15-20 years? Pshaw! :-) The oldest paperback on my shelf seems to be a copy of _The Two Towers_ that is 36 years old (1966, 7th american printing by Houghton Mifflin). That's 4 years older than me. Actually, I also have a 4th printing of _Soviet Science Fiction_, edited b Asimov, from 1966. I don't seem to have old copies of any of Brust's (Steve's? How do you prefer to be referred to in the third person?) books, probably because I keep giving them away (spreading the word!). I loaned out To Reign in Hell once when I was drunk hosting a party in 1996 and didn't remember who I had loaned it to. Needless to say it was never returned, which left me without a copy for several years. And of course on Amazon all the reviewers say "don't even think about loaning this book to anybody." Doh! Now, thanks to the reprinting, I own 3 copies and I'm in position to loan it again :-). I still miss that first cover, though. I also pick up copies of Jhereg in used book stores so that I could give them to new friends. -- Glenn Ellingson On Wednesday, June 5, 2002, at 07:46 AM, Starshadw at aol.com wrote: > Actually, my reason for preferring paperbacks is simple - I can get more > books on a bookshelf. :-) And I do re-read my books; I am just careful > to be > good to my paperbacks and I find I have no troubles with them lasting. In > fact, I've got some paperbacks on my shelves that are 15-20 years old. > > But I, too, am about to break down and go buy the hardback. I'll just > read > it, then do what I always do when someone gifts me a hardback: take it to > the > used bookstore, turn it in for credit and get paperbacks. Of course, that > would be after the paerback comes out. > > Stacy