I never completely agree with 100 best book lists. Usually about #3 I'm starting to get agitated and along about #10 I'm thinking, "Who in the world thought up this crazy list?"
It sure would be fun to be around in a 100 years and see what books make the list.
Haha! I was surprised initially by how many women were on the list. But there were were so many women writing novels right at the beginning, because novels were seen as inferior and possibly morally damaging. Much like women! Thank God for both!
I tend to get OCD with lists if I take them seriously so mixing that with my OCD book tendencies could get dangerous...but the real reason I never take these lists seriously is because I'm too much of an arrogant individualist to believe somebody else could possibly know better than me, regardless that they might actually be more widely read than me. For instance all the way through that list I was thinking, Hardy better be one of the 8 living authors!
Interesting snapshot, thanks for sharing, Ceridwen -- as subjective and individual a POV as any and all of these lists, and also with regard to some books, a great reminder that not all books judged masterpieces in one particular era stand the test of time equally well. Also interesting to see how transcription standards with regard to non-Western alphabets (and languages) can change over time ... seen the name of the author of "Crime and Punishment" spelled "Feodor Dostoieffsky" lately?
Anyone notice the Oscar Wilde quote in the comments about the importance of a list of books not to read? Or is the quote old hat, already emblazoned on the pennants of you crusaders from GR?
I'm hardly the best-read person when it comes to classics, but I was actually surprised by how many of the books on the list *are* books we still read today. The only one I was startled not to see was Tolstoy, but then he popped up in the "8 living authors" addendum.
It sure would be fun to be around in a 100 years and see what books make the list.
more than Nana...