←back to thread

95 points MrVandemar | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
sofayam ◴[] 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 #
iamacyborg ◴[] No.42192968[source]
That runs very much counter to how collectors actually collect books currently. The more pristine the book, the better, aside from particularly rare or valuable inscriptions.
replies(4): >>42193033 #>>42193056 #>>42193119 #>>42193781 #
sevensor ◴[] No.42193781[source]
True, but collecting is generally a terrible investment from a pecuniary perspective, unless you’re the mercenary type of collector who sells to people making terrible investments.
replies(1): >>42193858 #
1. iamacyborg ◴[] No.42193858[source]
Sure, albeit I’ve definitely got some stuff that’s appreciated quite considerably in price. Not that I intend to sell it.
replies(1): >>42195020 #
2. sevensor ◴[] No.42195020[source]
Yeah, speaking as someone who inherited a stamp collection, the one thing to avoid is thinking you’re in it for the resale value when you really just want an excuse to buy the object of your desire.