“This paperback is very interesting, but I find it will never replace a hardcover book – it makes a very poor doorstop.” – Alfred Hitchcock
There’s something about books that I like to get everyone’s opinions on: hardcover or paperback? I am a fan of paperbacks. There are very few occasions when my patience runs out and I’ll buy a book in hardcover. Yes, I shelled out the bucks to get the Harry Potter books in hardcover and I will be first in line to get Mockingjay when it’s released on August 24th (only 100 days left). But I have waited, in some cases years, to find books in paperback. In my opinion, they travel better. 1) You can fit more of them in amongst other items. 2) They don’t ruin the more fragile objects around them. 3) They’re lighter. And the best thing about paperbacks, the price. At least, that was the case before the enlarged paperback, sized and priced somewhere between hardcover and the traditional mass market paperback.
Some of my closest friends prefer hardcover so I’ve heard the arguments about how well hardcover last in the long run. They also tend to have better cover art. Any of the other reasons for buying hardcover tend to go in one ear and out the other, unfortunately. They take up too much space on my shelves so I have to get more and more bookcases to house them (I’m up to five bookcases and one hanging shelf at the moment).
The only way I can justify spending almost thirty dollars on one book is if it’s for a class (but most of those aren’t the books I really want) or if I have a gift card. But if I have a gift card, I feel the need to stretch it as much as possible, and hardcover doesn’t make the cut there either. Not when 2 hardcover = 3 or 4 paperback.
Of course, I could just start going to the library more and save all my book money.