Ok. My normative position is that the “backwards book” thing is HERESY and EVIL.
Analytically and fascinatingly though, this is a visible moment of semiosis around the materiality, functions, and “knowledge” of books. 
https://twitter.com/bob_maclean/status/951059810241470465 …
The real question I have is, are backwards books better or worse than no books? On the one hand, books! On the other hand, the fact that you definitely don't read them might make them even more pretentious than just not having them?
-
-
I think it largely depends on intention? I like Umberto Eco's idea of "antilibraries"—that people have books in their home that they haven't read. He argued that it keeps you intellectually curious and humble. You are surrounded by knowledge that can immediately be accessed.
-
How the antilibrary holds up in the age of the internet is another question though. Aesthetically and personally, I'm repulsed by the whole fad of turning your books backwards but that might be the bias of having two librarians as parents.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.