Why I Collect (1 Viewer)

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by Man-Fai Wong

At first, I was inclined to agree w/ you -- and I do find myself regularly conflicted between both my more irrational side of collecting (akin to Stu's) and my need to justify my collecting (more akin to yours).

However, I wonder though whether the justification of pursuing art/beauty isn't anymore a (unconfessed) rationalization than the (confessed) one that Stu offered. Just the fact that you admit that such pursuit is likely merely one to satisfy one's own self and nobody else seems to suggest it's not much different than Stu's compulsion to collect. It's just that Stu has decided to admit the conceit that whatever justifications he used to have (and might still like to hold to) are merely just that and likely nothing more.

What I read was the true pleasure came not from enjoying the item but the act of buying. That's the difference. This is not an argument of what is art. With collecting "art", however defined, the pleasure comes from enjoying it after the purchase. Rather, this mode of "collecting" derives pleasure from spending money, and not in actually enjoying the object, which is subsequently packed away, never enjoyed, and later discarded at a complete loss.

Collecting movies, which are viewed, shared, enjoyed, displayed as decorations I can understand. The pleasure is in the object, not the lightening of the wallet.

But spending sums of money on objects that the buyer knows at purchase will never be enjoyed because he has too many already is irrational.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Originally Posted by DaveF ">[/url]

But spending sums of money on objects that the buyer knows at purchase will never be enjoyed because he has too many already is irrational.

[/QUOTE]I was under the impression that he generally expects/intends to watch what he buys at the time of purchase (and also would wish to share w/ friends and family), but realizes by now that he probably will never catch up on some/many(?) of the titles he bought in the past w/out necessarily knowing which ones (other than those on obsolete formats).

For instance, he recently bought The Seventh Seal on BD and watched it already. Obviously, he's not being disciplined about limiting his purchases nor about catching up on what he owns and have allowed certain/many(?) titles to fall by the wayside, but probably many of us have done similarly to varying degrees too. I still have a sizeable stash of DVDs/BDs to catch up on myself -- and have even double-dipped in a few cases before watching the first purchase like Stu mentioned (and have also accidentally bought a few duplicates from bargain bins because I had forgotten about the previous purchases).

 

[Stu Rosen]

DaveF:

I don't think you really got the right message from my piece (or I failed in conveying it properly). The joy is not in the act of buying, it's in the act of having and using. Yes I have too many discs, but (as is often the case) the next one I buy may be the next one I watch - it's not like there's an orderly date-stamped queue. There's a pleasure I get from the choices I have, even if I don't ever expect to choose them all. Would I give back some of my discs and not miss them? Sure. But I certainly understand why I bought them in the first place, and it wasn't for the pleasure of handing over money.

I don't think it's irrational, what I do - it may be indefensible, but that's different from irrational. In any event, I don't see it as a problem, and just as importantly, neither does my wife. I can live with that.

Anyway, glad you thought enough of the piece to comment - I'm enjoying this thread.

Stu

 

[Craig Beam]

Another great piece, Stu. I own over 600 DVDs/BDs (not that many next to some folks here), and there's no way I'll ever watch them all (unless I become independently wealthy or disabled and have a lot of free time on my hands). But I love my collection, and I love the fact that I have a wide variety of films at my fingertips. Plus I love so many films and TV shows, it only makes sense (to me, anyway) to own them. People are usually stunned to see my three-and-a-half bookcases full of movies, but stunned in an impressed way, not a "holy shit, man, you are insane" way. I suppose if the collection doubles or triples, that may change.

 

[Cees Alons]

Originally Posted by RickER ">[/url]

When you think about it, we dont need any of this stuff. All we need is food, and a place to sleep. Everything, and i mean everything else is bonus.

[/QUOTE]
You really need to broaden that and add a few of the bare necessities of life.
Safety, not getting killed. And to "multiply" of course.
Guess what? Basically those are some of the very subjects of art, in whatever form.


However, I think DaveF led us astray by introducing the "art" topic. Even more so by almost making it a requirement. People can enjoy art, including film art, without ever collecting movie media. Or reading without owning a large collection of books.

As someone who has a library of many books, videos and DVDs, I can say that collecting those items, contemplating the acquisition, doing some research, adding them to your library, organizing them, arrange it all, make a database collecting more and more "relevant" info related to it ... that that's all part of the joy too.

[i]Somehow you are trying to accomplish your version of "completeness" of your collection.[/i]
A strive for completeness - a goal you know you will never really reach, be it only because you will move your defining conditions the moment you are in danger of being close to it.

 

[Frank Ha]

Originally Posted by Cees Alons

"As someone who has a library of many books, videos and DVDs, I can say that collecting those items, contemplating the acquisition, doing some research, adding them to your library, organizing them, arrange it all, make a database collecting more and more "relevant" info related to it ... that that's all part of the joy too."

"You really need to broaden that and add a few of the bare necessities of life.
Safety, not getting killed. And to "multiply" of course.
Guess what? Basically those are some of the very subjects of art, in whatever form."

Cees,
I think you are right about collecting. I get a lot of pleasure doing research, organizing, arranging, and making a database. I also get a lot of enjoyment sharing my collection of movies with close friends. They frequently borrow movies or TV shows. I have a little book that they have to write in the name of the movies that they borrow. I also enjoy having friends over to watch movies. So, for me I guess there are two aspects to movie collecting that appeal to me. First the solitary nature of collecting which is made up of research, databases, etc. Second, the social nature of sharing the film experience with others.

I live in a place where safety is a daily primary concern. When you could die tomorrow, you make decisions that reflect that. For me, it puts into perspective what is really important. Watching and collecting movies is not the most important thing in the world, but it is my hobby. So, it is one of the things that I do for enjoyment and I'm glad I do. Developing friendships is important. Because none of us may be here tomorrow, I think it is important to have friends that you actually do things with. Having friends over for a meal, watching a movie, playing games, and etc.are ways to encourage that.

Life is unsure. A person should take time to develop their interests (in a responsible way) and he should invest his life in the lives of others. Just my two cents.

 

[Cees Alons]

Originally Posted by TravisR


Cees

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by Stu Rosen /forum/thread/291477/why-i-collect#post_3595459

 

[Stu Rosen]

That's not it, Dave. The act of collecting is not just the act of buying and collecting. There's also the little matter of opening the objects and playing them. That's actually part of the process. Just because I don't watch every one immediately (or, in some cases, ever) doesn't meant that that's not my intention when I buy them.

No matter, though. I'm home today, taking a day off from work, so I think I'll go downstairs, open one of those things I collect, and get some enjoyment from it. Crazy, no?

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by Stu Rosen )

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Originally Posted by DaveF

My wife still wants me to dump my old, mostly packed-away, modest comic book collection too (among other things). I'd like to pass it along to my now-10-yo son, but it'd probably get ruined in a hurry (and lose whatever little $ value still remains) if I did that...

_Man_

 

[Stu Rosen]

I say, let the kid read the comics. Books, even comic books, should be read, not stored! Just one degenerate collector's perspective.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Originally Posted by Stu Rosen

_Man_

 

[Cees Alons]

"Only to collect" is a somewhat fuzzy notion as well.

There are many films or TV shows I have seen in the past, or recently, and/or have on what I clearly consider as an obsolete medium (VHS) or own not at all yet, that I do want to own. Always with the intention of watching it whenever I feel to.

I never buy a movie or a book I don't want to see or read ever. Or show to members of the family.

But, e.g. if I just happened to have it seen it in the cinema or even on TV, I may decide not to watch my new acquisition right away. It's part of the collection though, and I can choose to take any of them whenever I want to.

Which still leaves me with many items I haven't seen yet - not in that instance.


Cees

 

[hampsteadbandit]

my prime driver for collecting is to have the CHOICE

I sit down after a long day at work, and let my gaze move across my collection, I will find a film (whether on DVD or Blue) that grabs my attention

it might be something light like a comedy or TV show box-set, or a more involved viewing of a great film

but having that choice is essential - I do not have a TV aerial or satellite feed plugged into my high-def TV - its only recorded material, and I appreciate that every time I want to view, I am making a choice rather than being fed something from a TV network

once you ditch TV, your appreciation of movies changes, this includes TV box-sets which are like movies, but more involved due to the longer viewing period

 

[AaronMK]

So, for me I guess there are two aspects to movie collecting that appeal to me. First the solitary nature of collecting which is made up of research, databases, etc. Second, the social nature of sharing the film experience with others.

As for the first, I used to have a spreadsheet with all my DVDs and the prices I paid for them to calculate my contribution to Reel.com's demise, but lost interest in that. The second reason is what has really survived. Having a nice collection is great for when you have friends or family over, you usually have instant access to something good they haven't seen that also fits the mood.

Quote:

the next one I buy may be the next one I watch - it's not like there's an orderly date-stamped queue. There's a pleasure I get from the choices I have, even if I don't ever expect to choose them all.

Exactly! I use my collection to have many choices of movies I know are good spur of the moment entertainment. Adding titles keeps that selection fresh and varied, but also contributes to that perceived need to get titles on the shelf at increasing rates.

The number of Blu-rays I purchase has been cut in half because of high prices of many titles or the inability to get them outside of a box set or expensive collector's edition. I am usually a bit outspoken, including now, about how some studios have started raking consumers over the coals with these practices, but it has gotten me to take a look at why I really collect and what I really need to have in my collection to satisfy those reasons. I have found I can cut back quite a bit without any perceived loss in the collection's ability to serve its purpose.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Ditto much of what Aaron (and a couple others) said just above, including the spreadsheet thing. ), which is not bad at all.

_Man_