?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

amusing licence plate of the day:

on a little red corvette heading west on 66 this morning: WIDEN 66

had breakfast at denny's with todd and lou. 2 hours! we could have kept chatting. it was fun.

What is best for reading pleasure:

hardback
5(16.1%)
trade paperback
22(71.0%)
mass market paperback
4(12.9%)

Tags:

Comments

( 10 comments — Leave a comment )
bizarrojack
Feb. 14th, 2003 09:54 am (UTC)
I would like to add that I really really really really really hate reading hardback books.

"You know what the consumer needs? I'm sure everyone will love to pay a little extra for this - rigidity, and a fragile cover that can rip and look ugly."
bizarrojack
Feb. 14th, 2003 09:58 am (UTC)
I realize that I cited damagability as a quality of hardbacks, when paperbacks are actually more likely to be ripped to pieces, but they cost much less and are easier to handle. You can tape a hardback back together, have books rebound and it protects the pages better.

maybe my perspective is colored by the fact that I generally read a book once, and never go back, and I only own 5 books which were all gifts but 2, but still i just hate having a surface attached to my reading material that I may not bend.
bizarrojack
Feb. 14th, 2003 10:00 am (UTC)
and when i said "fragile cover" I meant the sleeve thing that they put over the cover. I always want to take it off the book and throw it away but I have a feeling I'm not supposed to.
traceracer
Feb. 14th, 2003 10:14 am (UTC)
I got what you were saying.. and for the most part, you're paying at least twice as much for a hardcover, so damage to them is more, well, damaging.
examorata
Feb. 14th, 2003 02:09 pm (UTC)
The dustjacket. I usually take 'em off to read the book and then put them back on, because they bend/rip/get dirty so easily.

Trade paperbacks are the way to go! Mass market PBs fall apart too easily, especially for lengthier tomes. Trades are easier on the eyes and easier for carting around!
snidegrrl
Feb. 19th, 2003 02:28 am (UTC)
you're supposed to take the dust cover off while you're reading it.
cheetahmaster
Feb. 14th, 2003 09:58 am (UTC)
Hardbacks are for nice books, like the complete works of Shakespeare and art books for your coffee table. Also, if I was finally building my library and already had the busts of Roman emperors to put on each of the shelves.

Trade paperback is awesome for reading.

Don't get me started on hardback graphic novels. Grr.
salami_salome
Feb. 14th, 2003 08:20 pm (UTC)
I have to side with the trade paperback crowd, here. I tend to eat while I read, fall asleep over a book and then roll over on it in the night or kick it out of bed, and otherwise heap abuse on my books. So I like something that I can toss around a little, bend back the cover, etc. It has to be flexible, yet not go all wavy when I read it in a bubble bath -- which I do pretty often. Hardbacks are expensive, rigid, unwieldy and too pristine. Mass markets are too flimsy, get cheap ink all over you, rip the moment you look at them, and besides, they make you feel like you are reading a crappy romance novel even if you are reading high literature. I have a couple of Thomas Hardy and D.H. Lawrence mass market paperbacks that I picked up at the thrift store for twenty five cents a piece, and when I read them I always feel a little like I am insulting the author. Trade papers are good. When I abuse them like I do, it is an act of love. I only once hurled a book across the room in a violent act of rage, but that's because it deserved it for being so terrible, and besides, it was only a mass market. Trade papers are almost ideal. I just wish I could buy them laminated.

snidegrrl
Feb. 19th, 2003 02:26 am (UTC)
you know what *really* pisses me off??? when the laminated cover of a trade paperback or paperback textbook CURLS UP and simply will do nothing but curl up. *grrrr*

that is often one drawback of a cheaply made trade paperback.

that said, hardbacks don't bother me nearly as much as they seem to bother other people. golly.
examorata
Feb. 19th, 2003 02:05 pm (UTC)
I enjoy hardbacks, and they're very good for some things, like extremely well-loved books and ones you want to make sure are around for a long time, etc.

What bugs me, for reading purposes and hauling-to-work-to-read-it purposes, are the Really Huge Books in hardback, because they truly do get unwieldy. Especially for portability. Mind you, I collect Stephen King in hardback, but that's because I'm a bit of a freak in that regard. One day when I have a gazillion dollars I will make sure to have all of his in nice hardback heirloom editions AND in trade paperback so I can haul the paperbacks around and not feel fraught with distress if I get a drop of juice on them.
( 10 comments — Leave a comment )