/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.4850987]

> look through bookshelf thread on /lit/
> people with lots of great books
> spines and covers 100% untouched looking, even the huge tomes

So you guys just buy the books and read the wiki synopsis eh?

[Anonymous No.4850990]

you can pic out the penguin editions by the shitty spines. have you switched to oxford?

[Anonymous No.4850992]

>>4850987
Maybe some people just take better care of their books?

[Anonymous No.4850993]

no, I just take care of my books. I remove the dustjacket when reading, and I try to prevent creasing the spine if possible

[Anonymous No.4851000]

>>4850990
penguin includes better notes and introductions

[Anonymous No.4851009]

>>4850987

I don't pull my books open wider than they need to go and sometimes I even put them in plastic bags when traveling so they won't get frayed. I'm not a materialistic person, but when I buy a book, I'm gonna take care of it.

[Anonymous No.4851011]

>>4850987
>all those penguins
it's like you don't even like reading

[Anonymous No.4851017]

>>4851011
What's wrong with penguins?

[Anonymous No.4851021]

>>4851000
not sold. i've a lot of penguins because they're cheap for classics, but if it's between the equivalent oxford and penguin editions like those i want to spend that ten quid on text that'll survive multiple readings. for the two quid editions, i couldn't care if it's wordsworth, but i don't expect them to last. the cheaper penguin editions tend to last longer also, which is just a double deterrent to buying their more expensive ones.

[Anonymous No.4851302]

>>4850993

> if possible

A book will look a little read after a full reading if it's over say... three hundred pages. Something like Les Miserables or War and Peace can not be kept perfect and read comfortably.

>>4851011

Penguins are great though.

[Anonymous No.4851309]

>/lit/-fags fuckin pnwd

/thread

[Anonymous No.4851343]

>>4850987
Dude, why do you think these people post pictures of the book collections? It's not about what they read, it's about what they want you to think they read.

[Anonymous No.4851357]

>>4851343
Yes people spend hundreds of dollars in a failed attempt to impress you specifically on an imageboard, you've cracked the case.

[Anonymous No.4851372]

>>4851357

[Anonymous No.4851454]

>>4851021
Not OP, but, Penguin classics are easy to find second hand in the UK (so, *very* cheap). As such they outnumber my Oxfords maybe 5:1. Oxford generally less common, except for the very old editions (tiny hardback ones).

I'm not even sure they are worse quality. It's just the black shows creases far easier, so you notice.

[Anonymous No.4851715]

Buy book, pirate ebook edition.

[Anonymous No.4851816]

>>4851302
I have a fully read paperback edition of the Stand that looks near-untouched. The spine is a bit concave but absolutely no creasing

[Anonymous No.4851830]

>>4850987
>So you guys just buy the books and read the wiki synopsis eh?
yes

where did you think you are?

[Anonymous No.4851833]

>>4851715
or just omit the first step

you're welcome

[Anonymous No.4851957]

>>4851017
they look like shit on a shelf

[Anonymous No.4851977]

>>4851017
nothing

just /lit/ being /lit/

[Anonymous No.4851978]

I'm autistic when it comes to taking care of books. I read Lolita without once fully opening it, I think. Read the whole thing at a 90 degree angle because I didn't want to break its back.

[Anonymous No.4852007]

>penguin history of the world

[Anonymous No.4852062]

>>4851302
>Something like Les Miserables or War and Peace can not be kept perfect and read comfortably.

I call bullshit on that. I've read my copy of Moby-Dick 3 times and it looks about as good as a copy from the store that a few customers have fondled.

[Anonymous No.4852083]

>>4852062
>I've read my copy of Moby-Dick 3 times and it looks about as good as a copy from the store that a few customers have fondled.

Speaking of bullshit.

[Anonymous No.4852084]

>>4852083

It does. It looks fine. It's paperback and lays open fine without creasing. I never took it out with me or read next to the pool or whatever dumb kid shit you do with your books.

[Anonymous No.4852089]

>>4852084
>It does.

Whelp, I'm convinced.

[Anonymous No.4852096]

>>4852089

Why is it so hard to believe my book doesn't look like shit? I even read with a hand towel sometimes so I don't get natural oils from my fingers on it. I'm maybe more careful than most, but it's not impossible to read a book and not fuck it up.

[Anonymous No.4852100]

>>4852096
not that guy but probably because you offer no evidence except "oh, yes it does"

it's dumb as fuck

[Anonymous No.4852129]

>>4852100

I don't really need evidence cause I'm not making an argument. He says these people don't read books cause their books don't look like garbage. I'm saying that I believe they read at least some of them because my books tend not to look like garbage after I've read them. Even the big ones.

[Anonymous No.4852139]

I used to be pretty careless. I was reading a book I'd read numerous times and it just fell to pieces in my hands. I try to get hardbacks whenever possible.

[Anonymous No.4852199]

>>4851017
they can't even fucking fly. waste of a bird

[Anonymous No.4852953]

[Anonymous No.4852967]

>>4850990
oxford spines are only marginally better. you still have to be really careful with them. norton critical is the gold standard (though owc gets the best translations on average imo)

>>4851000
and horrible translations usually. penguins have the most inconsistent translations

inb4 >reading translations

[Anonymous No.4852976]

>>4851957
>caring about aesthetics when it comes to books

do u even read?

[Anonymous No.4852980]

>>4850987
Penguins are always the giveaway. The black spines make it impossible not to show even the slightest wear.

[Anonymous No.4853038]

The worst looking are far and away Wordsworth Editions. http://www.wordsworth-editions.com/collection/classics

Makes sense they're so cheap.

[Anonymous No.4853060]

I made a goodreads and track my progress through books. If anyone thinks I'm a poser I just direct them to my goodreads.

But your observation is correct OP. There's a surprisingly large number of people here who simply claim to oh-so-badly want to keep their books in perfect condition so they do their utmost not to break the spine -- this is code for, "lel i just don't read them pls dont call me out on it."

(Granted, some spines don't crack easily: Vintage books, for example. But a row of Penguin classics, whose spines crack easily as shit even on tiny books? Suck a dick dude; you're not fooling anyone.)

[Anonymous No.4853063]

>>4853038
Oh my God.

[Anonymous No.4853076]

Or we don't treate books like shit.

[Anonymous No.4853084]

>>4850987
tfw all my paperbacks have their spines broken and their papers turning yello

[Anonymous No.4853086]

I read an ebook version and then i buy the book.

[Anonymous No.4853121]

>>4853038

I was a massive fan of them when they were using paintings from some catalog.

Luckily the only things I want from them now haven't changed covers other than from when they went from blue to black.

[Anonymous No.4853830]

>>4850987

Half of those books still look untouched though. Penguin books don't crease much if you don't spread that shit wide, but they fray at the bottoms. My shelf is like 50/50. I've read most of them, but only really half look all creased and frayed. I take better care of some or they just happen to have worn well.

[Anonymous No.4853855]

>>4851357
Oh I think you just exposed that part of yourself you hoped nobody would see. My heart goes out to you.

[Anonymous No.4853863]

>>4853060
I fold the covers rather than the spines, not for aesthetics, but cause the spine is what holds the pages in. My books look better than most even read.

[Anonymous No.4853864]

those look read to me op u just sound like a nasty nignog who likes to trash his books, not every destroys the fucking spine

[Anonymous No.4853865]

>>4852139
Same here

All those poor Redwall and Narnia library books I utterly destroyed from dog-earring and spine bending as a child

[Anonymous No.4853881]

True literary connoisseurs use e-readers. Those who buy books as a shelf accessory are pretenders.

[Anonymous No.4853888]

>>4853881
What is the fun in an E-reader. Amazon or where ever you get your books, sort of guides you to what you read. Don't you like going to a used book store and walking around and find something that calls to you?

[Anonymous No.4853913]

>>4853881
>believing that a patrician would eschew the grand tradition of books to read on his digital tablet

By patrician, did you mean millennial?

[Anonymous No.4853922]

>>4853881
So what about people who buy books, use ereaders and also use the library?

[Anonymous No.4853940]

>>4853881
true literary connoisseurs use a good library

>norton critical editions of everything
>if those don't exist, then everyman's
>absolutely completely free
>can get things on ereaders
>can request books and just pick them up at the desk
>no limit on how many books you can have checked out at once
>obscure shit you could never find IRL (i have women and men checked out right now)

[Anonymous No.4853950]

I just don't treat my books like dogshit. the only ones with spine creases are ones that came that way from buying used.

[Anonymous No.4853955]

>>4851017
rape culture, mostly

[Anonymous No.4854143]

>>4853881
ereaders are pleb as fuck

[Anonymous No.4854222]

Not everyone treats books roughly I mean I hate fraying edges on my penguins so I put clear contact on them which prevents this.

[Anonymous No.4854327]

are you people 40 year old men?
why the fuck do you have neatly presented book collections?

im cringing

[Anonymous No.4854337]

>>4853955


they like it though so its ok.

[Anonymous No.4854422]

>>4853955
Penguins are true libertines. Have you read the full Adélie penguin reports? Small groups of outsider "hooligan groups" were found beating male and female chicks (or whatever baby penguins are called) to death and having sex with the bodies, incest, just going around raping when bored, etc.

[Anonymous No.4854448]

>>4854422
>you are now imagining Judge Holden as a penguin

[Anonymous No.4854453]

>>4854327
edgy post bro u must b a tru carefree spirit

[Anonymous No.4856260]

>>4850987
>organising by publisher
fucking abominable

[Anonymous No.4856635]

>>4850987

>OP thinking his collection, with creased spines, is special
>OP not recognizing the idea of a reference library
>OP is clearly not an academic

you do realize that the collections your referring to belong to academics who read 150-200 books a year? you think "reading wiki synopsis" is equivalent to an ivy league degree that demands constant and diverse reading?

not from just another poster on /lit, but from a human being who has to share the public sphere with you: stop. we all know what you are trying to do, but it's ignorant, try-hard and unsubstantiated. you quite literally judge collections by the nature of the books' spines--failing to ask or mine the knowledge of their owner entirely. this is superficial at best, slavishly insensible at worst.

the very fact that you organize your books by publisher seems to indicate your own aesthetic, rather than merely intellectual, preference--you can't respect an equal motive in others? too embarrassed that your collection just isn't as big--that you simply aren't as well read?

[Anonymous No.4856672]

>>4856635
/lit/ has a lot more teenagers these days. It's hard for them to understand that there are professors on here, or people in graduate programs.

The level of reading that needs to be done as an academic or PhD candidate is not the same level as what is done for most literature survey courses in undergrad. And people like OP, with only experience in the later, can't seem to imagine what it's like for the former.

[Anonymous No.4856681]

>>4850987
>Chung/Halliday

[Anonymous No.4856744]

>>4854422
investigation time

[Anonymous No.4856793]

What the buck people - do you srysly have problems with used books?
At least when we talk about novels no one should be concernded about a paperbacks condition. And to academic literature - which of course is quite expensive.
These are not read anywhere but at a Desk, furthermore they are mostly hardbacks. So of course the DO look unused

[Anonymous No.4856811]

>>4853038
This one's my favourite.

[Anonymous No.4856947]

What I find amazing is apparently half of /lit/ can't manage to read a book without damaging it. I have some large Penguin Classics books which I have read multiple times (Including Brothers Karamazov, 1000+ pages) and none of the spines are cracked or damaged.

The only damaged books I have are second hand or have been leant to careless friends

[Anonymous No.4856986]

>>4856947
Sometimes they go cheap on editions and you get an edition that has less glue. So when you just hold it open for long enough, the spine breaks.

[Anonymous No.4856990]

>>4853038
>>4856811
Holy shit, what the fuck.

[Anonymous No.4857036]

>>4856811
This one is funnier

[Anonymous No.4857039]

>>4856635
>le try-hard high-brow language
>you do realize that the collections your referring to
>collections your referring to
>your
>mfw
Nigga you just automatically invalidated your opinion. l2proofread pls

Seriously though your style is cringeworthy as fuck, like, yuforik skawlar xDDDDDD

[Anonymous No.4857040]

>>4853038
>>4856811

[Anonymous No.4857057]

>>4857036

[Anonymous No.4858740]

>>4853038
That looks like gay porn. I should know since I work in an adult shop.

[Anonymous No.4858750]

>>4857036
no way that is fucking real

wordsworth must be rolling in his grave

[Anonymous No.4860014]

>>4853038
>>4856811
>>4857036
Funny thing is, while their covers with people on them are atrocious, i actually find some of the covers featuring art to be really neat.
>pic related, two versions of "The Idiot", thankfully i have the one on the left

[Anonymous No.4860036]

>>4860014
They used to have tons of books with paintings on the cover, which was at least decent looking, but there's probably some kind of expense or royalties to pay so they had to drop it

I have a Pickwick Papers and it looks better than the Penguin classics version tbh.

[Anonymous No.4860038]

>>4860014
I honestly have never seen the covers with photos on them.

I own several copies of ancient greek stuff though.

[Anonymous No.4860051]

>look at my shelf
>a third of it is garbage
does /lit/ hide their shitty books behind their respectable ones?

[Anonymous No.4860059]

>>4860051

>does /lit/ hide their shitty books behind their respectable ones?

they grow up and get rid of the shitty books. and we all know you only have those shitty books there still to buff up the overall size of your collection. they're just numbers to now.

[Anonymous No.4860114]

>>4850987
Another one of these. Anyone want to see the new shoes I got too?

[Anonymous No.4860234]

>>4860051
Iktf.
A lot of shitty mangos from when I was 10, I'm probably going to donate them.

[Anonymous No.4860255]

>>4853864

> those look read to me op

Well it is my bookshelf.

>>4856635

I read about ninety books a year working full time, now that I'm starting school I expect to read at least 150 and improve that anuum by focusing on getting my speed up.

>>4856260

Yeh I wouldn't do that if I had my full collection or anything... I might change it now, that's just how I threw it all on the shelf. I don't really own enough books to organize by content and eeeeeeh I'm too lazy to go alphabetic.

>>4856635

I'm pretty well read for my age and I own about 400 more books at my parents house. I think if I only count serious works of non fiction or literature I have probably read about five hundred. It isn't shit, I know, but it's better than buying books and never reading them.

[Anonymous No.4860262]

>>4860255

Also updated with Jesus. Go ahead, debate me ;)

[Anonymous No.4860269]

>>4860262
Still here, faggot?

[Anonymous No.4860274]

>>4860269

Ya

Hey what's everybodies problem with the Penguins? I like the translators (though oddly all of the Oxford translations I have seem to be my absolute favourite) and I think the black spine and covers look great. Vintage is sturdier, but a hell of a lot more expensive.

[Anonymous No.4860281]

>>4860274
I have absolutely no idea. I also think the covers look great.

[Anonymous No.4860292]

>>4860255
So why do you think you're all that different from other people who own about 700 books and have read about 500?

Also, alphabetic isn't that useful a way to organize either. You should base your organizational methods on the key areas of interest for you. Since you seem to be mostly concerned with reading the Western canon and established classics, organizing chronologically would probably be interesting and useful for you. You get to see the development of literature across the canon as you look over your bookshelves.

[Anonymous No.4860300]

>>4860292

Yeh that's not a bad plan, when I get more books I'll give more thought to organization. Anyway 500/700 is not a horrible ratio I suppose; I personally prefer to never have more than forty books unread at any given time. I was mainly referring to people with shelves and shelves of books which show absolutely no sign of wear and seriously if The Count of Monte Cristo looks completely untouched then it is completely untouched.

[Anonymous No.4860312]

>>4860300
I didn't post mine in the thread that spawned this one, but I've been told how "untouched" mine look weirdly often on /lit/, for having bought nearly all of them used and falling apart. And having written in the margins and keeping sticky notes and papers in half of them.

As has already been mentioned, it's not as good a practice for an academic or a professor to have that few books on the shelf unread. I read that many in a few months - I need to have more on hand to know if I'll be teaching them, more that I'll probably only use a few chapters of for papers and excerpting from. When getting read for a single class, you can go through forty books easily without finding everything you wanted to include.

[Anonymous No.4860322]

>>4860312

How many people on lit do you think are professors? As I recall from a fairly recent and heavily participated survey, the average /lit/ poster (or at least the average of all lit posters) reads something like twenty one books a year. So really assuming they own two hundred unread books that is an entire decade of reading.

That also means the average litizen reads like 19 pages a day. If you are actually a professor and you read two hundred books in one year you are in a very small minority here - 4chan is largely made up of teenagers and twenty somethings.

[Anonymous No.4860337]

>>4860322
I don't think it matters that we're a minority, when we're obviously the ones with the larger book collections on /lit/. And so, we're the ones targeted with "you don't really read any of those."

No one questions whether the posters with <100 books have read them or not.

[Anonymous No.4860612]

>>4860337

I arranged my books chronologically, some fun facts I discovered...

> in this set I only have two living authors shelved, alice munro and gunter grass
>5 unique authors from BCE (counting the bible as the old testament)
>8 from pre 1500's
>5 from pre 1800's
>17 from the 1800's
>26 from the 1900's

Kinda neat, also 61 unique authors and about 110 fiction books, most of the authors I read a number of books by are in the 1800's.

[Anonymous No.4860629]

>implying I don't just collect books because it makes me feel good
It's like animu figures to me, like seeing them on the shelf
Occasionally I might read it but most of the stuff I want is online

[Anonymous No.4860645]

>>4860612

Though this is going to be annoying whenever I buy books as I'll have to shift everything down to make room.

[Anonymous No.4860686]

>>4860612
>>4860645
Nice discoveries! I was also surprised at the number of living authors on mine, especially since one focus of mine is contemporary world literature. I didn't even know a few folks were dead.

Yeah, it would be more work to have a strict system in place like that than to organize aesthetically. I think it's worth it though.

[Anonymous No.4860836]

[Anonymous No.4860856]

>>4860836
>tell me a bit about its structure, themes and character development

We're not meant to be writing stilted undergrad papers on here.

[Anonymous No.4860916]

>murdering trees so you can show off your silly collections
>not owning an ereader

fucking embarrassing

[Anonymous No.4860982]

>>4860916
>Buying books as decoration instead of reading material

the most embarrassing thing imaginable.

[Anonymous No.4860991]

>>4860916
>Being this guy

Fucking autismal

[Anonymous No.4861019]

I own a lot of Penguins from when I first really started buying books because I thought they looked the best.