Begging Raising the question, …

This sequence (two four-panel stories) doesn’t seem to address a more fundamental policy matter than the details of pepper supply. Are they not aware of this patron planning to eat that big sloppy deli sandwich at his desk in the Reading Room?


The next episode:

(Yes, I’m aware that the strikeout in the post title doesn’t seem to work in Cell or Tablet display preview. So maybe change it to something about “Burying the <strike>lede</strike> lead.”)


  1. I’m trying to work out what play on words I’ve missed with the “hoards of people” line. Surely there’s more to it than a misspelling?

  2. I kind of hate this comic, even more so after reading the last panel with the misuse of the word “hoards”.

  3. My inner proofreader won’t let this go. He says “hoard” but means “horde”. Argh! I feel better now.

  4. They are aware that he’s going to break the rules (about “no food in the library”); they are simply being realistic about not being able to prevent it. Their solitary hope is that by refusing to give him any spices, he might pack up his bland sandwich and take it home to eat it there.

    P.S. One reason that I would never follow Library Comic is the never-ending parade of moronic patrons. It would be nice if just once, they would physically eject one of these idiots out the front door, but no, the staff is always too polite to do anything as reasonable as that.

  5. @ Ooten Aboot – If you hadn’t said anything about it, we would all have assumed that the error in the name was part of the gag.

  6. I’m not familiar with this comic, so is this a running Librarian (book hoarder) joke? Serious question here. I know one who has problems hosting her own book discussion group because of hordes (piles) of books.

  7. When I worked in a university library, I was reshelving once and smelled a familiar smell. I followed my nose, and on one of the desks there was a guy enjoying a gyros. Spread out over the whole table. But don’t worry, he wasn’t going to leave a mess, because underneath all the mess he had spread out several of our books.

  8. @Whitey, this is an established web comic, with home at . It seems to be a public library. The staff are regular characters, the patrons or others are sometimes recurring but often one-offs. Almost all strips are set at the library, but once in a while we see a staff member at home or going about their outside life.

  9. MiB, I think horde has to be people. Maybe if the books were animations appearing aware and capable of movement, they could constitute a horde. But usually, probably not.

  10. I thought the proper collective term for a group of books would be a “shelf. 😉

    P.S. What is the collective term for a group of Bostonians? (The only term that springs to mind is “bastion”, but it seems a little too alliterative.

  11. In English common law, “treasure trove” has a specific meaning, and “hoard” is distinct and something totally different. This is probably because it is still theoretically possible to find something buried in England that was put there by Romans, something that we just don’t have here in the States. If you discover a “treasure trove”, the ownership of the treasure works differently than if you discover a “hoard”. This is just one of many fun topics that get covered during the first year of law school. It starts with working out the proper ownership of lost or misplaced property, and then splinters into special cases of how and why the property got misplaced in the first place. So, if you own a house, and discover that it has walls that are stuffed with U.S. currency, it makes a difference if they are 1933 Federal Reserve Notes or 2021. If it’s the first one, you have discovered a treasure trove, and the ownership of the cash flows to the ownership of the land it was found on. If it’s last year’s money, then it probably belongs to the tenant who just moved out, if they claim to have hidden money in the house. (which, of course, they will do as soon as news gets out that money was found hidden in the house, whether or not it is true.) The valuable property that was concealed a couple of generations (at least) ago is a trove. It gets treated much the same as if naturally-occurring deposits of gold were found, and gets split between the finder and the owner of the property accordomg to rules that can vary by jurisdiction. The previous owner of the land has no claim to it. They sold the land (and everything buried in it) as a unit, no takesy-backsies. The more recent treasure, on the other hand, still belongs to whoever owned it prior to it being hidden.

    Unless I’m misremembering first-year Property class, which is, of course, a definite possibility.

  12. Note for above: There are some interesting exclusions. for example, if you have mid-30’s gold $20 double eagle coins, you probably do not want to send them to the U.S. Treasury for authentication, no matter where you found them. The U.S. stopped issuing gold coins in the early ’30s and claims that any privately-possessed U.S. gold coin from after they stopped issuing them is by definition stolen from the U.S. The last one was sent as a gift to the ruler of Egypt at the time, and that is literally the only double eagle coin from that year that it is possible to legally own, and you better have an authenticated chain of ownership. When a family discovered that their father, a coin collector, had a stack of them and asked the Treasury to verify that they weren’t counterfeits, the Treasury said “we’ll check them for you. Send them to us.”
    Turned out, they weren’t counterfeit, and the Treasury seized them as stolen property. It seems that the coin-collector dad had paid a mint employee to buy the coins before their release date, to be sure to get uncirculated coins, and the mint recalled gold coins just before that year’s coins were actually released, and therefore there aren’t supposed to be any that-year coins or later. For coin collectors, I imagine the exact year of the forbidden coin is unforgettable. I am not a coin collector. I think it’s the 1933 that there is only one of, but it might be 1932. I’m sure Google knows.

  13. If you’re speaking of Bostonians generally? No idea.
    But Bostonian sports fans? The plural form is a flushing of Boston sports fans (whether they’re fans of the Red Sox, the Bruins, or the Cheatriots)

  14. Note: Back the first time there was a USFL, there was one team that moved west every year. The first year of the league, they were the Boston Breakers. The second uear, they were the New Orleans Breakers. The final year, they were the Portland Breakers. Presumably, had the league held out for another year, it would have featured the Honolulu Breakers. When the league was revived last years, the Breakers were representing New Orleans again. Portland reconfigured its stadium in the interim to suit its current football tenants, the Portland Timbers.

  15. James d Pollock: Are you sure that a “flushing” is not a collection of New York Mets fans?

  16. Long before there were home computers, years before I even took a high school class in computer programming, I had a sixth grade English teacher who was not going to let me by without being able to spell or, as I entered it on every paperwork I handed in “sepll”.

    With her help I at least reached the point where I generally notice the word is spelled incorrectly and looked it up (this occurred around 1966 – long before the wonder of spell check) in the dictionary.

Add a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.