and I treasure them. When I move house I neatly pack the jackets so they don’t get hurt. An early signed Pratchett and an early Hitchhikers trilogy of four. They’re more about the memory than the book.
I have a copy of Goldfinger in hardback which I got without a jacket from a charity shop. The first time I read it, each page crackled and there was a tiny whiff of pipe smoke. You’d think that would be disgusting (I HATE the smell of old smoke) but somehow it just connected me to another person loving that book and reading it a hundred times.