(no subject)

[intertext]

I forgot to mention something about my UVic library expedition yesterday.

The book I wanted particularly - Textual Poachers: Television and Participatory Culture, by Henry Jenkins - was catalogued under abnormal psychology.

Hee.

Comments

[steepholm.livejournal.com]

:-) My favourite of that kidney was finding Umberto Eco's Travels in Hyperreality in the Travel section of my local Waterstone's. Book that ticket now!

[lidocafe.livejournal.com]

Hahahaha. Sounds like an elitist judgement and, as I said this aft, an excellent starter for your talk.

I have found Bierce's The Devil's Dictionary in the reference section, and in Blockbuster's they occasionally have some strange ways of categorizing movies. I have questionable films there in "comedy" and have told them that people are going to be quite disappointed, perhaps even appalled, when they get those films home. True to corporate form, they say they have no control and that the head office does it all. Meanwhile, some poor sap rents a nice light film like Requiem for a Dream or something and sits on the couch awash in dismay.

Waiting for Pan's Labyrinth to show up in the family section. After all, it's got animation and stars a little girl!

[intertext.livejournal.com]

hahaha. Yes, what was that movie - one about different women's lives - that was filed in the "gay" section because one of the episodes involved a gay couple?

[lidocafe.livejournal.com]

Was it Nine Lives or Things You Can Tell Just by Looking at Her ?

There's a gay section?

[intertext.livejournal.com]

It was "Things You Can Tell..."; and yes, at Nighthawks there's a "gay" section. Very silly.