Monday 9 April 2012

Hardbacks vs. paperbacks (and e-books!): The Book Reader's Eternal Question

I always knew I'd tackle this issue in a blog post on a day like today. A day so lazy, I have nothing to do but ponder pointless things (This is a lie. I have lots of stuff to do - work stuff - but I'd much rather ponder the pointless). Well, it's a bank holiday in the UK and it's pouring with rain, so it seems like I'll have no better time to discuss the age-old question: Do you prefer hardbacks, paperbacks or now, e-books?

For most of my life, I hated hardbacks. Too big and bulky and difficult to carry around. They were even difficult to hold up when I was a child reader. And the cost! Far more than my pocket money would stretch to. I could see that they looked posher and nicer on a bookshelf than paperbacks, but that wasn't enough for me when I could buy 2 or 3 paperbacks for the price of one hardback. Fans of hardbacks would tell me that hardbacks were worth the money because they lasted longer and didn't get creased and dog-eared like paperbacks, but I've always been one of those anal types who carries her paperbacks around in plastic covering and manages to read a whole book without ever breaking the spine - many of my books look completely unread to the untrained eye.

The final black mark against hardbacks was - and still is - that many books don't even get published in hardback, while every book will have a paperback copy. Another thing about anal types? We hate having mismatched sets! The idea of collecting a series in hardback, only for later books to be 'paperback originals', actually makes me shiver with dread. Better to just buy the paperbacks from the start, I've always thought.

So that was me and my attitude: Down with hardbacks! Paperbacks will do! Only, something happened. I became aware of book blogs; I started a book blog myself. And what did I see, week after week on IMMs? Hardbacks! Beautiful-looking hardbacks. Blogs also create hype; a need to have a book right away and not wait around for the paperback version. And while I've known for a while that it's better for the author if you buy hardbacks, I didn't really care until I started interacting with authors on their own blogs and on Twitter, found some I really liked and thought: Why not spend a bit extra if it will help them? 

However, some of my earlier hang-ups still stand. I will only buy a hardback if (a) I have already read the book and *know* I love it, and (b) it's a standalone or the whole series is already published in hardback.

Other than being cheaper and more suitable for reading on the go than hardbacks, I don't feel like paperbacks have anything particularly special to recommend them. For a long time, they were just the other alternative. Now there's a new other alternative: E-books and they're even cheaper and even more portable. I purchased a Kindle about six months ago and have added dozens of books to it since then. However, it's taken me a while to adapt to reading on the Kindle; reading on it would take me longer as I found the device...distracting, I suppose. My eyes would constantly dart to the progression bar, I would keep changing the font size, etc. It took me reading at least 5 or 6 books on the Kindle before I got used to it and could just read, without the device preventing me from fully immersing myself in the story. 

Now that I'm there, though? It's great. The convenience of carrying as many books as I like in one slim tablet really does outweigh most other concerns. Only...you can't pass e-books on after you've read them. And owning a book in e-format never seems like quite enough. When I first downloaded all the free classics, I thought I would get rid of my physical copies of Austen, Homer, the Brontes, etc. Only I couldn't bring myself to, even though these books are all on my Kindle. An e-book just feels...impermanent to me.

How do you feel? Do you love the beauty and style of hardbacks? Can you do better than me and give praise to the paperback? Or have you bought an e-reader and never looked back?

8 comments:

  1. I love all three! I love the beauty of hardback and if I have the money I do my best to buy them. I love the portability of paperback and some of my favorite series only go to paperback and eBook. I love my eBooks because for the most part they are affordable and I can carry so many at one time:)So I guess I am no help at all. LOL
    Wonderful discussion!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks! There being good things about all three is what makes this question so difficult! I feel like book readers will ponder this to the end of time :-)

      Delete
  2. I was paperback as a kid too. Now, I'm in a toss-up--I could get either type, mostly get the hardcovers of books I love, OR if the hardcover is on sale. But, I am the same way when it comes to matching--series always have to match. I have one series that doesn't and it's driving me nuts, LOL. I have an e-reader too and love it. I generally buy indie books and sale books of bestsellers on it. :) Great topic! I've wanted to do this myself but you covered everything! :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder how publishers can't know that it will drive readers crazy if they put out a series in non-matching covers! You'd think they'd realise us book readers are particular. And I don't think I covered everything in this post, Jess - I didn't come up with anything really good to say about paperbacks, and I have mostly paperbacks, so there must be something!

      Delete
  3. I can't stand hardbacks for the very reasons you mentioned. I find that a lot of the time I will dislike a perfectly good book because I was reading it as a hardback and was uncomfortable the whole time. I also can't stand the dust covers on hard backs. What a waste of resources. I don't think I have a single book in hard cover. Not even The Hunger Games. I've only just gotten and ereader and I get distracted by exactly the same things. I keep looking at the progress bar to see how far I've gotten into the book. But I love the idea behind ereaders and thu offer the added bonus of reding indie books. Though at the end if the day owning something on an ereader doesn't seem real to me. So I guess hat I'm saying is that I prefer paperbacks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I feel like nobody talks about that when it comes to e-readers. Everyone with an e-reader just says how great it is and...it is, but only once you get used to it; it's not an instant thing at all. And the not real thing is also an issue. I've limited my Kindle purchases to books that are either free or very, very cheap. Luckily, there are more than enough of those available.

      Delete
  4. I prefer paperbacks because they're easy to carry around and hold up when I'm reading. I do like hardbacks too because the spines don't break as easily, and at the same time they're easier to hold down flat on my bed or table when I'm reading, which only really old paperbacks can do. I'll usually always choose pb over hb though, just because I think they're easier to read overall.

    I haven't had much experience with ebooks except a couple I've read on my PC (which I don't really like doing), but I'm getting my first Nook this weekend, so I should find out soon how they compare to physical books. I've heard people seem to read books faster on an ereader, which I'm excited about. I'm hoping to read through a few lengthy classics on my ereader later this year.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I totally agree with you about all three!

    The only hardbacks I own are ones that I got super on sale, that I was given, or that I desperately wanted and couldn't wait for the paperback of. Plus hardbacks are such a pain when you have to move.

    So most of my books are paperbacks. Even some of the books I bought on Kindle--if I love them enough--I buy again in paperback.

    ReplyDelete

If you visit this blog, please comment! I really do appreciate and read every one and try to answer back as much as possible.