There are purists who read only physical copies. There are those who read only e-books. I even met people who stick to audiobooks only (although, those are usually parents with babies and they don\u2019t have much choice).<\/p>\n
I\u2019m omnivorous when it comes to the medium. I consume books from paper, e-books or audiobooks. My Kindle library is spread throughout several gadgets, including the actual Kindle<\/a>.<\/p>\n Out of a wrong habit I try to minimize physical copies, so I buy them only when there\u2019s no e-book available. My main reason for doing so will sound funny to some, and, probably, should sound funny to all. I\u2019m sad for the trees. The reason is wrong because, apparently, books are not made from some free wild forests. They are made from the trees grown specifically for this purpose. Thus, it\u2019s better for our air. The more books we buy the more trees they plant, the more oxygen is produced while the trees are growing. As for plastic Kindle and other gadgets\u2026 Well, you know where I\u2019m going with this.<\/p>\n Another advantage of a physical copy is that it\u2019s yours. No publisher will knock on your door and take the book back because there was some mix-up with license. That does happen to electronic versions. You also won\u2019t be prosecuted for passing your copy to a friend, or simply leaving it on a bench in the park. But what is it called when you leave your book online for others to read? Right, it\u2019s a crime. As a cherry on top, with a physical copy nobody is spying on you. What you browse, like, dislike or underline in the book stays only with you, unless you decide otherwise.<\/p>\n Still, my library is dominated by electronic copies. I wave off my privacy, my freedom to handle a book the way I see fit, in exchange for emptier shelves and lighter suitcases. And, well, for a life of a tree \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"