(This is, btw, my core reference collection. If I had twenty books, I could do that, though there wouldn’t be much point to it.Īs it is…let me illustrate, briefly, how I work and how I use reference books. This in turn means that the user has to have read every word in all of the books to hand (so as to know what’s in them), and to be sufficiently familiar with them as to recognize almost any author’s content. OK, this is conflating the two aspect virtues of tidiness, which do not necessarily operate in correlation with each other.įor an alphabetized reference system to be useful, the user has to know that the book s/he wants is written by a specific author. That’s the “How can you FIND anything in there?” response, which assumes that in fact, I can’t find anything _unless_ the books are filed according to an arbitrary pattern that the observer personally finds aesthetically appealing. Some people like simpler patterns, some like more complex ones, and that’s fine. Aesthetics rests on the perception of pattern, and there are patterns in total chaos (this is the basis of chaos theory). Now, putting aside any of my private opinions regarding the psychology that causes people to value Tidiness Uber Alles, tidiness _qua_ tidiness has two possible aspects that recommend it as a virtue: aesthetics and/or function.Īs to aesthetics, I’ll just note that there are people who like Gustav Klimt and there are people who like Mondrian, and leave it at that. I appreciate both schools of thought-and my sincere thanks to the kind souls who think I would do better (in some undefined way), if my books were alphabetized, sorted by color, arranged by height, or generally tidied into a visually pleasing (to them) formation that has nothing to do with what’s actually _in_ the books.
“What a mess!/How can you FIND anything!/Let me come and organize that for you!” It seems to be about 20:1 in terms of “OMG, this looks just like my shelves!/I love it!” vs. I’m as fascinated by y’all’s responses to my bookshelves as y’all are by the books, etc.
0 kommentar(er)
