YA books like choose your own adventure, etc, that I'm not particularly sentimental about, but are perfectly good books: is it a good thing to provide a library of books for your older kids? Or will they all be using e-readers by then?
Also was the font in YA books always so tiny?!?
We probably don't need two copies of Johnny Tremain, however.
My brother was into sci-fi, and I have no idea which are the good ones to keep.
Same with westerns. Shogun? The Guns of August? What about the Dune series?
I need someone with an older, voracious reader to weigh in. It may be that their kids uniformly prefer to rummage through public libraries.
Or will they all be using e-readers by then?
Possession of an e-reader does not mean that they can't also read a physical BOOK, you know.
As a kid, I didn't mind reading books with semi-yellowed pages, but now I kind of do. And I'm so used to the joys of backlit and adjustable font. God I love my kindle app.
7: But it might mean that the physical library goes untouched. And that even might be predictable.
4. Post a list of titles here and you'll get a dozen contradictory answers within ten minutes.
Terry Brooks? All of these MAD books? Arthur C. Clarke? Daniel Boone? Godfather books?
But fundamentally: is it worth acquiring a small library like this, for the future, given that none of the kids yet read and so we don't know if any are ravenous consumers of books?
The Battlestar Galactica books? The Dune books? Le Morte D'Arthur?
13: GOOD. That's the kind of decisive answer I'm looking for.
Default position for the books should be to get rid of them. Only save really good ones, sentimental value ones, nice editions, obscure things you think your kids might actually like etc. For instance, maybe the first Dune book, but absolutely none of the others.
If you are looking at a library that could offer multiple entry points for the kids, then I think a certain amount of eclecticism is good.
Ok, good advice. Kids can mostly acquire their own library and I should err on the side of discarding. This one is a purely functional consideration,
I kept a ton of of my childhood books for my kid, and she has read exactly none of them. FWIW.
She is a voracious reader, but she reads in her own directions.
Or, what 17 said.
Take the books home. then, set them on a distant but accessible shelf in a far corner, and tell the kids they must never, ever, ever look upon them -- or else something terrible, of which you must never speak, will happen. You'll have your obsessive readers in no time.
Kids can mostly acquire their own library
I think this is important; it's fun as a kid to have the sense of discovery that comes with exploring a library or (later) used book stores.
Terry Brooks kind of sucks but they're fun reads for kids. I don't think I'd keep any but the first of the Dune books.
Terry Brooks should have taken the time to change more than one or two letters in a name when he lifted something from Tolkien.
The Dune books after the first really do suck. I finished them up through the ones written by other people because I kept thinking it was going someplace that wasn't pointless. Boy was I wrong.
I mostly agree with 17. I will say that I have [cough] hundreds of my childhood books, and my greatest joy these days is recording them as audio books for my nieces and nephews.
Of course there are plenty that they aren't interested in reading or that aren't worth it, but I've done everything from some Jean Fritz books to a Maida book to Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH. Some of these books are still in print and you could easily buy a physical copy, but many are not.
Plus, there is something fun about having a physical book that your mother/grandmother/aunt once held and wrote her name in.*
*Men too, but I have not a single book from my father's childhood, and only a handful from my (material) grandfather. They include a lovely edition of Hans Brinker, and a pretty good Robin Hood (not Pyle), though.
Maternal grandfather! I don't understand how stupid Safari keeps turning autocorrect on.
I'm pretty sure there's a place where one of the characters in Shannara slips and refers to the Battle of the Pelennor Fields.
Further to 28: I guess I mean that you can't always tell what will resonate with the next generation. I have this book called Silver for General Washington, which (aside from the casual sexism and tone-deaf treatment of the enslaved person) is a rip-roaring Valley Forge adventure story, but I didn't particularly love it as a kid and only held on to it out of habit.
Yet now the sobrinos are completely obsessed with the Revolutionary War and it turns out to be great fun to have a book that mentions things like the Schuylkill River, Lancaster Road (Pike), Gray's Ferry,* etc.
*Back in the day when it still had the apostrophe, even!
My experience pretty much concurs with 23. I've read them lots of my childhood favourites that they wouldn't have bothered with otherwise, but I don't think that makes up for the other dozen or so feet of shelving. I did buy myself another copy of Harriet the Spy with the 'right' cover when mine fell apart when I read it to them, so for a handful of books having a particular one is important. Keep them for you though, not the kids - it's not like the world is going to run out of books.
28: Some of these books are still in print and you could easily buy a physical copy, but many are not.
[Cough] I must say for the record, as I should say every time this comes up: it's not the case that out-of-print books are difficult to find. It really is not.
It's strange to think of the Schuylkill River as something other than the scenery you can't look at because you'll die in a crash because apparently you're the only person on the whole interstate to notice how narrow and crowded the road is.
You monsters. Don't you want bibliophibians?
33: Good point. I should have elaborated and said that you can't always afford to get the out-of-print books. The last three I searched for were $60, $85, and $49, respectively.
We have boxes and boxes of books still packed from our move 18 months ago. Maybe we'll have some shelves built, although that's so low on the priority list it's hard to see it happening in this lifetime. (We did that in our Bethesda house, and it was nice having a library [and then plenty of shelves in the basement for the kids' books etc.]) I had some good discovery time in my parents' book collection when I was a kid -- nothing special, but they were and are readers, mostly of better quality material, so there was plenty to pick over.
31 - going ot, I like the word sobrinos. My lot say sibs or siblings when they refer to each other, so I'd always sort of assumed (when I've thought about the hopefully distant future) that they would use niblings. Anyone know a neat gender-neutral term for aunts and uncles?
Anyone know a neat gender-neutral term for aunts and uncles?
Assholes?
I thought the second Dune book wasn't too bad. The rest were unreadable, though.
On the one hand I can't even begin to contemplate replacing my physical books with electronic versions, on the other hand moving would be so much less of a hassle if I did. Dude.
Unfortunately I could see that catching on easily amongst my children.
36: Good lord. Feel free to let me know which titles they were; I'm curious. I take it you were looking for the original edition rather than a later reprint? Or that there were no later reprints? (I ask because if the book were still in print, you'd be getting a later reprint anyway, which suggests that it's not necessarily important to have the original.)
To be clear, I'm not combative on this: I'm just always curious when people say they can't find something, at least at an affordable price. Many seem to think that if something's out of print, it's just plain disappeared, and it's that that always confounds me.
I believe Terry Brooks was the first person whose books I ever rejected for being badly written. I remember being basically indiscriminate theretofore, and I remember picking up a Shannara book that I returned to the library unfinished.
Is there a hiking boot that's flexible but warm, waterproof but breathable, and affordable but luxuriant?
I have not recently been put to a decision point, but I know that as a teen I wasn't a stickler for keeping books; I once seriously angered my mother by attempting to sell a boxful of Hardy Boys books to a friend.
Migrating a mini-thought from the Kluwe thread:
what's the official Unfogged position on the singular "they" as a gender neutral option?
I'm against it, but I've been shouted down as a prescriptivist (not for the first time!), and anti-prescriptivism seems to be the official Unfogged position. I'm ... working on it.
I talked to a friend about it recently, who observed that he had no problem with it in casual speech, but would never use it in more formal speech and definitely not in writing.
It never occurred to me before: I wonder what my mom did with all my Nancy Drew books. I devoured those things, must have had over 50, maybe close to 100. Not that I want them now. Probably gave them to the library, but she wasn't one for getting rid of things. Maybe she always thought they were kind of stupid in the first place.
144: A friend just got these Merrells (I think, or some very similar ones) for day hikes and seems pleased with them. I know they were light, waterproof and warm but breathable.
I thought Dune stayed pretty good through three books, but I think I read about 6 more.
Am I right that people love Ursula Leguin? I've reduced to a very small pile - maybe 6 bags to one shelf-worth, but I've always believed I was supposed to read her books at some point, so perhaps they should be kept.
I have an abiding appreciation for The Left Hand of Darkness, but I didn't read it until after graduating college.
Keep LeGuin. Also keep Larry Niven's Ringworld series if you have any of that. Also the Lloyd Alexander series. Harriet the Spy, Encyclopedia Brown, Pippi Longstocking.
Judy Blume is probably way outdated and superceded* by more contemporary stuff by now.
I recall that I found the Bobbsey Twins quite absorbing, but that seems ridiculous now. The Little House books? Is all of that too troubled by sexism / what have you by now?
* Spell-check tells me this should be "superseded". Huh.
Singular "they" is obviously just fine. Parsimon, you are behind the times.
Nah, Judy Blume has stood the test of time pretty well. The Little House books are better to read yourself than to read aloud I decided, because then you can skim through the boring bits.
They is better than the alternatives, I think.
I am aware. That not everyone agrees. It just makes me grit my teeth, or, more mildly, roll my eyes, you see. "They" is not singular, no matter how much you might try to explain how it is.
You used to study Wittgenstein, right?
55 to 53.
54: Yeah, Judy Blume is still okay? That's good to know. I was wondering whether there was anything better out there now to help pre-pubescent girls through the changes they're looking at.
46: I would say that the properly prescriptivist position is to allow singular "they" where appropriate (as well as, e.g., splitting infinitives where euphonious and unconfusing.) You can oppose the following of a rule because you oppose rules generally, but you can also oppose it because it wasn't a valid rule to begin with.
Does singular "you" still bother you? Every time you say to an individual "You are..." (even with the falsely plural verb form, agreeing with the plural pronoun) do you die a little inside? If not, there's no need to let singular "they" bother you.
56: Yes indeed. I'm not sure how that's relevant, and you would have to explain.
50: I'd keep Le Guin. Particularly, if you're thinking about your kids, the Wizard of Earthsea/Tombs of Atuan/Farthest Shore, which are excellent older kid/YA books, of the kind that I'd still reread with pleasure now if I ran into a copy unexpectedly and had an hour to kill.
The assertion that "they" just isn't singular amuses me in that connection. Does it bear its essential plurality within itself, somehow?
59: I ... uh. Is singular "you" a problem? Isn't "you" both singular and plural? I thought so. When did that become the case? Was "you" once strictly plural? If so, I had no idea!
62: Oh, buh. Fine. Soon I'll introduce "it" as plural or something, then see how you like it.
64: Thou used to study Wittgenstein, right?
(Explanation: one wouldn't expect a student of Wittgenstein to think these things are up to one person's decisions.)
63: Hadn't you noticed that it takes a plural verb form? The grammatical second person singular, if you're going to be a stickler about it, is thou/thee/thine, all of which take singular verbs, like the truly singular pronouns they are.
Using "you" as a singular is a modern innovation.
You know that Wittgenstein wasn't *against* grammar, and didn't think it was a total toss-up.
Allow me to propose "dude" as a substitute for the singular "they".
66: Huh. I hadn't considered. How interesting! Unfortunately I'm away now for a bit.
68: Some people seem to think that about him, babe, that's all, and it's not true. That's pretty inside baseball, though, and neither here nor there with respect to singular "they". Wittgenstein has nothing to do with this.
||
LB, is Darling Coffee in Inwood good? I'm in Washington Heights for the weekend & need somewhere to read and preferably have good coffee.
|>
It's perfectly respectable. Also two blocks away from my house -- if you want dinner, we're having curry around seven.
So you guys are really proposing:
Singular:
I
you
he/she/it they
Plural:
we
you
they
Let me observe, parsimon, that 74 is remarkably stupid.
No one thinks that the currently existing stock of singular third-person pronouns should be jettisoned. (I suspect that even proponents of zir or whatever are willing to retain "it".) People think that "they" is also an acceptable singular third-person pronoun.
It would be great if there were an observable difference between your teasing and your earnest comments.
I am entirely unruffled by liberal use of "they", but will second parsimon in the case of Lloyd Alexander. He doesn't appear to be involved in the matter at hand, but I think I've noticed that his star's generally fallen and the memories I have of the Prydain Chronicles are fond but not clear enough to speculate about why. Is there some generally acknowledged reason?
I tried to work a reference to beetles in boxes into 78, but not very hard.
Did I manage to troll Unfogged with a grammer question?
Awesome.
I'm agnostic on Lloyd Alexander, but I concur that, as YA fiction, LeGuin's Earthsea trilogy has stood the test of time.
MAD as in Mad Magazine, as in those cheap paperback reprint dealies one used to buy at the drug store? Garbage. Total garbage.
Burn the Godfather books lest the children develop strange ideas about vaginas.
The first Dune is great. The second is incoherent and the third is weird and boring. I've never gotten past that and I'm sort of glad to know I shouldn't push farther and expect better results.
Did I manage to troll Unfogged with a grammer question?
Nice try!
Nice try!
We're talking grammar; I never claimed to know how to spell!
Books from Brooks' Magic Kingdom series are basically the only books I can recall my not-bookish older brother reading in his entire childhood.
I include orthography as part of grammar.
73: Thank you for the invitation, I probably have to decline because I'm with 2 other people for dinner, one of whom has particular dietary needs. But consider the invitation reciprocated next time you (w/ or w/out the family) are in DC.
Probably going to end up at Buunni for coffee since it doesn't require a subway ride from where I am.
what's the official Unfogged position on the singular "they" as a gender neutral option?
Singular they is totally fine. Indeed, the opposite stance can often be absurd or incredibly awkward. See Language Log passim for evidence.
Am I right that people love Ursula Leguin?
Yes. At a minimum, The Dispossessed, The Left Hand Of Darkness and The Lathe Of Heaven are all fantastic. I haven't actually read Earthsea, but it's very well liked.
Mom: if your father dies suddenly in the next few years, I imagine I'll die within 18 months.
Cheery thought! It's becoming increasingly clear that their stance has changed over the past year. A year ago, a doctor told my mom that my dad could count on living one year, and she went into a frantic tailspin and started asking each of us to come out and sort through the house.
Dad got some sort of heart data recorder, and the data is showing that his heart is totally fine, and her panic has receded. Also it sounds like she and my dad have gotten their stories straight about when they want to move near one of us - the answer now is "not until we have to go into a nursing home."
So in all, mom abruptly no longer cares so much if I don't take stuff this instant. Which is good and bad. I'm going through my bedroom and getting rid of a tremendous amount of junk, and the stuff that's sentimental doesn't need to come to texas urgently.
Glad your dad is more OK than previously thought. Also, relieved on your behalf that the moving-near-children isn't imminent! It is a strange process - not near you is kind of insulting but near you means so much more responsibility! Hope they both last many, many more years.
My parents insisted I take everything that was "mine" when I started grad school. I got rid of everything except books and clothes that fit. My sister's room, however, is a strange time capsule from 2002 complete with perfectly preserved clutter (not on the floor or anything, but messy closets and shelves). They've never insisted despite the fact that SHE HAS A HOUSE. I kind of want to box it all and ship it to her.
Soon I'll introduce "it" as plural or something, then see how you like it.
Don't you mean "then see how you like them"?
90.1, 90.2 -- !!!
Glad it's not as feared.
Expanding a bit on my position above, I think the bar for keeping a book from your parents/childhood is higher than if it is arguably a good read*. Your self-image and credibility is also at stake. And this not pure vanity; will yur kids listen to admonitions on drinking and driving from someone who lept around their copy of Dune Messiah?
*But do agree with keeping some questionable stuff getting pn grounds of eclecticism or what have you.
will yur kids listen to admonitions on drinking and driving from someone who lept around their copy of Dune Messiah?
Come! Dance with us around the paperback! Yes! Leap, leap! Be free! Don't drink and drive!
I agree with all the people who say the default should be to get rid of books. Only keep the ones with sentimental value or that you might want to read in the near future. Guessing what your kids might want to read is probably not worth the trouble.
(not on the floor or anything, but messy closets and shelves).
Does not compute.
Darn it, now the person with allergies cancelled & it looks like I turned down a home cooked meal for no reason :| Does anyone else in NYC want to have an impromptu dinnertime meetup?
||
Finding this strangely compelling:
One Year of Descriptive Phrases from New York Times Obituary Headlines: 2013
Spanish Film's Shepherd
Sharp Judge of N.B.A. Talent
Architect of Counterculture
Exposed a Jewish Klansman
Seen as Modern Art Master
|>
98: Bummer, and the curry turned out pretty good too.
I recall that I found the Bobbsey Twins quite absorbing
It's spelt "Boobsey"
As a kid, I was a voracious reader of the crappiest middlebrow grownup books I could get my hands on. Coffee-table books on classic cars, World War II, dogs, horses. Out-of-date Time/Life-ish science and geography. The Harvard Classics poetry anthologies, which made my parents laugh at me, and not in a kind way. Ray Bradbury paperbacks in poor condition. "An Incomplete Education" by Jones and Wilson. The only age-appropriate books I recall my parents handing down were the Chronicles of Narnia (likewise, yellow and disintegrating paperbacks).
102 is great. I read my grandparents' books, including some prize books from the late 1800s -- lots of Tennyson and Longfellow. Possibly Maria Edgeworth, though I think I'm retconning that. I don't know how I'd apply that pleasure to Terry Brooks, but I like imagining what the heebie-geebie grandchildren would make of it.
OT: I don't want to toot my own horn too much, but I made the TV news as a bystander. I'm standing with my head between the I and T of "Exit".
I'll try not to let it go to my head.
I'll try not to let it go to my head.
No worries. The news guy said that helmet rentals are free.
Local Man Appears in Background of Local News Broadcast
Isn't that more or less how Pamela Anderson was discovered?
Darling Coffee was one of the very few things I liked about Inwood.
So I guess at this point we can definitively conclude that heebie is in fact the only one who misses external cell phone antennae.
I's better than making the news for your participation in a gangland slaying.
110: in the old long-wave days there used to be a condition called "yuppie ear" where you grabbed your phone when it rang in the middle of the night and, in the darkness and confusion, rammed the end of the antenna into your ear canal.
Also I found $110 in a childhood bank, including a $50 bill that my grandfather slipped me once during dinner, when I was about eight.
my pre-pubescent and pubescent daughters like judy blume a lot. the first three dune books are worth keeping but only if you're the book-keeping sort, otherwise just keep the first. keep all the ursula k. leguin, all the larry niven that is not co-written with jerry pournelle (v.v. important) likewise all the arthur c. clarke not co-written with gentry lee, the first godfather book is weird and sexist but I just don't know what you're going for here. is it like: read this! or more: our house will be full of infinity yellowed paperbacks, find one! just today I saw my 12-year-old wandering all around the apartment staring speculatively at all the shelves. terry brooks bites ween as noted. westerns: sort of a mysterious stupid genre from when people were more bored, but fascinating in their way. I've read a lot because I wandered around my grandfather's house looking for everything remotely interesting to read. god we just moved from our tall beautiful house with its own pool and its white floors and beautiful kitchens to...well, to a 4 +maid's room apartment on the 26th floor with a really nice view and hella pools and gym equipment. fuck whatever. I loved that house. I promised I wouldn't complain after we moved, only before, and I have been as good as my word, except for one day. and now but y'all don't count.
but there's only one closet even big enough for the suitcases to go in, know what I mean? and I let my husband get rid of half our books without me looking and I still had to buy 4 billy shelves and 3 expedit ones where the books are double-stacked on one side and the LPs on the other, and I still have a nice 2-yard sq (but slender) oak bookshelf and 2 tall industrial style ones and where are my christmas ornaments going to go? aaaah fuck. the apartment is fine. I still have boxes in my bedroom though. tomorrow the girls and I have goals: mommy's going to start reading naruto, and we are going to get rid of these motherfucking boxes.
the larry niven that is not co-written with jerry pournelle (v.v. important) likewise all the arthur c. clarke not co-written with gentry lee
QFT. This cannot be emphasised strongly enough.
Sooo... Liking God Emperor isn't cool anymore? It's like the young kids' guide to Nietzsche!
westerns: sort of a mysterious stupid genre from when people were more bored, but fascinating in their way
Apt to have weird psychosexual fallout, though.
102: I thought An Incomplete Education was hilarious.
I have a few prize copies of Oxford Classical Texts from rando public schools. My Pearson Sophocles is filled with the boyish notes of a man who would go on to edit his own edition.
Re. throwing away books - When we were little, an elementary school near my house closed down, and my parents basically raided their library. As a result, we had a ton of books always, and they were pretty random -- we had like five biographies of John Paul Jones, a bunch of kids' science experiment books from the 1950s, etc. I ended up reading a lot of things I would never have picked out at the library, just because they were around. I think it was pretty great.
We also had a ton of super-inappropriate-for-kids paperbacks, with the result that I read a lot of Joseph Wambaugh when I was ten or eleven. Even crappy paperbacks can be pretty fun, if you're young enough.
I came here thinking mom had a well-defined plan and had set aside the parts that demanded my presence, which would therefore be very emotional items. It turns out mom is overwhelmed and disorganized (uncharacteristically) and a better thing is for me to keep organized lists and form a plan. And I'm not finding it stressful at all, but I do think I should come out and chip away at their stuff every six months until the house is under control. We've spent most of today working on my brothers' rooms.
Oh good, three shelves of a droppings-riddled stamp collection.
Oh good, three shelves of a droppings-riddled stamp collection.
Great! To the dumpster.
Or donate it to the local center for the study of philthately.
I actually cleaned them up and put them in a plastic storage box, and I'm trying to convince mom to give them to a friend who puts things on eBay. Mom is unconvinced. I labeled the box "stamp collection - not sentimental" at least.