While I don't agree with all of the 100 selections, I think it is a commendable compilation. There are some missing, such as the brilliant Lord of the Rings, all three parts.
This is a more objective list than Smith's. That said, I'd wager Faulkner found himself among the untouchables not because of any politics but because of the difficulty of his prose. He's one of my favorites now, but I went around bad-mouthing him for years over Sound and Fury.
If I were to make a list of my 100 it would definitely show my gaps, but I definitely contest Blood Meridian on the 25 you can skip. McCarthy's brutal, beautiful prose warrants placement on the other list. And no Lord of the Rings?!
Interesting. When I said objective here, it was in agreement with the author's (a woman) claim to objectivity in the opening. Do you think women are more objective than men, and only take issue with my use of the word, or were you going to reply to the OP as well?
Did anybody actually read (as opposed to skim or scan) the original author's introduction to her lists? Judging from these comments, I think not. You all need to go back and read, carefully, and in detail, exactly how and where she used the words "objectively" and "subjective". Then you can all apologise to Liza for mistepresenting her.
I think nobody is objective about art and claims to the contrary are evidence of a weak mind incapable of accepting the material reality of being human.
There are both objective and subjective aspects to appreciating art. For example, there are books you and I and probably everyone in the comments would agree belong in the top 100, and there are many more we'd argue over. What I meant by my original comment was that Liza's list hits more of those commonly respected high points of literature than the list she referred to.
I'm not going to comment on the big list, but the Don't Bother With list is chockablock with books I greatly admire. Here are a few: The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman, North and South [or WIVES AND DAUGHTERS, 1866], To the Lighthouse, Beloved, Sula, Walden, Never Let Me Go, The Awakening, Song of Solomon. I won't argue about BLOOD MERIDIAN, because it's a tough read, and because, although I'm an ardent McCarthy fan, I don't proselytize about his work [SUTTREE is my favorite novel, of anyone's]--it's not for everyone, especially BLOOD MERIDIAN. The rest of the ones I plucked out would leave a big hole in my reading, and I wouldn't wish missing those books on anyone.
Same! I literally named my Substack after Walden because it impacted me that much. While I acknowledge that Thoreau got very long-winded in some parts, all the same it dramatically impacted me in a way that I've been thinking about it ever since. I also think a reason I liked it so much was because I read it after reading Amusing Ourselves to Death, Digital Minimalism, and Brave New World. The idea of simplifying your life down to the bare necessities in an attempt to experience the world without any distractions or hindrances was revolutionary even then and it feels like an almost-impossible fever dream now.
On that note, does our literary diet can impact how we feel about a book? Obviously other contextual factors play a part: your life as it currently stands, maybe your own socioeconomic situation, how bored you are, the way you're reacting to current events around you, what your friends and family are talking about, the third season of The Bear, etc. Who knows? Maybe Liza would've liked Walden better if she had read it under different circumstances.
Maybe I'm reading into it too much. But I can feel very differently about a book I loved at 14 vs 34, so I don't think it's a total reach.
Zora Neale Hurston spent the last years of her life living in my parents' hometown of Fort Pierce, FL, forced to stay in a welfare home due to poverty. There is a mural of her on one of the downtown buildings there.
I also have an original printing of Gone With the Wind from my Grandmother from 1937.
Having the Count of Monte-Cristo is wild. I know it's a popular classic, and don't get me wrong, it's great. But there are easily ten novels in French literature that are just better.
I think giving the nod to The Way We Live Now as opposed to something from the Palliser or Barchester series is a bit of a conventional selection. not quite doing justice to Trollope’s less acerbic satire which is truly his particular genius unrivaled except for by Tolstoy.
Make no mistake, I LOVE the Palliser and Barchester novels, as well as many other Trollope books, but The Way We Live Now is a towering work. I submit it is Trollope's Middlemarch, also a work of genius.
But isn’t it just Trollope doing Thackeray? It’s Trollope generosity that makes him special. We don’t need any more stingy judgmental writers, we have plenty.
IDK, not read up on Thackeray, true confession. I've read about 30 Trollope books and enjoyed them all. He is just lovable to me. Oh, and, in the spirit of if you like that, try this, I recommend The Widow Barnaby, by his mama Frances, who can totally hold her own. 😍
Master and Margarita is my favorite ever book. A rich and intimate retelling of the Judas betrayal and also a fantastical romp throughout Moscow? In one book??!
Great to see it at the top. I was considering reading Pynchon- Crying of Lot ... because a podcast I listened to spent an hour talking about it. Now I can skip it.
Don’t skip it. I think this thread might not understand it. But the whole concept of being able to dismiss books because they “suck” for talking “particularist” themes is pretty close-minded.
I actually enjoyed The Scarlet Letter when I read it in school, possibly the only assigned book that I enjoyed. I know it’s not a novel but Leaves of Grass is spectacular. Oh, Catcher in the Rye SUCKS.
I think we deserve a short explanation as to why The Handmaid's Tale ranks poorly. I haven't read it, but several (conservative) and well-read members of the literati have recommended it to me.
Probably because it's quite heavy-handed with the political messaging, if I had to guess. I enjoyed it, though-- I thought it was quite good as a psychological study of a person under totalitarianism.
The sequel was just awful, though. Skip that one for sure.
Always pleased to get some additions to my long to-be-read list! One of the pleasures of engaging with literary Substack and classic books YouTube has been discovering new works to read and seeing creators’ enthusiasm for works I had heard of but hadn’t previously given much thought to.
I’m happy to see The Crying of Lot 49 on the skip list. I tried, but I found it exhaustingly self-satisfied in a juvenile way. A WASTE of my time, you might say.
I read the Crying Lot of 49 in college. Without the class I’m not sure I would have liked it. Thanks for reminding me! Worth digging into. Also Toni Morrison is fantastic. Glad I didn’t skip her novels. I’ve read everyone. And Virginia Wolfe! Like her or hate her, just read the middle section of The lighthouse. Her description of time going by is phenomenal! These writers may not be for everyone and their books aren’t easy reads but so well worth the effort.
The plot has potential, but everything is just so juvenile. I gave up after seeing the radio station KCUF. I couldn’t shake the mental image of Pynchon writing that, then sitting back in his desk chair and having a self-congratulatory chuckle. This is a joke that your least clever friend would say while punching you in the arm and asking if you get it.
While I don't agree with all of the 100 selections, I think it is a commendable compilation. There are some missing, such as the brilliant Lord of the Rings, all three parts.
Agreed. One of the only books/trilogies of the 20th century I feel confident will be read and celebrated 500 years from now.
No doubt, Andy. In point of fact, I read LoTR once every year just to restore and confirm that which is greater than myself! It is genius!
It has six parts, published in three volumes. It is also an example of a book that is better than the writing it contains.
This is a more objective list than Smith's. That said, I'd wager Faulkner found himself among the untouchables not because of any politics but because of the difficulty of his prose. He's one of my favorites now, but I went around bad-mouthing him for years over Sound and Fury.
If I were to make a list of my 100 it would definitely show my gaps, but I definitely contest Blood Meridian on the 25 you can skip. McCarthy's brutal, beautiful prose warrants placement on the other list. And no Lord of the Rings?!
I love Faulkner. I have yet to tackle Russian literature. My path is now clear.
“Objective”??
“””””objective”””””””???????
The need of men to feel that their emotional opinions are rational will never cease to fill me with profound amazement.
Interesting. When I said objective here, it was in agreement with the author's (a woman) claim to objectivity in the opening. Do you think women are more objective than men, and only take issue with my use of the word, or were you going to reply to the OP as well?
Did anybody actually read (as opposed to skim or scan) the original author's introduction to her lists? Judging from these comments, I think not. You all need to go back and read, carefully, and in detail, exactly how and where she used the words "objectively" and "subjective". Then you can all apologise to Liza for mistepresenting her.
I think nobody is objective about art and claims to the contrary are evidence of a weak mind incapable of accepting the material reality of being human.
There are both objective and subjective aspects to appreciating art. For example, there are books you and I and probably everyone in the comments would agree belong in the top 100, and there are many more we'd argue over. What I meant by my original comment was that Liza's list hits more of those commonly respected high points of literature than the list she referred to.
I think he just meant a list more based on consensus-agreed quality and depth vs ideology and political bias.
Agree. Blood Meridian is a masterpiece. End of. ;)
Lord of the Rings on the 100 or the 25?
100!
Liza kinda meets us in the middle on Proust by only picking Swann's Way.
Maybe we could the same on Tolkien and call it a day at The Hobbit? :)
I'm afraid LotR is non-negotiable!
Ulysses and Mrs Dalloway should be on there. It’s pretty recent, but My Brilliant Friend could stand the test of time.
I'm not going to comment on the big list, but the Don't Bother With list is chockablock with books I greatly admire. Here are a few: The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman, North and South [or WIVES AND DAUGHTERS, 1866], To the Lighthouse, Beloved, Sula, Walden, Never Let Me Go, The Awakening, Song of Solomon. I won't argue about BLOOD MERIDIAN, because it's a tough read, and because, although I'm an ardent McCarthy fan, I don't proselytize about his work [SUTTREE is my favorite novel, of anyone's]--it's not for everyone, especially BLOOD MERIDIAN. The rest of the ones I plucked out would leave a big hole in my reading, and I wouldn't wish missing those books on anyone.
It seems rather dismissive, no?
Same! I literally named my Substack after Walden because it impacted me that much. While I acknowledge that Thoreau got very long-winded in some parts, all the same it dramatically impacted me in a way that I've been thinking about it ever since. I also think a reason I liked it so much was because I read it after reading Amusing Ourselves to Death, Digital Minimalism, and Brave New World. The idea of simplifying your life down to the bare necessities in an attempt to experience the world without any distractions or hindrances was revolutionary even then and it feels like an almost-impossible fever dream now.
On that note, does our literary diet can impact how we feel about a book? Obviously other contextual factors play a part: your life as it currently stands, maybe your own socioeconomic situation, how bored you are, the way you're reacting to current events around you, what your friends and family are talking about, the third season of The Bear, etc. Who knows? Maybe Liza would've liked Walden better if she had read it under different circumstances.
Maybe I'm reading into it too much. But I can feel very differently about a book I loved at 14 vs 34, so I don't think it's a total reach.
Putting Blood Meridian on a list of books to skip is the wildest thing I have ever seen on the internet.
Never read Blood Meridian, but reading The Road has forever made me a fan of McCarthy.
Same
No room for Confederacy of Dunces?
There’s one I had trouble getting into. Maybe I’ll give it another try.
Re: "Their Eyes Are Watching God":
Zora Neale Hurston spent the last years of her life living in my parents' hometown of Fort Pierce, FL, forced to stay in a welfare home due to poverty. There is a mural of her on one of the downtown buildings there.
I also have an original printing of Gone With the Wind from my Grandmother from 1937.
Having the Count of Monte-Cristo is wild. I know it's a popular classic, and don't get me wrong, it's great. But there are easily ten novels in French literature that are just better.
It’s like putting or not putting Casablanca in a top movies list - there’s a justification either way
I think giving the nod to The Way We Live Now as opposed to something from the Palliser or Barchester series is a bit of a conventional selection. not quite doing justice to Trollope’s less acerbic satire which is truly his particular genius unrivaled except for by Tolstoy.
Make no mistake, I LOVE the Palliser and Barchester novels, as well as many other Trollope books, but The Way We Live Now is a towering work. I submit it is Trollope's Middlemarch, also a work of genius.
But isn’t it just Trollope doing Thackeray? It’s Trollope generosity that makes him special. We don’t need any more stingy judgmental writers, we have plenty.
IDK, not read up on Thackeray, true confession. I've read about 30 Trollope books and enjoyed them all. He is just lovable to me. Oh, and, in the spirit of if you like that, try this, I recommend The Widow Barnaby, by his mama Frances, who can totally hold her own. 😍
Master and Margarita is my favorite ever book. A rich and intimate retelling of the Judas betrayal and also a fantastical romp throughout Moscow? In one book??!
Great to see it at the top. I was considering reading Pynchon- Crying of Lot ... because a podcast I listened to spent an hour talking about it. Now I can skip it.
Don’t skip it. I think this thread might not understand it. But the whole concept of being able to dismiss books because they “suck” for talking “particularist” themes is pretty close-minded.
Read more. Not less.
Yes! I agree read more not less.
You should read it! We all have different tastes. Give it a chance.
I actually enjoyed The Scarlet Letter when I read it in school, possibly the only assigned book that I enjoyed. I know it’s not a novel but Leaves of Grass is spectacular. Oh, Catcher in the Rye SUCKS.
I didn't read Scarlet Letter in high school and wouldn't have liked it if I had, but I did read it in my early 30s and loved it.
It kills me.
I think we deserve a short explanation as to why The Handmaid's Tale ranks poorly. I haven't read it, but several (conservative) and well-read members of the literati have recommended it to me.
Probably because it's quite heavy-handed with the political messaging, if I had to guess. I enjoyed it, though-- I thought it was quite good as a psychological study of a person under totalitarianism.
The sequel was just awful, though. Skip that one for sure.
Always pleased to get some additions to my long to-be-read list! One of the pleasures of engaging with literary Substack and classic books YouTube has been discovering new works to read and seeing creators’ enthusiasm for works I had heard of but hadn’t previously given much thought to.
I’m happy to see The Crying of Lot 49 on the skip list. I tried, but I found it exhaustingly self-satisfied in a juvenile way. A WASTE of my time, you might say.
I read the Crying Lot of 49 in college. Without the class I’m not sure I would have liked it. Thanks for reminding me! Worth digging into. Also Toni Morrison is fantastic. Glad I didn’t skip her novels. I’ve read everyone. And Virginia Wolfe! Like her or hate her, just read the middle section of The lighthouse. Her description of time going by is phenomenal! These writers may not be for everyone and their books aren’t easy reads but so well worth the effort.
I liked it. I recommend it if you're into conspiracy theories and mysteries.
The plot has potential, but everything is just so juvenile. I gave up after seeing the radio station KCUF. I couldn’t shake the mental image of Pynchon writing that, then sitting back in his desk chair and having a self-congratulatory chuckle. This is a joke that your least clever friend would say while punching you in the arm and asking if you get it.
I've read 33 of your 100, and 5 of your 25.
It's an interesting list.
There are many titles among your 100 that I look at and think, "Yes, that's a helluva book, and no, there is no way I am going to read it."
Be well!
Ahh! You beat me by 3. I have read 30 of them. Not bad for us both: About 1/3rd of the list!
Where is Jane Austen's Sense & Sensibility?! There is much to learn from heroine Elinor Dashwood on honour, comportment and rationality!