[Sinisdar Toste]

17 of the hundred.

but both lists displaying a marked lack of vonnegut, which is kind of unbelievable. baco has the right of it, adding either cats cradle or slaughterhouse 5, some of his best

[Abyss]

39 on the Big List tho it's silly how series are stacked together and Shakespeare is listed twice and any list that forgoes Vonnegut but includes Harry Potter is automatic fail.

[dktorode]

Who the hell reads books anyways?

[D'rek]

If I've read Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, but not Pride and Prejudice, does that still count?

[Ribald]

I have read around 60 or so on the big list, but studying the stuff tends to skew results slightly.

[teholbeddict]

I've read 14/30 and 76/100. My number is fairly high on the list of 100 because I love classics and collect them, not to mention I'm a poetry fan as well. Alot of the books on that list were also required readings for school, not to mention Chronicles of Narina and Lion Witch and the Wardrobe really are kind of the same thing, if you've read the series, so that bumped the total up as well. I have to say some of the authors on there have better works than those that were listed imo.

As for the list of 30, I think I've read pretty much everything on there that I want to read. Some of those are a bit odd and obscure or just of no interest to me. Most of them were books that wouldn't really ever be on my list, never mind before the age of thirty.

[Morgoth]

I can't possibly believe they seriously believe that more or less all of Jane Austen's work deserve to be on that top 100 list.

A slightly anglocentric list if I may say so.

[Jusentantaka]

Not just her, but all of the terrible trio are on the list. But, as the 100 list is reader-submitted, it could be worse. I see no Ayn Rand. I can accept Brontesten headlining the list if it means he's not on it.

[Procyon]

Am I the only one thinking, why did they include The art of war and the origin of species but not The illiad or Odyssey?

[Aptorian]

I liked that the added Sun Tzu. But if they included that they could have mention one of Marcus Aurelius' philosophical works, which is in much the same vein.

And yes, the Iliad or the Odyssey should be in there. They can get mind-numbingly tedious in places, but the Illiad has some of the most hardcore battle scenes ever imagined.

[globish rip]

the 30 under 30 list is repulsive & makes me sad just as a list of books nvm as an attempt to build a cannon

british list is just lol w/e

[Baco Xpuch]

Here's another 100 best list that I agree with more than the previous one, though its still got some bullshit. This one includes Vonnegut, Twain, and some others the other was noticeably missing. Also, its got Palanuik on there, though I personally don't think Fight Club is his best book (Survivor, Invisible Monsters, or Choke are all better I think). Still no Illiad or Odyssey but it's getting better. Wouldn't mind seeing Still Life with Woodpecker by Tom Robbins on there.

Tried to cut and paste it and failed (when I posted it looked like programming code). Fuck it. Here's the link if you feel like checking it http://thebest100lis.../best100novels/.


Another good top 100 is at http://www.newsweek.com/id/204478. I couldn't cut and paste it but it's worth checking out

This post has been edited by Baco Xpuch: 26 May 2010 - 08:00 PM

[Jusentantaka]

Aptorian, on 26 May 2010 - 07:26 PM, said:

I liked that the added Sun Tzu. But if they included that they could have mention one of Marcus Aurelius' philosophical works, which is in much the same vein.

I found myself nodding along agreeing with you about Marky-mark, and then I wondered if that wasn't more the point of the 30 list: A list of books people (in america at least) should read so that they can do more than nod and offer the occasional idiot-echo whenever someone mentions them, rather than a list of the 'best books (to read by age 30)'. Sun Tzu comes up pretty often (corporate 'required' reading and such) Aurelius? Not so much. Same with Homer and many of the other suggestions.

[Tsundoku]

Completed: 4 from the first list and 20 from the second.

Attempted: 5 more on the first list and 20 more on the second. I just have a problem with some books that no matter how IMPORTANT they are, if it's a boring read, then I just stop trying. The furthest I have progressed in 10 attempts at War and Peace is about page 150. Admittedly that was a long time ago, but I feel there are so many other more entertaining books out there (even if they're aren't as IMPORTANT), that I don't have time to waste on something someone else tells me I MUST read. If I find it interesting and read it, and it happens to be on some list of IMPORTANT books, then cool. If not, I won't lose any sleep over it.

I find far too many people read books on these lists because they feel they have to, rather than they want to. Seriously - Ulysses? I think I got to page 10 before I decided the author was someone who wanted to be seen as IMPORTANT and/or was in love with his own prose masturbation. Probably makes me a barbarian, but oh well I can live with that. The Catcher in the Rye? Why the hell would I want to read about teenage angst? Lolita??? I'm sure that's on Roman Polanski's list of favourites, but I fail to see the attraction in reading about some ineffectual old pedo with a stupid name.

I absolutely hated the Great Gatsby, but that may partly be due to the fact that I was forced to read it for English in high school. No surer way to turn someone against an author than to force them to study it. I couldn't face Shakespeare for a good 10 years after high school for that very reason. That has since changed, I hasten to add, having developed an appreciation for the sly wit therein.

There are a few I wouldn't mind having a crack at (such as Catch-22), but there's already way too much on the too-read pile as it is.

[Use Of Weapons]

Re: Ulysses -- I read recently something that said, in effect, the first section of Ulysses is an intentional pastiche of the kind of intellectual wanking that Joyce decried in his contemporaries (written that way because one of the characters is of that ilk), and that the remainder of the novel is very different. Don't know how true it is, as I've not read it, but it would give me the courage to persevere.

[Mentalist]

small list:

read war and peace by myself

read Gatsby and Lord of the Flies for school, read LotR (obviously)

might have read the Prince once, or maybe just meant to.

Master & Margarita is the BEST book on that list, afaik, I love that one to death, but I'm a HUGE Bulgakov fanboy.

1984 and clockwork oranage are those things I keep meaning to read, but never get around to. tried DOstoyevsky once, couldn't handle it then. will probably try again, as it is a classic.

out of the 100, read Dumas, conan Doyle, Little Prince, Dante, Alice in WOnderland, Winne the Pooh, and I read part of The Miserables for school. DO want to read the whole thing though. I must say, I've never read Dickens, and that's the one gap in my classic literature that I'm actually ashamed of.

[Jusentantaka]

Sombra, on 28 May 2010 - 11:31 AM, said:

WHINING

Apart from calling you a COMMUNIST the only thing I can think of to say to that is that I am going to call the State Dept, get a hunting permit, fly to Austruliuh, and then at gunpoint force you to read The Sound and the Fury, all the while screaming "You think you know painful prose? THIS is painful prose!"

I kid I kid. Its cheaper to buy a gun there.

[Tsundoku]

Juicytaco, on 28 May 2010 - 03:51 PM, said:

Sombra, on 28 May 2010 - 11:31 AM, said:

WHINING

...( shrewish nagging) ...

I kid I kid. Its cheaper to buy a gun there.

Is it? Everything imported is usually more expensive Down Unda, and it's bloody difficult to get anything besides bolt-action or single-shot rifles or shotguns, due to the fact that we actually have gun laws.

But to be on the safe side, I will alert our customs people to be on the lookout for yet another illegal Asian immigrant. Possibly armed and definitely dangerous ...

Back to topic, I can say I've actually read the Bible (Good News version, admittedly) cover to cover. OK, I kind of skipped Psalms since it was all the same in that lousy quasi-poetry style. Took a month of weekends, and the Old Testament was a far more fun read than the New.

This post has been edited by Sombra: 28 May 2010 - 08:04 PM

[LadyMTL]

I've read 10 from the 30 book list and 45-50 from the 100 book lists (both MTS' and Baco's). Most of them, weirdly enough, are books that I chose to read on my own, like War and Peace, the Picture of Dorian Grey, One hundred Years of Solitude, Narnia, LOTR, etc etc. I even managed to get through The Brothers Karamazov but I didn't really like it.

The only two exceptions that I can think of are right now are the Lord of the Flies and Catcher in the Rye...my curriculum was heavy on Shakespeare.

This post has been edited by Maia Irraz: 30 May 2010 - 02:29 AM

[Fist Gamet]

I have read 20 of those one the 100 list, but many of the books in that list are, imo, just shit. I always have a problem when these lists are compiled, and I guess it's because there are always a number of books on them that you just know some pretentious twat put there to make themselves sound intellectual. I mean, fair enough, many books are on study lists and many mark important points in literature, but to read some of them for pleasure is pretty hardcore. I read Moby Dick once, but never again. Well written, a powerful story, yes, but really hard work. For Whom the Bell Tolls...dear God that was a shit read. The DaVinci Code, I mean, is this a joke? This is one of the most poorly written books I ever had the misfortune to glance at. Ok, so it's a readers list, but I would think that there are any number of books on both lists that most of us will not read.