Book thoughts
Jul. 7th, 2009 08:48 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lizzybennetThere are many different kinds of book lovers in this world. For example, the lover who cherishes the book as an item. This is the person who never leaves a book open and lying face down. This person always uses a book mark and never dog-ears a corner. It hurts this person to see other people "abuse" their books.
I am not that type of book lover.
Another type of lover is the note-taker. These are the book lovers who scribble notes furiously in all their books, sometimes commenting on, sometimes correcting, what the author has written. In general, I'd say these people do not ever part with their books. Each books holds a piece of their soul, their thoughts and insights, and thus becomes a permanent fixture in the lover's life. The Library has a lot of these types of books, collections donated by famous scholars in their twilight years.
I am not that type of book lover.
We can't forget the loyal lovers. These people read their favorite books over and over. And over. They never tire of reading their beloveds and can even directly start a book again after just having finished the last page.
That's not me, either.
I am a fast and furious lover, a love 'em and leave 'em type of gal. When I'm reading a truly fabulous book, it can consume me. I put everything on hold, and the book never leaves my hand. I have no reverence for the physical container of the knowledge. I leave my books laying all over the house, spread eagle so as not to lose my page. I dog-ear, I read in the tub, I leave my books in the kitchen while I cook. These are items that I utilize, not revere. Don't misunderstand me, I never abuse my books. I don't step on them, I don't tear them or use them to prop things up (very often...) but they are part of my life and they live my life with me. I rarely take the time to write anything in books because I'm too busy reading to take notes. Besides, chances are the book isn't mine. I'm a library girl and I'd much rather borrow it than buy it. I don't usually read the same book twice, not within the same decade. There are too many new books to be read to go back and revisit the others very often. I only have a handful of books that I've read more than once (Les Miserables, all the Harry Potters, Island of the Blue Dolphins, and Cold Sassy Tree, to name a few).
That being said, I do hold all books in great esteem; I know that seems to contradict everything I just said, but not really. Old books have so much history to them. Hopefully, these are books that have been loved and read, not just trophies on a shelf. Today we were given a tour of the Library's Thomas Jefferson collection and I realized that I have quite a lot in common with him, when it comes to the type of book lover he was. He didn't believe in collecting first editions because he felt they were inevitably full of errors. He'd just buy the cheap (pirated) 12th edition instead once all the corrections had been made. I interpret that as meaning that he was after the knowledge in the book, not so much the object of the book. Sometimes he'd have his books cut apart and rebound to suit his needs; for example if he was trying to learn a language, he might have the English edition interspersed and bound with the Arabic edition, so he could see the pages side by side as he studied. He had such vast interests and it was quite interesting to see just how varied, and sometimes mundane, his interests ran. Also, the curator said that Thomas Jefferson's literature collection was (and I quote) crap :) I'm sure the same would be said about my own literature tastes.
Despite this understanding of my literary tendencies, my book loving style, I don't necessarily like the way I love books. I wish I could use more moderation, that I could read more slowly and more fully.![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
themenow, I'm closing with a quote in your honor that touches on this issue. Last week you said to me, "There are too many books to read and not enough time." When I read this I knew it was for you and me both:
Maybe the measure of our reading should therefore be, not the number of books we've read, but the state in which they leave us.
What does it matter how cultivated and up-to-date we are, or how many thousands of books we've read? What matters is how we feel, how we see, and what we do after reading; whether the street and the clouds and the existence of others mean anything to us; whether reading makes us, physically, more alive.
-So Many Books by Gabriel Zaid
I am not that type of book lover.
Another type of lover is the note-taker. These are the book lovers who scribble notes furiously in all their books, sometimes commenting on, sometimes correcting, what the author has written. In general, I'd say these people do not ever part with their books. Each books holds a piece of their soul, their thoughts and insights, and thus becomes a permanent fixture in the lover's life. The Library has a lot of these types of books, collections donated by famous scholars in their twilight years.
I am not that type of book lover.
We can't forget the loyal lovers. These people read their favorite books over and over. And over. They never tire of reading their beloveds and can even directly start a book again after just having finished the last page.
That's not me, either.
I am a fast and furious lover, a love 'em and leave 'em type of gal. When I'm reading a truly fabulous book, it can consume me. I put everything on hold, and the book never leaves my hand. I have no reverence for the physical container of the knowledge. I leave my books laying all over the house, spread eagle so as not to lose my page. I dog-ear, I read in the tub, I leave my books in the kitchen while I cook. These are items that I utilize, not revere. Don't misunderstand me, I never abuse my books. I don't step on them, I don't tear them or use them to prop things up (very often...) but they are part of my life and they live my life with me. I rarely take the time to write anything in books because I'm too busy reading to take notes. Besides, chances are the book isn't mine. I'm a library girl and I'd much rather borrow it than buy it. I don't usually read the same book twice, not within the same decade. There are too many new books to be read to go back and revisit the others very often. I only have a handful of books that I've read more than once (Les Miserables, all the Harry Potters, Island of the Blue Dolphins, and Cold Sassy Tree, to name a few).
That being said, I do hold all books in great esteem; I know that seems to contradict everything I just said, but not really. Old books have so much history to them. Hopefully, these are books that have been loved and read, not just trophies on a shelf. Today we were given a tour of the Library's Thomas Jefferson collection and I realized that I have quite a lot in common with him, when it comes to the type of book lover he was. He didn't believe in collecting first editions because he felt they were inevitably full of errors. He'd just buy the cheap (pirated) 12th edition instead once all the corrections had been made. I interpret that as meaning that he was after the knowledge in the book, not so much the object of the book. Sometimes he'd have his books cut apart and rebound to suit his needs; for example if he was trying to learn a language, he might have the English edition interspersed and bound with the Arabic edition, so he could see the pages side by side as he studied. He had such vast interests and it was quite interesting to see just how varied, and sometimes mundane, his interests ran. Also, the curator said that Thomas Jefferson's literature collection was (and I quote) crap :) I'm sure the same would be said about my own literature tastes.
Despite this understanding of my literary tendencies, my book loving style, I don't necessarily like the way I love books. I wish I could use more moderation, that I could read more slowly and more fully.
themenow, I'm closing with a quote in your honor that touches on this issue. Last week you said to me, "There are too many books to read and not enough time." When I read this I knew it was for you and me both:Maybe the measure of our reading should therefore be, not the number of books we've read, but the state in which they leave us.
What does it matter how cultivated and up-to-date we are, or how many thousands of books we've read? What matters is how we feel, how we see, and what we do after reading; whether the street and the clouds and the existence of others mean anything to us; whether reading makes us, physically, more alive.
-So Many Books by Gabriel Zaid
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 12:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 01:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 07:57 pm (UTC)I have a... I think my wife calls it a "problem" with buying books, and not going to the library so much; though we do that, too. I have this stack of books to read this year, and I think for every book that I read, I buy two more. You can defintely tell the ones that I have read, vs those waiting. It's a dream of mine to have a nice library full of shelves holding worn paperbacks, and creased hardbacks; their pages tattered by me picking them up to read over and over.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-17 04:46 pm (UTC)Currently I'm going back through "The Shack" because I know my pastor will want to discuss it with me. I read it through once because I was in such a hurry to read the story, but I didn't make any notes. Now I'm going back through and looking for things that intrigued me when I read it the first time. My memory is so bad that I can't remember everything I read, so these notes and dog ears and sticky flags coming out of a lot of my books is my only way to remember what I was thinking about and what I found important when I read the book. Maybe this is why I had such a hard time in school. I couldn't write in my text books!