Which is your preferred edition of book?

Mass Market Paperback, Trade Paperback or Hardcover?

I like mass market paperback best, because it is easy to carry during my commute, light and leaves more room on my bookshelf for MORE BOOKS! :smiley:

(sorry if this belongs in IMHO - it’s kind of a twofer, so I put it here)

Depends. For general reading, anything will do. For my collection of Alaskana, preferably hardback first editions and scarce.

For the bookshelf, I like trade paperbacks. They take up less space than hardcovers and look nicer than the mass market paperback. To read on a trip or for books that I probably won’t keep after I’ve read them, I go with the MMP.

Oddly enough, my mother cannot and will not read paperbacks. Of anything. Ever. Even she can’t explain this odd aversion.

Me, I prefer paperbacks for commuting reading, but hard covers for home.

For ease of reading I prefer paperbacks. I don’t have to worry about mutilating my reading material. The expense is a nice draw too, especially when you have a good used paperback store to return them to for credit.

I am a rare book collector and dealer, so my heart is with the original edition of a book. It is a shame that books are rarely the works of art they once were. Even mass market editions were much more attractive a hundred years ago than they are today. Twain’s first editions, for example, are lovely to look at.

I am waiting for the day when I am financially secure enough to really build a collection.

I prefer hardbacks, but end up buying trade paperbacks. The lower price allows me to buy more books. Granted, hardbacks look nicer on the shelves, but, then again, I don’t buy books because of how they’ll look.

I despise mass market paperbacks. Just like **Eve’s ** mom, I can’t really explain it, but the distaste is very real.

How true. I purchased a seemingly quite old, nice hardcover copy of de le Motte Fouque’s Undine, and the book is so well-done - solid, hard cover, printed on thick paper, the spine is engraved with some kind of gold-leaf pattern, I believe, and the design on the cover/back is this spotted kind of paisley design - it’s probably not that rare, and it’s been thrown around a bit, but it’s easily one of the prettiest books I have! They do NOT make books like this anymore, or else those that are are ridiculously overpriced.

A serious question: do you have anything relating to Alaska exploration? I’m always in the market to enlarge my collection. If so, please email me.

Sorry for the slight hijack.

I like trade paperbacks. I like the feel of the stock they use for the covers.

For the shelf, hardcovers.

For general ease in reading, mass market paperbacks. They are easy to carry, fit in a purse or many pockets, and most are easy enough to read with one hand for those times when you need to eat or hang on to a subway pole.

I have a personal grudge against trade paperbacks. They are overpriced and fail, on average, to wear any better than the mass markets. I think they are a conspiracy to get readers to spend more money at the bookstore. More and more, titles available in mass market seem to tend toward genre works – science fiction, mystery, etc. “Literary fiction” tends to be entrenched in the trade paperback. The only use I have for them is for works of great length – some books are too fat to work well as a mass market.

Hi Chef - I do a lot of Travel and Exploration, but not much in the way of Alaskana. I will keep my eyes out though for auctions that might have something interesting.

I used to have a book fetish, and had to everything first cloth, preferably signed. I spent WAAAAY too much on books.

Now I own about a dozen books at a time, but have as many as 70+ items out from the library at any given time. I’m much happier and I have more to spend on fried food and pornography.

This of course is 100% accurate.

I will only read mass market paperbacks if a trade paperback is unavailable or if they’re given to me as presents–I hate the way they feel, both the cover material and often the quality of the paper. That being said, they’re often preferable to hardcover because the latter is a huge commitment in terms of price. I only buy hardcovers if the book is not out in paperback and I’m desperate to read it (mainly true of the last few Terry Pratchett novels) or if I really love the book and want a pretty copy. In this case I usually already have a paperback copy that I can reread if I’m not feeling particularly careful.

This is a bit of a hijack, but I’ll go for it anyway–how do people feel about buying books as opposed to taking them out of the library? A lot of my friends think I’m nuts because I buy all my books and end up spending tons of money I don’t necessarily have (college student, here) to keep up my habit. I’ve just never really felt the same about getting things out of the library, though; there’s something about actually owning a copy of a work of art you’ve enjoyed, even if you don’t count the ease of access for when you want to reread it.


My only criterion…I can learn just as much out of a cheap book as an expensive one.

These days, if I have a choice I choose trade paperbacks. They’re prettier and have larger print than mass paperbacks. I would like to choose hardbacks, although I’m permanently out of book space, but hardbacks are SO poorly made these days that it’s just not worth it. It’s depressing how shittily they put these things together these days! It seems the hardback quality has plummetted, but trade paperbacks are still often pretty nice. I do buy hardbacks if I simply must have it and that’s all there is, or if there’s a nicer hardback.

I don’t like the library. They want the books back. Once a book has come home with me, I never want to let it go.

Just like you, I want to be able to re-read books at my leisure. Nothing’s worse than getting a book “stuck” in your head, and not having it to read again.

The way I look at is is that I’m supporting the authors. I help make them profitable, thus ensuring that more of them will be published. Borrowing them from the library doesn’t do that.

A new book can be an aesthetic experience. Library books don’t have that lovely new-book smell, nor are their pages unsullied. You can’t get that from a “loaner.” I prefer my books to be virgins.

I always prefer hardcover. I’ll only buy them in thrift stores and used book stores though…well, unless it’s something I really *have * to have.

If it’s an author I haven’t read, or something that someone just recommended to me, I’ll either grab a paperback or check it out at the library. If I read it and love it, I’ll add it to my “wish list” that I carry around to the thrift shops so I can look for it in hardcover.

There is a thrift shop here that has a huge selection of hardcovers for $2.99 each. Best of all, they don’t sort through them and find the first and/or rare editions to sell to bookstores. I’ve found tons of great books there. I usually go check there every couple of weeks.

I’m running out of shelf space!

I prefer hardcover or trade paperbacks because you can open them, leave them open on the bed/floor/etc, and not have to worry about losing your pplace or breaking the spine.

But, pricewise, is the mass markets.

Mass markets for me. I suspect it’s due to my growing up reading Heinlein juvies. And I can take a small paperback with me in my back pocket when I go to work/ court/ travel/ etc…

The Trade Paperback is an abomination. All the drawbacks of hardcover (big, heavy, expensive) with none of the benefits, (durable, looks nice on the shelf, first edition…)