Do you keep both a hardback and soft back of the same titles?
Ok, so how many copies do you keep of the same title?
This question is tricky, because the general rule for me is keeping only one copy of the same title – makes sense, doesn’t it? However, as the book lover I am, it’s no surprise for you if I tell you that this is not always the case, especially if we are talking about ebooks. I love ebooks, I think they are extremely convenient, easy to transport, and it’s great to sync between devices. But keeping a digital collection isn’t the same for me as keeping a physical collection on my shelves. So when I really, really love a specific book, I tend to end up buying a physical copy – usually hardcover (because it’s so pretty, ok?)
My personal record for the most copies I own of the same title goes to The Sandman by Neil Gaiman (and I’m not even finished yet, I have a lot to collect…). I hope this counts because, of course, in this case, it’s not a standalone novel. It’s a graphic novel, and there’s a lot of issues! I have finished reading the first volume of The Sandman via comiXology (digital), and I loved it! I have also found a few issues of the original 1989 Sandman series in a vintage shop, so I have started collecting the individual issues as well (I will probably never be finished, but at least I now own the original issues from #1 to #20). Collecting something you are a fan of has a special taste.
And also… I got the annotated version of The Sandman (the four whole volumes!) for my birthday.
With that being said, generally speaking, no, I wouldn’t keep both a soft and hardback of the same title – unless there’s a specific reason for it. In the case above, all the copies have a different purpose. The individual issues, we can say they are collection material, but they are also in full colour, and easily readable. While the annotated version is suitable if it’s your second time reading the graphic novel as it’s all in black and white with interesting annotations.
How about you?
Would you keep both a hardback and soft back of the same titles? Why? Why not?
What is your record for the most copies you own of the same title?
10 Responses
No, I dont think I would. Because I like everything digital. However if you're a big fan and collector, I could understand if that's the case. It al depends on your own preference 🙂
I also love Neil Gaiman. The first book I read from him was “Snow Glass Apples” from literature class back in college. It’s basically a retake on the Snow White fairytale. I also loved watching Coraline the movie!
I stick to 1 copy. With books, I just have 1 copy of every book I own. But I can imagine someone might want to have more. Mainly when other versions have something special or extra. I agree with you on the digital version vs the physical collection. When I really love a bok, I'll always a physical one as well. Same for movies/ series. Even though it's on Netflix: If I love it, I'll buy it on dvd!
For “books to read”, I’m a one-copy gal, usually paperback so I can pass it on to relatives who like to read in bed, or else a Kindle version for voluminous things I want to read on transit or my lunch-hour.
I’m also a librarian/bibliographer/collector, however, so I have collecting interests where I’ll buy multiple editions and formats. For instance, I have a very completist collection of the novels of D.K. Broster, with every title appearing several times, in variant dust jackets, first editions, first *signed* editions, collected editions of short stories and stray appearances of those same stories in periodicals – you name it. Strangely enough, the only format I have no Broster in is e-blook, maybe because no-one’s bothered to issue any yet. (She’s a pretty minor novelist, but she died in 1950, which means she’s out of copyright in Canada, but maybe not in the States until 2020).
Oops, way TMI! 🙂
Thank you so much for visiting and sharing your experience with us! No TMI at all 🙂 I thought it was very interesting that you have such a nice collection of something you are passionate about. That’s definitely the reasoning behind the soft / hardcover deal debate.
I limit myself to one copy, but I’m thinking of getting a second copy of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (with the original cover) because I have this weird dislike of second edition covers. Interesting post 🙂
I love ebooks too! Though I sill prefer the smell of the books and it really feels great while you are flipping the pages. I think I’d prefer to have the hard back copies but from time to time I can also read via ebooks if I can afford a book.
Honestly, it’s a no but when I already got a paperback then if I found a hardbound which is on sale, I can’t help but get one. I had T’is both in paper back and hard bound. I think I also have one of Sparks book in both but I forgot what particular book.
I have always loved books. Did you know that I used to cut classes, go to a bookstore, and read books because I couldn’t afford to buy books??? Ironic isn’t it? So when I was able to save money to buy books, that’s what I did. I could only look at hard bound copies and learned to ignore because they are more expensive.
It was until we have our children and they both have allergy rhinitis that I got rid of books by donating. Since then, I only have a few paperbacks given to me as gifts. The books I have on leadership and business, autographed, I gave to my niece. I stick to Kindle now.
This is an interesting question and I do think that even if you have an ebook copy of a book, there is nothing quite like own a hard copy of the book. For one, it takes up beautiful space on your bookshelf. Also, there is something nice about the tangibility of a hard copy book. Most importantly, though, for me, is cover.
The cover of a book is always changing. It comes out first as hard cover. Then it goes to paperback after a year or so, which offers a new cover style. Then if there is a reboot or a movie adaptation, there will be another cover. (Though this last one is absolutely blasphemous in my book-lover mind. -.-)
However, owning multiple copies of a book has a whole new perspective when you speak multiple languages. The only book I currently own as a multiple copy (and they’re not exactly the same book, but by the same author and carrying the same stories) is The Brother’s Grimm tales because I wanted them in German but I was gifted a copy in English (by people who don’t speak German.) In this case, I have two copies of many of the stories in those books. Yet, they have different meanings for me as a reader when I read them in separate languages.
Though, I must say in general, I don’t like to keep second copies of books. This is especially hard for me if I have one book in the series as a paperback and the others as hard cover because I like them all to match. But I won’t go buy new copies of old books if I already have them because I only care about the particular copy that I actually read. I don’t feel an attachment to a book I haven’t flipped through and spent time on. So, even if I bought a matching copy for the series, I wouldn’t end up getting rid of the original non-matching copy anyway. Does that make sense?