Do you prefer digital, paperback, or hard-bound books?
Most of my books are hard copy paperback, or hard cover books. Generally, if the book is thick, I would prefer it has a hardcover. The not-so-thick books would be paper back books. Then sometimes, I must think about the expense. If I feel that the hardback is not worth the expense, I opt to get the paperback version.
But I ran into a dilemma when I used to travel around performing duty with my National Guard unit. I find that traveling with hard-covered books tends to be heavy and that it takes up a lot of space, so in tis situation, a paperback is more convenient, weighs less, and doesn’t take up as much space. But, having books in the field, they get dirty, and during the night reading and holding a flashlight can be a hassle. Plus, after a few days, if the books weren’t put together well by the publishers; pages used to fall out. I would end up having to throw away the book if it got wet.
It made me think and wished that I had a device that could hold multiple book titles, that was plastic and durable that took up minimum space. Then “hey presto,” the E-reader was invented. This answered my prays. But when the E-reader first came out during the early 2000’s; there weren’t many established book titles in electronic format. By the time established book, titles were converted into electronic format; I retired from the National Guard.
Today, I use an E-reader if I have to take a trip by train or bus, or when things are slow at the gov’t office where I work as a gov’t bureaucrat.
Do you have a library full of books or just your favorite tales?
I suppose that all the books combined can be considered a library. Would you believe that most of the books are non-fiction, then there are fiction, very few classics. Keep in mind, I use to get books from the public library so just because I don’t own some titles, it doesn’t mean I didn’t read them.
Harry Potter, Narnia, or Twilight? (You can choose all three or pick and choose.)
Would you believe that up to this day, I have not read a single Harry Potter book. Who needs to, when you can watch the Harry Potter movies.
I haven’t read a single Twilight book either. But if it is anything like the movies, then I’m glad I didn’t. I don’t agree with the notion of vile creatures like vampires being spiritual beings.
As far as Narnia; I started reading some of the books when I was younger, but never finished them.
Overall, those titles are paranormal, and I have lots of books of non-fiction paranormal information. In fact, True_George talks about paranormal events right here at http://www.truegeorge.com.
Do you like when books are turned into movies? Why or why not?
Yes, I like when books are turned into movies. How would I know Harry Potter existed if the movies didn’t come out. Even Stephen King horrors and the Sookie Stackhouse series.
I loved to see superheroes come to life on the big screen. The movies bring your imagination to life.
What I don’t like is if the movies deviate from the story as it is written in the book. Now I understand, that the cost of producing the movie is the biggest factor whether the movie production should be like it is written in the book or not.
What is a book that you have read over and over again?
Unless the book is a technical manual; or looking for some type of information of material that I am learning from. I rarely read fiction books repeatedly. Once I know the story, it gets boring if I read it over and over. The exception to this would be comic books. When I was younger, I loved reading about superheroes that sometimes, I would read a comic book story more than once.
Click on the book cover to get your copy: