Some theatre each day keeps the doctor away…

Attractive Bindings

leave a comment »

So I received two books today: Catching Fire, and The Luminaries.  The Luminaries rather surprised me, too.  I hadn’t bought the hardback, because it would’ve cost more, and so I guessed that the paperback would, most likely, be much smaller.  I’ve no idea how large the hardback is, but the paperback that I received is the same size, methinks (minus the hardcover, obviously).  It has heft.  The cover design, too, is rather grand – but this I knew beforehand, having seen it on the internet.  But when I removed it from its package – ripped open and disgorged it from its cardboard sheath – I was met with embossed gold text, and a matte creamy/beigey/something finish to it that was most unexpected, and most pleasing to the eye.  It is one of the most attractive books I have seen in quite some time.

Shakespeare’s Metrical Craft, on the other hand (or iambic foot), is one of the blandest and poorly designed covers in recent memory.  But it’s an academic work (I think), so one doubts that the publishers care much about aesthetics.

I can’t remember if I mentioned this before – and so I checked to see if I had (and I hadn’t) – but I had the choice of buying the hardback or softcover version of Ludmila’s Broken English (I bought it on the night I saw Small and Tired) for the same price.  I originally had the paperback in my hand, but then saw the hardcover.  And I was unsure which to buy.  The hardcover was obviously the better bargain – hardcovers being more expensive and all – but, when faced with equality of price, I started to wonder what was most suitable to me.  I ended up buying the hardcover, but I have a feeling the paperback would’ve been more in line with my reading habits: needing to carry it around, liking to hold it in one hand, and so on.

The disastrous thing about all this is that when I went, just now, to check whether I’d talked about this dilemma over Ludmila’s Broken English, and so did a search for “Ludmila’s” on my blog, I discovered that I had talked about it, but in December of 2009.  I had been to the Rupert Bunny exhibition at the Art Gallery and bought a copy.  (I think I bought it from the cheap bookshop at Central, though, where I bought the copy this month, as I bought four books for $22, I said, and that wouldn’t have been possible at the AGNSW bookshop.)

Oh God!  Oh God!  This is the beginning of a tragic play, this is.  Is this the first time I’ve double-bought a book?  Oh God!

(It was a $2 mistake – as the newest copy was rather cheap, so I’m not too dismayed.)


Written by epistemysics

October 14, 2013 at 4:23 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: