You're triggering /lit/
extra science shit that didn't fit in the textbooks case
i could tell by the collection of scientific books...everything real STEM people read is either in a textbook or a academic journal, it's not philosophy where something that's 2000 years old is just as "valid" as something from 20 years ago...that's how you can tell philosophy is a failed project, you have to start with 2500 year old writers...isn't it good physicists and doctors don't have to waste time starting with the greeks?
>organize your books just to post them on lit
Fuck the police
it is good. The vast majority of my books are scientific text books and the vast majority of what I read on a day-to-day basis is academic journals. Just thought these small collections were more worth posting here. Literature and philosophy for me is mostly just a self indulgent escape.
read The Razor's Edge first. If you love it (as any decent human should) and you want to get to know Maugham better, read Of Human Bondage. I found it drags a bit but it's exemplary English prose.
I don't actually know how people can have the likes of Burkowski and Vonnegut on their shelves and not feel the shame radiating off.
>The Simpsons and Philsophy
Thanks for sharing, I guess.
Wow bondage so edgy! But everyone should have FLP
I have a feeling you liked Walden a lot more than me. I'm not very philo strong
I'm glad you like this stuff because someone has to. Politics murders me
Why so Statistics based, OP?
I organize them because I'm not messy and like organization, not to show off.
The first post was CLEARLY mocking the OP.
Thanks for your critique
It's one of those floating frog mirror illusions. I bet you have seen it before.
Also the space is an illusion, my room is cramped as fuck until I move.
I liked it, why would I throw it out? Not everything you read has to be the next literary classic. Besides, I'm not using my bookshelf to show off, only to store my books in a way people have been doing since books were a thing.
Those on the other hand yea, it's been almost 10 years since I read them, but who am I to deny my youth? I liked them then and it's not like they're AWFUL now.
>I'm not using my bookshelf to show off, only to store my books in a way people have been doing since books were a thing.
What part of storing them includes the photo op and uploading the droppings to 4chan?
The thread was there? I like looking at threads like this to see how people organize their things and for ideas for what to read. You probably only view it as a materialism/power level sort of thing. Difference of opinion and values I suppose.
Ham on Rye is GOAT, stop trying to fit in, you faggot.
New stuff that's not in the other pictures. Sabato, Soseki and Simenon were completely free~
>The Simpsons and Philosophy
>Russel's history of western phil
>Wealth of Nations
>Only the Communist Manifesto and not any of the other much more important works from M&E
even more disgusting. You get 2/10
I love De Bolsillo, wish I could find them more easily.
Rest of stuff is either OK but not my favs or stuff I don't know / don't plan to read, 7/10
I absolutely hate those B&N (or whatever they are) hard covers with the fucking drawings in them, kitsch as fuck (and not in a good way)
Dude, I'm sorry, but it's very hard to believe you read a lot of those books. Even if you don't crack the spine, stuff like Penguin Modern Classics or Vintage classics tend to get grimy when handled.
Good books though, you'll have fun when you read them;
Can't r8 what I can't read. Nice legos tho, wish I had the money to buy me some
Why do you have two Ulysses?
Yea, only Dracula, Monte Cristo and Holmes are from the B&N sets but I don't think I'll get any more. I thought they would be fine since they are cheap but aside from how the book binding feels after a read, they are SATURATED in typos. Would not recommend, even ignoring your aesthetic dislike with them.
Wow I didn't get a good look at those science textbooks the first twelve times you posted this, good job.
Not my whole bookshelf, just stuff I want to read next.
What do you recommend?
i recommend replaces your books with non shitty editions, cunt whore.
Whe did you decided to start with this relentless shitposting? Do you have some sort of browser script that warns you whenever aquisitions / shelf threads are started or do you just hang around /li/ all day waiting to post those shitty paperbacks like they're some hot shit along with your Whitehouse vinyl?
b-but my "shitty paperpacks" really are hot shit though...
older books don't look like literal fucking garbage though.
This is now a vintage paperbacks thread
This is the only Penguin Classics 1st edition I've got.
L111 - 1961 for $6
I got this mint condition #48 for $3, they had 2 more Forester modern classics but they were fuck ugly.
got these not to long ago, they were $6 each.
Posted these at Christmas, updated pics as I’ve acquired a few since then. Plenty of these are unread, I buy about 3 times faster than I read.
In some cases I also buy books I’ve already read from the library (if I see them very cheap in charity shops). E.g., I’ve read Middlemarch, but my copy looks unread, whereas I’ve never read Felix Holt but the book has a broken spine. Sorry /lit/ spine detectives.
bedside penguin classics. I collect these are well as read them.
currently reading the sophocles
poetry (that isn't penguin classic or OUP) and war
old oxford classics, got the whole lot cheap (~£10) after a book sale. Only read a couple of them.
military history with a few others mixed in. Don't use these much now, mostly from my teens.
mixed overflow paperbacks as i've run out of space and am too lazy to sort things properly …
more misc stuff with extra philosophy and 'theory'
frog isn't lego, the blocks are about 1/4 the size. Waterstones UK were selling them near Christmas.
Most of my lego is boxed away, don't have space for books and lego. Pic related – tfw having to choose between lego star destroyer and more bookshelf space
>Do you work in the business?
'work' is a lose term, phd student. Got a few more books on graphic communication, visual language, etc scattered about as i'm using them for research.
my wondercabinet of pretensions
some sentimental faves:
-1st ed. Hemingway
-gilded 1881 ed. of Poe's "Bells"
-signed complet set of Ken Kesey's Merry Prankster "Spit in the Ocean"
-1890-something Tennyson collection given as a wedding gift with pressed wedding flowers
File's are too big. Rats. Well here's my Aleister Crowley library at least.
I would have happily shown my other pictures but the file sizes are too big. So much for variety.
yes, that is an entire row of harry potter books
the really awful shit is in a second row behind the books on the front
Pretty often actually. A few are reference books, some are things I like to re-read, others I just like to look at. I enjoy them for intellectual, tactile and aesthetic reasons, not because of what they're worth (which, to be honest, isn't very much.).
Tons and tons and tons of people do this.
I've spoken to many people when the conversations come up about reading, they'll have huge bookshelves covered in books they've never read and only pull out one or two to mention them.
Ask them about any others and they're "getting" to those.
On the internet, no one can call you on bullshit, hence why these threads work where they really wouldn't irl
>local thrift store has shit loads of books
>most of them have yellow pages and when you touch them there's dust or something stuck on your fingers
>most of them look like ass
>some of them are taped up
>there's nothing fucking decent
>it's all "New York Best Sellers!"
The only thing i got was a Discworld novel and that's because it was free.
>Taylor's Classical Mechanics
>Blanchard Devaney & Hall
my nig. used both of those in my mathematical physics class in undergrad. taylor was especially good (dat cover)
i also used Knight's Physics on your bottom shelf. I'd assume we went to the same school except you have Thomas' calculus.
David "MacDaddy" McAvity ring a bell?
Not him, but I'll take a crack at why.
Bukowski is easy; he's often adored by teenagers and tends to be liked by teenagers exiting their edgy phase and entering their more philosophical yet angsty "independent" phase.
Vonnegut, if I had to guess, is bad because of his incessant "wit" in his writing. He's also popular amongst high schoolers.
The cover of Taylor is excellent, but I found myself often needing to supplement the book content out of Marion, which a professor was nice enough to give me after I graduated.
Not sure who McAvity is but if my quick Google search was correct, you live in the same state as me. Could have something to do with it. (PNACP?)
You could say that. I'm not a fundamentalist Thelemite but I see lots of value in Crowley's work, as you can see.
Thanks. I wondered if anybody here would appreciate it. Crowley's work seems perpetually under-appreciated by all but a very few. It took years and persistence to put it together. Some of them are still expensive even when you find a steep discount.
Some people have the capacity for the type of thought that is needed to appreciate Crowley, others lack that capacity. I can always find something new in Crowley that I previously hadn't seen. His work is much like a fractal; his corpus becomes deeper and more complicated but also more rewarding the deeper you go because its all interconnected.
Crowley was not a hand-holder as a writer. You either get it or you don't and Crowley could care less. He is indulgent, but in an interesting way because he was such a fascinating person.
If you're not into English and Philosophy as subjects then I would say avoid Crowley. If you enjoy these subjects, and are patient, and haven't been completely brainwashed by monolithic academia, give Crowley a chance.
Crowley's reputation is hurt by his most serious fans; if you have met a few you know what I mean. I have found that many of these types who claim to love Crowley have actually read very little. They are like the Goth kids in South Park; they follow their little flock, small and silly.
>organizing your bookshelf like an exhibition
Are you mentally impaired?
I tend to only buy those that have to do with research I'm doing at that moment. While that does mean most of them were published the past decade, I buy lots of older works relevant to whatever subject I'm looking into too.
Not that I've even bought them all. I work in a literature field and receive a lot of books through other means.