http://www.best100novels.com/
I've read 45.
Why are these the best? I don't get it. Some of them, yes. Lord of the Rings (#4) is amazing. Likewise Narnia (#32), or even His Dark Materials (#47). That's a horrible book, with a horrible premise, but the writing is brilliant, and the premise is admittedly creative. Watership Down (#54), one of my favourite books of all time. Jane Austen, the Bronte sisters, all brilliant.
But why is Catcher in the Rye on there? Lord of Flies? Has anybody ever read these books, or do they just recall being forced to read them in highschool (or junior high) and assume they're good? Catcher in the Rye is about a teenage boy. I looked it up on wikipedia, and apparently the artistic merit in it is that Holden doesn't "grow" in the book; "his attitude is the same at the end of the story as it was in the beginning", which "distinguishes it from young adult fiction".
...And here I thought for a plot to move along, the characters have to learn and grow and let their experiences shape them. Wow, my career as a literary critic just went down the drain.
Lord of the Flies. A horribly depressing look at what happens when people are allowed to run themselves.
Yes, well, so is Planet Earth.
So, I have a confession to make... I like to read classics, because I like to analyse things and what better to analyse than something the rest of the world is analysing, because then you can check your work, but honestly?
I hate George Orwell. I didn't mind Animal Farm, because that's got talking animals; it's kind of like Babe, only with very thinly veiled political undertones. And Babe is more Chuckie than cute loveable animatronic puppet.
I think Steinbeck is really depressing and I've never forgiven him for killing the red pony. I like Mark Twain, because sometimes he's funny, but I like Tom Sawyer better than Huck Finn, because I don't like Huck at all, I never did; and while I appreciate some sex in books, I don't think Lolita is artistic in the same
way I would consider Titian's work artistic, but not Playboy's.I've read 45.
Why are these the best? I don't get it. Some of them, yes. Lord of the Rings (#4) is amazing. Likewise Narnia (#32), or even His Dark Materials (#47). That's a horrible book, with a horrible premise, but the writing is brilliant, and the premise is admittedly creative. Watership Down (#54), one of my favourite books of all time. Jane Austen, the Bronte sisters, all brilliant.
But why is Catcher in the Rye on there? Lord of Flies? Has anybody ever read these books, or do they just recall being forced to read them in highschool (or junior high) and assume they're good? Catcher in the Rye is about a teenage boy. I looked it up on wikipedia, and apparently the artistic merit in it is that Holden doesn't "grow" in the book; "his attitude is the same at the end of the story as it was in the beginning", which "distinguishes it from young adult fiction".
...And here I thought for a plot to move along, the characters have to learn and grow and let their experiences shape them. Wow, my career as a literary critic just went down the drain.
Lord of the Flies. A horribly depressing look at what happens when people are allowed to run themselves.
Yes, well, so is Planet Earth.
So, I have a confession to make... I like to read classics, because I like to analyse things and what better to analyse than something the rest of the world is analysing, because then you can check your work, but honestly?
I hate George Orwell. I didn't mind Animal Farm, because that's got talking animals; it's kind of like Babe, only with very thinly veiled political undertones. And Babe is more Chuckie than cute loveable animatronic puppet.
I think Steinbeck is really depressing and I've never forgiven him for killing the red pony. I like Mark Twain, because sometimes he's funny, but I like Tom Sawyer better than Huck Finn, because I don't like Huck at all, I never did; and while I appreciate some sex in books, I don't think Lolita is artistic in the same
I hated the Great Gatsby. I don't know if I was missing something, but that was the most boring, least "classic" book I've ever read.
I was pleased to see that Ender's Game made the list, of course.
And Eragon didn't. =)
