Thread 24607555

>someone posts an image of a book
>hurr you havent read it because its not damaged beyond repair and the spine doesnt have 13 extremely deep creases down the spine
are you people apes? almost none of the books i've read have any visible damage

>>24607555 (OP)
do you look like that?

>>24607555 (OP)
samuel johnson said books are to be used, not preserved like relics. tear out pages, annotate them, skip to the middle, fold corners, read the good bits again and again until the paper frays.
you can read how you like. most people with real feeling for literature have enormous appetites and consume books ruthlessly. some only read on the train & in bed.

>>24607555 (OP)
>he calls spine creases 'damage'. Nonreader detected

>>24607558
yes

>>24607555 (OP)
Meta threads are lazy—contribute something of value. Yes my books have creases yes or no if I they are very new wow, incredible.

>>24607592
wanna talk on disc? I'm a schizo.

>>24607555 (OP)
every book i have ever read at least once has minor spine damage, and i am very gentle with books.

>>24607555 (OP)
As far as most of my books go, mine are all in almost the same condition they were when I purchased them. The only exception are larger volumes, which tend to have minor creases on the spine.

>>24607585
>>24607899
You can easily prevent spine damage and it only takes 1 minute. The book will become unbreakable except for the passing if time.

>>24607555 (OP)
What's the point of owning books if you don't own them?
>I bought this with my hard-earned money
>I can now do whatever I want with it
>treat it as if I don't even own it
Cucked way of thinking. Be proud you own something and own it.

>>24607555 (OP)
Lot of poors on this board.

As >>24610493 pointed out, why are people ITT carving out a weird exception for books when it comes to their possessions? If I have a car, I’m not going to ding it up on purpose, especially when easily avoided, and not even if it would only be superficial damage.
This isn’t even about having pride in one’s stuff, necessarily, just that it’s a weird attitude. It’s as though, as literate people, we’re prone to putting an especially high premium on books as objects. Such thinking can become obsessive, call it Quixotic if you like, but it’s equally obsessive to create a special exception for books where it’s both good and proper to damage them. Ladies protesting too much, or something.

>>24607555 (OP)
if my books start to go bad, I just buy new ones

>>24611120
that's the opposite of what >>24610493 pointed out.
a lot of (i guess young) men don't look after their cars. you just run it into the ground then get a new one,

>>24611136
Reading comprehension.
>Cucked way of thinking
Was his point about the position of
>I can do whatever i want with it
and the others.

>>24611140
did you miss something? that's exactly wrong.

>>24611140
I'm the (You) and you're retarded. I'm disagreeing with OP because he's retarded too. If you own something, own it. Don't treat it like a museum exhibition or a library copy. Mark it up, tear it apart, piss on it, deface it, sell it, fuck it, suck it. Books have basically zero resale value. Zero point in "preserving" them.
>but but but my edition is so pretty it's embossed cover and gilded edges and a ribbon bookmar-
People who think like that ^ are not serious readers and should be ignored.

>>24611170
>be a nigger
great advice

>>24611183
NTA but isn’t
>oh I bought this honky tonk printing press book here, ooh la la better look after it
more of a poor mindset than a bourgeoisie one

>>24607555 (OP)
Aren't all people apes if Darwin is to be believed?

>>24607656
ew fuck off weird faggot