Why are paperbacks so unwieldy

Kewreeuss · 03-07-2021 11:19PM #1

Big ugly briquettes.
Coarse paper, you have to break the spine to keep them open, they weigh a blasted ton, you can’t bring them anywhere with you unless you have a huge handbag or backpack, they fill up your bookshelves too quickly, the font size is 12 I’d say, like we are all going blind.
I feel like a big baby with these massive tomes.
Do the publishers have a deal with some big forestry company that they can churn out so much paper? They say they are sustainable but it’s still a waste.
Remember when you could slip a book into your coat pocket and pull it out to read on the bus? You can’t do it anymore. Thank god for kindle and mini iPad.

Dial Hard · 03-07-2021 11:22PM

Is a paperback really any more unwieldy than a hardback? Do they use less paper??? I doubt it. I find I generally have to break the spine on hardbacks too.

lukegriffen · 04-07-2021 12:03AM

Totally agree. I read Hamnet recently & it could easily have been printed on a smaller font & 100 pages fewer. It's like publishers think they can charge more & sell more if it's a door stopper of a book. I guess only option is to use libraries or Kindle.

Kewreeuss · 04-07-2021 11:36AM

Hard backs are bound in sections. I’m not sure it is possible to break the spine of a hardback. At most, one side of the spine cover may detach from the front or back cover and flap about.
The nicest books to hold in your hand are the Everyman ones.
Yes, I get most of my books from the library and download too.
It’s like the book itself is the product not the writing within.

Why are paperbacks so unwieldy

Comments