3 ms·

https://archive.is/Qh4JY https://archive.is/Qh4JY I don't know where the notion of "have you read them all" come from. It's like food in the fridge, it contain

by a_c 4y ago

https://archive.is/Qh4JY https://archive.is/Qh4JY I don't know where the notion of "have you read them all" come from. It's like food in the fridge, it contains stuff so I can consume when I want to. It is fun to hoard books too IMO.

DeathArrow 4y ago
The questions like "have you read them all" mostly come from people who never read.
- eru 4y ago
  I wonder if that attitude would make me feel better about my Steam game backlog.
  - a_c 4y ago
    Physical thing being, well, physical is something magical. Flipping a book gives a different full body experience than reading on screen. I guess similar can be said about seeing moving in cinema or attending music performance.
nosianu 4y ago
Somewhere I once read an answer from Umberto Eco to this question that was along the lines that if he had already read them he would not need to keep them, his library was explicitly mostly for things he hadn't read, so that he could always go and get something new from there whenever he wanted. For some reason I had never thought about it myself, but that answer made a lot of sense to me when I read it (and still does). Until that moment I too was one of those people who thought one should have read most books in one's own library. EDIT: Or was it Nassim Nicholas Taleb? Now that I tried to think about where I read that I'm beginning to doubt whom it was from. Or maybe Taleb talking about Eco? -- https://www.themarginalian.org/2015/03/24/umberto-eco-antilibrary/ https://www.themarginalian.org/2015/03/24/umberto-eco-antili...
rcme 4y ago
Usually it's considered wasteful to buy a lot of food you have no plans to eat. I think the same can be said about any physical resource.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  Food rots. You're still taking care of the books you haven't read, and somebody else will have them after you're dead if you picked the right titles. > Usually it's considered wasteful to buy a lot of food you have no plans to eat. And if you only buy food when you have a immediate need to eat, you've chosen the most wasteful way to eat. You'll overpay, create more waste (packaging, imprecise portions), and immediately starve when you lose access to a continual supply.
  - rcme 4y ago
    > And if you only buy food when you have a immediate need to eat, you've chosen the most wasteful way to eat. You'll overpay, create more waste (packaging, imprecise portions), and immediately starve when you lose access to a continual supply. That's why most people have a few days or weeks worth of food at home. Which is also what most people do with books. Having a library with hundreds or thousands of unread books is like having an aerated grain silo filled to the brim in your yard. Most people would say that such a thing is a bit excessive, and "can you eat all that?" would be a natural question upon seeing it.

by a_c 4y ago

DeathArrow 4y ago

The questions like "have you read them all" mostly come from people who never read.

eru 4y ago
I wonder if that attitude would make me feel better about my Steam game backlog.
- a_c 4y ago
  Physical thing being, well, physical is something magical. Flipping a book gives a different full body experience than reading on screen. I guess similar can be said about seeing moving in cinema or attending music performance.

nosianu 4y ago

Somewhere I once read an answer from Umberto Eco to this question that was along the lines that if he had already read them he would not need to keep them, his library was explicitly mostly for things he hadn't read, so that he could always go and get something new from there whenever he wanted. For some reason I had never thought about it myself, but that answer made a lot of sense to me when I read it (and still does). Until that moment I too was one of those people who thought one should have read most books in one's own library. EDIT: Or was it Nassim Nicholas Taleb? Now that I tried to think about where I read that I'm beginning to doubt whom it was from. Or maybe Taleb talking about Eco? -- https://www.themarginalian.org/2015/03/24/umberto-eco-antilibrary/ https://www.themarginalian.org/2015/03/24/umberto-eco-antili...

rcme 4y ago

Usually it's considered wasteful to buy a lot of food you have no plans to eat. I think the same can be said about any physical resource.

pessimizer 4y ago
Food rots. You're still taking care of the books you haven't read, and somebody else will have them after you're dead if you picked the right titles. > Usually it's considered wasteful to buy a lot of food you have no plans to eat. And if you only buy food when you have a immediate need to eat, you've chosen the most wasteful way to eat. You'll overpay, create more waste (packaging, imprecise portions), and immediately starve when you lose access to a continual supply.
- rcme 4y ago
  > And if you only buy food when you have a immediate need to eat, you've chosen the most wasteful way to eat. You'll overpay, create more waste (packaging, imprecise portions), and immediately starve when you lose access to a continual supply. That's why most people have a few days or weeks worth of food at home. Which is also what most people do with books. Having a library with hundreds or thousands of unread books is like having an aerated grain silo filled to the brim in your yard. Most people would say that such a thing is a bit excessive, and "can you eat all that?" would be a natural question upon seeing it.