Tue 6 Jul 2010
A Review by Tina Karelson: JAMES W. HUSTON – Balance of Power.
Posted by Steve under Reviews[5] Comments
JAMES W. HUSTON – Balance of Power. Wm Morrow, hardcover, May 1998. Reprint paperback: Avon, April 1999. Deluxe (tall) paperback: Harper, May 2009.
For the record, this is not the kind of book I normally read, but it was my local book club’s February book, so I manned up and dived in. To make an overly long story short, an American merchant vessel is seized by pirates pretending to be terrorists. They kill everybody.
The Speaker of the House invokes an obscure clause of the Constitution to circumvent the President’s preferred course of action.
No point. No character development. Or so it seemed. Imagine my surprise when the woman in the group who used to work in military intelligence enthusiastically presented the binder of research she’d put together to accompany the discussion.
Evidently, if a military-political thriller filled with the names and model numbers of boats and helicopters and amphibious craft is something you enjoy, this is an excellent, accurate example of the subgenre.
July 6th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
I notice this is one of those “deluxe” tall paperbacks, and thought this would be a good place to ask if anyone likes that format. All I have heard is complaints that they don’t fit collectors shelves, are uncomfortable in the hand, and don’t fit with their other paperbacks.
I don’t mind them other than they are higher than regular paperbacks and cost extra, but I know a lot of people who actively loathe the format. Any opinions?
July 6th, 2010 at 8:42 pm
David —
This has come up before, but I don’t know if anyone besides you and I joined in the discussion. I have the same objections you do, but I can tolerate them if the books are substantial enough to “fit” the format.
Books in this large size that look obviously over-padded — big margins and big print — get passed by, at least by me.
Other opinions?
— Steve
July 6th, 2010 at 10:09 pm
Oh well, it’s just that everyone I know who reads hates this format, and I wondered if it is anywhere near that universal a complaint.
My dislike of it is much the same as yours, but the general consensus by others seems to be an upset that they don’t fit with their other books on their shelves and they are uncomfortable to read and carry because of their size and shape.
You have to wonder if the publishers care so many readers hate the format the way they have committed to it. By now they have spent so much money on it that we are stuck with it, but I know readers and book sellers both hate it.
July 6th, 2010 at 11:26 pm
I do dislike them, but I will bite the bullet and buy them if it’s a book I really want in paper.
The problem with them. as far as I am concerned, is not shelving them: they are not really terribly dissimilar in height from certain trade paperbacks.
But they do feel uncomfortable in my grasp, especially when propped up on my chest as I read in bed…
July 7th, 2010 at 5:43 am
I prefer trade paperback size to this oversize mass market size, which seems stretched for two reasons: to be more noticeable on store shelves (and thus, one hopes, attract the eye of potential buyers) and to justify charging more.
But no, I don’t object to reading this size per se.