Monday, July 27, 2015

Do you prefer reading hardcovers or paperbacks?

I’ve always been a paperback girl myself, but now that I’m older I tend to track new releases a little more—Stephen King’s, at least—and as such, I always end up with hardcovers.

This is good for my burgeoning collection of first editions, but not so great for ease of reading. Then again, it’s always nice to be able to mark your page with the dust jacket of a hardcover. As you can see, I’m pretty conflicted, so I’m going to make a list of the pros and cons of each. If you have any to add, let me know in the comments!

Paperback* Pros and Cons

PRO: Small, light, and portable. More so than hardcovers, at least. If I can’t fit a book in my purse, that’s a strike against it (or at least that particular edition). I like that the pages are thinner and easy to flip, and when they get older they have this charming “old book” smell.

PRO: Smaller, more compact text. Maybe this is just me, and surely I won’t feel this way as I get older, but the trend toward 1.5-spaced paragraphs in books bugs me. I want to see a page look like this:



Not like this:



It’s sort of distracting for me if there’s too much space between each line. It also seems like such a waste of paper. This is something that bothers me about some trade paperbacks, too.

PRO: No slipcovers to rip/damage. Is there anything worse than a damaged slipcover?

CON: Still easy to damage. It’s easy to shove a paperback in your purse or backpack and go, sure, but that also means it’s easier to damage them that way. Bent covers, smushed pages—ugh, the worst. And they don’t have heavy covers to flatten the crumpled pages back into shape, so you have to pile other heavy books on top of it.

PRO: Cheap. Even if you do destroy your paperbacks, at least you have the cold comfort of knowing that you (probably) didn’t pay over $10 for it.

Hardcover Pros and Cons

PRO: They’re preeeetty. It’s no secret that hardcovers are often much prettier than their paperback cousins. Hardcovers are made to be displayed, whether in the bookstore to convince you to buy them or in your home so you can show off your collection.

CON: Large and sometimes awkward to read. Personally, I like to read in positions that aren’t really conducive to heavy hardcovers—I’m often holding the book over my head in one way or another. They also aren’t the easiest to travel with. I will say, though, that if I’m reading while I’m doing something else (i.e. eating, most likely) I like hardcovers because most of the time they’ll lie open on the table and I don’t have to exert any effort to keep reading. So their size and weight is sort of both a pro and a con here.

PRO: Potentially valuable. No one collects “first edition paperbacks.” (At least, no one I know of.) And why would you? A book is published first in hardcover if the author is big enough, and if they’re not, then why would you be keeping their first editions anyway? The exception, obviously, is if you have original paperbacks from before an author was big enough to merit a hardcover publication. They also use higher-quality paper and binding than paperbacks do, so they’re harder to damage.

CON: Dust jackets/slipcovers. Why oh why must dust jackets be a thing? They are probably my number one annoyance with hardcovers. They make the book slip around in your grip; they’re easy to damage; really, they’re so much more trouble than they’re worth. The only good thing about them is that you can use the flaps to mark your place, but half the time even that results in bending or otherwise abusing the slipcover. I long for the good old days when books’ covers were actually imprinted on the cover rather than on a piece of paper that covers the cover.

How about you? Do you prefer hardcovers or paperbacks? Did I miss any pros and cons for either one?


*”Paperback” refers to “mass market paperback,” in almost all cases, unless I specify trade paperback.

26 comments:

  1. One reason I like hardcovers is that I can read them at a table (which I often do on my lunch hour), and they stay open without holding them. Kindle books are great for this as well. Paperbacks usually take one of my hands to hold it while reading.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I pretty much agree with your whole list. I will say a potential con in paperbacks is when they try to squeeze TOO much on to a single page. Like, my eyes are not bad (well, not my reading eyes, distance is another story) but my old copy of Rebecca is just HARD to read with that little of a font.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am a paperback girl myself... I just get books to read them... So if all possible I go digital. It never occurred to me to start collecting first editions of books. I thought that was a thing of the past. Something to think about thanks for the share!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I still prefer paperbacks. Hardcovers are prettier, BUT THOSE DAMNED JACKETS... Argh! However, paperbacks also get damaged if my hands are sweating, and if the cover gets ruined, I will have to put some plastic in it for the book not to be destroyed accidentally.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm on the fence with this one. Hardcovers look AWESOME on bookshelves, but those jackets really are so annoying. I end up just throwing it to the side until I'm done with the book because they are so easy to get ruined. Plus, they are rather expensive. Paperbacks are just so convenient and easy to read, but they just aren't as pretty. So, I tend to buy more paperbacks.

    Cheryl @ I Heart Fictional People

    ReplyDelete
  6. I prefer a good hardcover to read but if I'm traveling, I look for paperbacks because they're lighter. Also, I save my books and hardcovers maintain their pristine condition much longer - the paper is better quality so don't yellow with age.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I used to like hardcovers but lately I've been obsessed with paperbacks. I do like the wider spacing though, I don't know why but it just looks cleaner to me. It doesn't usually matter to me, though, because I love books anyway. The only kind I don't really like are kindle book, they just don't have the same feeling or smell and you can't physically turn the page.

    http://tayloramartin.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
  8. I hate bending the spine so for that reason I'd go for paperback.. At the same time I find hardbacks rather awkward to hold and as you said they're heavier :/ Not sure I could really come to an answer on this one!!!

    Laura @ What's Hot?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Paperbacks all the way! I have bad wrists and hardcovers are too heavy. Hardcovers are also too heavy to travel with or lug around in my purse/backpack. At the gym, when I am looking for a book to stay open on the ledge of the machine, I get e-books from the library - added advantage of being able to make the font size huge for reading while exercising

    ReplyDelete
  10. I like hardcovers. I like how they look on the shelf, all lined up. I enjoy the weight of them in my hands, and I feel like they stand up to repeated readings more than a paperback.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I like hardcovers. I like how they look on the shelf, all lined up. I enjoy the weight of them in my hands, and I feel like they stand up to repeated readings more than a paperback.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I own more eBooks than physical books, and my hardcover/paperback ratio is pretty even when it comes to physical books, though I do prefer hardcovers over paperbacks. Storage space is the main reason I don't own more physical books. eBooks are much easier to store, and obviously take up less space. If I had a physical copy of all my eBooks, I would have like... 700 books.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I like hardcovers BECAUSE you can remove the slip covers. That way you can remove the pretty paper and keep it pristine and then have a stronger cover as you transport your book everywhere.

    Though I much prefer the weight of paperbacks...guess that's why I eRead, best of both worlds!

    ReplyDelete
  14. I like both, though mass markets paperbacks tend to be a pain to hold open one handed and eat or throw the dog's ball at the same time.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Paperback, mass market or trade. If I don't want to wait for a paperback edition, I'll read it on my Kindle.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Paperbacks all the way! (Although they're still horribly expensive in New Zealand, you can expect to pay $25 even for a not recent release.)

    ReplyDelete
  17. I'd rather read a hardcover, but I normally wait until the paperback because it's cheaper. But more often than not, I'll just get it on my Kindle. (I love the portability!)

    I actually prefer spaced-out lines. I get a bit scared when I see too much text on the page all at once. And with hardbacks, I normally just take the slipcover off and keep it on my bookshelf until I'm finished with the book.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I'm torn between them as well, because of the size problem. I always take the slipcover off while reading a hardcover, so as not to damage it (SO ANNOYING). With paperbacks I'm always reading really awkwardly because I'm terrified of cracking the spine... I'd say I prefer e-reading, but I love physical books too much for that.
    The struggle is real.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I love the feel of a paperback but the look of a hardback so I'm also torn...no wait ill just buy both and have a copy on my kindle too! #win

    ReplyDelete
  20. I prefer reading paperbacks because they don’t hurt my hands like hardcovers do. Hardcover books are difficult to hold open for hours. However, I tend to buy hardcovers whenever possible because paperbacks fall apart too easily. A lot of my older ones are held together with glue and rubber bands.

    Aj @ Read All The Things!

    ReplyDelete
  21. As others already mentioned, I love the durability of hardcovers, and I also remove slip covers while I'm reading them. That way if I accidentally get a smudge on the cover, the slip cover will cover it right up!

    ReplyDelete
  22. I actually prefer hardcovers. They're sturdy, easier for me to read, and like Marie, I remove the dust jackets when I read them. I just wish the actual book covers matched the dust jackets. Paperbacks lose their shape so much after being on the shelf, and some of my paperbacks are just as thick and big as my hardcovers, so I don't know that they're any easier to transport. Well, except for the weight, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I usually prefer hardcover. They feel more special! The only time I gravitate to trade paperback is when the book is VERY long. But if it is a new release I will be reading hardcover either way. I try to stay away from mass market paperbacks. I cannot stand reading from them. Great post!

    ReplyDelete
  24. I've seen a lot people "hate" on mass market paperbacks because they're bulky and the text is so small but you know what? I actually like to read a mass market paperback every once in a while because I think their cute.

    In general I'm more of a hardcover type of girl. I really calmed down when it comes to book buying and as a reward I feel like I'm allowed to spend a little more on the books I get and get the hardcovers. The books I buy in physical form are the books I know I'll like and that I know will sit on my shelves forever. So why not get the pretty ones? I don't feel like the dust jackets are a problem since I take them off when I read the book.

    I do own quite a collection of paperbacks though, but there's nothing wrong with that. With paperbacks you can see when a book is very well loved when the spine is cracked and the cover bent.

    So all in all I like both but if I had to choose one format for the rest of my life, it'd be hardcover.

    ReplyDelete
  25. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I was always a paperback girl, but now that I use the library almost exclusively, most of the books I check out happen to be hardcover (except some YA). So I'm getting used to them, too! And I agree - much prettier for Instagram pictures. ;)

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts with Thumbnails