If you should keep one thing in life it’s books.
My apartment is 60% books. I don’t have enough bookshelves, I have most loaded to the point where they are bending and there are piles of books stacked on top. Stacks and stacks and stacks.
I think my library is almost an art project at this point. I thrift a lot, check out library discard sales and have a bunch of things I bought when you could get books on Amazon for a penny + shipping. I often pick up 5-10 a week, because at the thrift shop that’s maybe $10 at most. (Goodwill is getting precious, but the really ratty ones are often prime spots.)
Very little fiction. Mostly textbooks and history and language and arcane computer things and strange religious literature and philosophy and paranormal arcana. Obscure things - I mostly collect things that I wouldn’t normally be able to find in a library.
My ex hated my books and wanted to work out a deal where I’d have to give up two for every one I took in. Now I am free to live in a pile of stacks. I don’t care if it looks “messy” or “cluttered.” It represents my mind.
A buddy called me to fix some plumbing in a house he baught , he said the previous owners were hoarders. So I went over and the whole fucking basement was wall to wall book shelves with fucking isles!
He said the lady that owned the house was some eccentric type that hung out in NY back in the 50’s around artists and writers, traveling the world etc. her husband was some sort of critic and they liked books.
I asked what he was doing with it all and he said he sold the contents of the house sight unseen to some guy that wanted it all and was going to be arriving any minute but if I wanted anything to take it now. My brain was scrambling, I didn’t want to be a dick so I just grabbed two books; Tropic of Cancer and Future Shock ( and a bunch of lab equipment that was in a secretive back room lol). They were both first edition books and had newspaper clippings about Miller and Toffler among other reviews that were stuffed in the pages.
It was crazy because they had so much bad ass shit , old leather bound stuff etc. It was just too much to process and I hope it didn’t all wind up in a dumpster. I wish I could have spent a few days pillaging those shelves.
At least when you die and archeologist find your trove we’ll be able to deep learn your stack in order to recreate a cyber you.
A goal of mine is to ensure that my library is preserved in some fashion after I die, because I do believe it would be valuable. Many of the books I have are out of print, rare, and obscure. I have a fantasy of a library room set aside with my collection - a couple of comfortable chairs in a little nook.
Especially with the way that AI has polluted information sources online, I think having a collection of the printed word which is guaranteed to be vetted and written by humans would be useful. The religious material I think also could be helpful in preserving history - eg, I have versions of Mormon books which are likely not consistent with current doctrine.
I’m making a push to hoard my books a little more organized. With the space I have on my e-reader, I could easily have thousands of books.
And I intend to take advantage of that. And I think I might keep a local git repo just for the sake of making sure regex formatting changes don’t fuck things up.
Anyone else have a redneck family that started dropping off endless truckloads of random used books from various flea markets at your home the very moment they found out that you like to read?
My parents sort of did this to me for a while… I did get some books I ended up really liking this way but we also lived way out in the country so getting to a library was difficult. Didn’t have much choice but to try them.
But then they realized I was well beyond kids/young adult books and started giving me books they liked when I was in 5th grade, like sphere and the third pandemic… my teachers thought it was super weird, and I got a lot of negative comments about age appropriate-ness, but I had a dictionary and undiagnosed autism (diagnosed adhd, though), it was fine.
I was so excited when we moved and I was walking distance from a library. I ended up getting 2 library cards so I could reserve a bunch of stuff and still check out 5 at a time (I was there usually twice a week, and would just burn through books at around 1,000 pages a day, because it was all I ever did)
It’s not that I’m not appreciative, it’s just that a 40+ year old man like myself can handle only so many Julia Quinn, Emma Chase, and Tessa Dare books
No but that sounds fucked up. A book collection should be a carefully curated catalog full of things that you personally love or find great use for, not some sad eclectic mix that looks like a hoarder’s pile.
Unless you have a giant library to fill
Thats so cruel. When I mention I like to read my family drops off endless amounts of books at my doorstep.
Laughs in research library
You can pry the books I never read out my cold dead hands!
(Feel free to suggest me some public domain books I can get from Gutenberg, maybe I will read them)
“Throw out stuff so you can buy more” – Maria Kondo
Miss me with that braindead shit.
She doesn’t even follow her own system anymore because she had kids and her system doesn’t work well for families she admits.
I don’t know who that is, but that might actually check out. I have a bookshelf full of books that i looved as a teenager :D i just keep them for the memories of enjoying them:P
I can fit all of them in my pocket with ebooks and a bit of… um… you know… 🏴☠️ (yaRrr)
And how many are read?
I keep all my ebooks neatly categorized in Calibre. I also keep track on Storygraph. I still register what I read once in a while, but don’t bother with any of the reading streak pressure because it causes me anxiety. I love checking once a year and see that, despite the fact that my currently reading list never goes down. My read list is always growing (as well as my to-read list). So I decided to stop worrying and just enjoy whatever it is I’m reading at the moment without pressure.
Completely fair. I asked because I’ve got 2K+ books on my Kobo and I’m trying not to guilt trip myself too much about only reading a hundred or so…
That’s ok, it means it is doing its job. It’s like feeling guilty because a water tank is filled with water. That’s why it exists, that’s what is there for. I personally delete books I’ve read from my kindle. My computer is the library with all books, and the ereader is the mobile library with all the books I want to read someday.
I really like that analogy, thank you! I do think of my Kobo as my “forever library” and it is one of my prized possessions.
Oh… um…
😅
(I collect them like people collect Steam Games 😉)
That means I would have to go to the library to borrow books I want to read and then really read them and turn them back in. I just want to buy books to sit on the shelf as I tell myself I will read them someday in the future.
Or… what if you do both…
I would hit the 30 limit so quick lol. Well I am past it
Less than 30? That woman is goofy.
How do I actually read more? Like how do force myself to read a book. I have some cool books I’d like to read but it’s hard to choose it over say a video game. I also have ADHD.
This shit seems weirdly disposal/consumerism focused.
Fuck all of this.
Well she is big on giveaways, as long as you’re not “cleaning“ while in fact dumping tons of junk on family members who are equally convinced “oh yeah maybe someday I’ll totally wear this…“
I’m not sure why you’re conflating “don’t hoard things you don’t need” with consumerism.
There’s certainly ways to do that irresponsibly, but it’s not part of the philosophy.
Im sure the other extreme isn’t great
But then, hoarding is usually a reaction to poverty.
If your whole schtick is about decluttering, you should be able to differentiate between “less” and “fewer.” Getting things down to a countable number achieves “fewer”-ness.
Also, looking at walls of books sparks joy.
Sorry, less word more good
Less word more fewer!
Less book more feuer!
Careful there, you sound a bit like a nazi.
-
+1
Less junk, fewer things. Less anxiety, fewer panic attacks.
… And I already reached semantic satiation with “fewer.”
Less shit, fewer sewers.
If your whole schtick is about decluttering, you should be able to differentiate between “less” and “fewer.” Getting things down to a countable number achieves “fewer”-ness.
Bullshit dogmatic rule by pedants who make up rules & pass them down like schmucks instead of observing & studying the actual, standard language. True: fewer is only for countables. However, less is fine. It has been used with countables for about as long as written English has existed as documented by linguists & English usage references:
quoted passage
The primary point is that the now-standard pedantry about less/fewer is in fact one of the many false “rules” that have recently precipitated out of the over-saturated solution of linguistic ignorance where most usage advice is brewed.
But not the usage advice at MWCDEU. This is the start of its entry on less/fewer:
Here is the rule as it is usually encountered: fewer refers to number among things that are counted, and less refers to quantity or amount among things that are measured. This rule is simple enough and easy enough to follow. It has only one fault—it is not accurate for all usage. If we were to write the rule from the observation of actual usage, it would be the same for fewer: fewer does refer to number among things that are counted. However, it would be different for less: less refers to quantity or amount among things that are measured and to number among things that are counted. Our amended rule describes the actual usage of the past thousand years or so.
As far as we have been able to discover, the received rule originated in 1770 as a comment on less:
This Word is most commonly used in speaking of a Number; where I should think Fewer would do better. No Fewer than a Hundred appears to me not only more elegant than No less than a Hundred, but strictly proper. —Baker 1770
Baker’s remarks about fewer express clearly and modestly—“I should think,” “appears to me”—his own taste and preference. […]
How Baker’s opinion came to be an inviolable rule, we do not know. But we do know that many people believe it is such. Simon 1980, for instance, calls the “less than 50,000 words” he found in a book about Joseph Conrad a “whopping” error.
The OED shows that less has been used of countables since the time of King Alfred the Great—he used it that way in one of his own translations from Latin—more than a thousand years ago (in about 888). So essentially less has been used of countables in English for just about as long as there has been a written English language. After about 900 years Robert Baker opined that fewer might be more elegant and proper. Almost every usage writer since Baker has followed Baker’s lead, and generations of English teachers have swelled the chorus. The result seems to be a fairly large number of people who now believe less used of countables to be wrong, though its standardness is easily demonstrated.
Less is more general than fewer, and the references identify common constructions where less is preferred with countables.
You’ll have to pry my Pratchett collection from my cold, dead hands.
I have never read all of his books because at some point I will have read his last book.
Sadly the quality was dipping for the last few. I didn’t finish Unseen Academicals.
