altivo

The usual stuff for a Wednesday. Longest day of the week, ugh.

Did have one library user late in the day who wanted us to help him find stuff that wasn't full of violence and bloody mayhem, which was a bit unusual in that he is a male. He complained that male authors in particular don't seem to know how to develop characters and stories any more. I'm often inclined to agree with him.

As the discussion went on, I started to get an idea of what he wanted and was able to make a few suggestions. When I mentioned Elizabeth Peters and he said, "Oh, yes, I really like her," we knew we were on the right track. It turns out that we can suggest quite a few authors from the first half of the 20th century or earlier that he may well like. Unfortunately, he prefers audiobooks and most of those tend to be contemporary authors, since those yield the highest sales. We sent him off with Cormac McCarthy's "All the Pretty Horses" and something by Nicholas Sparks though I'm not sure which one he decided on. Our "reads like" database suggested H. Rider Haggard for him, but I couldn't locate any audio versions. I suspect he'd like Wilkie Collins too, and Conan Doyle. I described Dorothy Sayers and he was quite interested, but we didn't have anything available right now. Still, we have a number of leads to follow for him and if he likes the Nicholas Sparks that leads to several other contemporary writers.

Weather is back to unseasonably mild, but we expect snow tomorrow and then some bitter cold. Oh, and the weavers' guild I belong to has a workshop going in the library meeting room, with half a dozen looms set up and being warped. I missed visiting them today because I don't come in until noon and then I had a lot to do. They left at 5 pm, but will be back tomorrow, and that's a quiet day so I should get a chance to pop in and say hi.

Oh, and I know some of you are fans of Leo Magna's strip Fur-Piled. He's just done an update and there are several new pages online.

Current Mood: blah

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

drgnkiyo.livejournal.com

I guess I haven't really been reading enough to realize that. I know when I write I really try to develop the characters. >_>;; But then again I would also need to finish what I'm working on for that to really count, so... orz.

Our weather was omg!cold yesterday. And rainy. Snowy some places north of here. It's supposed to be the same but a little warmer today. I love dry colds. Not wet colds. T_T

From:

altivo.livejournal.com

Snowing here right now but it's not cold. Only just below freezing. Tomorrow is supposed to be cold, after the snow stops.

There's this terrible stereotypical thing in the US in particular about men vs. women. The basic assumption is that men are only interested in violence, sex, and competition. So we get literature written for men and literature written for women, with very little overlap. However, I think this user's assumption that it is the author's gender that determines the style of book is in error. A large percentage of the women's fiction is written by men, though some use a female pen name. Likewise, a significant chunk of the really aggressive, violent suspense and action stories are written by women.

The really worrisome thing to my way of thinking is that (by empirical observation) while women still read a fair amount, men are doing so less and less. By just watching who comes in the door and what they do: the majority of adult males head for the computers or the videos, with a few going to the newspaper section. Almost none who are under retirement age actually check out books to read. The overwhelming majority of the adult women do spend time selecting books and will typically borrow three or four at a time.

From:

gabrielhorse.livejournal.com

Hmm... there's a lot of tangled threads in that thought I'm reticent to pull apart and analyze...so I'll start with man's seeming attraction to violence & mayhem.

Preface: Of course, no two people are alike, but since many are brainwashed by our society in general- perhaps to a degree that most are unaware of- it stands to reason there are some generalities of males that some more observant males may be able to comment on through our own empirical observations...

I (sort of) agree about more males going to the computers than females- but I've also seen far more go to both magazines & newspapers.... come to think of it, I've never seen a female of any type pick up a newspaper at any of the local libraries. Also, like myself, males tend to read in the library and return the books/periodicals/newspapers to their shelves... I myself have checked out maybe three books from a library in the past ten years- and one of them was a rather amusingly absurd book FOR women about relationships with men entitled "Men are @$$#%\e$" (written BY 2 men, I might add... the lady at the desk was more than a little amused I was checking it out)- so again, I ask why you find it so disturbing men don't check out books or carry them around for others to notice? You'll forgive me if I sound like I'm talkng down to you for a moment, but I'm inclined to agree with the observation that males are more visually oriented than females... though I don't think the real reasons have ever been properly researched.

Something I have noticed in my own experiences makes me wonder if perhaps a broader parallel can be drawn between my personal experiences here and those of males in general... perhaps even to most humans on the planet- we seek to express our own power. The reasons may vary- probably the most selfish and childish of these come from those who develop an awareness of their capabilities the least- but it seems like all males invariably seek to use their power to live in whatever way they desire. I've met those who wish they had more power to help others, those who wish they had more power to hurt others, and those who wish they had more power to be given more attention BY others- personally, at various times in my life, I've wanted each of these myself.

Now, to me the expression of one's innate nature is not a bad thing, even if it seems selfish- so in that sense, I cannot fault anyone for seeking power...regardless of the justifications.

But here's where the kicker comes in- SOCIALIZATION. Since all people are thrown into society's mix before they've had a chance to properly define themselves- become aware of their nature & have a grounded sense of self- you end up with all sorts of misanthropy as various individuals seek to become MORE powerful individuals. If one doesn't know who they really are, how can they find their core center of inner strength with times invariably get tough?

(I had to cut it here because I wrote too much...continue onward...)

From:

gabrielhorse.livejournal.com

(Now, more about socialization...)

Through socialization come all sorts of confusing messages, double/triple standards and whatnot. Power through money? Very unlikely, it just makes you more dependant upon the means to gain it. Power through manipulating others? ("dominance through submission" was something I saw on someone's page just the other day...) It's myopic... you again get focused on who you're twisting around your finger until you are the one being twisted by your own out-of-control methodology & subterfuge. Power through transformation? (cover yourself with tattoos? Take steriods? Maybe even attempting to "define" your sexual orientation? Perhaps even going as far as gender reassignment?)Please, just another example of someone who never figured out who they were to begin with, and now grasp desperatly at another straw only to find that who they really wanted to be was already in them and didn't need hormone treatments or surgery to bring it out... assuming they even manage to get that far. The kind of people you probably run into a lot at the library are those who seek power through vicarious association- be it dominance of enemies, sex objects or "weakness"(addictions, insecurity & flaws in others).

IMO we all have power within us. First know thyself, the rest will follow if you keep at it and be honest with yourself about who you are. There now, no need to bother with those stupid self-help books that take up entire shelves in book stores... and are beginning to creep into our libraries.

A question we should all ask ourselves is how stereotypical is our mindset of others? How do we assume to know so much about complete strangers? Futhermore, do we question "what we know"? Do we examine it, or just accept it at face value?

For example, Alt... if I frequented YOUR library, but didn't know you, what would you assume of me- as I'd likely go to use a computer everyday and say or show nothing of what I read?

From:

altivo.livejournal.com

I include those who read inside the library without checking out materials in my overall assessment. Our layout is such that generally I can see what every user is doing most of the time, and we are well aware of the people who actually read in the building. We have a fair number of them because not everyone is eligible for a free library card. It depends on where they live, and if they are unable to pay (or unwilling) they may not be able to borrow materials, However, they can still use them inside the building and they are welcome to do so. Our in-the-building readers are about evenly split between men and women, but with the same note: most of the men read the newspaper, while the women read books. Our magazine usage is pretty low except for just a couple of titles: People and Seventeen, both of which get mostly female interest.

A large number of men come in and just sit on a bench by the door while their wives or girlfriends select books to check out. They treat it much the same, I guess, as they would if they went shopping with her.

Sure, socialization is an element, and I think I did mention that it was probably cultural to the US and I don't know about other societies. Those statistical reports on reading behavior to which I've referred in the past confirm much the same pattern that I've mentioned here, though. Reading is declining overall, but faster among men than among women.

From:

gabrielhorse.livejournal.com

Curious- mostly males frequent the magazine & newspaper section, and I've seen most of them nosedeep in something- sometimes even a book. I cannot begin to estimate who checks out what... but I always see a couple of males sitting in that area reading. *shrugs* Admittedly, most aren't in my age group, but most are under the age of fifty... to be honest, I didn't really even begin to frequent libraries until I was almost 20 myself...

From:

altivo.livejournal.com

There are of course geographical and socioeconomic factors as well, and the community in which I work could be significantly different from the one where you are now.

This is a small town, surrounded by farmland, with a fairly low average educational level. I'm sure most people finished high school, but few completed a college program of any sort. Most work at blue or pink collar jobs, or in agriculture. A fair number of women still read books for simple enjoyment, but even that may be less than half of the overall female population. Men, by both observed behavior and what they actually say, generally prefer television or movies.

More significantly, though, we have about 9000 people eligible for free library cards. Only about 2400 actually have cards, and of those, only about 1200 have used their card to check out a book, magazine, or video in the past year.

From:

altivo.livejournal.com

Oh, and the nearest actual bookstore is 15 to 20 miles away depending on which direction you go. So given the relatively low average income, I think it unlikely that we have lots of people running out and buying books rather than borrowing them from the library. Even "cheap" paperback books cost $6 or more each these days.

From:

gabrielhorse.livejournal.com

...unless you go to book fairs :P I've gotten Peter Straub's "Koko" & David Seltzer's "Prophecy" for 99 cents each :P

...sadly, both have a great deal of violence in them :/ Meh, I tried...

From:

altivo.livejournal.com

Used books can be amazingly cheap. The nearest book fair to here, though is even farther away than the bookstores. The libraries have used book sales, but the material we offer is what has been given to us. That means most of it isn't very interesting, I'm afraid. Unless, of course, you are into Harlequin romances or conservative political diatribe.

From:

gabrielhorse.livejournal.com

"There are of course geographical and socioeconomic factors as well, and the community in which I work could be significantly different from the one where you are now."

I don't doubt that one bit.

Most of the males I know in my circle of friends generally don't watch much televison or movies- I personally gave up on TV this year, and by that I mean altogether; I've probably sat and watched two half hour shows all year, at other people's houses. Movies too are begining to become very easy to read, so in the first five minutes I can tell if I'm going to watch one or not. I guess you could use the addage, "been there done that", so if I had a little more freetime, I'd probably start reading books indepth- as it is, I've begun going through those books that discuss an amost random selection of classic and give a little background on the authors... it kind of reminds me of your audio posts, but less warm :P

From:

gabrielhorse.livejournal.com

It seems to me that in general, books aren't particularly well suited to describing actions, espcially in a situation like a fight sequence. Words, thoughts, details... lingering effects and memories- these seem to be a book's strong points. Maybe one very decisive action, often motivated by a great deal of though, but not much more than that.

From:

altivo.livejournal.com

Well, I'd have to disagree with that. The first example that comes to mind is the scene at the climax of Robert A. Heinlein's Glory Road, in which a swordfight is described blow by blow and parry by parry. Not exactly my cup of tea, but it is done so well that even one unversed in the language of fencing can picture every move. In the process, you learn some of that language in fact.

From:

gabrielhorse.livejournal.com

Ah, I knew I should have said, "IMO...", I'll have to make a point of checking it out. Maybe it depends upon the kind of fighting... and the language used. Perhaps those versed in particular styles of fighting might be able to use terminology better there... I'll keep this example you've given in mind. *bows* I feel a bit ignorant right now... :P

From:

altivo.livejournal.com

There are others, of course. One that comes to mind without a human in the scene is from Rin Tin Tin's Rinty by Julie Campbell. It describes a fight between a wild cougar and a German Shepherd dog.

Of course, any detailed written description of rapid, violent action is going to suffer in the opinion of some because you can't read it aloud as fast as it would have taken place. However, I've heard good actors do that and with tremendous effectiveness, so that the listener in no way loses the sense of the action.

A good example of that takes place in the audiobook recording of Lyndon Stacey's suspense mystery Blindfold as read by Gordon Griffin. It describes an arson fire in a stable, and the action taken by the main character to save both horses and humans. Gripping stuff, though it takes perhaps 15 to 20 minutes for Griffin to read something that would have to take place in just five minutes or less.