Am I the only one who has a problem reading Mass Market Paperback?

[Ken]

Oh yes! yes to the above.

[John]

Back in the days before e-books, I liked them because I could read them with one hand and not worry about destroying the book because of folding the cover over.

I also did not mind the paper that they are printed on because I often read with the use of a book light, and white paper is just too bright to read in the dark with a light shining on it.

It does not make you too picky, however, just because you have a preference. Reading is something that requires attention and comfort, so if something about the book is distracting you then it is worth it to shell out a bit more money for higher quality. It is just a bummer for you that you do not like the books that are the most affordable, especially used. :)

What I like about e-books is that I can set up the viewing experience to suit my own preferences, and reading in the dark has never been nearly as pleasant as with the paperwhite, but I really miss the smell of decaying cellulose.

[[deleted user]]

John wrote: ... reading in the dark has never been nearly as pleasant as with the paperwhite, but I really miss the smell of decaying cellulose.

Keep an old book by the bed while you're reading your Paperwhite, and occasionally inhale.

I love my Paperwhite too. It's like reading a book on magic paper.:)

[Paul]

There's no doubt that mass market paperbacks don't age well - which is a shame, since a book of all media should be able to last for ages.

[Liam || Books 'n Beards]

I try to get the bigger ones as much as possible.

[Stewart]

There will always be folk who love their printed material. Me? I've given away several large box of books and will probably rid myself of several more. I prefer having my library on hard drive.

[Experiment BL626]

John wrote: "but I really miss the smell of decaying cellulose."

Now you don't have to: http://ebookfriendly.com/book-smell-p...

[Tia]

I’ve always been a fan of paperback books. They’re portable, inexpensive, and I think they hold together just fine – I have a MMB published in 1944 that is in almost perfect condition. Are they more easily banged up than hardcover books? Of course, but if you take care of them, they’ll hold up perfectly well.

Also, I think some incredible cover art was reserved solely for the paperbacks, especially the MMPBs (at least in science fiction, anyway). When the pulps declined in popularity and MMPBs took their place, quite a few iconic pulp artists made the transition to paperback covers. You don't typically see this kind of design on hardcover books. Since I collect books for the cover as well as the story, I by necessity have a huge collection of trade paperbacks and MMPBs because of their delectably campy sci fi art.

[[deleted user]]

I guess there are varying degrees of quality, even with paperbacks. I just reread a Elmore Leonard novel that's been on my bookshelf for 15 years, and it still looked new.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

As long as you treat your books with respect, they will respect you. I have MMPB that I've read many a time but you can't tell.

I went into ebooks hardcore at first...but I've been drifting back to paper. I like the feeling of holding books.

[Liam || Books 'n Beards]

I tend to get the larger paperbacks. MMPB always feel... cheap. I suppose cos they are.

[[deleted user]]

I no longer buy MMPB books. For me its either Hardcovers or The larger trade paperbacks. I love to collect books though so quality is a big deal to me. Also, you can go to any online bookstore and get like new condition used Hardcovers for 2 or 3 bucks a lot of times. Which is half the price of most MMPBs.

[L.G.]

I've always found it annoying when the price of the book doesn't reflect the quality. Too many MMPB are costed at much higher prices that they should be.

[Mark]

http://bookoutlet.com/

[Aaron]

Dux wrote: "Ian wrote: "I no longer buy MMPB books. For me its either Hardcovers or The larger trade paperbacks. I love to collect books though so quality is a big deal to me. Also, you can go to any online..."

Their are plenty of older hardcovers $1 or less the problem is always the shipping.

[Erin *Proud Book Hoarder*]

I prefer mass market paperbacks. I have a large book collection, to my standards, and the spacing and appearance of them on the shelves is something I find pleasing. Personally I find hardcovers tedious - on the shelves they never line up the same as they tend to be in different heights. I also find them more combersome to read and not as comfortable in the hand.

Also just like the feel of reading a paperback, besides their appearance on the shelves. I have a lot of older books, many used, so spine creasing doesn't bother me. That said, I love a brand new, shiny paperback too.

[James]

I don't have a problem mmp books. I hate it when the font is big (makes me feel like I'm back in grade school)or there are spaces between each paragraph instead of indentations. I just got done reading a book where they double spaced and it drove me insane. It was a kindle book so I thought there was something I could do to 'fix' it but no.

Now that I have a kindle, and am now use to it, I won't buy another paper book or periodical. It still bothers me to read anything longer than a magazine length article on the laptop/pc.

I guess I have a lot of issues. lol

[Liam || Books 'n Beards]

I prefer trade paperbacks or hardbacks, but if I order a book from work and it shows up Mass Market instead then I deal with it.

[CS]

I'm happy with any format (hardcover, trade paper, mm paper). Typeface is all. I want a readable font size, adequate leading, decent contrast and clarity of typeface on paper. I'm not gonna badmouth mm paper. In general, I've found mm paperbacks very readable.

Recently I gave up on a hardcover novel I borrowed from my public library. The font size was the smallest possible for readability with wide leading to make up for it. I actually edited a travel reference many years ago with the same font size and leading. Maybe my experience was karmic. For a reference where people read only a page or two at a time, the font size should be OK. For a novel? No.

I also rifled through my stack of library books while thinking about this topic. One of them, a trade ppbk, has an artsy thin typeface with minimal contrast to paper. Conducive to eyestrain, maybe. Big margins, small blocks of text and verse. It might still work.

I don't read e-books. I do all my (paid) work on the computer screen, and when I want to relax, I read on paper.

[[deleted user]]

I used to read mass market paperbacks because they're easier to hold (I have small hands and wrists) no matter which position you're in. But then I got an eReader and now I don't see any point in getting mass market books. They're small, wear easily, and don't maintain much value if you plan to sale them secondhand when you're finished. Now I mostly read ebooks, but if a book looks promising I'll get it in hardback for my shelf.

[Shan]

Great topic. I can visualize all of us trying to muscle a paperback into staying open while we eat a messy sandwich or brush our teeth, arguing with ourselves over whether it's safe to read the next chapter on our Kindle in the bathtub, groaning in frustration when the last few pages have come unglued from our antique paperback...

My preferences have changed as I've gotten older & more decrepit. I used to love MMPBs because they were easy to carry around and they were cheap - I have tons of old ones around the house, cover prices starting at 25 cents, many of which I got used for half that price. Now, I usually get the Kindle version if there's one available; or I get the trade paperback or hardback if it has illustrations or seems like the kind of book I'll want to flip back and forth in or maybe mark up with a pencil, or more rarely something I really want to add to my overcrowded bookshelves. I also buy the physical book sometimes because of where I discovered it - I have a couple of great independent bookstores in my area, and they'll have things I never would have stumbled on otherwise, and they bring authors in for signings, and I want to support them.

This seems like an appropriate forum for my complaint about some newer paperbacks' poor use of white space. Wide outside margins and the print running right up to the spine on the inside - did somebody really think that was a good idea, or is it poor quality control? Drives me crazy.

[Monica]

Add me to the list of people who can't really appreciate MMPB because of the small print, brittle spines and paper discoloration and deterioration. As other's have said up thread, it's really too bad because I have a sizable library of paperback books purchased when I had good eyes and no time to read. I have repurchased more than a few on kindle where I can increase the font size and brighten the background.

[CS]

Shan wrote: "...some newer paperbacks' poor use of white space. Wide outside margins and the print running right up to the spine on the inside - did somebody really think that was a good idea, or is it poor quality control? ..."

I'm not involved in production anymore, so I can't give you a firm answer. I speculate they're downloading the text from hardcover/trade pbk to mm pbk, and the page size doesn't scale exactly. So they cheat by taking up space on the outside margins and the gutter (inside margins). Sometimes the design job is sloppy and they go too far. Or maybe they're trying to squeeze more words on the page to minimize printing costs, to the detriment of readability. Those are my guesses.

I was curious about your question, so I dropped into a bookstore today and pulled some mm pbks off the sf and mystery shelves at random. I found a couple mm pbks just like the one you describe. No gutter, the print ran across the two facing pages. Ugh! Both books were being reprinted from hardcover or trade pbk. I also noticed a fair number of mm pbks reprinted from hardcover or trade pbk that were very skimpy on margins and gutters--readable, but not that comfortable on the eyes.

Original mm pbks didn't have that problem, at least not the ones I saw. Margins, gutters and overall print quality were fine. Also, many mm pbks had adequate margins and gutters even if they were being reprinted from hardcover or trade pbk--no cheating or sloppiness there. So I think this is an isolated problem with certain books and/or certain publishers. I'm glad you asked the question because now I will be extra careful to check the quality of mm pbks before I buy.

[Shan]

CS wrote: "CS wrote: "I speculate they're downloading the text from hardcover/trade pbk to mm pbk, and the page size doesn't scale exactly. So they cheat by taking up space on the outside margins and the gutter (inside margins). Sometimes the design job is sloppy and they go too far. Or maybe they're trying to squeeze more words on the page to minimize printing costs, to the detriment of readability. "
Thanks for the insight!

[N.J.]

my problem is I always seem to destroy the spine on a book that is too small, and I want one that will last!

[V.W.]

I'm always very careful with my paperbacks so they last. Plus I wrap them in plastic. I have ones I bought 30 years ago second hand that were published in the 50s and are still in pretty good condition. I like their size and relative light weight.

These days however I read all my books on my smartphone.

[Carolyn]

My eyes have been getting old for a bit now. I have kindle and nook and I love them. They literally brought me back to reading...

With that said, not all books are reader formatted. I still buy books now and then. I just bought The Great Book of Amber...huge book with small print. It is a horror for me to read. I will get through it but the print and the big fat book will take some of the joy away.

I do not plan to travel with this fat book, I just read it at home. I would have to clean out my purse to take this monster book with me... just not worth it.

[Chris]

Mass market paperbacks are clearly for young people with good vision and less spending money. I remember being shocked at how the MMPB version of A Game of Thrones tarnished my reading experience. These days I love to listen to audiobooks while I walk (10k+ steps per day), and the pages of a hardback book look beautiful when I go that route.

[Ken]

I cannot stand MMPB and don't buy them. When I make a wish list for Christmas/Birthday I explicitly state which version I want, because I don't want to embarrass the buyer by returning it. I won't have them in my house. I am not a mass market. I am not the kind of reader who gets sand and fry grease all over the pages or spills coffee on the book, or leaves it spine-cracked on the floor. Therefore, a format which is bent upon this intended use model is not for me. I want my books to live longer than I do, so that my progeny can enjoy them. I want them to be wondrous vessels of amazing stories, rather than cheap text copy-pasted onto fraying media and falling apart after the least use. I dislike them because I am not their intended user, and also because on principle I do not want to actively support such a market in the first place. I want books to be revered with the same respect a gallery painting receives.

If I'm going to buy a Rembrandt, I will not buy the dollar store print and go frameless, nor will I buy a Rembrandt.JPG. This philosophy I apply as well to books.

[Erin *Proud Book Hoarder*]

I really haven't seen my MMPB as fragile as some here are saying. I tend to keep books as well, so some of mine are pretty old. Sure they don't stay pristine through multiple readings on the spine, but that doesn't bother me. The pages don't fall apart and most of the books are fine with text size. I've ran into books that are too small in text but this doesn't strike me much thankfully.

[Ken]

It's not rude when the family members have thanked me for being clear. That's an aside to this discussion, but since you brought it up: that's how we buy gifts for each other. Everyone makes a list and people tend to buy from it. Of course, many gifts are hand-made instead or bought in the usual thoughtful-idea way, but the list makes getting ideas very easy and prevents "not knowing what they need/want". The clarity on specifics helps too, the gift-giver wants to get or make something that the receiver is sure to appreciate.

It's not rude or pretentious, it may be too upfront for your taste but it takes the awkward guesswork out of the affair and makes holidays simpler and more fun for us.

A part of me twitches whenever I see someone dog-ear a page, write in a book, or crack the spine. It's like being slapped. Again, that's just my personality. It's an alien concept to me. All of my books, be they hardback or trade paperback, are treated as if they belonged to other people. I don't go obsessive-compulsive about it, but I like to keep them in like-new condition to a reasonable degree. It's not hard with the right kind of care.

One thing we agree upon is that the use of extra large fonts is a negative aesthetic, one I try to stay away from in purchasing.

[Papaphilly]

I am a Luddite. I read paper. Having said that, I read all three types of books. If I can get a first edition and it is a non-fiction book, I will buy hardback because I will keep it for my personal collection. I alternate between trade and MMPB depending on my mood and how much I really want the book. I will read MMPB at the drop of a hat. I read allot and I cannot afford to buy all of my books in hardback especially if I do not keep it. I give most of my books to other readers and I read so much, I overfill my friends till they stop me and beg to quit giving them books because they cannot keep up.

As much as I appreciate Kenneth's view on this subject, I cannot get all of my books in hardback and some of the independent books I have found are real gems and they do not come in hardback very often. Those books tend to stay in my personal collection especially if they are signed. I started out reading MMPB's and they have a true spot in my heart for the very same reason that others hate them.

[Jennifer]

For the longest time, it seemed that everything was only MMP. But that must have been forever ago.

[Al]

I'm after the WORDS, not the media. If I can't see the words (getting old and my eyes reflect that -- started wearing glasses a decade ago), I'm not getting what I want.

I have a huge MMPB library (well, not as huge as some, but it takes up most of one wall in my office) and some of them have started shrinking the text on me :-)

My Kindle can be scaled to fit my eyes, so that's my preferred method. However, when camping I have to take paper along because even Kindle batteries don't last forever.

[Graham]

Al wrote: "However, when camping I have to take paper along because even Kindle batteries don't last forever."

These days, there are portable solar chargers that you can take with you anywhere to keep that Kindle running. Why saddle yourself with dead trees if you don't have to? :-)

[Papaphilly]

Graham wrote: "Al wrote: "However, when camping I have to take paper along because even Kindle batteries don't last forever."

These days, there are portable solar chargers that you can take with you anywhere to ..."

Dead trees are people too :^)

[Erin *Proud Book Hoarder*]

Al wrote: "My Kindle can be scaled to fit my eyes, so that's my preferred method. However, when camping I have to take paper along because even Kindle batteries don't last forever.
"

That's a good bonus on e-books, although it doesn't help me much since I mainly read e-books that are ARCs. Since they use Adobe Digital DRM protection, they are in PDF format, which has to be used with a program on the kindle. With those you cannot set the text larger or smaller - the last ARC had tiny print and it was tedious to get used to. So the print being adjustable isn't a large selling point with me.

Besides that, I like to take a break from technology and screens and curl up with a book most of the time. It's comforting and wonderful for me. I have to sit in front of a screen all day at work already.

And you're right on kindle batteries - although not sure on the 'even' thrown in there, as I always thought the kindle battery sucked, at least for the fire. Definitely wouldn't last me long enough for my tastes when I'm in a big reading mood over a few days.

[Erin *Proud Book Hoarder*]

Graham wrote: "These days, there are portable solar chargers that you can take with you anywhere to keep that Kindle running. Why saddle yourself with dead trees if you don't have to? :-)"

We're obviously different in our tastes - books are never a burden to me, only a joy! But I'm a bibliophile and always have been.

I guess the solar thing would work to a degree, never thought of charging that way. I know if my kindle completely dies, even my computer won't charge it. I can only get it charged through the wall then, and it takes a few hours extra to get the charge really starting. This is why I try to be as careful as possible on not letting the battery drain completely.

[Whitney]

i always have to look at the font and one spacing before picking up a book. Tablets and Kindles have solved this problem because you can change font spacing and size to fit your own reading style / eyesight. i've switched to reading a lot of books that are only in small print or mass market only on my tablet.

[Graham]

Erin wrote: "We're obviously different in our tastes..."

I think you may be a special case, Erin. Anyone who has to read PDFs all day on a computer screen is bound to develop a certain antipathy to the technology. I used to love driving until I had a job that involved a two-hour-each-way commute every day. Now I don't.

Personally, I haven't bought a paper book since 2010. I don't use a dedicated e-reader at all (although my wife is a big Kindle Paperwhite fan), preferring to use my phone. It's a high-quality, 5.5 inch screen phone, so similar to the best dedicated e-readers. The beauty of it, though, is that it is always with me. I'm a bibliophile too and the joy of having my entire library (and the world's biggest book stores) in my pocket at all times is one of the great joys of modern life.

[Ken]

I'm a bibliophile like Erin. I don't see the benefit of carrying around 1000 books in e-format. I only read one at a time, and one book is hardly a burden. I pull it off my shelf, read it, and take it with me. I put it back when done.

[Graham]

Kenneth wrote: "I pull it off my shelf, read it, and take it with me. I put it back when done."

And, when you finish it, you're stuck without a book until you get home. And, when you're on holiday, you have to pack four. Also, you're carrying a block of paper, as well as a phone, everywhere you go.

"Bibliophile" doesn't mean you like paper, it means you like books. The word is technology neutral. I'm happy to say I love books but I find paper books clumsy and limiting. We clearly need a word that means "lover of paper books" for those who favour that particular presentation technique.

[CS]

I like to bring paperback books when I travel. I don't worry about breaking them or losing them. One of my pleasures is to leave the book where I am when I finish it, for the next interested person who might come along.

[YouKneeK]

Kenneth wrote: "I don't see the benefit of carrying around 1000 books in e-format."

You must not do much business travel…. says the person who recently got home from her fifth straight week of business travel and can’t imagine life without her Kindle.

It isn’t just the ability to have my entire library accessible wherever I go. When I’m exhausted and my eyes are tired, I can increase the font. When I’m on an airplane with a nosy neighbor, I can decrease the font. When they dim the airplane lighting at night, or when I’m in a hotel with an odd lighting scheme, or when I’m traveling in a car at night (as a passenger, of course), or when I’m eating breakfast alone in a dimly lit hotel restaurant, or whatever, I can have exactly as much light as I need without even thinking about it – a couple touches to my screen and it’s perfect.

When I’m in the middle of the first book in a series and I’m not sure yet if I want to read the sequel, I don’t have to choose between buying it in advance (and possibly having a book I don’t want) or not buying it all (and possibly having to wait a week or more before I can get a hold of a badly wanted sequel). I can read my book through to the end and then immediately purchase and download the sequel if I want it. I like to plan ahead but, the last time I bought a sequel in advance, I regretted it so now I’m more cautious.

If I’m just running around doing errands, I only carry what I can fit in my pockets. I hate lugging stuff around, and physical books don’t fit in my pockets. If I get stuck somewhere and need to kill some time, I can whip out my smart phone, sync it up to where I left off on my Kindle, and keep reading the same book. Since I’m somebody who’s always arriving early, and most of the people I know are always arriving late, this comes in handy more often than one might think.

But everybody has different needs, as anybody who has paid attention to this thread can attest. The value of a book to me is the words and ideas they contain. I think the format is irrelevant aside from how it influences my ability to enjoy a good story. When people talk about how much they enjoy the “touch and feel” of a physical book, I honestly don’t get it. I get this mental image of a person slowly and cautiously turning a page to make sure they don’t rip or crease it, pausing to sniff the book and rub it fondly, and then having taken so much time turning the page that they have to turn it back to refresh their memory about what they just read.

I realize I’m surely exaggerating, but this is the mental image I have and it always makes me smile when I hear people say it. But I have heard the statement enough to believe that the tactile experience is an important part of the reading process for many people, and why should I care anyway? Other people can read how they want, and I can read how I want, and we can all be happy.

[Papaphilly]

Graham wrote: "Kenneth wrote: "I pull it off my shelf, read it, and take it with me. I put it back when done."

And, when you finish it, you're stuck without a book until you get home. And, when you're on holiday..."

Last time I checked, paper does not require batteries and does not break when dropped.

According to Merriam Webster:

bibliophile:

Full Definition of BIBLIOPHILE
: a lover of books especially for qualities of format; also : a book collector

Examples of BIBLIOPHILE

for bibliophiles, no electronic device could possibly give the tactile pleasure of a beautifully bound book

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictio...

No you are wrong. Bibliophile means books as in paper books. The format is what is important. What you are actually referring to is Logophile, which is lover of the written word. While I have no quarrel with your underlying argument, you are technically wrong.

[Mary]

Graham wrote: " And, when you're on holiday, you have to pack four. "

Twelve at least. Don't know what mood I'll be in.

Then, it's good exercise. 0:)

[Graham]

Papaphilly wrote: " While I have no quarrel with your underlying argument, you are technically wrong."

No, I don't think so. I think the people who compiled this dictionary have reworked the definition to fit their paper book prejudice :-) I learned the definition of bibliophile in an age before there were electronic devices with which to display books. Let's face it, a book written on papyrus scrolls is still a book. Do bibliophiles not like papyrus scrolls? Or the walls of ancient tombs?

Unfortunately, books have been recorded in bound heaps of paper for so long that the technology has become synonymous with the content. The fact that You could present To Kill a Mockingbird electronically (or on papyrus, or on clay tablets) does not change its nature. As I suggested earlier, we need an expanded lexicon to cope with the new technologies and the need to clarify our concepts.

And, yes, I am also a logophile - because I love words, not just written words, or printed words, or spoken words, but words, however they are presented.

[CS]

Graham wrote: "...I don't think so. I think the people who compiled this dictionary have reworked the definition to fit their paper book prejudice :-)"

No, the definition is not modern. It's the same definition for "bibliophile" in my 1974 copy of Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. That dictionary was compiled from Webster's Third International Dictionary, unabridged, which was the standard dictionary for the American publishing industry back in the day. That said, I'm not sure what the "especially for qualities of format" part of the definition is supposed to mean. I don't think a bibliophile is limited to paper books. As I see it, the basic definition of "bibliophile" simply means someone who loves books. The expansive definition of "bibliophile," according to Webster, means someone who loves books not only for their content, but for their quality as a physical object, i.e., fine printing, illustrations, quality of paper and bindings, etc.

[Ken]

Graham wrote: "Kenneth wrote: "I pull it off my shelf, read it, and take it with me. I put it back when done."

And, when you finish it, you're stuck without a book until you get home. And, when you're on holiday..."

Graham wrote: "Kenneth wrote: "I pull it off my shelf, read it, and take it with me. I put it back when done."

And, when you finish it, you're stuck without a book until you get home. And, when you're on holiday..."
As Papaphilly wrote, actually bibliophile does mean specifically physical books. And I don't find it a problem to carry a finished book home, nor have nothing to read for a day or two - instead I contemplate the story. As for damaging a book in travel, we seem to do just fine not damaging our far-more-breakable phones and tablets, I don't see how it can be difficult to take good care of a book as easily. I put it in my carry-on bag if I'm flying, or just carry it in one hand.

@YouKneek, actually my previous job for 8 years required me to travel literally all around the world. I have been to 6 continents, 37 countries, including Mainland China, Australia, Iceland, Russia, Argentina, you name it. All over the place geographically, and frequently. I'm burned out on travel now and have changed jobs. However, I never found it a problem to bring a book or two with me. And even on an extended trip, can anyone honestly say they read more than 5-10 books a week? Do you really NEED access to 1000+ books at once?

Yes we can all be happy reading in our own way - and I'm glad that the tradition of reading can accommodate new technology to fit a changing world with changing norms. What I said before about e-books (was that in this thread?) having no intrinsic value, only sentimental, utility value, is still a truth though. Every reasonable argument defending e-books is one of practicality. And that's just fine, so long as it's recognized as such.

[Al]

Erin (Paperback stash) *is juggle-reading* wrote: "And you're right on kindle batteries - although not sure on the 'even' thrown in there, as I always thought the kindle battery sucked, at least for the fire. Definitely wouldn't last me long enough for my tastes when I'm in a big reading mood over a few days. "

I was referring to the Kindle eReader, not the tablet. Since the eReader uses digital ink and has no back-light, it doesn't eat electrons unless it's changing pages.