Nathan Bransford - The Forums

Yesterday's blog topic made me wonder - what do most people prefer - hardbacks or paperbacks?

I'm definitely pro-paperback. Paperbacks are so much easier to carry around and read. They fit in my pocket and get all nice and broken-in looking. They fit on my shelf, too.

Personally, I don't like hardbacks. In fact, sometimes Amazon will send me the hardback, even though I ordered the paperback, and it really bugs me!

Do you agree? Or are you a hardback sort of person?

(E-books are also a viable choice.....)

Soft–cover.

Paperback for the vast majority of books.

For me, hardcover is only worth buying if there is additional material or if i'm going to get the author's signature at a book signing. i don't enjoy reading from a hardcover nearly as much, so the ones that i buy are more for collection purposes. thats just me though...

When buried in books, paperbacks are preferable. <g>

Definitely paperbacks.

If I'm going to have a paper book I want the hardcover - it's usually a much more beautiful product and looks best on the shelf. But these days anything I would normally read in paperback I read on my phone.

looks best on the shelf

How many bookshelves would a book agent have if a book agent would shelf bookshelves?

Seriously? Does your place resemble a bookstore?

I read both paperback and hard cover. I used to prefer to buy my favorite books in hard cover; but recently so many of them are made with such shoddy glue, the pages fall out after only a couple of readings.

I prefer for my favorites to be in hardcovers, mostly because the paper quality is generally better. In fact, I would buy hardcovers of books I already have in paperbacks if I like them enough.

Paperbacks. Hardbacks are oafishly large and inconvenient to take most places. A paperback, I can carry around no problem. Sure, a hardback might be a bit more durable, but give me something fragile and I'll do everything I can to spare it damage. Give me something that can take a little tear, and "oh, silly me, I dropped my book down the stairs. Oh well, I'm sure it's fine." That's a big part of why I have such a large collection of books. If my books were falling apart, I'd get rid of them and replace them eventually, but I do everything I can to keep them order, for the most part. Some of the older ones are a bit more worn, but hey, I was a kid. Paperbacks also eat up much less space, which considering I've already eaten up a sizable portion my 16x20 room in books (don't get me started on the old 9x10), it just makes things much more convenient. And there are places I can fit a paperback where a hardback just won't fit. My collection would be much, much smaller if I had to fit an arsenal of hardbacks about my room.

Sandy Shin wrote:I prefer for my favorites to be in hardcovers, mostly because the paper quality is generally better. In fact, I would buy hardcovers of books I already have in paperbacks if I like them enough.

I agree! Some books and series I just have to have in hardcover. Sometimes it takes me years to get an entire series in hardcover, if the series is out of print. I'm now working on getting the entire Brother Cadfael mystery series by Ellis Peters. You really get lost in another world with those books.

Sometimes I do acquire a paperback of a book I'm reading in hardcover, just for the convenience of carrying it with me. When I read Noble House by James Clavell earlier this year, I started out reading the hardcover, which is about 1200 pages. But one place I like to read is in bed, resting flat on my back, holding the book above my face. When the book falls from my hands and lands on my face, it's time to turn out the lights and go to sleep.

It occurred to me that if the hardcover edition of Noble House fell on my face, it might fracture my skull. When people say some books are dangerous, they have no idea how literally true that is.

Though on the plus side, hardcover books can double as weapons in a pinch.

I like paperback a) because they're less money and b) I have an intense hatred for hardback because of school.

Math books and science books were always, always hard back with thousands of pages. And we'd have to carry those extremely heavy books from school and back. It was ridiculous. So, to my enjoyment my mom brought Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows. But to my dismay and irritation it's in hardback and it's a large book so... She said she buys hardback because they last longer and she's abusive to books.

it really depends. I like hardcovers, they look better but paper covers are sometimes more comfertable to read, so it depends :)

lovelylj wrote:So, to my enjoyment my mom brought Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows. But to my dismay and irritation it's in hardback and it's a large book so... She said she buys hardback because they last longer and she's abusive to books.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows took two years to come out in paperback. The Da Vinci Code took three years. And we still don't have a date for the paperback of Breaking Dawn, the last book in the Twilight series.

The downside of paperbacks is the delay. I work in a bookstore, and many times when a long anticipated title has just been released in hardcover, we'll have customers asking where the paperback edition is. I usually tell them "About nine months to a year in the future", which is usually the case.