|
I guess it comes with the intended audience, explains the choice of the other books, or lack thereof, as well
|
|
|
|
|
I don't take any list of that kind without Terry Pratchett seriously!
|
|
|
|
|
36, which means, as I read a minimum of 100 books a year, either that I read some real rubbish or this list is too random to be representative of anything much. I'm choosing to believe the latter!
|
|
|
|
|
Member 9082365 wrote: this list is too random to be representative of anything much
You have just been Sharapova'd.
|
|
|
|
|
Couldn't agree more! The only possible reason to exclude him might be because it's a list of "classics", but that's definitely not the case here: Douglas Adams, Aldus Huxley, Audrey Niffenegger, etc. But not Terry? Come on! He's head and shoulders above those - they're only worthy to be book-stands to his collection.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, Pterry IS classic! 
|
|
|
|
|
Jörgen Andersson wrote: Hey, Pterry IS classic!
Too right you are! ... BUT he's not OLD!
|
|
|
|
|
According to the USA Library of Congress, the most influential book in America for decades (after the Bible), has been Atlas Shrugged. Why is it not on the list? Is it because the list was compiled by the BBC?
How do we preserve the wisdom men will need,
when their violent passions are spent?
- The Lost Horizon
modified 6-Sep-15 20:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Like most news organisations, the BBC tends to attract people of a certain political bent. I doubt Atlas Shrugged would be on the recommended reading list of any news organisation.
There is a very good book by Thomas Sowell, Intellectuals and Society, that examines intellectuals and intellectualism. Whether or not you agree with his thesis, I think you will find it an interesting read.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
From the little I know about the BBC, I do believe you are right. I will look into the book by Thomas Sowell. Thanks!
How do we preserve the wisdom men will need,
when their violent passions are spent?
- The Lost Horizon
|
|
|
|
|
I did some research on the book. It looks interesting, so I ordered it from Amazon. Thanks for your suggestion!
How do we preserve the wisdom men will need,
when their violent passions are spent?
- The Lost Horizon
|
|
|
|
|
You beat me - I only read 44
|
|
|
|
|
This list is plain stupid: I don't see Italo Calvino, Alessandro Manzoni, Dante Alighieri, Italo Svevo, Leonardo Sciascia, Giovanni Verga or Luigi Pirandello in any of those authors.
That's just for Italian literature, because internationally I couldn't see Tolstoj, Chekhov or Erich Maria Remarque, just to name a few.
Still, it names Dan Brown - ok let's put Clive Cussler in it just to raise the level 
EDIT: it misses all of the Epic genre, as the Odissey, Aeneid and Iliad (which I read aged 12), it misses (if I did not miss it) Edgar Allan Poe.
I will not name any investigative book (only Conan Doyle is named), whreas I read almost the entire bibliography of Rex Stout, Ellery Queen and Agatha Christie.
EDIT 2: There was Tolstoj, my bad. The rest is unchanged though...
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
modified 7-Sep-15 3:35am.
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: I couldn't see Tolstoj
Well, they do list his "War and Piece" as well as "Anna Karenina". But I agree - that list is not perfect. Even if they just used darts to determine which were in and which were out I'd expect a better list.
den2k88 wrote: (only Conan Doyle is named)
Agreed ... One I cannot understand why they didn't include him (especially as the Sherlock Holmes novels were inspired by some of his): Edgar Allan Poe!
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry I saw it NOW looking again, my phone showed me only half of the list.
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you about Dan Brown (one of God's little jokes on the ignorant readership of today).
But chucking in a whole bunch of non-English authors is coming it a bit strong.
Also, keep in mind that, to English-speaking readers, only Russian and Japanese novelists write convincingly.
Romance language authors, in particular, are stuck in a kind of "picaresque", broad, and psychologically naive mode.
Not because they lack skill, but because that mode is most conducive to sending the clunky political messages which they believe is the purpose of novel writing.
Bar those South Americans who are positively influenced by Borges, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
Robert g Blair wrote: But chucking in a whole bunch of non-English authors is coming it a bit strong.
Yes it is - as is implicitly relegating all non English people in the lowest ranks.
Robert g Blair wrote: Romance language authors, in particular, are stuck in a kind of "picaresque", broad, and psychologically naive mode.
Not because they lack skill, but because that mode is most conducive to sending the clunky political messages which they believe is the purpose of novel writing.
I totally agree with this observation, and that's why I read a lot of non Italian books!
Geek code v 3.12 {
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
}
If you think 'goto' is evil, try writing an Assembly program without JMP. -- TNCaver
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I'm definitely not average - was reading at least one book a week since my 10th birthday (and I'm 41 now). Do the calcs, I can't be bothered. I've read 54 of the 100, some of those multiple times in different editions (especially the Sherlock Homes versions).
But I'm definitely with the idea that the list is suspect. E.g. it lists Roald Dahl's "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory". But in my mind (having read all 3) the more popular books of his would be "The Gremlins" and "Matilda" (both which has been made into films one even inspiring a whole series of films). Even "James and the Giant Peach" is at least as memorable as CatCF. And with the Charles Dickens novels it's even worse - the list includes Bleak House, David Copperfield, Great Expectations & A Christmas Carol. What? Oliver Twist didn't make the cut, but those did!
And IMO if they want to include several of Charles Dickens' novels (even if they missed his most popular one), then why not rather include Lemony Snicket's (Daniel Handler) "A Series of Unfortunate Events"? And if they include only "classics", then what the Elephant got into them to exclude Edgar Allan Poe from the list? The Sherlock Holmes collection made it in, but not even a mention of any of Agatha Christie's novels - WTE?
And then if they want to blazon multiple books by one writer, then why only Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit (by JRRT)? Why not also "The Children of Húrin" and "The Silmarillion". And I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that they saw LoR as the entire trillogy, not just the first volume! Of course, if the books are only those from which films were made, then it makes sense. Same goes for Frank Herbert's Dune series - I hope by "Dune" they mean the entire set of novels he's written (not just the first volume - which was named Dune, but also Dune Mesiah, The Children of Dune, God Emperor of Dune, Heretics of Dune & Chapter-house Dune) including those his son wrote after his death to finally finish the saga (Hunters of Dune, Sandworms of Dune, Winds of Dune & Sisterhood of Dune) and include the prequels to all the great houses (The Machine Crusade, The Butlerian Jihad, House Atriedes, House Harkonnen, House Corrino, etc.).
My biggest gripe however: Douglas Adams' "Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy" is in ... none of the rest (which actually comprised most of the stuff shown in the movie). But much much worse: Terry Pratchett didn't even get a single reference! What Hogfather, Going Postal, The Colour of Magic - all 3 of which has been made into films. And "Soul Music" as a children's animated series also didn't make it? That's ignoring any of the 100s of other books he's written.
|
|
|
|
|
I just checked if there are any such lists done where I live, and here[^] is one. In Swedish but with original title in the list.
I don't agree anymore on it, but at least it's seriously thought through.
|
|
|
|
|
Totally agree. Then, this is a "yet another top x list" from the internet...
|
|
|
|
|
"least one book a week since my 10th birthday"
Never mind the quality, feel the width!
|
|
|
|
|
It's a vice ... 
|
|
|
|
|
I read 55.
I didn't count those that I started, and put down as unreadable (by me anyway), like Ulysses, Cold Comfort Farm, Confederacy of Dunces and others).
There were quite a few books on the list I would never read (Dan Brown, Margaret Attwood, Ian McEwan) because reviews warn me off (often by reviewers who like the books).
The review of "The Da Vinci Code" was so fall down funny that when I did try to read the Da Vinci Code, I just had to put it down from laughing.
And there are several on the list that I wont read, having read other books by that author (such as Gabriel Garcia Marquez).
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed, mine was also only the books I have in fact completely read through. Though I'm a bit less sensitive to reviews.
But I can definitely say I agree fully about Dan Brown ... most of the stuff in Da Vinci Code is so far fetched or outright impossible that it becomes a satire without his intent. Which is why I continued reading it - saw it as a comedy instead of a mystery/fantasy-adventure. Actually, after reading it I came across a satire based on it - exactly making fun of those "stupid" concepts Dan "invented".
The De Villiers Code[^]
I actually re-read Da Vinci afterwards, and found new places to laugh at since the De Villiers Code indicated stuff I missed the first time round. And thus in turn I then went and read equally stupid stuff from Dan Brown like Angels & Demons, The Lost Symbol & Digital Fortress. Again - I needed to see it as comical satire, else I'd have become disgusted by it.
|
|
|
|
|
28.
46 is not bad, congrats ! Were you forced, or was it by choice ? (I ask because I have 5 I _had_ to read in school).
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
