4 ms·

In France the standard became de "livre de poche" edition, the "pocket-book". Fits well on shelves, kind of uniform format, softcover, so it is easier to read/t

by Iv 7y ago

In France the standard became de "livre de poche" edition, the "pocket-book". Fits well on shelves, kind of uniform format, softcover, so it is easier to read/transport, good paper quality. I have grown with this being the standard and to me when I see US hardcover books at $50+ I don't understand it: it is bulky, hard to read in a cramped place like a subway (or toilets!) No two books are the same size or color and it is printed with so much spacing that it looks like kids books or the kind of dissertation formatting I used to do when the teacher asked for 20 pages and I only had 5 pages of material.

pojntfx 7y ago
+1 for small book formats. As some who reads in the metro each morning, not having to carry around a hardback is nice.
- vinay427 7y ago
  I've never seen a non-textbook that was only available in hardcover. Has the lack of a lighter alternative ever been a problem for you?
Consultant32452 7y ago
I think it's that books, particularly hard backs, are in a pseudo-artwork/collectible category. There are times I've liked a paperback so much I bought the hard back and never opened it, just to have the "pretty" version on the shelf.
- Iv 7y ago
  Yes, that's a weird thing. Some books seem to be vanity items. But even in that respect, I find the US format weird: all books are dissimilar and are harder to fit in typical furniture. I do prefer the look of this: http://a52.idata.over-blog.com/2/25/73/36/Photos/Bibliotheque/100_1143.JPG http://a52.idata.over-blog.com/2/25/73/36/Photos/Bibliothequ... to the look of this: https://www.archimag.com/sites/archimag.com/files/styles/article/public/web_articles/image/Biblioth%C3%A8queLivres.png https://www.archimag.com/sites/archimag.com/files/styles/art...
  - barrkel 7y ago
    That's comparing books by a single publisher in what looks like a very specific series, with paperbacks from different publishers. The former - the one you prefer - looks institutional to me, like something a hospital or childcare home would buy in bulk, at a discount, to provide reading material for the unfortunate inmates. The latter has a lot more distinctiveness, and is chaotic since the book designs individually try to grab attention, so that they sell themselves in a bookshop. I don't particularly love the result, it's an artifact of how books have been sold over the past century, but it's preferable to the former by some distance. It's far easier to spot a book whose cover you know in the second style.
    - Iv 7y ago
      The image I linked, yes, was from a single publisher. Here is one from several different ones: https://a-gilles.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/aef9a82f8a20563b7fb7a6fb1f43d430.jpg https://a-gilles.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/aef9a82f8a20...
  - jhbadger 7y ago
    Penguin used to do that decades ago in the English speaking world -- their paperbacks were all the same with nothing more than the name of the author and the title on an orange background(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penguin_Books#/media/File:Image_of_the_cover_of_'The_Tanker_%22Derbent%22',_English_edition.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penguin_Books#/media/File:Imag...). But they've moved away from that except for intentionally "retro" editions.
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > I think it's that books, particularly hard backs, are in a pseudo-artwork/collectible category. On either the “artwork” or “collectible” front, the “pseudo” is an unnecessary modifier.
rusk 7y ago
> softcover, so it is easier to read/transport All books get damaged when being carried on a regular basis. Pocket books especially so, because pockets can be a fairly hostile environment for stiff card and a wad of paper. Say what you like about convenience, but the larger formats do lend themselves to being treated better. For convenience these days we have ereaders though. I personally find hardbacks easier to read on the move, because you’re not battling with the cover as much or having to hold it awkwardly folded in half or something. But they are cumbersome and awkward to carry.
- Iv 7y ago
  Thing is, you are supposed to carry a book the time it takes to read it. It just has to survive something like 2 or 3 weeks in transports.
  - rusk 7y ago
    The kind of books that only take you three weeks to read on public transport are usually garbage anyway.
goodcanadian 7y ago
Seriously, it is market segmentation. The hard cover comes out first at a massively inflated price to capture that segment of the market that is willing to pay a premium for "early" access. A while later, the softcover version is released for everyone else. Most people wait and buy the pocket book. The pocket book really is standard in North America as well.
- Iv 7y ago
  I think it also comes from the Lang law, that prevents competition from different editions of the same book. In France, book are taxed at a much lower sales tax than other items but in exchange, there must be a single price for a given book (usually printed on the cover) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lang_Law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lang_Law So a publisher has to choose the format they are going to sell and the single price for it. It made most publisher favor the most popular soft-cover pocket-book format. Reference books, that need to be more durable, textbooks, photography books, comics, usually prefer hardcovers. (Disclaimer: I have no specific opinion on this law, I think it lowered the price of books in France and reached its goal in making literature more accessible but I have no idea about its detrimental effects on the industry. I have never seen anyone violently oppose it)

by Iv 7y ago

pojntfx 7y ago

+1 for small book formats. As some who reads in the metro each morning, not having to carry around a hardback is nice.

vinay427 7y ago
I've never seen a non-textbook that was only available in hardcover. Has the lack of a lighter alternative ever been a problem for you?

Consultant32452 7y ago

I think it's that books, particularly hard backs, are in a pseudo-artwork/collectible category. There are times I've liked a paperback so much I bought the hard back and never opened it, just to have the "pretty" version on the shelf.

Iv 7y ago
Yes, that's a weird thing. Some books seem to be vanity items. But even in that respect, I find the US format weird: all books are dissimilar and are harder to fit in typical furniture. I do prefer the look of this: http://a52.idata.over-blog.com/2/25/73/36/Photos/Bibliotheque/100_1143.JPG http://a52.idata.over-blog.com/2/25/73/36/Photos/Bibliothequ... to the look of this: https://www.archimag.com/sites/archimag.com/files/styles/article/public/web_articles/image/Biblioth%C3%A8queLivres.png https://www.archimag.com/sites/archimag.com/files/styles/art...
- barrkel 7y ago
  That's comparing books by a single publisher in what looks like a very specific series, with paperbacks from different publishers. The former - the one you prefer - looks institutional to me, like something a hospital or childcare home would buy in bulk, at a discount, to provide reading material for the unfortunate inmates. The latter has a lot more distinctiveness, and is chaotic since the book designs individually try to grab attention, so that they sell themselves in a bookshop. I don't particularly love the result, it's an artifact of how books have been sold over the past century, but it's preferable to the former by some distance. It's far easier to spot a book whose cover you know in the second style.
  - Iv 7y ago
    The image I linked, yes, was from a single publisher. Here is one from several different ones: https://a-gilles.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/aef9a82f8a20563b7fb7a6fb1f43d430.jpg https://a-gilles.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/aef9a82f8a20...
- jhbadger 7y ago
  Penguin used to do that decades ago in the English speaking world -- their paperbacks were all the same with nothing more than the name of the author and the title on an orange background(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penguin_Books#/media/File:Image_of_the_cover_of_'The_Tanker_%22Derbent%22',_English_edition.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penguin_Books#/media/File:Imag...). But they've moved away from that except for intentionally "retro" editions.
dragonwriter 7y ago
> I think it's that books, particularly hard backs, are in a pseudo-artwork/collectible category. On either the “artwork” or “collectible” front, the “pseudo” is an unnecessary modifier.

rusk 7y ago

> softcover, so it is easier to read/transport All books get damaged when being carried on a regular basis. Pocket books especially so, because pockets can be a fairly hostile environment for stiff card and a wad of paper. Say what you like about convenience, but the larger formats do lend themselves to being treated better. For convenience these days we have ereaders though. I personally find hardbacks easier to read on the move, because you’re not battling with the cover as much or having to hold it awkwardly folded in half or something. But they are cumbersome and awkward to carry.

Iv 7y ago
Thing is, you are supposed to carry a book the time it takes to read it. It just has to survive something like 2 or 3 weeks in transports.
- rusk 7y ago
  The kind of books that only take you three weeks to read on public transport are usually garbage anyway.

goodcanadian 7y ago

Seriously, it is market segmentation. The hard cover comes out first at a massively inflated price to capture that segment of the market that is willing to pay a premium for "early" access. A while later, the softcover version is released for everyone else. Most people wait and buy the pocket book. The pocket book really is standard in North America as well.

Iv 7y ago
I think it also comes from the Lang law, that prevents competition from different editions of the same book. In France, book are taxed at a much lower sales tax than other items but in exchange, there must be a single price for a given book (usually printed on the cover) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lang_Law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lang_Law So a publisher has to choose the format they are going to sell and the single price for it. It made most publisher favor the most popular soft-cover pocket-book format. Reference books, that need to be more durable, textbooks, photography books, comics, usually prefer hardcovers. (Disclaimer: I have no specific opinion on this law, I think it lowered the price of books in France and reached its goal in making literature more accessible but I have no idea about its detrimental effects on the industry. I have never seen anyone violently oppose it)