Everyone, I trust, is neurotic about something. We all have some micro-environment requiring micro-management. It’s a benign failing so long as it never escalates into the macro-scale. Take books. Mine I organize on the shelves by author and subject – that’s conventional enough – but within those loose categories I organize by size. I get itchy when I see volumes of widely divergent dimensions – dictionaries next to chapbooks – adjacent on a shelf.
A friend sent me a link to this week’s Michael Dirda column in which the Washington Post writer reviews some of
his bookish crotchets. “Over time,” he writes, “all readers acquire an array of
personal, often bizarrely eccentric rules and routines that govern — or warp —
how they interact with the printed word. . . . Perhaps you will recognize a few
of your own.”
Dirda mentions
his inability to listen to music while reading. That’s true for me as well. Nor
can I have music going while I write. This is odd because for a quarter-century
I worked in newspaper newsrooms, which are notoriously noisy places – police scanners,
televisions, reporters complaining, editors arguing, reporters arguing, editors complaining. “I find this impossible,”
Dirda writes, “which is why you’ll never see me working at a coffee shop.” Same
here. I brew my own coffee.
Dirda and I share
a number of dislikes: remainder marks, library-style plastic book covers, unremovable
price stickers, and our refusal to read on electronic devices: “I’ve never,” he
writes, “used a Kindle or any type of e-reader. I value books as physical
artifacts, each one distinct. Screens impose homogeneity.” That one seems self-evident.
I’ve never understood the ongoing fashion for e-books. The love of novelty or
the latest gadget, I suspect. Perhaps my favorite agreement with Dirda is this:
“Buy only what you will read
“Mine is a personal library, not a focused collection. I never buy any book I don’t hope to enjoy someday. True collectors, by contrast, aim to be exhaustive and inclusive, gathering all sorts of material they have no intention of ever reading.”
Books are
not for ostentation, vanity or home decorating. They’re more like tools. One of
our neighbors has turned his garage into a clean, well-lit, perfectly organized
woodworking shop, an environment I can admire and emulate. Books are not tchotchkes.
I can conceive of rereading, some time, every book I own.
2 comments:
I put the least-likely to be re-read (small-type paperbacks, dog-eared war horses) on the shelves up by the ceiling, and put the to-be-read and most likely to be re-read at eye level. The lowest tier groans with oversize (like that 2-volume OED with the magnifying glass we all have) and art books that have been consulted less and less in recent years. The other shelves are a no-man's land of the overfamiliar, the odd, whimsical purchases and books that I keep to remind myself of how much I hate them. This is where I go looking for surprises.
"some of his bookish crotchets"
"Crotchet", a whimsy or fancy, is new to me.
It brought to mind Peacock's 19th c "Crotchet Castle". A bit of wordplay humor I suspect.
A few notes:
89 ... a gentleman's house: there's nothing more fit to be looked at than the outside of a book
104 ... At Oxford's undisturbed libraries, Rev Folliott laid a wager with Crotchet "that in all their perlustrations they would not find a man reading," and won it. ... We may well ask, in these great reservoirs of books whereof no man ever draws a sluice .... What is done here for the classics?
Post a Comment