This week's question is:
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?
This one's easy - paperbacks! For one thing, I don't like actually reading hardcovers because they're too big and heavy. And they won't fit in my handbag. I have a few hardbacks, but only really thick books so that they don't fall apart on me.
Plus, I don't know, if I try to imagine a library in my house having only hardcovers, in my head it looks kinda... stuffy. I guess paperbacks are just more 'me'.
I'd make an exception if I could have a magic library like Trish thought up - I don't think I'd be able to resist something like that!
11 comments:
I agree. Paperbacks are much easier to read and carry, and hardcovers are good for display!
Happy BTT!
Yes, hardcovers tend to be heavy -- I can't help but think of a story I read somewhere about a woman whose floor fell in from the weight of all her books. Bet most of 'em were hardcover!
Happy BTT! :)
ps -- I forgot to add: I am loving The Time Traveler's Wife! :)
In my head, my house has floor-to-ceiling bookshelves. And they're all paperbacks.
I wish I lived there ...
I prefer paperbacks too! :-)
Happy BTT!
I feel about the same way!
Happy BTT :-)
Books that shrink when you put them in your handbag would be good - that way I could carry two!
Ah, yes, books that will fit in your purse. Now THAT is brilliant!
I too like books which fit into my purse. Easy to carry! Paperbacks anytime!
Booking through format
Yes, it's the portability issue every time isn't it.
I own the most in paperbacks but I have some hardcover. I have about 6 John Grisham in hardcover. I am with you on the being able to put one in your purse. Lately I have been leaving one in the car just in case. :)
Post a Comment