Hard or Soft?
>> Tuesday, August 25, 2009
I'm not talking about tacos. Or massage pressure. Or even your favorite pillow.
I want to know what you prefer. Hardcover books or paperback? I find this question interesting because I can't really pin myself down on what I like the most.
Paperbacks are generally cheaper (which is a bonus) and easier to transport. But there's something so nostalgic about hardback backs that can't be replaced. Plus they are more fun for collecting and decorating.
So spill it. What's your poison?
6 comments:
Ooo, that's a tough one. Guess i almost always go for paperbacks because of the way they feel in my hand--lightweight and easy to hold. Hardbacks tend to be harder to read for me, though I am in the middle of one right now that is perfect! It's got to be at least a hundred years old and sewn together at the binding, so it falls open and lays flat on each and every page!
I can't choose either. Hardbooks are so much nicer to look at and look great in a collection on your shelf but, as I'm constantly on a budget, paperbacks are way cheaper. It's a hard one.
Hardcover if at all possible. It's less likely that I will damage the cover. Also, they look so much prettier on my shelf.
Well, it's harder to read hardbacks in the tub...though it may build muscles. But they look nicer on the shelves. Hmmm, I guess I just have to say I can't judge a book by it's cover.
(Sorry, I just couldn't resist.)
You know how there are people in the world who just make you laugh no matter what and even if it's not THAT funny... that's how I feel about Anna. Just wanted to throw that out there.
Also, I can't decide. Which seems to be the common thread here. Paperbacks are smaller, cheaper, and easier to read. But I'll definitely screw them up in some way, so hard backs are probably safer. I HATE HATE HATE dust jackets though. Hate.
Charity,
Right back at you with the making me laugh thing. : )
Post a Comment