20 pointsby bookofjoe10 hours ago9 comments
  • oarla11 minutes ago
    I was initially very surprised to see "The god of small things" in this list and even more so to see it at 32 in the list. But then, this is a list voted for by authors, critics and academics who are probably the only set where such books are popular.
  • procaryote8 hours ago
    I often suspect lists like these to be more of a reflection of what books people have been told are great, than any quality of the book itself.

    Ulysses being in the top three is a good example... I wonder how many of the people voting for it have read it.

    • analogpixel6 hours ago
      I'd agree that people need things to latch onto to appear smart. For example, was Einstein the greatest scientist ever, or is it an easy thing to talk about to look smart; if you were talking with a group of people and wanted to look intelligent would you talk about Einstein which they all know and can bob their heads to, or Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin, who won't get you any street cred with the people around you.

      This also happens in art, where people latch on to popular names so they can pop them out in conversations and every can nod and agree. Was Picasso really that great of an artist? or does he just have a name people recognize so people go with it. If Picasso's work was released on Instagram today, would anyone even look at it?

      And back to the books, the same; these are are books people can safely say the names of and have everyone nod along and agree about how smart and cultured you are for knowing the correct names to say.

      I really dislike these lists and those github repos of great software for xyz with 100s of links. what I want is 1-3 thing you really like and why.

    • bookofjoe8 hours ago
      I didn't vote but I did read it. Full disclosure: I've tried "Finnegan's Wake" at least three times but never got beyond page 20 or so.
  • 9 hours ago
    undefined
  • amai8 hours ago
    Interesting that english people like russian literature so much. There are more russian novels on the list than french and german combined.
    • 7 hours ago
      undefined
  • jafo19894 hours ago
    No Catcher in the Rye? Bold.
  • cf100clunk8 hours ago
    Such lists are always a good starting point for debate and whataboutism.
  • begueradj7 hours ago
    None of Albert Camus' work is mentioned ?!
  • Synaesthesia7 hours ago
    Now I really want to read Middlemarch.
    • bookofjoe7 hours ago
      OMG. I'm 77 years old, I finally read it three years ago and was astounded: it's incomprehensibly great — unimaginable that a human could have written it. Side-splittingly funny, deeply original, insightful and instructive. Written/published in 1871/1872; if it appeared today it would rocket to the top of the bestseller list.
  • NetMageSCW7 hours ago
    Serious lack of SF in that list.
    • bookofjoe7 hours ago
      Yes. I believe Philip K. Dick is a more deserving Nobel Prize winner than Bob Dylan.
      • whyage5 hours ago
        I beg to differ. Bob Dylan's poetry impacted me much more. He totally deserved the prize.
    • karmakaze5 hours ago
      I noticed that too. The "The story behind our list" link says:

      > But all human life is here.

      I think that's why I don't resonate with many of the titles. I do enjoy reading a vivid account of a person in a situation, but I prefer one that's not primarily people drama, and interacts with something large in an objective sort of way.

      Books are weird to non-regular readers. I've thoroughly enjoyed almost every book I've read (except those assigned in school). Even reading books much longer than I'd ever expect to finish. I grew up on early sci-fi books from the public library, later reading Microserfs, Cryptonomicon, Diamond Age, Godel Escher Bach, Lord of the Rings. I also enjoy accounts of personalities in music, automotive, and math/science (based on my Youtube history). I can enjoy but feel cheated by stories which are just human drama with a sci-fi backdrop.