Handling Your Household Library
12.13.07 By Derek DahlsadAs we’ve mentioned before, the Wifey and I read by osmosis. Oh, we do read the traditional way, but owning is that first step to actually acquiring the knowledge bound within the pages 
on our shelves. Organized? Of course not. Here’s how we started: Wifey’s books on one set of shelves, mine on another. Then a couple bookshelves were added, and books were taken out of storage. Then we bought more books. Then we added shelves. Then we rearranged the rooms. Then we added shelves…et cetera, and so forth, and etcetera forth. There IS a rough organization, where general subjects — feminism, sci-fi, business, graphic design — are clumped together, but I couldn’t tell you what we’ve got or where it’s at.
In fact, we recently attended a book sale, a time when knowing what’s already on our shelves would be an asset. See, as frugal shoppers we went on the last day, during the last advertised hour or so. The big local used-book-sellers were lined around the edge, waiting for the quiet signal: after 2:30, the per-book-sale became a bag-sale. The resellers were waiting like vultures for the final gasp of breath, waiting for the last of the readers to pass by the books that final time, so they could swoop in and take the rest away at pennies a copy. Of course, everybody gets grabby pretty quick — so, if we knew what we’d already owned, we wouldn’t have wasted time on yet another copy of Dick Gregory’s From The Back Of The Bus or a James Blish’s Star Trek adaptation that’s not one of the ones I’m missing. Sure, when it works out to two cents a book, it’s not a horrible loss — but where in the world will we put them?
Last year, someone with a similar problem turned to the geek world for help: he asked Slashdot how to best organize and sort his and his wife’s personal library. Once you get past the snark and humor (telling which is which is tough), there’s quite a few good suggestions. The amateur librarian took the best solutions he was given, and applied it to his library. His rules for the home library are as follows:
- It needs to be easy to find a book.
- It needs to be easy to add a book to the system.
- The systems needs to handle foreign language books.
- It needs to be easy to maintain the system going forward.
- The initial cataloging effort can’t take forever.
Ah, if only I could have such high goals! While I’m not Collectors’ Quest’s resident library-expert, it seems that taking cues from modern libraries is the key: use barcodes, organize by tried-and-true structures (the guy above used the Library of Congress’ method), and stick with 
whatever you decide to do. It sounds like the library-questing guy and his wife are primarily non-fiction-readers, which lends well to the LOC method of organization; Dewey Decimal might be best for fiction lovers, or maybe take notes on how Barnes & Noble does their shelving. If you’re a collector of old books, you may be out of luck when it comes to using ISBNs and barcodes to speed along your cataloging. Using software to catalog the books, of course, only matters if you can shelve them in a findable way — invest in good shelves, lest you start stacking and double-rowing your books like we have. Still, the 5 Rules do not rely on ISBNs, Libraries of Congresses, computers, or zebra stripes — it’s a matter of willpower.
Ah, willpower. How much smaller would our collection of books be if we had some willpower? There’s a Catch-22 in that — if we had the willpower to organize, we’d have the willpower to resist buying so many books and have less of a critical need for library organization. Whether or not we own a copy of Catch 22, I couldn’t tell you. Wifey thinks we own somewhere between zero and ten copies, which is a reasonable estimate; one of these days we’ll narrow it down a bit, when we get to cataloging our library.
Gotta Collect? Then You Gotta Connect - Join our Collectors’ Community!
---
Article Tags: books, catalog, librarian, library, maintenance, organization, Slashdot, storage================
Gotta Collect? Then You Gotta Connect - Join our Collectors’ Community!
December 13th, 2007 at 10:25 am
I must comment, as the resident library expert : the Dewey Decimal system is not used for fiction, only nonfiction. While there’s a section WITHIN the dewey decimal system that houses classic fiction, it’s all lumped in the 800s more by era or general genre than topic. The LOC system drives me crazy.
The best way to organize fiction is alphabetical by author, if you wanna go the modern library way of doing it.
Even more disturbing is that at least two libraries have thrown out the Dewey Decimal system and have set up their floors like Barnes & Noble, grouping books together with even broader generalizations than ever. You want a Japanese Cookbook? Go look at every single cookbook in the section, and good luck, because it’s not at a very specific number anymore. HERESY!
December 13th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Ah, I thought that alphabetically-by-author’s-name was a Dewey Decimal thing for fiction; that’s how every Dewey-Decimal library I’ve been in has looked. I, too, dislike the LOC system; it seems like similar topics are scattered about more than DD does — plus, in public school we had DD drilled into us, only to get to college and find out that the library is no longer arranged how we’d expect. But for a library to switch to a bookstore type layout? Very interesting…numerical organization is for looking things up in a catalog and finding the book easily, or being able to stand in front of a shelf and have all similar books grouped closely together. Those libraries seem to have adjusted for browsers — I hate to blame the internet for anything, but I suppose libraries are seeing less targeted research and more stack-wandering, due to easy access to internet information repositories.
December 13th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Well, right now I’m planning a lottery win, followed by manor home, followed by very large room with many bookshelves! I’d just keep them in order of topic followed by author…
As for being “easy to find”, personally, I like a BIT of a hunt… hence by “topic” followed by author.
December 13th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Nah, Dewey didn’t account for fiction besides the chunk in the 800s, which is way too general to accommodate a smart & quick way to find what you need. He was much more concerned with cataloging facts over fiction. Plus, who would want to send the Danielle Steel posse into the midst of BOOKS ABOUT REAL THINGS? I can see the battle brewing now.
The alphabetical-by-author thing is a pretty standard practice - but it exists completely independent of Dewey. No decimal, no Dewey! I don’t even know if it has a name.
Of course, all I need to do to catalogue my junk is look at which superhero stars in it.
December 13th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
My shelves are by topic/subject, but I’ve not even attempted by author or any other organization… I think the reasons are #1 Time, #2 like Matthew I like a bit of a hunt or browsing experience, and #3 tend to be a visual finder.
(Like most wives & mommies, we can find nearly anything we’ve seen; I get a little photo image in my head and I know where it is by it’s proximity to other things.)