I saw this list a while ago: The BBC Big Read which is an attempt to find the best books by having the public vote on it. I took a look. Decided it was bad by the first book (The Lord of the Rings) and completely disqualified it by the fifth (Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire? Come on, that isn't even the best Harry Potter book). This got me thinking that there must be a better list out there, and so I started looking. I checked out Good Reads, and nearly died laughing. The Book of Mormon at #3, Twilight at #4, and the Bible at #6?
So decided a little more researched list might be better. I went to Newsweek which had a list compiled from 10 other lists. Very scientific, right? Well, I haven't read all the books, but some of the one's I have read certainly wouldn't make my list. Gulliver's Travels? The Canterbury Tales? Brave New World?
One last try, into the world of the true scholastics. The Novel 100 list, by some dude with a PhD. I could only disagree with one (On the Road, which I hate but everyone else seems to love), so it looks good. The problem? It's the list out of which I've read the least number of books.
To summarize, all the lists seemed to suffer from one of the following problems: It was open to the public and was therefor co-opted by either special interests (Book of Mormon, Bible, anything by L. Ron Hubbard. Are you really going to argue these are the greatest books ever? They're barely readable) or by kids that have only read crap (Twilight?!?), written by list compliers that are relying on others opinions and/or the historical significance of the book (I mean while I can see Canterbury Tales place in history, it can hardly be considered one of the best books ever written), or the lists are such that I'm entirely unqualified to have an opinion about having read to few of the books.
So screw it, I'll make my own damn list (with your help of course). So here are my votes (at least the ones I'm remembering).
Also Rans:
The Old Man and the Sea, Ernest Hemingway.
Dune, Frank Herbert (You know I had to).
The Metamorphosis, Franz Kafka
Watership Down, Richard Adams.
The Contenders:
A Confederacy of Dunces, John Toole Kennedy.
All Quiet on the Western Front, Erich Maria Remarque
Johnny Got His Gun, Dalton Trumbo.
And then there's my top two. This was a hard debate, and finally I had to decide that since Kessey was writing about Oregon there might be some bias there.
2nd:
Sometimes a Great Notion, Ken Kessey.
and #1:
East of Eden, John Steinbeck.
Jul 21, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
43 sucka ass fools had something to say:
You'll have to explain the greatness of Metamorphosis to me.
Perhaps Lank takes 'also ran' to mean awesome? Are we really going to revisit the legitimacy of arbitrary connotation?
I have no interest in talking to MT face-to-face since I can have the same discussion with my mirror. I also hate On the Road. I just happened to just have coffee with a friend where I bitched about Kerouac ad nauseum. Screw that guy, and Hemingway. I hold no pretense for the sanctity of life when I admit I'm glad he offed himself. If he hadn't then a full 35% more of my literature degree would have been devoted to the one or two extra novels he would've written in the interim between when he killed himself and when he would have anyhow.
The question is: what criteria are you using to determine what will be considered for "the best books?" At the very least, I say that we should set the criteria so that it differentiates between fiction and non-fiction--which eliminates the Good Reads list.
If you are talking about the most influential books--the most trans formative genre defining works, the Newsweek list looks pretty good. If you want to know what is
(currently) the most popular book, the BBC list is OK.
The best books are probably those that fill both categories--novels that are equally ground-breaking and entertaining. The Lord of the Rings is a good example of this--it helped shape the face of 20th-century fiction (like it or not) and was immensely popular. In contrast, while there is no question that Ulyses changed the face of English literature, the careful craftsmanship is lost on the average reader and Joyce's prose is much too difficult for popular consumption.
Bearing this in mind, the best book of the 20th Century (I agree with MT on this--it's too tricky to go back more than 100-200 years with one of these lists) has to be The Great Gatsby--popular, enduring, and completely brilliant.
Hemingway and Kerouac redefined literature. You may not like them, but they definitely belong where they are in the cannon.
A much better list
How did LOTR shape 20th Century Fiction?
http://www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/100bestnovels.html
seems to go along with the other lists I remember seeing over time and addresses (to some degree) the critics vs public issue without getting into pulp territory.
Looks like SZ and I can both use google.
I read portrait of the artist and didn't find Joyce too difficult. I'm far from a literary snob. But, I'm also OK with missing a large chunk of the intended meaning and gliding right past some symbolism/irony. I could see why this would be unacceptable/annoying, but for me if theres enough interesting stuff along the ride thats OK. Where is Fab Five on all these lists?
I'm trying to read sound and fury. It is difficult. Hopefully things clear up by the end.
I'm not saying that it was a high-minded progression, but Lord of the Rings basically defined the Fantasy genre. It also set the mold for the epic trilogy.
I saw the Modern Library list as well. Here are my problems with it:
First it's done by Random House, a publisher. Can you say conflict of interest?
Second in the Critics list, both Brave New World and 1984 made the top 15. And yet We, which is clearly the book that both of those are based on in addition to being better than either of those, isn't on the list.
Third in the Public list Battlefield Earth made the list. I already said any inclusion of a L. Ron Hubbard book is an automatic disqualification.
As to my criteria, well I am deciding off of what I thought of each of the books when I read them. Cultural impact is irrelevant unless you're studying history.
Why should I care that On the Road changed literature when it's a giant crapfest of a book and I hated every page?
Popularity is irrelevant because, well to speak in cliches, just because it's popular don't make it good (see: The Da Vinci Code which made a surprising number of those lists).
As to non-fiction, well they can be included, but I've never read one that I enjoyed as much as fiction.
So my criteria are did I enjoy the book? Did it impact me? Do I still think about it? Was it well written? Was it worth while? Was it quality? Did it give me something I wouldn't have gotten otherwise?
What I'm really curious about are what your all's opinions on the matter are. Who cares what some Harvard researcher said? Or the general public. I want intelligent and rounded opinions.
I agree on Hemingway besides The Old Man and the Sea, which I really enjoyed.
The Great Gatsby is a good choice. It might make it into my top 10, but I think it would have to fight it's way in.
So my criteria are did I enjoy the book? Did it impact me? Do I still think about it? Was it well written? Was it worth while? Was it quality? Did it give me something I wouldn't have gotten otherwise?
I kind of think that any book that fits this criteria is more of a favorite than an all-time great, but that might be splitting hairs. But here are some books I've enjoyed.
Top 3 Possible Greatest Books of the 20th century:
The Master and the Margarita. Bulgakov.
Hunger. Hamsun.
The Plague. Camus.
These are books I've read multiple times, can always pick up something new when I read them, and that I enjoy. Also each are pretty unique and none of them were written by L Ron Hubbard.
Several books by Murakami could be included: The Wind Up Bird Chronicle is especially very good. McCarthy's The Road is probably as good of post-apocalyptic fiction as there can be.
Nonfiction: Jared Diamond is pretty good. I like Howard Zinn. And he's not an all-time great, but some of Bill Bryson's stuff is highly entertaining and informative.
As to your list, Moon Tramp, I agree on Kerouac and Hemingway (though his short stories are perhaps some of the best I've ever read). Out of your contenders, first, and second place, I've only read East of Eden, which was underwhelming but I read it in high school and it could probably use a reread.
Hmmm--you don't like Hemingway, but you do like McCarthy. I'd wager that we'd never have gotten The Road without the stripped-down prose of Papa Ernesto to influence McCarthy.
Moon Tramp: my problem with your criteria is that it's completely arbitrary--if you can nominate any book that you happened to like, then why can't I nominate Battlefield Earth?
I agree with SZ. Its hard to take a list that automatically excludes random authors seriously.
MT, are you dismissing LRon and the Bible out of hand because of their association or have you actually read these things?
If no one else is going to say it, then I will:
INFINITE JEST!!!!!
I read the Bible. Afterward I went out and bought a shirt that said Bomb Darfur.
Hmmm--you don't like Hemingway, but you do like McCarthy. I'd wager that we'd never have gotten The Road without the stripped-down prose of Papa Ernesto to influence McCarthy.
You make a good point. I should say that I appreciate Hemingway and his influence and his wordsmithery. His dialogue is as good as any I've ever read. I just don't enjoy his novels. He's sort of the Citizen Kane of authors to me--seminal and maybe even the best ever but not one that I particularily enjoy.
I've tried to read both Hubbard and the Bible. Neither is good.
And yes my criteria are arbitrary, but that was my point. If I want a scholars opinion I look at those lists. And the reason you can't choose Battlefield Earth is because I eliminated anything by L. Ron Hubbard in my criteria.
But despite that you still have to make a case for whatever book you choose. I can make a case for all the books I listed.
But since y'all are disliking my initial wording, what if I change it to a simple question: What are the books that you feel every person should read?
(I know that doesn't fit some definitions so just throw out the ideas of best, favorite, greatest, etc.)
Jeremy said it, and I'll second:
Infinite Jest.
While dark and long-winded, DFW is also hilarious and insightful. The book can be torturous at times but the payoff is well worth it.
From infinitesummer.org (Its not too late to catch up.)
"Because like Eggers said in his foreword, this book is an exercise for the mind, and Wallace gives us the chance to piece things together before he explicitly synthesizes. He leaves some aspects of the world of O.N.A.N. foggy, so that we must pull a Supreme-Court-Justice-building-the-right-to-privacy-piecemeal-from-the-Bill-of-Rights maneuver to understand"
"skimmers miss out. Had I skimmed the Wardine and yrstruly sections, would I still have understood ...Had I skimmed endnote 24 — well, I’m sure I’m not alone in reading 24 with alacrity, then re-reading each synopsis as I caught references, and soon probably going back to read the whole list in case I’ve missed something."
“It all tends to get complicated, and probably not all that interesting – unless you play.”
I can relate to this:
"For someone who hasn’t read anything longer than a New Yorker article in a solid six months, IJ is an unmerciful beast to bring me back into the fiction fold. "
"Infinite Jest cannot be read in ten minute spurts on the back of a bumpy, crowded bus...when I really gave myself over to it, and fought the urge to skim and won, I knew IJ had become more than my latest reading project, it had became the rebirth of my much-missed attention span. Infinite Jest takes focus. There is keen insight embedded in nearly every page, but you have to be fully present to see them."
I don't think that fits into your criteria MT, but since you're arbitrary criteria is to define our own arbitrary criteria...
Everyone should read Tarzan and at least one Robert E. Howard book.
They should probably read The Bible too.
I read Job in High School and remember it being interesting. Haven't read anything more than random lines here or there since then. My sense is that its not interesting as literature but is interesting in the sense of interpretation to and in our modern culture.
So, if we're making an MVC "Best Books Ever" list based on arbitrary criteria, as interpreted by MVC contributers, I'll submit a book I've only read one section of.
The Bible
Did I enjoy the book? The part I read, yes.
Did it impact me? Yes
Do I still think about it? Yes
Was it well written? Not sure, I think not.
Was it worth while? Yes
Was it quality? ???
Did it give me something I wouldn't have gotten otherwise? Yes
Thats two votes for the Bible and two for IJ.
Make that two for Tarzan as well!
I counter vote the bible. Seriously poorly written, plus the whole first section is plagiarized from the Torah.
Infinite Jest is a good choice. And I will get back to it. Like one of the quotes, I was trying to read it on my commute. I'll give it another go when I'm more focused. I do think it is really good.
I'm rethinking my post. I say screw non-Oregonians. Sometimes a Great Notion is my choice for best.
I hope you realize one of my motivations is to compile a list of books to read. So instead of asking straight out I concocted this post.
So far my to read list includes:
Tarzan
The Master and the Margarita
The Plague
Hunger
And the following authors:
Robert E. Howard
Murakami
And my to finish list:
Infinite Jest
The Bible? (I don't know, I'll think about it)
I'd like to join a bible reading book club with liberal atheists. It would be fun to read a chapter here or there and be all WTF.
I've never understood a book I read less than Master and Margherita, but it was still entertaining at times and brilliantly written, err translated.
or liberal agnostics or liberal christians. Whatever, anybody really who can look at it from a perspective other than the HOLY WORD OF GOD.
When I said I have no interest in talking to MT face-to-face, I left out the part about also agreeing about Sometimes a Great Notion.
Although, to say the Bible is poorly written is a bit hollow of a claim, at least if not presented with the criteria you used to come to that conclusion. For one thing, the KJV - generally observed as authoratative - is, for all intents and purposes, written in a different language. Secondly, you also have to consider which literary conventions were valued in the culture and during the time those texts were composed. I may complain about the 15 chapters of genealogy that begin some of the books, but they may have been necessary back then to afford the narrative legitimacy.
As far as the Bible co-opting the Torah, I always thought the first five books of the Bible was the Torah. Am I mistaken?
As far as the Bible as recommended reading, I've read it from cover to cover. Unfortunately, it was a mindless read just so I could say I did it. The text requires a lot of concentration that I just wasn't willing to give, and I imagine many of us here would have similar experiences. I suppose that's presumptuous, but what I mean is that the language isn't intuitive, and the themes aren't avant garde, so to say, kind of like the way no one's really impressed much more with the special effects in Star Wars.
Some recommendations:
Dan Brown - cutting edge. joke.
How to Read a Book - Mortimer Adler and Charles Van Doren
Disgrace - J.M. Coetzee
Anything by Milan Kundera - I was introduced to him through The Unbearable Lightness of Being, but after going through quite a few of his other novels, I'd suggest reading them in the order he wrote them to follow the development of his thoughts. I'm particularly fond of his treatment of history and interpersonal communication.
Thomas Pynchon - Afterwards you can explain him to me.
I haven't read any of MT's top 5. I'd like to read them all.
SAGN was the best play I ever saw. It sounds somewhat torturous as a read though and thats what I found when just sampling a little bit of it.
The KJV Bible was rumored by some to have been written by Shakespeare, at least in part.
I gave MT Disgrace. Has he read it yet?
He has not, but will read Disgrace.
As to SAGN, I found there's a threshold you have to get over. He changes perspective a lot without telling you, so that's a little difficult, but if you can get through the chapter that is written from the perspective of the younger son as he's headed west and on drugs you're in the clear. That chapter is especially hard to understand.
And yes, I am probably being too hard on the Bible.
What about LRon, theres gotta be SOMETHING there right?
I've never read Infinite Jest, so I can't really say anything about it, but I don't like the idea of nominating a book that you've just recently read. We often really like books when we've just finished them, but the impact of a lot of them fades with time. Part of Moon Tramp's criteria speaks to the lasting impact of the book. Does it still impact you a year later? 5 years?
I don't even remember how my wife spelled her name five years ago....I mean 6.
Also, I started it 5 years ago and am still not finished. Now THAT's impact, homie.
Well, if it's just books to recommend to Moon Tramp, the job gets a lot easier. You recommend certain books to certain people that you wouldn't necessarily prescribe to society as a whole.
Jeremy brought up Thomas Pynchon. I'm currently reading Gravity's Rainbow, a book that is definitely right up your alley, MT.
I also suggest (again) that you read anything by Don DeLillo--I think that you would particularly enjoy Libra. I'm not sure if you've already read The Adventures of Cavalier and Clay. If you didn't you should. If you did, and you liked it, you should also read The Mysteries of Pittsburgh.
I have admiration and pity for anyone attempting Gravity's Rainbow. I have the general sense that it makes reading IJ a leisurely stroll.
I have a copy of The Crying of Lot 49 lying around, if anyone wants to summon the courage.
DeLillo's a good recommendation. I've only read a couple of his novels, but I've noticed for as engrossed as I've been in them it takes an hour to get through 10 pages. I imagine that'll be what Infinite Jest is going to be like, now that I'm inspired to actually attempt to summit it.
A light summer reading list:
Infinite Jest
Gravity's Rainbow
Underworld
Sounds like I need to give IJ a shot.
Obama's crappy list for his August vacation up in Martha's Yard of Vines:
--Tom Friedman's Hot, Flat and Crowded
--David McCullough's John Adams
--Richard Price's Lush Life
--Kent Haruf's Plain Song
--George Pelecanos's The Way Home
William Edward Burghardt Du Bois wrote: "There are certain books in the world which every searcher for truth must know: the Bible, the Critique of Pure Reason, the Origin of Species, and Karl Marx' Capital."
Post a Comment