Doesn't fit into my (lush) life

So I'm finally reading Richard Price's LUSH LIFE, sort of. Finally, because this is the third time I have checked this member of the New York Books canon out of the library, and I don't know what I was thinking the first two, because it's really good. Sort of, because I was away all weekend and didn't bring it with me -- something that torpedoed at least my first attempt at reading Price's much acclaimed novel.

There are those who say the hardcover must be sacrificed to save the book industry; there are others who insist it must remain as the ne plus ultra of the printed word. To this latter group I say: Anyone want to carry my books for me? I'm really into LUSH LIFE so far, and yet I made no progress on it this weekend despite having ample reading time, because have you seen this book? It is a beast! I would say it's about the size and weight of 12 iPods, one of which I was also taking with me, but at least you can divide iPods among your various pieces of hand luggage. I probably would have finished it on my trip, too.

I know LUSH LIFE reaped the benefit of its hardcover presentation in one specific way: By getting a lot of positive notices from critics, which definitely contributed to my finding my (circuitous) way to the book. Some narrow-minded outlets won't even look at paperback originals; for this book, given its criminal plot, a paperback printing may have stuck it into mystery or true crime instead of getting it the attention of mainstream critics. But what I want to know is, should the hardcover be saved?