3 ms·
That advice makes no sense. In fact - many old huge books are epic. I remember in the early 1990s we had a huge book about history. It detailed each year with
by shevy-java 20d ago
That advice makes no sense.
In fact - many old huge books are epic. I remember in the early 1990s
we had a huge book about history. It detailed each year with the most
important events. I loved reading in it. Even today I like it.
Unfortunately I am also now part of the digital-only guys, so I have not
bought a hardcopy paper books in quite a while (excluding one exception
for Raymond Feist, but by and large I only read .pdf files nowadays).
So I store things in .pdf files mostly. I also hate .epub files and refuse
to use them.
I still have many old books here, but new books rarely come up and I only
keep books I find interesting or important or I may re-read. For instance
I have one small hardcopy of 1984; I think it is an important book. And a
few more like that. But I barely have any new paper books.
I don't presently have any really huge book. Not sure what I will do should
I inherit huge books. On the one hand, having them is kind of cool, but I
don't want to keep them in a library or shelf either, so ... I will probably
not use it. But I would not chop up any book, not even on a first april. It
just seems totally pointless and also defeats the point of having huge books.
Huge books are kind of cool. Not practical but cool.