Mass or Trade

[billy]

I've often wondered if I'm the only person struck with what I affectionately like to call PDD (Paperback Dimension Disorder).

It's so bad that when shopping on amazon or in book stores, I've turned down books I'd like to buy because I can't find it in the right format. And the right format, of course, is Mass Market (17.5 x 10.9 cm). Tradebacks, however (20.5 x 12.6) seem to dominate these days, and it's just not right.

I've just been searching amazon for some Magnus Mills (because I really like the sound of him) Plenty of tradeback paperbacks, but no mass market, so I've come away empty handed

[sean]

Seriously??? Or is this a late April fool thing?

I have to say that the thought of not buying a book I want to read 'cos its the wrong size has never, not once, crossed my mind. Such as my mind is.

[David A. Riley]

That would rule out buying most, if not all small press soft cover books. You would be missing out on a lot of the best stuff being published today.

David

[Johnlprobert]

I tend to wait for mass market books to come out in paperback (eg Stephen King) because otherwise they take up so much bloody room on the shelves

[carolinec]

I think I might have seen this on the Pantechnicon forum, but I recall a (true?) story of a man who came into an antiquarian bookshop where this other person worked and bought up a load of RED books - didn't matter what books they were, as long as they were red. Later he came back for some more because they were "the wrong size". Turned out he wanted them for interior design purposes (red matched the colour scheme) and had cut them all to the required size to fit them on the bookshelves with the red spines showing!!

Maybe, Billy, you need the change the size of your bookshelves!
;D

[billy]

Ah, well. Pretty much the responce I was expecting. I know it's stupid to miss out on a book because of it's size, but it's a state of mind I can't shake off. I'll find a sympathiser one day

[sean]

You could always trim them!

[dem]

Given the choice, none of my paperbacks would be any bigger than your average Pan Horror Stories collection, and the hardcovers wouldn't stray far from the classic '70's Gollancz format unless they have to. I don't much care for this trend for over-sized paperbacks by mainstream publishers, especially when there's little or no justification for it. Picked up a Pan edition of James Herbert's The Secret Of Crickley Hall recently and, even given that it's a 600 plus page novel, the actual book is twice the size it needs to be. Do the big companies believe that a door-stopper will convince us we're getting better value for money?

[billy]

admin said:

Given the choice, none of my paperbacks would be any bigger than your average Pan Horror Stories collection, and the hardcovers wouldn't stray far from the classic '70's Gollancz format unless they have to. I don't much care for this trend for over-sized paperbacks by mainstream publishers, especially when there's little or no justification for it. Picked up a Pan edition of James Herbert's The Secret Of Crickley Hall recently and, even given that it's a 600 plus page novel, the actual book is twice the size it needs to be. Do the big companies believe that a door-stopper will convince us we're getting better value for money?

And there's my sympathiser

[billy]

sean said:

You could always trim them!

I do. Not paperbacks, of course, but these stupid oversized DVDs. I trim them and put them in a regular Amaray case.

[dem]

billy said:

And there's my sympathiser

I think you've more than one, Billy, as I seem to remember we had a mass moan about this on our old board if only I could find the thread.
Another horror trend I'm not overly fond of is how comes every new mainstream anthology is the Mammoth book of this, that or the other? Too big, very broad interpretation of what constitutes 'horror' and no wonder I never finish 'em!

[carolinec]

admin said:

Picked up a Pan edition of James Herbert's The Secret Of Crickley Hall recently and, even given that it's a 600 plus page novel, the actual book is twice the size it needs to be. Do the big companies believe that a door-stopper will convince us we're getting better value for money?

I think there's an issue here with the size of print too. Or maybe that's just of concern to an oldie with failing eyesight like me! I prefer books with larger print as I can read them more easily - which, of necessity, makes the book larger. I tend to avoid tiny books with tiny print as it would give me a headache trying to read it!

Sorry, Billy, I wasn't trying to be flippant with my story, or devalue what you were saying in any way. I'm sure your reasons for prefering books of a certain size are very valid to you - like me with my large print!
;D

[Craig Herbertson]

Yes small print is a bugger now. I used to prefer it.

[troo]

I do loathe tradebacks. They're huge, cost almost the same as a hardback (which if I wanted to spend that kind of money I'd just get the sturdier of the two), and are bloody heavy (weak wrists get tired fast holding big books).

[redbrain]

billbunter said:

Yes small print is a bugger now. I used to prefer it.

Yeah, small print is a bugger now, as I head into my 60s. Apart from that, I generally prefer books to take up as little space as possible. That said, I wouldn't refuse to buy a book because it's a bit bigger than it needs to be. And some really big books have a charm of their own. I wouldn't want my copy of Gardiner's Egyptian Grammar to be any smaller.