Do we have biases on collections?
After writing the post about when your collection becomes clutter, I’ve kept wandering back to my earlier post about Kyoichi Tsuzuki’s Happy Victims exhibition, because he has said some pretty profound things that made me re-evaluate my perceptions.
In particular this paragraph has been sticking to me:
I don’t want to say it’s stupid, but imagine it:
A very small room, the person doesn’t have a lot of money but they spend all their money on books, and they fill their small room with books, you wouldn’t say they’re stupid.
Right?
But a small room filled with Comme des Garçons, looks really stupid, no?
That is our prejudice—that the person who spends all their money on books looks better than the person with Comme des Garçons.
There’s a hierarchy: Books have the highest position, then records, and fashion is kind of on the bottom.
But it’s all the same.
It’s how your passion flows.
So I started looking at collections of books people have at home in their personal libraries and in particular, how they displayed them
“Home Library cost: $110,000″ – Source: BusinessWeek
Those libraries look elegant, refined, and spacious. One might even call it minimalist, with the lack of frills around the area.
But in essence, it’s just space taken up to store STUFF, all the books that have been collected over the years, and surely read & beloved by the family.
However if we look at someone spending money on clothes or something less-than-equal in our eyes, we feel as though it is a waste of money.
$6500 Closet
$18,000 Closet
“A $40,000 home for your clothes” – Source: BusinessWeek
And the above pictures look like a waste of money to many, and a waste of space. I mean, really, a whole room for shoes & clothes?
Yet, they are both collections.
Those clothes and shoes have been in essence, collected and stored over the years, surely beloved & used by the family (or one girl? I don’t know).
It is because books are considered a worthy pursuit of academics.
Never mind that your library is mostly filled with Japanese manga or books about vampires or love stories.
It is a far better thing to be enamoured with the written word and to display it, rather than to be in love with wearing different shoes and making up different outfits.
Right?
Regardless of how you rank the different types of collections, we can all benefit from Concojones’ comment:
You’re right that not all collectors are hoarders, but even a devoted collector can benefit from applying the 80/20 principle to their collection: only keep the nicest pieces and give them your full attention.
3 things I learned from Tsuzuki:
1. Collections in my eyes, HAD been ranked before
I had previously felt guilty for collecting jewelery, until I realized that it was my passion & I’d rather borrow books instead of owning them.
2. Collections are possessions of a similar nature that you are proud to display and cherish
If it isn’t worthy to you, to cherish and display your collections, then it is just clutter.
And as commented above, apply the 80/20 principle and only keep your favourite pieces to give them your full attention.
3. Don’t collect items just for their perceived image
I’m sure you have heard this before: “Oh I haven’t read any of those books in the library. They’re just there for decoration.”
Or.. “I don’t really care about silverware collections, but they are EXPENSIVE antiques!!!”
Silly.
Be passionate about your collection (if you have one), and stand by it.
That Kind of Girl
on Oct 28th, 2009
@ 10:03 am:
And then there is, of course, the oh-so-tiny detail that the things we collect can be useful! The most dominant collection in my apartment is my vastly overflowing bookshelf, which exists not because I want to show off how smart I am (my sci-fi/fantasy novels are quite at home nestled between my Wodehouse and Zadie Smith), but because I need these books. I need to read something of substance every single day, for as many hours as I can, or else I am not living with joy or purpose. So. There’s also that.
Presumably there are people who feel similarly about being able to wear brilliant and beautiful outfits, or accessorize with charm and inventiveness. I just don’t happen to be one of those people.
Still, I do in principle agree with the idea of thinning out a collection, even if it is useful: when I moved cross-country, I ended up thinning out about three-quarters of my books, either to give away, if I felt I wasn’t going to re-read them, or to store at my childhood home until I have a more spacious living situation. (Man, though. About half of the books I left behind I now kind of wish I’d taken…)
Christine Simiriglia
on Oct 28th, 2009
@ 12:11 pm:
“There’s a hierarchy: Books have the highest position, then records, and fashion is kind of on the bottom.”
I totally agree and wish to maintain a different type of heirarchy: used versus collects dust. If you wear clothes and jewelry, than they are great collections. If you read, then books are a great collection. Little Dollar Store statues are not, they do nothing but collect dust. Little spoons of the world are not, for the same reason. Maybe I’m a hard ass, but there are some collections that still belong at the bottom of the list.
Christine Simiriglia´s last blog ..Organize to Winterize
Meg
on Oct 28th, 2009
@ 12:24 pm:
Soooo very true. I’m rather minimalist, but I still have quite a few books and quite a few clothes — maybe not even more than the average person anymore, but enough. And probably do have more shoes than the average woman. (O.k., my mom teasingly called me Imelda once.)
I don’t feel any negative judgment when it comes to having the books. In fact, when I tell people that I’m getting rid of books, they look at me like I’m kicking kittens — even though I still LOVE reading and am donating the books to the library, which I use frequently.
The clothes I feel a bit more pressure about, even though I wear most of the clothes fairly regularly except for some I’ve kept for when I lose weight.
And the shoes? Oh, yeah. I feel it so much that I wonder sometimes if I can consider myself “minimalist” with so many shoes even though I still have MANY more books than shoes. But why should it be so different than the books? Both are well organized — in fact, by color in both cases. And I rewear the shoes MUCH MORE often than I reread the books. Plus, they are useful. I might not need so many of them, but it’d be easier for me to live without books than shoes even though I like going barefoot some of the time. And, of course, they make me feel good when I feel “put together” in a nice, coordinating outfit. Let’s face it, too, many people keep books more for appearances than the usefulness of the content — which they can usually find online now, anyhow.
Jennifer
on Oct 28th, 2009
@ 2:32 pm:
Great post and I definitely agree, if it’s not precious to you or hold any special meaning, than it is clutter. I collect clothes and books. I’m dying over those closets you posted. Dying….
My best friend’s dad used to collect flamingos. Thousands all over the house. Dusty too. I thought it was clutter and it turns out I was right. He didn’t care about flamingos. He just thought he should collect something. Sigh.
Concojones
on Oct 28th, 2009
@ 2:35 pm:
@EverydayMinimalist: ahh, it feels nice to be quoted alongside a name like Kyoichi Tsuzuki – haha!
You’re right that clothes collections can be worthy collections too. Never looked at it that way (but then again clothes are not my thing).
@meg: better not base your decision on what others think. Beside, your already know what they’re gonna say.
I think the criterion for keeping a collection is: do I feel excited about it? Keep it! Mixed feelings? In my experience that means that quite a bit of the collection is “so so” or giving me stress because I still haven’t read/used it yet (and I feel I have to! but it’s too much to deal with, hence the stress). In both cases a clean-up is due.
In my experience, it’s ALWAYS safe to throw away stuff that “may come in handy someday”. Yes, I occasionally find that I end up “needing” an item after I’ve thrown it away, but that usually means I found a use for the item, a reason to justify its ownership, which is not the same as NEEDING it because I’ll just use something else for the job.
On the other hand, I’ve learnt to be careful with stuff that has an emotional value (childtime memories), especially if self-created (drawings). I put those in a box and open it a few months later to see if I’m still OK with throwing it away.
Mrs. Micah
on Oct 28th, 2009
@ 8:01 pm:
Excellent post. I think people tend to prize books because they (potentially) make you smarter & better-informed, which most other collections don’t. I’m entirely prejudiced towards books and am following a library career. In fact, I want to work in archives, which takes a special book-hoarding type.
Despite these prejudices, I think personal collections should be about what you value having and using. I have a few hundred books, but I don’t collect books like my parents did or some of my friends do. I borrow most books from a library and only buy books that are harder to find in libraries or that I find myself checking out more than three times. I prefer to save up my money for crafting projects or occasional electronics.
Mrs. Micah´s last blog ..Is the Era of Democratic Credit Really Over Now?
lynda
on Oct 29th, 2009
@ 11:05 am:
I honestly used to think books were a precious collection not to be discarded – I collected them fervently through childhood and for a decent span in adulthood! The only time I willingly parted with some of them was when I desperately needed money while pregnant. It broke my heart at the time.
When I had to leave my husband I was forced to leave two walls stacked full of books and research tomes, taking only the “essentials” – at that time I hated it. Then a couple of years after that it hit me – I wasn’t reading any of the books I had brought with me, and really didn’t miss the books I had left behind!
Currently I tend to keep a few books on computer repair and operating systems that I actually DO reference on occasion, some sewing books I reference for ideas and how-to’s, as well as a few cookbooks and simple living tomes that were hard to find and I actually look at routinely. This collection takes up a single four-shelf unit, with overflow being sold or given away. I rarely purchase fiction anymore, as I only read them once – instead I borrow the book from a library or borrow a digital copy from someone.
Alas, I am not so diligent on paring down my digital book collection. I am a sucker for how-to books and it shows on my hard drive. I’m not ready to let EVERYTHING go, so this is my compromise – I can stash as many on my computer as I have hard disk space, cause moving them is as easy as a couple of clicks or picking up a single computer!
Little by little I have gleaned some of the garbage stored on my disk, but I’m not about to tackle all of it at once. That is a sure recipe for failure with this girl!
lynda´s last blog ..Paying the Bills…
Jennifer
on Oct 29th, 2009
@ 3:28 pm:
I loved this entry.
I too love jewelry. My other collections:
Jane Austen books
Various old books of poetry
Zane Grey books
Waterford Crystal
Any blue glass items that I find beautiful.
But I have to love it to keep it.
Jennifer´s last blog ..Cosmo in November
Patty @ Why Not Start Now?
on Oct 29th, 2009
@ 7:25 pm:
Hi there – I never thought of it this way, but you’re absolutely right. I think I’m probably a book snob, i.e. a collection of books is more worthy than a collection of something else. So I like the way you look at it. And for me, my collections have to meet the value and worth question. And I like to keep them small, just a few of each.
Patty @ Why Not Start Now?´s last blog ..Imagination Quiz
Carnival of Minimalism Episode III
on Nov 11th, 2009
@ 10:22 pm:
[...] Everyday Minimalist presents Prejudices about collections posted at The Everyday Minimalist, saying, “We all have prejudices about collections. Kyoichi [...]