"Blues is about life as we've lived it, and they're not all sad songs."
- B.B. King
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
Why I don't buy hard-back books anymore.
Let me start by saying that I love hard-back books. I love the way they look on the bookshelf. I love the heft of them in my hand, the timelessness, the I'll-be-here-when-you-want-to-read-me-again-ness of them. I enjoy that it's darn difficult to break the spine on a hard-back book whose pages have been stitched together - bound solidly, that the pages are smooth and bright and that the print is clear and vibrant and that the font is usually a bit more unique and well-spaced.
Now, all of that said, I do not buy them anymore (or at least very rarely). Because? It's not because of the cost. Well, not entirely. Previously, I had counted the cost as an investment in quality materials that would last.
But, over the last 5-10 years (maybe longer but this is when I started noticing), the hard-back book has changed. The bindings are glued together (one of my harry potters fell apart the first week I owned it, I mean the book split and separated and fell out of the binding - and I TAKE CARE OF my books!) and the paper is not much better quality than is currently found in a standard paper-back.
In order to mass-produce paperbacks, the paper produced is cheap and has a relatively high acid content. That means that, in a few years, the pages will begin to yellow and, after several more years, they will crack and break. I accept that. I understand that. I'm willing to pay $5-6 dollars for that.
BUT, I am NOT willing to plonk down $25-30 for a hard-back book with the same (or not much better) cheap-o paper!
So, those books I really, really want to read that come out in hardback first and I have to wait another 6 months to a year for the paper-back version? Unless it's good paper (ok, I can forgive the not-stitched-in binding - I know that's costly), I simply WILL NOT buy it.
I, instead, take myself off to my wonderful local library and get to read the story for free - FOR FREE - where before, I would have been willing to pay that $25-30.
(We won't talk about the one time I sat down in a book store and read the whole novel that afternoon while sipping on chai tea. Well, why else do they put the chairs there?)
Now, all of that said, I do not buy them anymore (or at least very rarely). Because? It's not because of the cost. Well, not entirely. Previously, I had counted the cost as an investment in quality materials that would last.
But, over the last 5-10 years (maybe longer but this is when I started noticing), the hard-back book has changed. The bindings are glued together (one of my harry potters fell apart the first week I owned it, I mean the book split and separated and fell out of the binding - and I TAKE CARE OF my books!) and the paper is not much better quality than is currently found in a standard paper-back.
In order to mass-produce paperbacks, the paper produced is cheap and has a relatively high acid content. That means that, in a few years, the pages will begin to yellow and, after several more years, they will crack and break. I accept that. I understand that. I'm willing to pay $5-6 dollars for that.
BUT, I am NOT willing to plonk down $25-30 for a hard-back book with the same (or not much better) cheap-o paper!
So, those books I really, really want to read that come out in hardback first and I have to wait another 6 months to a year for the paper-back version? Unless it's good paper (ok, I can forgive the not-stitched-in binding - I know that's costly), I simply WILL NOT buy it.
I, instead, take myself off to my wonderful local library and get to read the story for free - FOR FREE - where before, I would have been willing to pay that $25-30.
(We won't talk about the one time I sat down in a book store and read the whole novel that afternoon while sipping on chai tea. Well, why else do they put the chairs there?)
Monday, June 22, 2009
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Home Improvement Shows
Ok - I did decide to editorialize about one thing today. I watched about 2 1/2 home improvement shows this morning (the ones where they update everything to sell). I love home improvement shows - usually. But today, I began to notice this focus on ripping up and tearing out perfectly good items simply because they're outdated.
"Right. That's the point, isn't it?" you're thinking.
Well, sorta', I suppose. But let me explain.
This woman was planning to sell her house. YES, it looked like it was furnished in 1983. YES, the stove and refrigerator were harvest gold but the dishwasher was white and clearly made in about 1998. YES, she had brass fixtures everywhere. And, apparently she was content. But her house wasn't selling (four months or so on the market).
Now - I completely get why they bought a new stove, a new refrigerator, and made her hide the microwave (because there really wasn't room for it). I do get it. And, frankly, it did look much more modern and pulled-together. BUT they pitched the working stove and the working refrigerator. BECAUSE. They. Were. Harvest. Gold.
Now, I love a well-decorated home. I enjoy sassy style and the 'wow' of a good paint job. I read Traditional Home (and a few others). So, I'm not knocking the re-do.
But, I am questioning the practice of pitching perfectly good stuff rather than working it into the design. Why not make 50s 60s 70s 80s stuff look modern-cool? NO - I do not mean I want the SAME shag carpet as was originally installed. That's just gross (and the dust mites and goo, well ewwwww...).
But, what I do mean is why not make it work? I happen to LIKE older kitchens (love 50s kitchen cabinets and stoves) or maybe make modern kitchens more adaptable (like when kitchens used to use furniture instead of attachable cabinets - I like that idea) or SOMETHING so we're not throwing out perfectly good kitchen-ware because it's harvest gold.
Just a thought.
"Right. That's the point, isn't it?" you're thinking.
Well, sorta', I suppose. But let me explain.
This woman was planning to sell her house. YES, it looked like it was furnished in 1983. YES, the stove and refrigerator were harvest gold but the dishwasher was white and clearly made in about 1998. YES, she had brass fixtures everywhere. And, apparently she was content. But her house wasn't selling (four months or so on the market).
Now - I completely get why they bought a new stove, a new refrigerator, and made her hide the microwave (because there really wasn't room for it). I do get it. And, frankly, it did look much more modern and pulled-together. BUT they pitched the working stove and the working refrigerator. BECAUSE. They. Were. Harvest. Gold.
Now, I love a well-decorated home. I enjoy sassy style and the 'wow' of a good paint job. I read Traditional Home (and a few others). So, I'm not knocking the re-do.
But, I am questioning the practice of pitching perfectly good stuff rather than working it into the design. Why not make 50s 60s 70s 80s stuff look modern-cool? NO - I do not mean I want the SAME shag carpet as was originally installed. That's just gross (and the dust mites and goo, well ewwwww...).
But, what I do mean is why not make it work? I happen to LIKE older kitchens (love 50s kitchen cabinets and stoves) or maybe make modern kitchens more adaptable (like when kitchens used to use furniture instead of attachable cabinets - I like that idea) or SOMETHING so we're not throwing out perfectly good kitchen-ware because it's harvest gold.
Just a thought.
A couple points of interest...
First - happy father's day to all, my dad especially and particularly (of course :)).
Now, I've decided that, since I have the summer off, I shall begin as I mean to go on.
Goal 1 - weed out excess and duplicate paperwork. That shouldn't really take too long but it needs to be done.
Goal 2 - finish knitting projects, and by that I mean the ones I've been dawdling over for years - literally.
Goal 3 - 30 days - 30,000 words. Yup. Oh yup.
So, that's it. Should be a blast. No editorializing today - just goal-oriented focus. I believe I'm going to go read now. :)
Now, I've decided that, since I have the summer off, I shall begin as I mean to go on.
Goal 1 - weed out excess and duplicate paperwork. That shouldn't really take too long but it needs to be done.
Goal 2 - finish knitting projects, and by that I mean the ones I've been dawdling over for years - literally.
Goal 3 - 30 days - 30,000 words. Yup. Oh yup.
So, that's it. Should be a blast. No editorializing today - just goal-oriented focus. I believe I'm going to go read now. :)
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Economy And Confusion
First - a quick point - apparently, "they" have decided to put Kings back on. Go figure. Now, I'll watch but I don't want the rug pulled out from under me again...maybe I won't watch.
But more importantly - what's the rush to push through half-formed ideas about finance and health care? Nothing has occured that hasn't happened many times in the past with either one.
So, why the rush? I would be far more interested in some careful deliberation and a well-thought-out plan rather than the hodgepodge, cobbled-together, unclear-agenda ideas that are being put forth as plans.
And at what point did we as a country start to demonize the value of asking questions and disagreeing (oh, right, that was a political device that came from 9/11 - asking questions is unpatriotic).
Personally, I want to know that the people voting in laws are ASKING LOTS of tough question. I want to know that folks have put in some careful deliberation and some fact-finding time on the matter. I don't want them voting in things because they feel like it's better than nothing. NO. Here's a thought folks, let's take a bit more time, ask questions, and iron out an elegant solution.
Please.
But more importantly - what's the rush to push through half-formed ideas about finance and health care? Nothing has occured that hasn't happened many times in the past with either one.
So, why the rush? I would be far more interested in some careful deliberation and a well-thought-out plan rather than the hodgepodge, cobbled-together, unclear-agenda ideas that are being put forth as plans.
And at what point did we as a country start to demonize the value of asking questions and disagreeing (oh, right, that was a political device that came from 9/11 - asking questions is unpatriotic).
Personally, I want to know that the people voting in laws are ASKING LOTS of tough question. I want to know that folks have put in some careful deliberation and some fact-finding time on the matter. I don't want them voting in things because they feel like it's better than nothing. NO. Here's a thought folks, let's take a bit more time, ask questions, and iron out an elegant solution.
Please.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)