|
Post by RepairmanJack on Nov 4, 2004 19:34:07 GMT -5
A few years ago Modern Library came out with a list of the top 100 english language novels of the 20th Century. Here is the list: www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/100bestnovels.htmlNumber one is Ulysses by James Joyce. Has anyone actually read this. I have picked it up a few times, but have never read more than a small part. Should it really be number one? They also did the Top 100 Nonfiction books www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/100bestnonfiction.htmlThe Education of Henry Adams by Henry Adams was number one. I have read this one and cannot believe it is even in the top 50.
|
|
|
Post by stubedoo on Nov 4, 2004 21:23:14 GMT -5
If Charlotte's Web or A Wrinkle in Time aren't in the list it's useless.
|
|
|
Post by Shutter Girl on Nov 4, 2004 23:43:24 GMT -5
If Charlotte's Web or A Wrinkle in Time aren't in the list it's useless. LOL! You can tell we're the same age because I have to agree with you! Flying off on a tesserach near you....
|
|
|
Post by RepairmanJack on Nov 4, 2004 23:59:55 GMT -5
If Charlotte's Web or A Wrinkle in Time aren't in the list it's useless. Hey Stu--those can both be considered fantasy books. I knew you liked fantasy ;D
|
|
TriKrona
Minstrel in the Gallery
Posts: 28
|
Post by TriKrona on Nov 9, 2004 16:02:23 GMT -5
Okay, the list is mostly useless. Ulysses is worth reading. Get an annotated version. Take your time. Joyce was way ahead of his time.
Now I can quibble with the Modern Library's list, but did you look at that reader's list next to it? I shoudl look into how that was compiled. 4 Ayn rand books in the Top 10? 2 L. Ron Hubbard books? Wha..? L. Ron Hubbard--that hack who wasn't fit to hold Heinlein's jock strap? And while Ayn Rand will always have a place in my heart, she isn't anywhere close to being top ten material. Okay enough ranting for the moment.
|
|
|
Post by Shutter Girl on Nov 9, 2004 18:25:11 GMT -5
LOL!! I agree with the Ayn Rand comment! Who compiles these lists anyway? Maybe we should make our top 100 books of all time list. Now THAT would be interesting.... BTW, here's a explanation of Ulysses in, er, cartoon. If you haven't seen it before then check it out, it's hilarious!! www.bway.net/~hunger/ch1-ulys.html
|
|
|
Post by RepairmanJack on Nov 13, 2004 22:52:39 GMT -5
Does anyone read the classics anymore? I admit that my school years were a bit lacking in this department. Unfortunately I only had the opportunity to read a small number of them. I have been trying to make up for this over the last few years.
Which brings up the question of does a book have to be read at a certain time? I remember how much I loved Catcher in the Rye and Holden Caulfield. Of course I was a senior in high school when I read it. Now that I have passed 40 I wonder if it would have meant as much to me if I had read it for the first time now.
|
|
TriKrona
Minstrel in the Gallery
Posts: 28
|
Post by TriKrona on Nov 14, 2004 12:49:24 GMT -5
I suppose that it would depend on what you consider a classic. Do I read them anymore not really. Though a few years ago I got back on a Dickens kick. Dickens is very cool, though many people are put off by his writing style. I was also on an Allen Quartermain kick back when the comic version of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen came out. But that's a classic of adventure fiction and not literary fiction. Heh--that is if you care to make such distinctions.
Now, Catcher in the Rye brings up an interesting question. Should you read a book at a particular time? No, I don't think so, but I would suggest re-reading your favorites every few years. Catcher in the Rye reads differently when you're a teenager in high school and into that whole teenage rebellion thing as opposed to once you're past that phase.
|
|
|
Post by RepairmanJack on Nov 14, 2004 22:44:01 GMT -5
Now, Catcher in the Rye brings up an interesting question. Should you read a book at a particular time? No, I don't think so, but I would suggest re-reading your favorites every few years. Catcher in the Rye reads differently when you're a teenager in high school and into that whole teenage rebellion thing as opposed to once you're past that phase. I have to disagree with you on that. I do think a book needs to be read at the right time. I don't think it is possible to separate out who you are from the book. Yes, it is just a book. But we still filter it through the lens that is the sum total of who we are at that particular moment. As my life experiences change it colors how I intrepret the information I process. The words are the same, but how I react to them is not. Now how do I know if it is the right time? That I can't answer. It is an individual thing. My right time will be different from you. But I do agree that re-reading your favorites is a good thing. It can help to bring out nuances to the book that you never knew where there.
|
|