Pet Peeves anyone???

[fighthefutureofhd]

It might have been at some point. But it's been ingrained in us for so long that it's now become human nature. This has been going on for centuries and centuries. I might could buy learned behavior at first, but after 200 years or more? I don't think so.

[BizCat]

This is a pet peeve...

Getting an email, from USPS, that I have an expected package coming this Saturday, with the tracking #/link.

I have no idea what it is, or who it is from, no details. I'm not expecting anything. Soooo now it'll be on my mind until the mystery comes.

[Hitman Horton]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

It might have been at some point. But it's been ingrained in us for so long that it's now become human nature. This has been going on for centuries and centuries. I might could buy learned behavior at first, but after 200 years or more? I don't think so.

This happens because a person's ego can't accept the fact that they're wrong so they refuse to admit it.

[Hitman Horton]

Originally Posted by BizCat

This is a pet peeve...

Getting an email, from USPS, that I have an expected package coming this Saturday, with the tracking #/link.

I have no idea what it is, or who it is from, no details. I'm not expecting anything. Soooo now it'll be on my mind until the mystery comes.

Exciting. Are you gonna update us when it arrives?

[BizCat]

Originally Posted by Hitman Horton

Exciting. Are you gonna update us when it arrives?

I think I figured it out. It's a book my wife ordered for our daughter, lol

[Hitman Horton]

Originally Posted by BizCat

I think I figured it out. It's a book my wife ordered for our daughter, lol

Glad you figured it out. If it was me it would have driven me nuts too.

[fighthefutureofhd]

Thought of a major pet peeve of mine yesterday. When people or stores ignore words/letters such as A or The when stocking things alphabetically. Some examples include the following:

1. The X-Files
2. the innocence missions
3. The Cranberries
4. A Time to Kill
5. A place in the Sun
6. A Rainy day in New York
7. A Raisin in The Sun
8. The Gun In Betty Lou's Handbag
9. The Golden Girls
10. The Sundays
11. The Sugarcubes
12. The Batman

It drives me up a wall. These artists/studios didn't just title these things like that for the hell of it. It means something and it matters. The Batman, for example, is done so to differentiate itself from the others titled simply as Batman. At least that's what I think is going on. But they always put that movie in the B section. I always put those things in their RIGHT place and don't ignore those letters or words.

[BeastCreatureTrapper]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

[Show spoiler]Thought of a major pet peeve of mine yesterday. When people or stores ignore words/letters such as A or The when stocking things alphabetically. Some examples include the following:

1. The X-Files
2. the innocence missions
3. The Cranberries
4. A Time to Kill
5. A place in the Sun
6. A Rainy day in New York
7. A Raisin in The Sun
8. The Gun In Betty Lou's Handbag
9. The Golden Girls
10. The Sundays
11. The Sugarcubes
12. The Batman

It drives me up a wall. These artists/studios didn't just title these things like that for the hell of it. It means something and it matters. The Batman, for example, is done so to differentiate itself from the others titled simply as Batman. At least that's what I think is going on. But they always put that movie in the B section. I always put those things in their RIGHT place and don't ignore those letters or words.

It's a matter of convenience. Do you realize how many film, book, record, tv titles begin with articles like "A", "An", "The", etc. etc. If you sorted with respect to those articles, you would have an unwieldy mess. It would take you so much longer to get to The Batman listed in your example.

So, we list said title as "Batman, The (2022)" in cataloguing a collection.

It's not a matter of disrespect to any one title, but rather a more practical approach to sorting a large collection of items for faster access.

[Vilya]

Alphabetizing titles by ignoring determiner words like "A" and "The" at the beginning of a title has been a standard practice at libraries for ages. Most companies follow these long established library practices because, as BeastCreatureTrapper noted, to do otherwise would indeed create an unwieldly mess; The "A" and the "T" sections would be nigh unto endless in length.

Libraries know what they're doing and it is why their example is followed.

[fighthefutureofhd]

I could certainly understand and get on board with that if they just didn't use the A or The in the title at all. Take The Golden Girls, for example. They did a tribute to the show at the Emmys and they referred to it as "The" Golden Girls. Not Golden Girls If you're not going to be bothered with organizing it correctly then stop referring it to as such. You cannot have it both ways. Plus, I'm not all that convinced it creates that much more hassle in respects to organizing and cataloging.

Now, what about titles that require usage of A or The in the title. if Stephen King wrote a book called The Eye in You & Me where should that go? Negating the word the helps to negate the authors intent and story. Cause it isn't Eye in You & Me. The in that title has some relevance to that story. Or Stephen King wouldn't have used it. It's probably referring to a specific eye (in this hypothetical). Not something random.

A library of all places should be the one that DOES get it right. Not to mention the grammatical aspects either. Eye in You & Me makes no sense. In no way is it grammatically correct at all. I cannot imagine how it would be. it just sounds so wrong when you say it. And if we don't say it that way then why are we cataloging it that way. I mean we don't say Eye in You & Me, The.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

Plus, I'm not all that convinced it creates that much more hassle in respects to organizing and cataloging.

If you ever actually worked in a library you would see first hand why titles are alphabetized by skipping determiner words like "A" and "The."

Your example of "The Eye In You & Me" would be buried deep into the "T" section otherwise. You would have to get to the "Th" section and then past every possible combination of "The A..., The B..., The C..., The D..., and finally near to the end of "The E..." before finding what you wanted.

Cataloging titles has NOTHING to do with how things sound when read out loud, grammar, or "artistic intent", which no one would ever agree upon, anyway. Many titles are grammatically incorrect by design. The goal of cataloging is to create a uniform and standardized way of organizing titles so that we can easily and readily locate them, which is especially important with large collections.

You would be able to locate "The Eye In You & Me" far faster by looking for "Eye In You & Me, The" near to the end of the "E" section. That's why it is done this way. Find what you want and find it fast. Library cataloging makes it simple to find things everywhere that follows their well thought out methodology. Libraries have been doing it this way for centuries; it is a time tested and proven practice.

In short, I am glad that you are not making these decisions.

[fighthefutureofhd]

Libraries have been doing it wrong for centuries. A title can tell you something about the art contained within. Often times, it may not. Depending on the art itself. But it definitely applies to books. A book title gives you a little insight to the overall theme of the story. Something that sort of tells you what you are about to read. While being just vague enough that it doesn't give anything away.

The Goldfinch is a good example of that. Goldfinch, by itself, can mean many different things. So can The Goldfinch. In the case of The Goldfinch book and movie, it's about something very specific. To remove the from it negates a lot of what the book and movie are about. in this case you can't remove the without gutting the story. Plus, how is it to find a book titled The Goldfinch. It won't take you any longer to find it under The than it would under G.

Same goes with my example. The internet does it. So, I really don't see why libraries can't either. It's laziness to me. Complete and utter laziness. This is a pet peeve of mine that I don't believe I can budge from. It drives me nuts too much. How does one explain songs like The One That Got Away. Or artists such as The Band. They didn't choose to call themselves The Band just for shits and giggles. There was intention there. And, YES, it does interfere with an 'artist's intent".

Just like using capitalization for the band the innocence mission negates their intent and identity. After their first two records, they decided to stop using capitalization in the spelling of their band name. It's been that way for 30 years. Even their website is done that way. It is what they want, so why shouldn't we allow this. We're about respecting people's decision with identity and whatnot. So, why should this be any different.

We don't get to decide or choose these things. Take a look at it another way. On the internet our email addresses can be case sensitive. And we have to follow that if we wish to send an email, for example. And we should follow the same rules when cataloging art such as books or movies. We're already doing it anyway in some respects and I don't see why we can't do it for everything. R.E.M. and H.E.R. go at the front of the R's and H's. 10,000 Maniacs goes in with numbers. Unless you decide to spell it out. Just like with 10cc. Again it's utter laziness to just do it half assed.

One last example here that might shift things a bit. Say I, as an author, write a book called A Alphabet that deals with an alphabet/language that only has A words in it. There is only A and A related items in said alphabet. Now where would that go? It's not super hard to find it simply under A since the next word begins with A. But according to the stoic, stodgy rules of cataloging that would dictate it HAS to go under alphabet. But in that one moment you have totally changed the whole meaning of the book and story that is contained within. You've basically given the reader a false sense of what this book is about.