I’m sitting here looking around at my bookshelves and I don’t like what I see. Granted, I just emptied all the books out of their storage boxes and put them on shelves with no regard to order.
Now, my anal retentive nature is getting the better of me. Everything else in the room that can be put in order, has been (except the DVD’s which have outgrown their allotted space, but new shelves go up this weekend).
The biggest problem with books is size. Some are tall. Some are short. Some are wide. Some are narrow (damn you, Letterman Top Ten books!). Some are combinations of the above.
My organizational tendancy is to arrange them (without regard to subject) by height and then width. The bigger books would go on the bottom with the books getting shorter as they go up. This is mainly a weight balance thing, really. I don’t want to be crushed by an avalanche of knowledge.
I have three six-foot & two three-foot bookcases that feature a fixed shelf in the middle while the others can be set to whatever height I want. I may have to get another three-foot unit since I don’t have room for a six-footer.
It’s going to be a PITA, but I cannot stand it anymore! Since I have Friday and Monday off, I’m gonna do it.
Almost all of my books are in storage until I can make a library (which will happen fairly soon, now that I’m buying a house). But I’m still getting my Easton Press books. I have them separated into to science fiction series and the 100 Greatest Books series, and they are alphabetical by author.
When I get my library, they will be separated into leather bound and non-leather bound. There will be sections within the divisions for science fiction and fantasy, classics, reference, non-fiction Naval, non-fiction Aviation (some crossover there), Western, war studies, etc. I’ll group the magazines together, and I’ll have a section for the pulp paperbacks (again, separated by subject and ordered by author).
Isn’t Easton Press da bomb? I have their Arthur Conan Doyle set and a couple other things…maybe the Federalist Papers, or something like that.
I don’t have much of an organization at all. I have three six by three foot bookcases, which are about 80% full. Much of that is taken up by reference and computer books, the rest, mostly on the right-hand side, by fiction and classics and whatnot.
I don’t arrange my library to be visually pleasing, but for ease in locating books.
Currently, I have the fiction on one side of the room, and the non-fiction on the other. The fiction is simply arranged alphabetically, with a seperate section for the classics.
The non-fiction is broken down by type: sociology, history, science, biography, etc. Biographies are alphabetical by subject. History is shelved in chronological order, then alphabetized by author. Sociology and cultural studies are loosely grouped by subject, then alphabetized, as is science.
First by subject matter/genre. Then alphabetically by author. For each author, either by title alphabetically or chronologically if it’s a series.
At least, that was the plan when I refilled my bookcases after having my living room recarpeted. (BTW, a little red Radio Flyer wagon is great for moving book cartons from room to room.) Of course, since then I’ve bought more books, and once read, they’re tucked horizontally on top of my previously shelved books, as close to author-alphabetical as I can manage.
As to height: mostly I buy paperbacks, so they’re pretty much of a size. My hardbounds go on the lower shelves, which messes up the alphabeticizing some but anchors the bookcases. That’s the setup in my two glassfront bookcases; things are somewhat less organized in the smaller three-shelver and the ancient revolving bookstand. But those hold the more eclectic stuff and the oversize hardbounds.
My pride and joy is a ten-shelf poplar-wood bookcase I had custom made, with adjustable shelves that I specifically requested could be set up for paperbacks. The bottom two shelves are hardbound-height; the rest are perfect for paperbacks, without all that wasted space that conventional bookcases have. The woodworker who made it anchored it to the wall when he delivered it, so the cats can’t pull it over.
Of course, now that I’ve filled it, I’ve had to go back to regular bookcases – got three overflow assemble-them-yourself waist-high cases partially filled on the second floor. When will the madness end?
I group books my subject generally: science fiction, fantasy, mysteries, classics, non-fiction, and miscelaneous other. Within any given subject, I just throw them on the shelf randomly. Since I currently have fewer than one-hundred books total, finding any one isn’t difficult. Since I intend to continue acquiring new ones throughout my life, I rather imagine that I’ll eventually have enough to justify arranging them alphabetically within each subject.
My books are basically grouped by genre: I have two bookcases filled with my cookbooks/food history books, a case with all our non-fiction, and the case in our bedroom has all our books on spiritual matters, fiction, and ‘fun’ stuff to read. Beyond that, we don’t have any real way of arranging them–we stick 'em where they’ll fit.
By height and by author, but not in alphabetical order or by genre. What I mean is if I have several books by one author that are the same height, they go together. But if some by one author are in paperback, and some are in hardcover, like covers stay with like covers. (although there’s a couple shelves of one bookcase reserved for unread books, regardless of cover type) I’m more about efficency of space that catogorizing. OTOH, before my orginal database was lost in a HD crash, I used to arrange my cds in purchased order; by that point it was to hard to remember the order of 200+ cd purchases, so I had to stop after I packed them for a move- now there’s no cd system at all. I didn’t think the character in High Fidelity was nerotic for doing the like for some reason…
All over the place. Wherever they will fit. The paperbacks are mostly in stacks, two layers deep, because I would need more shelves than I have otherwise. (I have three tall bookshelves and one slightly shorter one). Hardbacks, textbooks, etc. etc. no particular order. Just wherever they fit.
In my previous place I had categories: general fiction, SF/fantasy, history, reference, travel, humour, work, art, classics. Within those alpha by author, then by release date (but series always kept together). I ignored size.
Haven’t even got bookshelves in my new place yet, but as I have fewer books now I don’t think it’ll be quite as elaborate.
I remember reading that Alastair Cook collected vast numbers of books about the USA, but couldn’t decide how to sort them. By state was OK, except most weren’t only about one state. By author didn’t work as he usually wanted something about a particular place or time.
Finally he ended up using a physical analogy - books on New England in the top right corner, on the Mississippi valley down the middle, Florida bottom right, etc.
Fiction/literature is alphabetical, and when I have more space, the SF/fantasy will have its own space. The following have a special shelf or two each: poetry and plays, classics and mythology, medieval literature, reference, gardening/Miss Manners/home, general non-fiction, foreign languages, chess, literary criticism, librarian stuff, fairy tales, history, biography and letters, religion. That takes care of 3 sets of bookshelves in different rooms, plus another bookshelf entirely for children/YA books.
The big heavy books are mainly either reference or history, and so have extra shelves at the bottom to themselves. Lastly, neato books that belonged to family members (great-grandmother, mostly) get a special shelf, the cookbooks live in the kitchen, and the quilting and embroidery books overflow near my sewing area.
I’m saving up for new bookshelves that will cover the wall of our office/den/library room (aka Room 4). Meanwhile, it’s very crowded.
My friend tried to shelve her books by Dewey decimal. I thought that was very cool, but it didn’t work well on account of size.
I don’t think it’ll be quite as elaborate.