Which one?!

[Idril]

Although this is about authors, I'm putting this here because it is not even remotely a serious literary discussion and seems better suited to the light-hearted discussions here.

I organize my library by country of the author and while most of the time, this is an easy classification, there are those authors that leave me doubting the wisdom of this choice. Case in point: Arthur Koestler, he was born in Hungary, educated in Austria but eventually became a naturalized British citizen...where the heck do I put him?! I had this quandary with Milan Kundera, he was born and raised in Czechoslovakia but emigrated to France, half of his books were originally written in Czech, half in French, but really, he is and will always be Czech to me so I didn't hesitate too long with that one. And then there was O.E. Rolvaag, born and raised in Norway but emigrated to the US in his early twenties. His books, I think, were all written after he moved here, they are largely about the immigrant experience and take place in the Dakotas and Minnesota but yet in the end, I stuck him with the Norwegians because his 'voice' is so Scandinavian and I believe he actually wrote them in Norwegian and were then translated, it just seemed wrong to stick him with the Americans. But this Koestler guy...I have no idea! The book I'm reading is actually about the Stalinist purges of the old regime from the '30s so that doesn't lead me one way or the other so what do I do? Go with where he was born? Where he went to school? Or where he eventually ended up? Opinions please! I need to be guided! :lol:

[papayahed]

You organize by country of Author??

[Virgil]

You organize by country of Author??

Actually that makes sense to me. One groups authors in one's mind by that, at least I do.

But Idril why don't you use my method: complete and utter chaos and disorganization. :D

[papayahed]

Actually that makes sense to me. One groups authors in one's mind by that, at least I do.


How do you keep them straight? Especially the modern authors? Granted the bigger names are fairly easy.


My CD's are arranged alphabetically however my books are thrown in a bookshelf willy nilly.

[Idril]

You organize by country of Author??

Yeah, I do. I do realize it's a bit odd but it makes perfect sense in my mind. Actually, I used to have them organized alphabetically by author and then chronologically within an author...I am anal, I admit that freely :p...and it worked but it occurred to me that when my son would come in and peruse my library, as he does sometimes, and ask how many Russian books I had or what have you, that it would be so much easier to answer that question if they were all together. I have my own odd system within the country grouping thing, like my Scandinavian books are all together under 'S' ( did I mention that the countries are arranged alphabetically?) for Scandinavia because I want them all together but then within that context, they are separated by specific country...but still alphabetically... Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. And the Russian and Soviet stuff is all together too under 'R' for Russia and It's Former Republics. :lol: I do recognize each country as a completely sovereign entity but a large majority of them were written during the Soviet era so I want them together, again, they are arranged by specific country within the 'Russia and It's Former Republics' context, Armenia, Georgia, Russia, Ukraine, etc...complicated but yet not without a certain logic. :D

I can't help but notice that neither of you have expressed an opinion yet as to where I should put this Koestler guy.

Oh, and I would probably hyperventilate if my books were all willy nilly because, as the 2 above posts prove, I am a freak. :lol: ;)

[Virgil]

You guys are way too organized for me. ;)

[papayahed]

ok, I read a little on wiki and my vote is for British.

[Idril]

You guys are way too organized for me. ;)

And you know what the really great thing about that is, Virgil? You can ask me about any book in my entire library and I'll know exactly where it is. :p


ok, I read a little on wiki and my vote is for British.

Ok, one vote for British...

[bluevictim]

But Idril why don't you use my method: complete and utter chaos and disorganization. :DWhat a coincidence! That's basically my method now, too.


Actually, I used to have them organized alphabetically by author and then chronologically within an author That was my original system before I discovered the far better system that Virgil described.

I vote for putting Koestler under British, since his most important work seems to have occurred during the time when England was his home. I sympathize with you, though, about the perplexities of categorizing Darkness at Noon. Should it really be thought of as British literature? It was written in German, by a man whose background is hard to pigeon-hole (as you explained), but the original German version is evidently now lost. This is a case where the utter chaos system truly shines. :)

[stlukesguild]

Once you reach a certain number of books some sort of organization is a must. Originally I organized my books in a loose chronological manner because I largely think of writers in a historical sense: Renaissance, Romanticism, 18th century, etc... As my library increased in scale this method became unmanageable and so I broke it down further: chronologically by nationality. In terms of nationality I focus upon the language of the author... thus German, Austrian, and authors of any other nationality who write in German (such as the Czech Kafka or Romanian Paul Celan) are organized under "German". Perhaps the sole exception is within the literature of the English language. I organize all literature of Great Britain and Ireland together, but have a separate grouping for American and Canadian, and Australian (small as that last may be). My main groupings are Chinese, Japanese, Indian, Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Middle-Eastern/Arabic/Persian, Italian, German, French, Russian, Dutch, East European (Polish, Hungarian, Czech, etc...), Scandinavian, British/Irish, American/Canadian, Australian. Within each language, I have organized the books in a roughly chronological manner. As a result... even with some 3000 books... I can rapidly locate Voltaire or Octavio Paz or Heinrich Heine.:nod:

As for difficult authors such as Nabokov or Conrad... I place them under the language in which they wrote the majority of their mature works. Thus Nabokov is shelved with the Americans and Conrad with the British. Perhaps its not a totally fair system... I still place T.S. Eliot and Ezra Pound with the Americans and the Sephardic Jewish writers such as Halevi under Spanish largely because just as I think of Eliot and Pound as central to American Modernism, so I think of Halevi and Ibn Gabriol as central figures in the Golden age of Arab Andalusia... or medieval Islamic Spain.

[JBI]

I dunno - just put him in England if he was writing in English, or whatever. As it is though, I sort by language and then by genre, but I only have 150 or so books, and most of them are poetry.

[Veho]

I would put Koestler under the language the books were originally written in.

[wessexgirl]

Why don't you just have a section for World Literature, but then categorize them alphabetically by author? That's what I've done in my school Library, as there are certain authors, as you've pointed out, who could fit into more than one country, for example, I would have a problem with Patrick Suskind in your method, as I point out to the students that he is German, but now lives in France.

[Idril]

I sympathize with you, though, about the perplexities of categorizing Darkness at Noon. Should it really be thought of as British literature? It was written in German, by a man whose background is hard to pigeon-hole (as you explained), but the original German version is evidently now lost. This is a case where the utter chaos system truly shines. :)

It really doesn't seem like a British novel at. all! I'm not sure it seems really German either...it seems very Russian but I can't put it there!. :confused: English doesn't seem right because while he ended up in England, that is not the country that shaped him or influenced him. Like the whole Rolvaag thing, even though all his books were written after he moved to the US, he will never seem like an American author to me. If I put Koestler with the English, does that mean I have to move Rolvaag in with the Americans? :eek: ;) You know...I'm starting to lean towards putting him with the Germans simply because he spoke German, joined the German communist party and wrote the book in German...is that wrong? :p Or maybe go with Austrian, or maybe I could create an Austria-Hungary-German group so they could all be together...my several German books and this one other one. :lol:


I would put Koestler under the language the books were originally written in.

And that would be German! :nod:

stlukesguild, I love that there is someone out there with a system even more complicated than me, one that also requires a lot of inner dialogue and bargaining. ;) I don't have anywhere near the books you have, I think I have a little over 300 but it really is wonderful to be able to find any book you want at any time. And another benefit of being freakishly organized is that if my son comes in a takes and book without my knowing it, I can look at my shelves and know exactly which one is missing.

[kitkat203]

You have no idea how much I have enjoyed reading this thread! As a trained librarian I completely understand the struggles and 'inner bargaining' regarding shelf placement. I have organised my 'home' library of both fiction and non fiction in various manners over the years, although I can't compete with the amazing systems listed above. Eat your heart out Melvil Dewey!! :banana:
Nowadays I have to say that although I keep my non fiction in loose subject order, I have embraced the notion of utter chaos for my fiction, poetry and classics. Having now left the library profession I am enjoying filing my books in a haphazard way. There is just something lovely in being able to randomly rediscover books I have not seen or thought about for some time.

[Whifflingpin]

"I would put Koestler under the language the books were originally written in. "

"And that would be German! "

Not really, unless you can have your authors in multiple places. Koestler's later books were written in English, and I think he wrote in French for a time.

No doubt there are those who would claim him as a Jewish writer too.

I think the fairest thing is to give a writer the nationality he chooses, presumably that is want he wants to be. So Koestler (and Conrad) would count as English.

Personally, in my occasional bouts of organising, I order fiction writers alphabetically (and then chronologically by date of writing except for writers of historical fiction whose books get ordered chronologically by date of action.) Non-fiction gets grouped by subject. Koestler screws this up as well, because he wrote fiction and non-fiction, so he just gets lumped on his own.

Oh - and size also messes things up. Some authors get split up because not all their books fit on the same shelf.

[Koa]

I would go with language in any case.

OR. Language if the author moved to a country early enough for it to influence it, like Conrad; country of birth if not.

Damn it, if I write a novel in English now, would it be English or Italian literature...? Maybe it would be English... I think language is the most important factor in any case.


It really doesn't seem like a British novel at. all! I'm not sure it seems really German either...it seems very Russian but I can't put it there!. :confused:

I don't think this is a good argument. If you want to organise your library so precisely and scientifically, you can't get doubts because of how a novel "seems" or feels. And the way it seems Russian to you depends on how many Russian novels you've read, but it's not a scientific criterion like language or birhtplace.

Languages wins in my opinion.

P.S. and techinically, Finland is NOT part of Scandinavia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavia
Oh, and Iceland neither. And double oh, it says Finland is included in common English usage. That saddens me. It's like allowing people to refer to the whole of the UK as "England", as it commonly happens... but ask a Scot about it... :D

[Idril]

Yeah, I see what you're saying, I do, but the great thing about a personal library is that you can bend the rules to suit you! :lol: Scandinavia will always include Finland and Iceland for me whether or not they are technically considered so. Especially Iceland since so many of my Icelandic books are Viking Sagas. I do certainly understand that Finland is more separate, completely different language base, different mythology but for my own purposes, I will keep it where it is. I don't know that I would say my library is organized scientifically, it's organized within an inch of it's life, but not scientifically, there is a lot of room for what a book 'feels' like if the country of an author is vague. If I were organizing a library for someone else, I would be more bound to rules but because it's my own, I have more wiggle room. And I want to be clear that I'm not actually considering putting Koestler with the Russians because it seems Russian, I realize that would be ridiculous. I guess what I was trying to express with that comment is that the book itself doesn't help me lean one way or another, either towards the Austrian or English...or the Hungarian for that matter.

[Koa]

And I want to be clear that I'm not actually considering putting Koestler with the Russians because it seems Russian, I realize that would be ridiculous. I guess what I was trying to express with that comment is that the book itself doesn't help me lean one way or another, either towards the Austrian or English...or the Hungarian for that matter.

Sure, that was clear, but
1) I don't really know who Koestler is beyond what you mentioned about him, so he might as well be Russian or Australian :D
2) I still don't think the "feel" is a valid argument, then of course as you say, you have your own rules :D


Hmm have a shelf just for him, or put it next to your fishbowl...(buy one if you don't have one), or on the floor to hold a door open... ;)

Or make a shelf of hybrid ones you're undecided on :D

[papayahed]

Or make a shelf of hybrid ones you're undecided on :D

Koa has a good idea, maybe you could have a "what the hell do I do with this?" section. :confused:

[Idril]

Koa has a good idea, maybe you could have a "what the hell do I do with this?" section. :confused:

That's not a bad idea! I could put it under 'U' for uncertain so I can still be organized in my confusion. :lol:

[Koa]

LOL :lol: