Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was looking over the remains of the Nat'l Geo and wondering why I haven't subscribed in a decade or so. Essentially, it became too much too keep up with and it just got lost in the background clutter to renew it. .
You know, you can purchase 100 years of National Geographic's (something like 1888 - 1988, I believe) copied onto a compact set of CD's.
Shred it? Heh. I could buy an Alaskan cruise for the cost of shredding that stuff.
Thank goodness I now have a nice fire pit in my backyard. In the past several months I have torched over 2 dozen large boxes packed with totally useless papers that I've never EVER needed to even look at - some since 1990. It was a blazing inferno, and bingo! instantly, I now have oodles of storage space - and, the best part? nothing to put into it!
Just an FYI--just google "free shredding events" in your area. During my major de cluttering I had boxes of old tax returns (dating back to the 80's), old checks and the like. Sweet driving up to the "free shredding event" and watch it all be shredded in less than a minute! One of the local churches around here does it twice a year. We give them a donation of $15.
The wife is about one shoebox of old ribbons & birthday cards short of officially being classified as a hoarder. I told her," You know, I'm getting older. If I want to drop dead, I'll have to step outside so I have a place to fall."
I agree with GiGi's earlier comment about getting rid of stuff:- save the kids the trouble of throwing it out when we die....BTW- we're making some good cash selling it on one of those "Buy-Sell-Trade" sites.
You know, you can purchase 100 years of National Geographic's (something like 1888 - 1988, I believe) copied onto a compact set of CD's.
Well, yes, that would be the modern answer but it has several drawbacks.
First of all, one is buying again what they have already bought. Secondly, it violates smell. Ie,
Jenny Calendar: Honestly, what is it about them that bothers you so much? Rupert Giles: The smell. Jenny Calendar: Computers don't smell, Rupert. Rupert Giles: Smell is the most powerful trigger to the memory there is. A certain flower or a-a whiff of smoke can bring up experiences... long forgotten. Books smell... musty and-and-and rich. The knowledge gained from a computer is a... it, uh, it has no-no texture, no-no context. It's-it's there and then it's gone. If it's to last, then-then the getting of knowledge should be, uh, tangible. It should be, uh, smelly.
(BtVs, I, Robot.....You jane!)
Third, related to that point, are the other elements of memory such as the feeling of the pages, what was experienced through time. Fourth, having the issue autographed by someone famous in this or that article is much more than having the CD autographed.
Fifth, if one wants the picture to put in a frame on the wall, they may run into a problem, maybe. When I started printing out my own photography and went to FB for the stuff I had posted there, I found that the edges of the FB picture were blurry. In posting them on FB, they went through a compression which really showed up when printed to a picture. I solved it by going back to my original DSLR work, but now I know another thing to look out for in commercially stored pictures.
Sixth, data on the computer is its own kind of clutter in that we can spend hours, days sorting it, putting it into order, backing it up, arranging it so a search engine can find it and in the end, for all that work done.....what do we have to show for it? I have tens of external hard drives sitting around and do I know what is on each and every one? No. Pictures I imagine, both the thousands I have taken and the millions I have collected over the years but can I point to the drive that has them? No, that project has not been done yet. By the way, another thing about all those pictures? They have a purpose in the before mentioned Project Sarah.
FURTHER, in our fast computer world, there is a massive tendency to download it all and "read it later", especially when doing research. I have drawers of CDs, when hard drive memory was still quite costly, of where I found a site with info of interest to me and instead of searching through it, I downloaded the entire site and burned the CD. It is probably, if it can be read now, a disk of data that I don't need, but since it is in hand and since we have memories of that one picture we once saw and would want again, so the possibility of holding on to stuff once recorded has meaning to us, we are compelled to keep it.
Somewhere deep down in my files, I hope, there is a sexy but not nude picture of Racquel Darrian and Saber from, I suspect, their lesbian acting days that I would love to have in my active diary files. Both women have a place in my diary pictures that relate my thoughts, Racquel for being athletic to her profession and Saber for big hair days and having that picture to use would add variety to my files.
I can't find it in my files, I can't locate it on the Net despite numerous searches, and when I want it but can't find it, that can drive one crazy. Hence we have the clutter of computer files and reasons why we never get rid of those. They are out of sight, out of mind, they don't take up much room per se (the need to have two drives for every piece of data is an issue), and we would rather have these many of electrons somewhere than to delete them just in case there might be something we want.
De clutter in one area, stack the clutter in another.
Last edited by TamaraSavannah; 09-23-2020 at 06:29 AM..
I'm an antique/collectible dealer. There is no such thing as too much stuff. Give it to me!
That is where it gets tricky getting rid of some stuff. Is it worth anything? I have two boxes of depression dishes, a few hummels, my father's trains, there is several very old Playboy magazines from the early 60's. Sometimes I just want to dump them in the trash
I don't see how the people on Hoarders can let it get that way. That is a serious mental illness pure and simple, but I can't even see how they begin down that path. Like the OP, a certain level of clutter drives me nuts and provides an impetus to cull, toss, donate before it ever gets to be too bad.
Looks like we're singing to the same sheet of music.
That is where it gets tricky getting rid of some stuff. Is it worth anything? I have two boxes of depression dishes, a few hummels, my father's trains, there is several very old Playboy magazines from the early 60's. Sometimes I just want to dump them in the trash
Check on all of the online places to sell and see what people are asking...
find a seller who has something similar to what you have, and follow it until it sells, or it doesn't.
It will give you insight to see if these items are in demand or being snubbed.
Perhaps offering them to donation would be the next option, and a kind one too.
I would through out the Playboy Magazines. Ew, you don't know where they've been.
The wife is about one shoebox of old ribbons & birthday cards short of officially being classified as a hoarder. I told her," You know, I'm getting older. If I want to drop dead, I'll have to step outside so I have a place to fall."
I agree with GiGi's earlier comment about getting rid of stuff:- save the kids the trouble of throwing it out when we die....BTW- we're making some good cash selling it on one of those "Buy-Sell-Trade" sites.
YOU ARE TOO FUNNY!!!!!!! My eyes are all watery crying-laughing
Now, then, this looks like a good place to jump in.
One of the things that bought it in the move from the apartments, in Operation:WHIRLWIND was 40 years or so of Nat'l Geographic. It was just too much tonnage to move in the too little time that was then left. Now, perhaps a single shelful remains. I am still up on the fence about the loss of whether I would still have this picture, that article that are in my memories........or to take the decision of the Gods and get rid of the rest that sit a shelf away, unread.
One of the interesting paradoxes of Nat'l Geo is remembering this or that picture, this or that article in so many issues and using that as a justification to save them all. Another approach is to have a coffee table book of "that" instead and I do....many, many coffee books. So are the coffee table books the next item on the chopping block? One might say yes because there are so many of them and they hardly ever get touched.
On the other hand, however, that is one of the decluttered lifestyles that is sought after, to have an open living room with my coffee, looking at one, say "Persia Bridge of Turquoise" (up there on the shelf, I inherited it), using my home as a portal to other worlds, getting away from it all.
These days, ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS, getting away from it all means getting away from the computer and the Net. So for all we might say that we don't need paper, its replacement, the computer, is really no answer at all. Further, as I sit here typing this, I am forever looking over this or that shelf, saying I really ought to be speed reading such a book so I can get rid of it. Our wonderful space saving computers, however, take up so much time.
Anyhow, I am getting rid of things as I unpack boxes but the catch is it is a slow process. One just does not fill up the trash dumpster and put it on the road for that would be selfish and irresponsible. It has to be sorted to what is recyclable, what needs to be shredded, what needs to be.....
The time that too much clutter makes me crazy is when the crunch is on, when I am trying to find something that needs to be done, and there is too much stuff in the way......or when the cats in their games tip over an organized stack.
As to this or that, well, I suppose it depends on whether or not, of how important it is to you. I am thinking of getting rid of the 50 million Star Trek novels I have, those of the post James Blish style era, the Stephen Kings, the Robin Cooks (if you've read one Robin Cook book, you've read them all) but when it comes to Anne McCaffrey or Ballatine war history, not so quick to swing the ax.
I suppose the big question is that after "it is done"......and then what?
A decade or so ago, I was talking with a comrade at a psychology conference of the, say, "Researcher Obsession Syndrome" of where one holds on to ALL their old research material in the belief that they will need that one little snippet in something someday.
Something that I learned in one of my graduate research courses is that one should not be using articles more than 10, certainly not 20 years old in their work.
On the other hand, though, I am not about get rid of my Cousteau books. They are certainly ancient but they are very enjoyable killing time books and now, I even have a reason to lend one out......recently I came across some students who never had heard of him.
Finally, getting away from books and just into all the things of this or that, my life has often been not one particular bag to one particular task, but many bags and for whatever the problem is, a procedure can be developed with the stuff being carried to solve it. At least, that was the approach back in my back pack days when the old book bags took on second lives as storage bags for this or that. Then, when I was going on a trip such as doing field work for many weeks, all these bags filled the car.....the reason why I got into SUVs because the sedan wasn't as efficient for carrying all that stuff. There's that philosophy, too!
40 years of National Geographic????
Go get some counseling before you wind up on Hoarders.
...........I would through out the Playboy Magazines. Ew, you don't know where they've been.
Or what young minds they have perverted. The before mentioned, sort of, June 1969 issue was the one to me.
HENCE, if they are in good condition, you may not want to throw them out but see what people are asking for it. My item of such sweet decadence.......all puns intended......seems to be going for around in the $20 though there seems to be someone on Amazon who thinks people will pay over $900 for it.
As it is, I do keep all my old Playboys, from about 1987, I think. While it is interesting to see how one standard of beauty changed over the years, right now, it is more of a compulsion especially when considers that I really haven't even opened many issues for years. Basically, the reason why right now falls into "The 80s File" where I look back on them when I am in my 80s and remember what propelled youth......and to toss them out now means that I have accepted growing old.
Hence, another reason to support "clutter".
As far as the pun? That particular issue had the film review on the flick "de Sade" with Keir Dullea (Dave from 2001). For all the scenes they showed of the flick in the magazine, sugar to a young mind growing up on Roger Corman flicks, they really weren't there in the movie. Oh, they are, but in his dream sequences, the movie itself is rather boring (bought it a few years ago). There's much more fun in a flick like "Cry of the Banshee".
But, money wise, one can never tell. I think we all want to feel like we were when we were children, before we found out that growing up sucks!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ew, you don't know where they've been.
