So, There I was at work, plucking away at an XML app thingy, when Miriam IMs me out of the blue. This happens all the time, of course; and it's worth mentioning that Miriam sits about ten feet away from me, that I can look up at her, open my mouth, and in a normal Indoor Voice have a conversation with her. Sometimes IM is just the more appropriate choice. There's a whole blog in that, I think, somewhere in the back of my mind. Anyway...
Miriam:
if you were on a date, and you went back to someone's house for coffee (or at a dinner party, whatever) and found that they had organized their bookshelves by color, what would you think?
Pete:
hmmm
Pete:
Firstly, that they weren't colorblind. This might go to further assurance that they were not, in fact, post-operative.
Pete:
: )
Pete:
But seriously. Hmmmmm.
Pete:
It would be a flag, for me to look for other things. my guess is that people who do such things are looking to control aspects of their life that are easy to get ahold of, as a reaction to other ( huge-er ) areas of their life that they feel are beyond their control
Pete:
That would not bode well, for the starting romance.
Miriam:
How would your opinion contrast about a person who used Dewey or Library of Congress' systems?
Pete:
It would change only in the order of magnitude I would be looking for... not the general theme. Someone who organizes along those lines ( instead of color ) probably is sharper, and has more depth... this might be great, but then their problems are going to be huge-er-er, as such people might generally be better at taking care of these things. So if they're out of control, that might be way-bad.
Pete:
And none of that is a given, of course... but it would alert me to be on the lookout.
Pete:
More then usual.
Miriam:
Ok, so it's the level of precision/control that's jarring, as opposed to "logical system" vs "flakey system"
Pete:
Most of the time, yea
Miriam:
�Foucault..... yes that book is in the periwinkle shelf�
Pete:
Unless their personal library is so large, as to merit that sort of thing.
Miriam:
O_o
Pete:
Most of the time, that's not the case
Miriam:
Ok, so lets say the set up isn't DD/LOC vs. color, but "subject" vs. color - what do you think then?
Pete:
Organizing by subject is less a flag, maybe not a flag at all... I'd see that as the default. Just an organized person... on par with no organization, and my flag-looking wouldn�t be raised to an increased level.
Miriam:
Gotcha
Miriam:
Question inspired by http://ask.metafilter.com/mefi/31462
Miriam:
This, however, is by far my favorite answer: "Imagine your books are persons. Then arrange them according to the conversations they could have with their neighbors."
Pete:
Ha!
Pete:
I would need to already be �very- close with my sweetie, for her to reveal that little tidbit to me and not have it set off warning bells
Pete:
: )
Miriam:
rofl
Miriam:
I think it was meant as a joke
Miriam:
The color thing sets alarm bells off to me
Pete:
I'd be sooooooo tempted to hold up a given book, and do a bit of exploratory fucking-with... "So, if this book were talking, what would it be saying, honey...?"
Pete:
Color is kind of a lazy-person's way of doing it, I'd think. Obvious and something that you could do from your medulla, not yer cerebrum.
Pete:
But it would hint at bigger things, possibly, as I said.
Pete:
But, also like I mentioned, that's assuming the library didn't, in fact, rate a classification system.
Miriam:
It�s a funny thing; it's organized, yes, but in a mostly useless fashion
Pete:
Right
Pete:
There�s no meta-game, there.
Miriam:
I knew someone who had their books organized by PUBLISHER
Pete:
Eeeeks
Miriam:
lol
Pete:
I would be hearing reactor-emergency class warnings in my head, there.
Miriam:
Like, the person who organized by color, would be the same one who would answer, "spaghetti" if you asked them what was the difference between Jesus and the Buddha...
Pete:
lol Indeed. "How very cute. But no, really...?"
Miriam:
Exactly
Miriam:
Or, the one person I've seen in the wild that did the color thing? A _COMPLETELY_ unimaginative, dull, dreary little bitch, and I always read it as her way to be "look how kooky! I can be..."
Pete:
Ha! Well, there is that, too. It could just be someone striking out, doing something -crazy-
Pete:
Also a matter meriting a bit of attention, if this is them being "whacky"
Miriam:
Right
Pete:
The must be a -terror- on the dance floor, after a few mai tais
Miriam:
Ugh
Miriam:
I don't even want to THINK about ( that girl ) on the dance floor
...and so on. Yea, I know. I am not a trained psychologist... but niether am I offering up testimony as to the mental state of someone in a felony trial. Just my opinion, and an off the cuff one at that.
But then in Usability Nerd fashion, I started to consider the idea. I guess my own library is organized loosely by subject, with a smattering of frequency dictating placement as well. The books I use all the time are close at hand, the ones I don't maybe on the bottom shelf. Also, some minute consideration ( like, for a few seconds at the most ) given to the size of the book.
Don't want the books' sizes interfering with my ability to get at them. -That- would just be crazy.
: )
In a ( very ) mini poll around the office, again aesthetics reared its head in how people organized their lives; one of the more popular answers was somethign along the lines of how the books looked: ratty books are not generally kept in the living room, or next to the fine china.
No comments:
Post a Comment