The hidden dangers of working in serials

One of the many hidden dangers of working too long in serials...is learning Roman Numerals...

Does anyone else think in fluent Roman Numerals? Am I an oddity? After 10+ years in the field, I can glance at a journal, a book, or the end movie credits and go "that says "1976" or "2010" or whatever. I am not sure that this is a skill that really translates to the real world...and I might be one of the few people that got the joke about the "M&Ms being the official candy of the new millenium..." ((I even had to explain it to my husband and he has a mathematics degree!)) And now I seek out Roman Numerals in the real world and revel in my superiority of being able to read them...

Who knew what dangers lurked in the heart of serials...? ((with apologies to "The Shadow" radio show"))

Roman Numerals

I can understand the confusion about some of the Roman Numeral rules. Especially the one about the "X" and not using more than 3. However, I received 2! related publications in the post today that makes me think that Roman Numerals should be taught in math classes in primary and secondary schools once again. What, exactly, is the point of putting "XLX"? The volume number should be 50 and that's what this one winds up being -- but how obtuse can you get?!

Roman Numerals

Roman numerals are always a fun thing to deal with. I was fortunate enough to have taught seven classes (in one day) on Roman numerals once. Since they are pretty standard it is no problem for me to read them. However, sometimes the patrons or my assistants are not able to get a handle on what symbol stands for which number. And then there is always the fun that is created when the publisher loses track of where they are and then places whatever one they want (or so it seems) on the issue. Then there are the publishers who insist on using "X" as many times as they want -- disregarding the regular rules and making me have to go "ok, was that X for 10 more or to take away from the next symbol?"