Now, *this* is an asshole!

[Oeditpus Rex]

A library inside a newly renovated home in Connecticut gleams with row upon row of polished leather-bound books that climb 20 feet to the ceiling. An elegant rolling ladder and a narrow catwalk provide access to 13,000 books whose rich hues, exquisite bindings and gilt lettering provide an aura of wealth and sophistication. The homeowners, a wealthy businessman and his wife, will never read any of them.

These decorative books were selected by an interior designer solely for their aesthetic appeal, and most of them are written in French. They are arranged on the shelves not by author or topic, but by color and size.

“A roomful of books, it’s a great impact,” said Larry Laster, an antique-book dealer in Winston-Salem, N.C., who supplied the books for the Connecticut library. “It states that you have great wealth and that you’re literate, whether you read the books or not.”

http://jscms.jrn.columbia.edu/cns/2005-11-01/fullerton-fauxlibrary

Larry Laster
Old & Rare Books
[e-mail]

Here's what I e-mailed him:

"A roomful of books, it's a great impact," said Larry Laster, an antiquebook dealer in Winston-Salem, N.C., who supplied the books for the Connecticut library. "It states that you have great wealth and that you're literate, whether you read the books or not."


No, it states that you're an arrogant, presumptuous, self-serving boor. It might say you're literate, etc. to your contemptible ilk — which I'm sure is what Mr. Laster had in mind.

:evilgrin:

[qnr]

1. Well, I thought my diet and exercise routine were making me more

mellow and even-natured. I guess not, because this has me positively fuming.

[0007]

40. ....add a little hatha and meditation

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. Well, the guy might have great wealth......

But he has no taste.....

I agree with your assessment, my dear Oeditpus Rex..... :puke:

[RevCheesehead]

3. What else do you expect from superficial people?

These are the people who actually DO judge a book by it's cover.

[Whoa_Nelly]

5. Send them your snowman nativity

It would add some real sparkle to the decor and their lackluster lives...

[RevCheesehead]

6. NEVER!

That's going to be a priceless heirloom... if I ever have and heirs. :P

[Whoa_Nelly]

10. True enough!

Those pigs don't deserve such quality!

[KitchenWitch]

4. I have no words

:nuke:

[ghostsofgiants]

7. Am I the only one who clicked this thread reluctantly...

Expecting to see goatse man?

[Orangepeel]

37. I expected the brazillian joke (n/t)

[Rabrrrrrr]

8. He is, indeed, a real class-A Asshole

What a fuckwad.

[RevCheesehead]

13. And ya know what, Rabrrrrrr?

When it comes to assholes, I trust your judgment completely! :evilgrin:

[SeattleGirl]

9. Blasphemy!

Books are to be read, re-read, enjoyed, learned from, shared!!!!!!!!

[evlbstrd]

11. Such a sad waste of books.

And human skin.

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. You tell em

Good email. What an arrogant illiterate ass.

[NMMNG]

14. It makes me sick to think of books being wasted on a feeb like that

Sitting in an unread library no more makes you literate than sitting amongst unused cars makes you a driver. :eyes:

[qnr]

15. Or sitting the the Oval Office makes

well, nevermind.

[Oeditpus Rex]

16. Ooo!

Wish I'd thoughta that. :applause:

[LeftyMom]

17. I don't know what pisses me off more

The conspicuous consumption, the unread books or the leather.

If the other shit's competing with the stolen skin, you know I'm mad enough to spit nails. :grr:

[Spider Jerusalem]

30. Nothing wrong with leather.

Leather-bound books tend to be rather more durable. And considering that the leather comes from beef cattle and veal calves anyway, you can hardly complain that it's the result of wasteful and unnecessary killing (unlike, say, fur).

[LeftyMom]

32. Uh, yeah I can.

I certainly don't approve of the consumption of cows and calves either. In any case, the skin is the most valuble part of the cow, so the use of leather keeps the whole miserable process profitable.

In any case, tanning hides creates a lot of pollution, it's not precisely good for the enviornment. Then again, neither is animal agriculture in general.

[Spider Jerusalem]

36. You don't approve? Too bad.

Something you'll have to learn to accept unless you're planning to come up with a way to erase a few million years' worth of evolutionary heritage. Humans are by nature omnivores; it's a simple fact. It's all well and good that you've decided that a strict vegan lifestyle is appropriate for you personally; it's exceptionally presumptuous and self-righteous for you to decide everyone else should do it, too.

And tanning needn't necessarily create pollution, either. The traditional method involves curing the hide with the animal's brains; no pollution, and also efficient utilisation of resources.

[Orangepeel]

38. this whole thread is about not approving

of shit people do. Hell, a third of the lounge is about not approving of shit people do (another third is about cats and the final third is miscellaneous). One way to deal is to vent. :shrug:

[flvegan]

41. You should respond to every person on this thread condemning

the opulence of the folks in the original post. I mean, "you don't approve? Too bad." right?

I don't see where the poster you're referring to "decide(d) everyone else should do it, too." Maybe you can point it out to me.

And yes, humans are omnivores. The treatment of animals, and the subsequent obtainment and use of leather proves DE-evolution.

Oh, and how many folks cranking out leather for these books and the interior of a Benz is using the "traditional method" anyway? Just curious...

[Spider Jerusalem]

42. Not the same thing.

Not even close. Using books as interior decoration props instead of reading them is wasteful ostentation; using cattle for meat and leather is not. There IS a difference.

[flvegan]

43. You missed it.

Not meat, just leather.

Try again.

[Spider Jerusalem]

45. Leather from animals that were in all likelihood slaughtered for meat.

And leather is highly durable if cared for, provides protection against wind and cold when used for jackets and coats, makes longer-lasting shoes than fabric or synthetic materials, and it's something that would otherwise go needlessly to waste. I don't really see why you'd have a problem with the fact that, if cattle ARE going to be slaughtered, as much of the animal as possible is utilised.

And these books, being rare and antique, probably received their bindings anywhere from one to three centuries ago (restoration rather than rebinding being the more common practice).

[flvegan]

48. Prove it.

Longer lasting...your words.

I'm disgusted that books, that could otherwise be preserved, are justifiably bound in a byproduct of cruelty.

Oh, and by the way, here's your post, "Using books as interior decoration props instead of reading them is wasteful ostentation; using cattle for meat and leather is not."

Using cattle for meat and leather is wasterul ostentation for the same reason. It's not NEEDed. I defy you to prove otherwise.

[Spider Jerusalem]

51. Prove what, specifically?

That leather is a durable material if properly cared for? I could send you to the websites of any number of antiquarian booksellers, where you'd see books with half-calfskin bindings dating to the 1700's.

Using cattle for meat isn't wasteful -- humans are omnivorous, not herbivorous; your personal choice does not change this basic and simple fact of human biology. Meat is a natural part of the human diet. Prior to the advent of civilisation and animal husbandry, we obtained it through hunting; some aboriginal tribes still do. As to not needing it, humans do require protein in quantities that you can't get from most plants...and I know you'll mention soy protein, but that argument is beside the point; soybeans weren't widely grown anywhere on the planet except eastern Asia until about fifty years ago, and tofu and other soy products are still considered somewhat exotic and rather odd by many people whose cultural and culinary heritage is NOT Asian. If you think that this is something easily overcome, I would suggest that you're sadly deluded.

You also seem not to understand the meaning of the word "ostentation" - 'Display intended to attract notice or admiration; pretentious parade, vainglorious "showing off"' (per the OED).

[LeftyMom]

44. My point is that I'm not being a hypocrite on this issue

It'd be one thing if I typed "leather is icky" while my other hand held a hot dog. As for what I can and can't make an ethical judegment about- I didn't ask you.

In any case, here in the real world hides are cured with harsh chemicals, they're fed grain that could feed humans and the feedlot, slaughter and tanning processes all pollute our water. "Efficient utilization of resources" would be to aviod the whole stinking mess.

In any case, I was just making an offhand remark about the degree to which the show library thing bothered me (because anyone who knows me would know that anything that bothered me as much as flesh bound books must bother me a great deal,) it really wan't my intent to start an argument about animal exploitation. (I do that a lot, but I wouldn't hijack someone's thread for that purpose. There are plenty of appropriate threads to discuss those issues.)

[Spider Jerusalem]

46. Those calfskin bindings that offend you so greatly...

are most likely a century old or more. (Rare and antique books are usually restored rather than rebound unless there's too much damage.) It's highly unlikely that the bindings are new or even recent.

[LeftyMom]

49. I don't see why that matters

They're books bound in flesh. I find that offensive. It would bother me even if it were some 20K year old thawed mastodon hide or some cow that had lived as a pet and died of old age, because it's some poor creatures mortal remains being exploited and disrespected.

As I said, I really didn't want to hijack Oeditpus' thread to talk about why leather sucks I was just making a point about how bothered I was.

[flvegan]

50. "Most likely..." "highly unlikely"...

YOU take offense to another's thoughts and opinion, yet, you don't know. However, you're quick to hand down your judgment. Seems sort of...hypocritical, dare I say, on your part, considering the basis for your outrage/anger/misdirected hostility.

[Spider Jerusalem]

52. Do YOU happen to have any knowledge of antique books?

Because I do. I have some idea what I'm talking about; rather more, on this subject, than I expect YOU do. And I'm not angry, OR outraged; if you got that from anything I've said, then you're reading something into it that's not there.

[neweurope]

18. If those idiots had half as much intelligence as money they would

have bought those books for the public, and the public would have been grateful. What they did evokes not admiration but spite and contempt. To each his own.

-----------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[Oeditpus Rex]

21. That's exactly what I was thinking

You've got 13,000 books you aren't gonna read? For the love of Jeebus, give 'em to a library! Do something for someone besides your own pathetic, sorry-assed selves, you fucking losers! Maybe one good deed in your life will save your shit-filled souls.

:grr:

[Maddy McCall]

19. What will be embarrassing is when someone who truly is well-read

visits the Lasters, and says, "So what was your opinion of the Bordeaux novel there?" and the Lasters have to explain that they've read none of the books they possess.

No thanks. I'll keep my six floor-to-ceiling bookshelves stacked with paperback and secondhand hardback historical works. I can discuss every one of the six hundred or so books on my shelves. I'm not rich, I'm not pretentious, but I am literate and well-read.

[RevCheesehead]

20. And you're naked....

...without your frog, that is. :evilgrin:

Is he in a forced time-out with the rest of the sig lines? :hi:

[Maddy McCall]

22. Hey! Yes, he's on time-out.

And I am certainly not naked. It's in the forties here tonight, which means I have on my tinkerbell flannel pajamas and am buried under an electric throw blanket. :D

:hi: :pals:

[RevCheesehead]

23. It's 23 degrees here,

and I'm sitting around, barely wearing my undies.

Why are you laughing? :shrug:

[Maddy McCall]

24. BRRRRRR!

I would be under TWO electric blankets, sitting on top of one, with longjohns under my flannels, and three pairs of socks, and a knit cap, if it were 23 degrees here.

You nut! Get some clothes on. You're gonna catch peenewmonia! :rofl:

[RevCheesehead]

25. What I neglected to tell you

Is that it's a balmy 68 degrees INSIDE. (or is it 70?)

[Maddy McCall]

27. Still. You have to go outside sometime.

And then you can rush inside, jump under the electric blankets, in your flannels and longjohns, socks, and cap. :D

I don't see how you guys handle it up there in snow-and-ice-land. :scared:

[Sequoia]

31. I read all my books!

Aren't you proud of me!

Sigh, acutally this is the library in the Biltmore Estate near Ashevill, NC. I was awed as a kid and in high school our class went there and I asked the guy if anyone ever reads the books and he said no they weren't allowed to, just dust them. I said, but who would know? I'd sneak and read them you can be sure!

[tigereye]

34. yup

:thumbsup:

[hfojvt]

26. I would not call that an a$$hole

even though he probably is. He is unread, and apparently has no interest in reading. He likes to pretend to be something he is not - well read, intelligent and cultured and able to read French (or he took his designer's advice on that). He has a fair amount of money, but no information is provided as to how he got it, or how he spends most of it. He spent alot of money at a bookstore, and that certainly does not make him a bad person in my eyes.

This story makes him sound pathetic, insecure and phony, and it exposes him as well. I do not see evidence of him being mean-spirited, or acting cruelly, which to me are the sine qua non of an a$$hole. Who has he hurt?

[Oeditpus Rex]

29. My reference was apparently vague

The asshole in question is Larry Laster, the book dealer quoted in the third paragraph of the story.

[pokerfan]

28. Mark Twain said it best

"A person who won't read has no advantage over one who can't read."

[tigereye]

33. you aren't literate, if you don't actually read

sigh...

[skygazer]

35. How could a book dealer approve of such a thing?

He should be publicly flogged, just for participating in such a travesty. Me, I cherish books - I'm at the point now where I could really use another large room just for my books. And these morans waste them on self-indulgent prigs who have no appreciation for them beyond how well the colors match the drapes. :grr:

[flvegan]

39. I'd rather have an empty room and a "Thank You!" letter from

my local homeless shelter or battered women's shelter hanging on the wall, because I donated however much all that crap cost to them.

That's wealth. What these folks have is an issue with being judged by folks. I can only be very, very thankful that I'm NOT like them.

[Strawman]

47. "I'm very important. I have many leather bound books...

and my apartment smells of rich mahogany."