←back to thread

Discarded delights: The joy of ex-library books (2021)

(www.abebooks.com)
95 points MrVandemar | 4 comments | 20 Nov 24 09:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.962s | source
Show context
sofayam ◴[20 Nov 24 11:37 UTC] No.42192915[source]▶
If you are going to collect books as physical objects, rather than their much more convenient digital versions, then it strikes me you should actually find the signs of previous interactions with that object (library stamps, marks from other readers etc) make them more interesting than pristine copies that no one has read.
replies(6): >>42192968 #>>42193045 #>>42193174 #>>42193372 #>>42193707 #>>42193788 #
dazzawazza ◴[20 Nov 24 11:56 UTC] No.42193045[source]▶
Personally I do like these marks. But I buy books to read, not as an investment. I recently bought a book on "How to survive being gassed" published in 1934. It had a typed A4 sheet of paper in it with a poem about how to identify the different types of gas. Humourous and probably useless but real and very alive.

I also take umberidge with the idea that digital books are more convenient. A physical book is more engaging, more beautiful, more real and more present than a digital book. All things that I find convenient when I want to interact with knowledge and art. Horses for courses I assume.

replies(4): >>42193149 #>>42193726 #>>42194092 #>>42195806 #
1. vundercind ◴[20 Nov 24 12:08 UTC] No.42193149[source]▶
The UI of paper books is better in most ways. Ebooks don’t need separate large print editions, and have full text search. Basically every other point goes to paper books. I don’t bother to defend the aesthetics of books, because their actual utility is high, too.

They’re damn bulky, though, especially when there’s an alternative that weighs nothing. Damn bulky.

replies(1): >>42196526 #
2. dghlsakjg ◴[20 Nov 24 18:00 UTC] No.42196526[source]▶
I tend to disagree, or at least argue that UI/UX is strongly subjective. I have sought out digital copies of books that I have in paper form just because I strongly prefer reading on an ereader for text. Obviously, something with graphics is likely to be better in paper.

You can't lose your place easily. Lighting isn't an issue if you buy a backlit model. Reading lying on your back or side is much easier. Traveling is easier with an e-reader. Access to wikipedia and the dictionary on the same device.

There are emotional reasons that I like paper books, but if I'm just trying to read, give me an ebook.

replies(2): >>42196767 #>>42199497 #
3. nescioquid ◴[20 Nov 24 18:27 UTC] No.42196767[source]▶
To add to your comments on travel, reading position, lighting, some books are just too large or heavy to lug around or even hold for long periods. There are a number of door-stopper books that I otherwise just wouldn't have read because of this.

If the medium makes the difference between me reading a text rather than not reading that text, I tend to think that makes it functionally "better".

4. vundercind ◴[20 Nov 24 23:59 UTC] No.42199497[source]▶
Ebooks will be on their way to being a match when readers come with facing-page screens, spine and cover screens (I've forgotten the authors of ebooks I'm actively reading because I don't get reminded of the title & author passively by just having the book around me) and some kind of much better interface for locating and bouncing between bookmarks, which interface will probably need to not reside entirely on the main screen(s) in order to make a real difference. Still missing a lot, but that'll close maybe half the gap.