burn all the texts
apparently the other day a nasty lady who was angry with the offer made on her books suggested that we (the employees of the used bookstore at which i work) read a recent editorial in the cap times. dutifully i looked it up. the writer of said editorial felt that the amount of money offered her for her used books--not at our store, but at madison used bookstores in general-- was insulting to the integrity of books in general.
i very much wanted to respond with an editorial of my own, but my boss said this would be verboten. so instead i will rant here, and i will feel free to snark until my heart's content, because here i represent no one but myself.
it is easy to be high and mighty and talk about the integrity of books when your paycheck does not rely on it. to some who eschew economic reality in favor of lofty ideals, it may even sound honorable and intelligent. however, i feel the need to point out that if you think your books are so goddamn sacred, then why are you selling them to begin with? shouldn't you keep them holy like the sabbath or some shit like that? or at least give them away to the book-impoverished? i think that's what jesus would do.
i am reminded of the adrienne rich poem "on the burning of paper instead of children" and while i cannot say that the burning of books arouses no sensation in me, i can say that someone so distracted and self-righteously indignant about the disrespect of a mere symbol (a book, a flag, etc) probably has her priorities out of whack.
the woman who wrote that editorial would like us to think that she is angry about the treatment of books, because that would make her selfless, the defender of the wronged. but she is just angry that she did not get the money she thought she deserved. books have no sense of entitlement; people do.
i very much wanted to respond with an editorial of my own, but my boss said this would be verboten. so instead i will rant here, and i will feel free to snark until my heart's content, because here i represent no one but myself.
it is easy to be high and mighty and talk about the integrity of books when your paycheck does not rely on it. to some who eschew economic reality in favor of lofty ideals, it may even sound honorable and intelligent. however, i feel the need to point out that if you think your books are so goddamn sacred, then why are you selling them to begin with? shouldn't you keep them holy like the sabbath or some shit like that? or at least give them away to the book-impoverished? i think that's what jesus would do.
i am reminded of the adrienne rich poem "on the burning of paper instead of children" and while i cannot say that the burning of books arouses no sensation in me, i can say that someone so distracted and self-righteously indignant about the disrespect of a mere symbol (a book, a flag, etc) probably has her priorities out of whack.
the woman who wrote that editorial would like us to think that she is angry about the treatment of books, because that would make her selfless, the defender of the wronged. but she is just angry that she did not get the money she thought she deserved. books have no sense of entitlement; people do.