Paperback or Hardcover?

Bighuey · Post by **Bighuey** » 03 Mar 2012, 22:00

It dosent really matter to me. Hard cover has advantages and disavantages, as do paperbacks. The thing about any book, no matter what kind of shape its in, if youve never read it before, its a brand new book.

Fran · Post by **Fran** » 04 Mar 2012, 05:10

Bighuey wrote:It dosent really matter to me. Hard cover has advantages and disavantages, as do paperbacks. The thing about any book, no matter what kind of shape its in, if youve never read it before, its a brand new book.

Very profound Bighuey ... you're turning into a philosopher

Bighuey · Post by **Bighuey** » 04 Mar 2012, 09:30

Fran wrote:
Bighuey wrote:It dosent really matter to me. Hard cover has advantages and disavantages, as do paperbacks. The thing about any book, no matter what kind of shape its in, if youve never read it before, its a brand new book.
Very profound Bighuey ... you're turning into a philosopher

Well thank you Fran, I get into some of this deep stuff once in a while.

DATo · Post by **DATo** » 04 Mar 2012, 18:35

*LOL* @ Bighuey and Fran !!

I think if you are buying a book only to read then paperback is fine, but if you want to have a nice home library then the hard back is the way to go. I have both. Now this may sound weird but I have many titles in both paperback and hardcover. A significant portion of my library contains classics from the International Collectors Library publisher ... these books never leave the house. I may also have a corresponding title in paperback which I am willing to take to work or to the park to read. Like others who have posted already I loathe the feel of a hardbound's dust cover in my hands but the print is usually larger and produces less eye strain. So I suppose it is 6 of one and a half dozen of the other.

One more point: After many years a paperback's glue seems to become brittle and the pages start to fall out, so as an investment hardbounds may be the better choice. I sometimes have to put paperbacks back together with white glue.

Bighuey · Post by **Bighuey** » 04 Mar 2012, 20:44

DATo wrote:*LOL* @ Bighuey and Fran !!

I think if you are buying a book only to read then paperback is fine, but if you want to have a nice home library then the hard back is the way to go. I have both. Now this may sound weird but I have many titles in both paperback and hardcover. A significant portion of my library contains classics from the International Collectors Library publisher ... these books never leave the house. I may also have a corresponding title in paperback which I am willing to take to work or to the park to read. Like others who have posted already I loathe the feel of a hardbound's dust cover in my hands but the print is usually larger and produces less eye strain. So I suppose it is 6 of one and a half dozen of the other.

One more point: After many years a paperback's glue seems to become brittle and the pages start to fall out, so as an investment hardbounds may be the better choice. I sometimes have to put paperbacks back together with white glue.

Rubber bands work for me. Ive got quite a few rubber banded books.

Gannon · Post by **Gannon** » 05 Mar 2012, 21:32

DATo wrote:*LOL* @ Bighuey and Fran !!

I think if you are buying a book only to read then paperback is fine, but if you want to have a nice home library then the hard back is the way to go. I have both. Now this may sound weird but I have many titles in both paperback and hardcover. A significant portion of my library contains classics from the International Collectors Library publisher ... these books never leave the house. I may also have a corresponding title in paperback which I am willing to take to work or to the park to read. Like others who have posted already I loathe the feel of a hardbound's dust cover in my hands but the print is usually larger and produces less eye strain. So I suppose it is 6 of one and a half dozen of the other.

One more point: After many years a paperback's glue seems to become brittle and the pages start to fall out, so as an investment hardbounds may be the better choice. I sometimes have to put paperbacks back together with white glue.

Hi there DATo.

It warmed my heart reading your post. I also have hardcover editions, usually a first edition signed, and a paperback of the same title. I read the paperback and lend it to friends but the hardcover barely gets touched. You have no idea how much grief I cop from my friends who do not understand what it is like to love collecting books as much as reading them. Our house is slowly turning into a library.

troxelkr · Post by **troxelkr** » 05 Mar 2012, 21:48

I would have to agree that if I am buying a series I tend to buy them all in one or the other. While paperbacks are easier to handle, I also agree that they get torn up. In the last few years I have grown to prefer hardback, but I am all about cost effectiveness, so whichever is cheaper is the one I usually go with.

pjh · Post by **pjh** » 07 Mar 2012, 17:42

I love the look of a hardback book, however, I almost always go for paperback for a couple of reasons. First, like someone else said, it's a bit more comfortable when you are reading in bed. Second, though I like for all my books to remain nice, I not as upset if a page gets bent or the book gets dirty with a paperback as I would be a hardback.

Auggie · Post by **Auggie** » 07 Mar 2012, 19:55

I prefer paperbacks normally. Aside from the fact that they're usually cheaper... I'm one of those 'bend the book' people and that's impossible to do with a hardcover book.

Like others who have posted here I normally buy the hardcover books when it's part of a series I'm serious about collecting, or if it's a new-release that I want to read right away.

Hardcover books are more appealing to the eye, but I can't stand book sleeves. I always take them off. They irritate the heck out of me. I've started removing them from my books and putting them away in a file as kind of a "memory" deal.

shaphat · Post by **shaphat** » 08 Mar 2012, 02:41

Esthetically, Hardcover is nicer; but in reality it takes a lot of space to keep it. Hardcovers are fatter and taller than paperbacks so that's a huge problem for me, because some of my bookshelves are short in height so hardcovers can't fit well in them. I only buy hardcovers if the paperback hasn't come out yet or is sold out. Besides when I'm handling a hardcover I almost feel like I have to use gloves to touch it, it's even worse if it has a withdrawable cover, then I feel like it will crumble and get ruined as I put it in my bookshelf. It's like having a expensive car :/

Nanao Clams · Post by **Nanao Clams** » 15 Mar 2012, 09:43

I prefer hardcovers! There's something about those sturdy covers that made me feel squeal in delight whenever I cradle them in my arms..

bookstasted · Post by **bookstasted** » 06 Apr 2012, 11:01

DATo wrote:I think if you are buying a book only to read then paperback is fine, but if you want to have a nice home library then the hard back is the way to go.

Agreed. Most of my books are paperbacks, but I try to invest in hardcover for things I want to keep around for the long haul.

But what I really love is trade paperback! They are the perfect size for reading and turning pages. Mass-market paperbacks are just too hard for me to read (especially with really long books like Cryptonomicon or North and South). Given the choice between only mass-market or hardcover, I'd go hardcover for readability. I am SO glad that more and more books are being released in trade paperback now instead of mass-market.

frik · Post by **frik** » 08 Apr 2012, 06:40

Definitely hardcovers. With the occasional signed/limited edition to add a bit of class..
Those, of course, should be read as well. I know of collectors that only buy limiteds as an investment, leave the book in the box it came in and re-sell whenever an opportunity arises. Yuck!

sk