I had lots of reactions to today's NYTimes House&Home section.

First -- if the retro 70s chestnut/turquoise/off-white color scheme is being run in the Times, it is well past its peak. Trendoids take note.

Second -- Paying $20,000 and up for a mattress is not just a joke, it's decadent, self-indulgent and offensive in a world where people starve to death every day. Those writing in to argue for why they "need" such a mattress will simply prove my point.

Third -- While there were some useful ideas in the article on managing books in a small space, organizing books by size or hiding them in ottomans is not how readers respond to books. We do not think that having our living spaces "look like a bookstore" is a bad thing. Clutter is bad. Books piled on the floor and on tables are visually messy. But bookshelves filled with books organized alphabetically or by subject or chronologically are vibrant testaments to our passions and personalities. I do recommend using the library as much as possible; it won't stop you from buying books but it might slow the flow a little. And periodically you have to cull (this is from a woman with three copies of "The Young Visiters," by the way).

Oh -- not that this article mentioned it -- but although I think the idea of organizing books by color is a hoot, and looks great, it is utterly impractical if you ever plan to find a particular book.

like deborah, i thought it was odd that the nytimes thought having more than two bookcases (and therefore creating a bookstore effect) was bad. i would love to have a wall of books/library.

Books only get dusty if you don't dust them. That's not a difficult task, nor is it even particularly time-consuming. And I say this as someone with 1000 books in my 832-sq-ft house.

Books can be beautiful, functional decor.

I love books, but when I moved across the country I vowed never to accumulate stacks of them again. I swear I read more now that I don't have all those unread titles I'm not really interested in to make me feel guilty about borrowing or buying books I actually want to read.
I also think it's easier for me to get rid of books I've already read now that I rarely pay for them- in my Brooklyn neighborhood, there are always boxes of free books on the sidewalks after stoop sales. That's where I get nearly all my reading material now. Easy come, easy go :)

MrGreen, what I should have pointed out: books only get as dusty as other items in your household do. They'll only accumulate dust if you are not regularly wiping all the items/surfaces in your household clean of dust on a regular basis.

I am sorry my pithiness obscured the real intent of the message. In the future, I will endeavor to make all my messages hew to a specific reading level.

Ugh, the graphics featured in the trowel and the mouse article in the paper this morning offended me so much. They are so gross, and so is that fence, and so is that hokey horrendous barfy HGTV-esque cheesy horrible design. BLECH! No one should ever be allowed to render plants like that. If you are playing with the programs and your design turns out like that, get thee to a landscape architect STAT!

Hmmm, I guess i just discovered a new neurosis (neuroses?sp?) i have. Like I needed more of them.

Becky

Deborah - That was my reaction exactly! I like looking at my books, and I like them arranged in a reasonable fashion!

boomer,

i was just given a full-min bed from dwr. haven't bought a mattress in years. since i won't need the boxspring what advice do you have from your research? budget is around $1,000.

thanks.

1. I wholeheartedly agree with both Boomer and Deborah about the luxury mattress nonsense. I did, however, fall in love with a mattress recently when visiting the in-laws in San Francisco. It's made by a small firm called McRoskey who do the manufacturing on site behind their showroom on Market St. The mattresses are kinda old-fashioned (basically just springs -- jeez, they even make their own steel coils! -- and cotton wadding) but that's the attraction. No weird synthetic contents or hi-falutin' gimmicks. I spent about 20 minutes lying on one and it was divine. They have 4 levels of comfort (firm to soft) and all run $1,850 for a Queen, although you gotta add about $600 to ship to the East Coast. Very tempting. But that's totally at the top end of my budget.

2. Re. storing books, I have to mention my current bug-a-boo in shelter mags (see the current issues of Elle Decor) and furniture catalogs: turning books around so that their spines are not visible. I realize styling for these photos is a big deal nowadays but it's just so damm philistine to treat books as solely a visual decorating gambit. It makes me crazy.

3. No comments about the Park Slope brownstone reno? I can't believe this story wasn't on brownstoner. Figured there'd be a huge flame war about what one can and can't do to an intact brownstone. I've no problem with modern renos but I do question the exposed brick look (couldn't they at least have painted the brick white, otherwise it's so 70s/80s) and the exposed ceiling beams (what does that do to sound transmission?).

That's very good advice on mattresses from several people, and I will save it. The artisan mattress from San Francisco sounds cool -- but as you said it was $1850 (plus of course shipping) -- pricey but not so over the top it's more than a new car (at least more than my Civic was when new in 1999) -- it's the $20,000 mattress that got to me.

i would feel very disgusted with myself if i ever spent $60,000 on a mattress. i couldn't sleep knowing how many other things could have been done with that money.

I'm with the "Enjoy looking at my books" camp. I like that books in a home warm it up and make it more personal. I've been wanting to get some glass-fronted units to display mine in - my cats always end up sitting on the shelves...