burlington Posted 19 January , 2008 Share Posted 19 January , 2008 Both editions are selling for not too dissimilar prices in the UK. Which one would you buy? The hard cover, embossed 1920 version, or the soft cover 2007 reprint? And why? On Amazon affiliates, the former is circa £10 upwards, and the latter some £8 upwards. Nearly the same on Abe Books. Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay dubaya Posted 19 January , 2008 Share Posted 19 January , 2008 Hi Martin, I downloaded an e-book copy of the original recently, not qute the same as having a hard copy in front of ya... but given the choice I'd go for the original green and gold embossed version over a softback, cheers, Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanA Posted 19 January , 2008 Share Posted 19 January , 2008 I already have the original and wouldn't part with it. The content of any book is important but so is the feel and smell of it. I have 18th century books which I inhale as well as read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Riley Posted 19 January , 2008 Share Posted 19 January , 2008 The original every time (as long as the price difference is not too silly). It feels better to read and there is an immediate connection with the past (if that is not a contradiction in terms). I have got a lot of pleasure from my copy. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 20 January , 2008 Share Posted 20 January , 2008 I mentioned this in response to a thread a while back, I got the feeling the poster at the time hadn't considered the originals. heres a few as comparison not as an advertisement. http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/SearchRe...p;x=88&y=16 Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burlington Posted 20 January , 2008 Author Share Posted 20 January , 2008 I have actually purchased a Nonsuch 2007 reprint. Basically because the originals are too 'valuable' to be subject to the hurly burly life of a book being read thoroughly. I might still buy an original later, perhaps if for no other reason than to 'inhale' as IanA does. In fact this is not so strange as it might appear. I grew up in an environment when I had easy access to books and similar from between the Wars. The smell, the feel, the typeset etc etc of these books and the images they conveyed to my, then, young mind has stayed with me always. Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 20 January , 2008 Share Posted 20 January , 2008 Martin, its not strange at all. The smell of books, webbing, old weapons and even uniforms is extremely evocative...every time I walk into the room where I keep my books and collections I am met with a smell i wish i could bottle. Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T8HANTS Posted 20 January , 2008 Share Posted 20 January , 2008 Look out for the original bound copies from the war years, they do not seem that rare. I also agree with Ian, a book should be inhaled, and felt as well as read. like Ian I have books going back a couple of hundred years, and guess what instant access to the data there in, unlike the five and a quarter inch floppy discs I have kicking about somewhere. Gareth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now