Thursday, February 21, 2008


All other things (like price and storage space) being equal, given a choice in a perfect world, would you rather have paperbacks in your library? Or hardcovers? And why?

Paperbacks. I have small hands and hardcover are harder to hold. And I am very nearsighted, so when I read in bed, without my glasses, I have to hold the book very close to my eyes, and paperbacks are much easier for this reason. Have you ever dropped a hardcover on your face? No fun.

The only advantage to hardcover is that they are released first. I concede they are prettier, but only the ones with the cloth actually covered. I don't find the dust cover helps much and I always remove it to read the book, and then my book looks all anonymous and like I am trying to hide what I am reading. And I then I have piles of dustcovers flopping around the floor of my bedroom. But hardcovers look nicer on a shelf.

So, it's softcover to read, and hardcover to look at on shelves.


  1. Signature looks good! You have very practical reasons for your choice. That definitely makes it easier to answer this question.

  2. Hahaha! I take it you've dropped a book or two on your face? Were you falling asleep while reading? Spill it!

  3. chris - thanks for the link, it was fun

    trish - oh yes, read too late at night, and drop the book. I'm not the only one, am I?

  4. Yeah, a hardcover in the face is no fun. Or the dents in your leg from propping up the book because of the edges. ;-)

    I don't really mind hardcover books most of the time, but they aren't always the most portable or, as you pointed out, easy to hold. And like you, I take the dust jacket off to read--although I do put the dust jacket back on as soon as I'm done.

  5. I have dropped a hardcover or two on my face. Believe me, it is no fun!



Thanks for commenting, so nice of you to visit.

(I'll try without the letters for a while - so please dont be a spammer! Let's try no anonymous users)