I've read a number of these novels, but like most lists of this kind, there seems like a political agenda to some of the choices. INFINITE JEST should NOT be on this list, but the author died recently so he's on the list. The author of WIDE SARGASSO SEA is a woman whose book is based on JANE EYRE. My 100 BEST NOVEL list would include Jack Vance.
Actually, this list seems to me one of the better attempts. There is always going to be novels that we think should be added or left off. At least this includes some crime and mystery writers like Chandler, Hammett, LeCarre. And it doesn't ignore SF like most lists. Philip K. Dick, Gibson, Orwell are mentioned.
By the way, Huckleberry Finn was left off because it came out before 1923.
I've read over a third. For my money, White Teeth should not be on there. I agree with Walker Martin, though. At least there's some SF, spy and crime lit in there.
I like Jean Rhys, though I haven't read WIDE yet (as simultaneously easy on the eye and soporific as the loose--in perhaps two senses--the film adaptation is, perhaps many were put off). But all such lists are ridiculous, as I think Bill enjoys demonstrating.
Have they read these novels, or anyway read them lately? ALL THE KINGS MEN is a mess -- it's remembered for the film and its subject matter, but is a very hard slog.
RED HARVEST is a hell of a book, but choosing it over the far superior MALTESE FALCON? (THE GLASS KEY and probably THE DAIN CURSE are also better than HARVEST, which is mostly just a wild ride.)
Or for that matter, THE BIG SLEEP -- which again is wonderful but very patched together -- over FAREWELL, MY LOVELY or THE LONG GOODBYE?
WATCHMEN? What trendy nonsense.
I'm glad to see Richard Yates on the list. I guess. I hate these lists.
I understand Max Allan Collins and Todd Mason when they say they hate these lists. But such lists are great for starting discussions and arguing over what should be included or left out. So I like to study these lists and think about what I agree or disagree with...
I like the lists both because they're ridiculous and that they give us something to talk about. Nobody's ever going to agree with them. Everybody finds something or other to defend, most of the time, and while we all agree that there are things that don't belong, we don't always agree on which things those are.
14 comments:
I think I've read about 45 of these. Too many read like an Oprah's Book Club list for my taste.
Jeff
I've read a number of these novels, but like most lists of this kind, there seems like a political agenda to some of the choices. INFINITE JEST should NOT be on this list, but the author died recently so he's on the list. The author of WIDE SARGASSO SEA is a woman whose book is based on JANE EYRE. My 100 BEST NOVEL list would include Jack Vance.
Not only those two but THE CORRECTIONS? WHITE TEETH? NEUROMANCER?
The 100 best novels EVER?
Not in my world.
Jeff
Where's Huckleberry Finn?
Where's Murder in Four Parts?
Where's Elevator Girls in Bondage?
Bah!
I'm with you, Jerry. And Jeff and George, too. Not that I've plowed my way through Infinite Jest.
Actually, this list seems to me one of the better attempts. There is always going to be novels that we think should be added or left off. At least this includes some crime and mystery writers like Chandler, Hammett, LeCarre. And it doesn't ignore SF like most lists. Philip K. Dick, Gibson, Orwell are mentioned.
By the way, Huckleberry Finn was left off because it came out before 1923.
I've read over a third. For my money, White Teeth should not be on there. I agree with Walker Martin, though. At least there's some SF, spy and crime lit in there.
I like Jean Rhys, though I haven't read WIDE yet (as simultaneously easy on the eye and soporific as the loose--in perhaps two senses--the film adaptation is, perhaps many were put off). But all such lists are ridiculous, as I think Bill enjoys demonstrating.
I hate these lists. Really, truly hate them.
Have they read these novels, or anyway read them lately? ALL THE KINGS MEN is a mess -- it's remembered for the film and its subject matter, but is a very hard slog.
RED HARVEST is a hell of a book, but choosing it over the far superior MALTESE FALCON? (THE GLASS KEY and probably THE DAIN CURSE are also better than HARVEST, which is mostly just a wild ride.)
Or for that matter, THE BIG SLEEP -- which again is wonderful but very patched together -- over FAREWELL, MY LOVELY or THE LONG GOODBYE?
WATCHMEN? What trendy nonsense.
I'm glad to see Richard Yates on the list. I guess. I hate these lists.
I understand Max Allan Collins and Todd Mason when they say they hate these lists. But such lists are great for starting discussions and arguing over what should be included or left out. So I like to study these lists and think about what I agree or disagree with...
I like the lists both because they're ridiculous and that they give us something to talk about. Nobody's ever going to agree with them. Everybody finds something or other to defend, most of the time, and while we all agree that there are things that don't belong, we don't always agree on which things those are.
Nine.
I've read 20 out of the 100 and was a little surprised that the total was that high.
I've read 44 and tried several times to read three of the others. Not planning to try again except maybe one of the three.
Post a Comment