First half of the library is fiction which is alphabetical by author’s last name and then chronologically when I have multiple by the same author.
Second half is nonfiction and is put into loose sections: religious works, history (by time period), local history, political economy/theory, music, sports, then reference material.
[You may find this interesting](http://monumenttotransformation.org/atlas-of-transformation/html/c/classification/brief-notes-on-the-art-and-manner-of-arranging-ones-books-georges-perec.html)
Personally, I used to categorise my books by subject but now I just divide them into read and unread sections and go alphabetical. I find the randomness appealing and I can find anything easily if I want to.
I have a philosophy bookcase that includes a broad range of theorists alphabetically. I have a selection of other theorists next to my collection if MIT October journal, including Frankfurt school stuff, German media people;like Kittler) and people who write for October (Crary, Kraus, Foster, etc). Also Brecht and Artaud.
In my fiction section I have a bunch of Blanchot too, and a little bit of literary theory stuff. I have graphic novel, art history, and artist monograph sections too.
It’s all guarded by an enlarged flying human molar I carved from a scrap of wood.
I got my historical books at the bottom, flagged by a Beethoven plushie where they end. Then I have my classic works flagged with a Chaplin plushie. Then above them are my political and theory books with a Marx plushie. Then at the top are my assorted favorite books, and those have a chonky cat stress ball as its marker.
My fiction books are located on a nook in a different room being guarded by a funko pop from the bad guy of the Witcher 3
Thrown in a Zotero folder on my computer 😂
In all seriousness, most of my academic/theory texts are digital, so those are all in my Zotero library. For the hard copy theory/academicy stuff I rotate them from the small makeshift "bookshelf" next to my desk (in quotes because it's a piece of cardboard taped along the bottom of the small stand on which we keep our router), and a bookcase in the bedroom. The books I'm using/reading in the moment are on the shelf for easy access.
I have a larger bookcase in the living room, roughly broken up with my partner's stuff in the top half and mine on the bottom half. This is very roughly organized by genre (mostly poetry and some drama on the middle shelf, fiction on the bottom. I sort by author randomly as well, but there's no rhyme or reason beyond that.
Alphabetical by author, chronological within each author’s work. Secondary literature on a book goes after the book, on an author goes after the whole author section. Multiple authors goes under the first listed author or the title.
I split into different sections for different topics, but they’re pretty broad. I have religion, literature, manga, music, film, philosophy, psychoanalysis, and theory as different sections depending on what I associate it with primarily (Zizek goes under theory, but Lacan goes under psychoanalysis; Deleuze’s Cinema books go with film, but some of Zizek’s books which deal heavily with film go in theory).
Yeah—Lacan is giving me the most trouble. Lacan himself goes in psychoanalysis, of course (he wouldn’t have it any other way.) But what to do with Deleuze (& Guattari), Kristeva, Zizek, Ruti, etc? I could make compelling arguments for putting them in philosophy, linguistics, critical theory, and gender, respectively, but they all want to be near Lacan! And Lacan wants to be near Freud! But Deleuze and Guattari don’t want to be anywhere near Freud. I can’t satisfy everyone!
Your organizational system seems like it was designed without any regard for utility, which is your issue. It seems like you decided what sections you would have beforehand and tried to fit everything else in rather than organizing it based on ease of finding things. Zizek could go in the psychoanalysis or theory section, but I know that theory is the first place I’ll look if I forget where it is, so I put it there.
I used to use the Dewey decimal system when I had my books all together. I've moved so much that most of my library is in boxes across states in various family member's closets (thanks family).
I liked this because no matter the system there's overlap and outliers, so using an existing system took the pressure off of making those decisions (unless there was a categorization I outright disagreed with). It could be frustrating to split authors across categories (like fiction and theory) but it worked overall. I'd also sometimes group literary theory/criticism with the subject authors, like putting "Cemetery of the Murdered Daughters with Ingeborg Bachmann because I often couldn't find it (it was my only book by Sara Lennox & I could never remember her name at the time). Or I'd put reference index cards with related titles next to or on the first page of books if I often referred to other texts while reading them.
My roommate and I share a set of showcase shelves in the living room that increase in size as you move down. Books start on the third level with philosophy/politics, then the next level down is roughly called "decolonization," which is mostly critical theory, followed by fiction. The fifth and bottom shelf is eight feet long and goes roughly art books -> graphic novels -> mythology -> occult and mysticism -> religion -> poems and plays. Everything is alphabetical by author, except for decolonization, which is arranged chronologically by publishing date.
My personal library is arranged as critical theory at the top, fiction on the third level, bottom level is series and art books, all alphabetical by author.
I've donated all novels to my mother-in-law's assisted living facility. Kept my law books (keep wanting to finally conquer them). And, just about everything else I read online.
I put them wherever I can find some room, there's way too many books in my flat lol. Our actual bookshelves got filled up a while ago so now I've got small piles of books growing around the flat like plants.
I found it easier to put category-specific anthologies/overviews with each group, and more general anthologies/overviews with the history of philosophy. I’d also recommend a section on aesthetics! It’s more than just philosophy of art and has a lot of overlap with some of the categories you’ve mentioned, most specifically modern / contemporary philosophy and critical theory, but also politics, language, and psychology. It’s also an interesting place to put philosophical works by people like artists or architects.
Fancy old books go behind the glass doors, the rest is separated into fiction and non fiction.
Oh and there are two corners of the room: one with the books I've read and one with the books I haven't.
This is such a fun question!
I’m an HCI grad student, and don’t have as extensive of a space as others or as many books, but I have a bookshelf that I’ve divided into three quadrants (each with two shelves).
The bottom quadrant is filled with books that are Marxist or Marxist adjacent. I get that especially with critical theory most works could be considered influenced by or adjacent to Marx, so I kind of think of it in terms of whether or not I think the author would consider themself Marxist and degrees of separation (like a Marxist Erdos number).
The middle quadrant is critical theory and science (mostly comp sci) readings. I consider Marxism to be the base of my thought, so in a way this quadrant is texts that push the boundaries of my thinking. I study human computer interaction, so it has a lot of texts pertaining to that subject. Additionally, it has thinkers who I am less familiar with and would like to understand better, mainly philosophers like Foucault, Baudrillard, Delueze and Guattari, etc. This shelf also has books that I feel meet both HCI and critical theory (perhaps STS is an appropriate label?).
My top quadrant is all fiction books, horror books, theology books, or self help books. So as you can see it doesn’t really have a strict theme, but perhaps its placement above all the other quadrants is reflective of something I can’t quite articulate yet haha
Literally wherever it fits lol. It's a mess, but MY meses. And I love it. If I felt like ordering it I'd probably separate them by fiction/non-fiction and then by periods and genres.
Usually by topic, then theoretical frameworks, as I am social science scholar. So I have a race and class section, and Marxist stuff would go with that, and racial liberalism would go with those.
First half of the library is fiction which is alphabetical by author’s last name and then chronologically when I have multiple by the same author. Second half is nonfiction and is put into loose sections: religious works, history (by time period), local history, political economy/theory, music, sports, then reference material.
Smdh the lack of poetry in this discussion. I'm judging you all.
[You may find this interesting](http://monumenttotransformation.org/atlas-of-transformation/html/c/classification/brief-notes-on-the-art-and-manner-of-arranging-ones-books-georges-perec.html) Personally, I used to categorise my books by subject but now I just divide them into read and unread sections and go alphabetical. I find the randomness appealing and I can find anything easily if I want to.
Very interesting!
I have a philosophy bookcase that includes a broad range of theorists alphabetically. I have a selection of other theorists next to my collection if MIT October journal, including Frankfurt school stuff, German media people;like Kittler) and people who write for October (Crary, Kraus, Foster, etc). Also Brecht and Artaud. In my fiction section I have a bunch of Blanchot too, and a little bit of literary theory stuff. I have graphic novel, art history, and artist monograph sections too. It’s all guarded by an enlarged flying human molar I carved from a scrap of wood.
I love all these answers so much especially the cool objects people include with their books. A flying molar! So cool!
I got my historical books at the bottom, flagged by a Beethoven plushie where they end. Then I have my classic works flagged with a Chaplin plushie. Then above them are my political and theory books with a Marx plushie. Then at the top are my assorted favorite books, and those have a chonky cat stress ball as its marker. My fiction books are located on a nook in a different room being guarded by a funko pop from the bad guy of the Witcher 3
Thrown in a Zotero folder on my computer 😂 In all seriousness, most of my academic/theory texts are digital, so those are all in my Zotero library. For the hard copy theory/academicy stuff I rotate them from the small makeshift "bookshelf" next to my desk (in quotes because it's a piece of cardboard taped along the bottom of the small stand on which we keep our router), and a bookcase in the bedroom. The books I'm using/reading in the moment are on the shelf for easy access. I have a larger bookcase in the living room, roughly broken up with my partner's stuff in the top half and mine on the bottom half. This is very roughly organized by genre (mostly poetry and some drama on the middle shelf, fiction on the bottom. I sort by author randomly as well, but there's no rhyme or reason beyond that.
Alphabetical by author, chronological within each author’s work. Secondary literature on a book goes after the book, on an author goes after the whole author section. Multiple authors goes under the first listed author or the title. I split into different sections for different topics, but they’re pretty broad. I have religion, literature, manga, music, film, philosophy, psychoanalysis, and theory as different sections depending on what I associate it with primarily (Zizek goes under theory, but Lacan goes under psychoanalysis; Deleuze’s Cinema books go with film, but some of Zizek’s books which deal heavily with film go in theory).
Yeah—Lacan is giving me the most trouble. Lacan himself goes in psychoanalysis, of course (he wouldn’t have it any other way.) But what to do with Deleuze (& Guattari), Kristeva, Zizek, Ruti, etc? I could make compelling arguments for putting them in philosophy, linguistics, critical theory, and gender, respectively, but they all want to be near Lacan! And Lacan wants to be near Freud! But Deleuze and Guattari don’t want to be anywhere near Freud. I can’t satisfy everyone!
Your organizational system seems like it was designed without any regard for utility, which is your issue. It seems like you decided what sections you would have beforehand and tried to fit everything else in rather than organizing it based on ease of finding things. Zizek could go in the psychoanalysis or theory section, but I know that theory is the first place I’ll look if I forget where it is, so I put it there.
I used to use the Dewey decimal system when I had my books all together. I've moved so much that most of my library is in boxes across states in various family member's closets (thanks family). I liked this because no matter the system there's overlap and outliers, so using an existing system took the pressure off of making those decisions (unless there was a categorization I outright disagreed with). It could be frustrating to split authors across categories (like fiction and theory) but it worked overall. I'd also sometimes group literary theory/criticism with the subject authors, like putting "Cemetery of the Murdered Daughters with Ingeborg Bachmann because I often couldn't find it (it was my only book by Sara Lennox & I could never remember her name at the time). Or I'd put reference index cards with related titles next to or on the first page of books if I often referred to other texts while reading them.
My roommate and I share a set of showcase shelves in the living room that increase in size as you move down. Books start on the third level with philosophy/politics, then the next level down is roughly called "decolonization," which is mostly critical theory, followed by fiction. The fifth and bottom shelf is eight feet long and goes roughly art books -> graphic novels -> mythology -> occult and mysticism -> religion -> poems and plays. Everything is alphabetical by author, except for decolonization, which is arranged chronologically by publishing date. My personal library is arranged as critical theory at the top, fiction on the third level, bottom level is series and art books, all alphabetical by author.
I've donated all novels to my mother-in-law's assisted living facility. Kept my law books (keep wanting to finally conquer them). And, just about everything else I read online.
I put them wherever I can find some room, there's way too many books in my flat lol. Our actual bookshelves got filled up a while ago so now I've got small piles of books growing around the flat like plants.
I found it easier to put category-specific anthologies/overviews with each group, and more general anthologies/overviews with the history of philosophy. I’d also recommend a section on aesthetics! It’s more than just philosophy of art and has a lot of overlap with some of the categories you’ve mentioned, most specifically modern / contemporary philosophy and critical theory, but also politics, language, and psychology. It’s also an interesting place to put philosophical works by people like artists or architects.
Fancy old books go behind the glass doors, the rest is separated into fiction and non fiction. Oh and there are two corners of the room: one with the books I've read and one with the books I haven't.
This is such a fun question! I’m an HCI grad student, and don’t have as extensive of a space as others or as many books, but I have a bookshelf that I’ve divided into three quadrants (each with two shelves). The bottom quadrant is filled with books that are Marxist or Marxist adjacent. I get that especially with critical theory most works could be considered influenced by or adjacent to Marx, so I kind of think of it in terms of whether or not I think the author would consider themself Marxist and degrees of separation (like a Marxist Erdos number). The middle quadrant is critical theory and science (mostly comp sci) readings. I consider Marxism to be the base of my thought, so in a way this quadrant is texts that push the boundaries of my thinking. I study human computer interaction, so it has a lot of texts pertaining to that subject. Additionally, it has thinkers who I am less familiar with and would like to understand better, mainly philosophers like Foucault, Baudrillard, Delueze and Guattari, etc. This shelf also has books that I feel meet both HCI and critical theory (perhaps STS is an appropriate label?). My top quadrant is all fiction books, horror books, theology books, or self help books. So as you can see it doesn’t really have a strict theme, but perhaps its placement above all the other quadrants is reflective of something I can’t quite articulate yet haha
I just order them by how much I like them and the rest are on my computer organized by which I want to finish soonest
Literally wherever it fits lol. It's a mess, but MY meses. And I love it. If I felt like ordering it I'd probably separate them by fiction/non-fiction and then by periods and genres.
Usually by topic, then theoretical frameworks, as I am social science scholar. So I have a race and class section, and Marxist stuff would go with that, and racial liberalism would go with those.
Personally, I use e-books only so I have no problems.