Guardian's 1000 novels everyone must read...

[TurquoiseSunset]

I've just found this list: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/jan/23/bestbooks-fiction...and it's explained here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/booksblog/2009/jan/23/best-list-novels-1000-explained.

What do you think of this list or these kinds of lists in general?

[MorpheusSandman]

These lists can be helpful if you're looking for something to read or an idea of what the "canon" is, but other than that I don't put much stock in them. How did they leave David Copperfield off? :confused:

[TurquoiseSunset]

True.

I find most of them to be very elitist, and it really makes me want to chew my arm off sometimes. Especially when half of the books on the list haven't even been read by the people who compiled it.

But, I suppose that can be said of some forums and forum posters as well... It bugs me that people talk about certain books and subjects just because it makes them sound cultured, because, I feel, it defeats the purpose of the list/forum...

Does that make sense? I'm not the most articulate person on the planet :D

[lichtrausch]

I use a couple of these lists as guides to some of the best literature. They are helpful for pointing someone like me, who doesn't have much knowledge of literary history, in the right direction. However I won't use a list with over 100 books. I have my own tastes and interests which often don't coincide with the critics' opinions so I want to have time to read in those directions and not just slave through a 1000 book list for a couple decades.

These are the lists I use:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/may/08/books.booksnews
http://www.zdf-jahrbuch.de/2004/programmarbeit/arens.htm

[JBI]

Pretty meh list. Seriously, whoever drafted that list has a pretty limited perspective of the world, and of the genre of novel as a whole.

[Eryk]

The current Penguin Classics list (http://ppi-pwf.texterity.com/ppi/penguinclassics2008/) is one thing I use for buying ideas.

[Nightshade]

Actually having reccently convereted the 1000 list into an excel file ( I know I know library worker much) anyway the list is pretty blah, its like they thought one book by one author was good so why not have the lot?

[MorpheusSandman]

The best of these lists I've found has been this one: http://www.adherents.com/people/100_novel.html, because I think the ordering about as close to being "right" as one could get, this one: http://www.editoreric.com/greatlit/index.html (http://www.editoreric.com/greatlit/indexA.html) for its clear and concise presentation and grouping, and, for a more complete overview of literary history, this one: http://www.interleaves.org/~rteeter/grtbloom.html

[kelby_lake]

I don't think the list is that bad, and I like the categorisation.

Unfortunately I can never find one on plays :(

[TurquoiseSunset]

I think this list is pretty bad as well, although in general they can be helpful. I think, when reading them, you have to keep in mind what methods were used and what the purpose of the list was in the first case.


Actually having reccently convereted the 1000 list into an excel file ( I know I know library worker much) anyway the list is pretty blah, its like they thought one book by one author was good so why not have the lot?

About a year ago I got a few lists together and converted them into one consolidated Excel file, I think it's a good blend of 'elitist' and 'popular' lists. Obviously, no one will ever agree on exactly which books should be on these lists and I'm too lazy to add more lists anyway...
The lists are from Time magazine, The Guardian (100), The Observer, Modern Library (there's 2), Friendswood and BestNovels.com.

So Nightshade, at least you have an 'excuse' :D...whereas I'm just a nerd! :)

[bazarov]

Why do you look on any list except LitNet's Top List?

[Helga]

I agree with Bazarov, the lit-net has the list I think is the best... maybe because I've read many of them. in the guardian list I've read from 5 to 15 in each categorie, but besides the ones I've read I own about 5-10 other books in each categorie that I haven't gotten around to reading yet...

[TurquoiseSunset]

Well, everyone has their own opinions about the format of a list and which books should be on it. I think it's interesting to see the different lists and compare them. I don't think any one list is the best; I take them all into consideration.

[Dark Lady]

I think, as others have said, that these lists are most useful for people who want some reading ideas. I used one of these sorts of lists years ago to give my reading some direction (we read a lot of s**t at school) and it was what first got me reading Victorian literature. I read Jane Eyre, Great Expectations, and (maybe not quite Victorian) Pride and Predudice because they were in the top 20.

I don't tend to pay as much attention to these sorts of lists any more but sometimes a browse through will make me think 'ooh I'll add that to my 'to read' list'.

[TurquoiseSunset]

I think, as others have said, that these lists are most useful for people who want some reading ideas. I used one of these sorts of lists years ago to give my reading some direction (we read a lot of s**t at school) and it was what first got me reading Victorian literature. I read Jane Eyre, Great Expectations, and (maybe not quite Victorian) Pride and Predudice because they were in the top 20.

I don't tend to pay as much attention to these sorts of lists any more but sometimes a browse through will make me think 'ooh I'll add that to my 'to read' list'.

Exactly. Every now and then they are nice to look at for a reading idea, but these lists, in my opinion, aren't something to live by...just for guidance and interest sake.

When I was at school we did at most two novels and one play a year, so we were never properly exposed to literature. In general, ours is not a culture that emphasises literature as important. So I only got into it fairly recently (I'd say the last two or three years at most), and apart from school, the few classics I actually read happened by 'accident'. So these lists helped me a lot in the beginning.

[prendrelemick]

For a reader, a list of a thousand books is too large to be much practical use. It needs whittling down a bit.

When I started looking for more serious literature, I came across the English A level reccomended reading list. It was about ninety authors long, very useful.

[TurquoiseSunset]

For a reader, a list of a thousand books is too large to be much practical use. It needs whittling down a bit.

When I started looking for more serious literature, I came across the English A level reccomended reading list. It was about ninety authors long, very useful.

Sure, but the original idea of the thread was just to ask what people's opinions were of the list. I did not mean for it to be a recommendation. I don't like this list either...but once again, it's just a list, an idea, an indication of what a group of people think the top 1000 novels are. Nothing more.

And I also agree top 100 lists are slightly more helpful...

Do you still have that list you are referring to? Or maybe the link for anyone who might be interested?

[prendrelemick]

You can find such a list here

http://www.teachit.co.uk/attachments/readlist.pdf

But it was the local lending library that published one about 20 years ago, that I used.
It's a bit unexciting and old fashioned, but it was just what I was looking for.

I agree with you over the limited value and purpose of such lists. I suppose my thinking is that to list a thousand books shows a certain indescision. The list itself is ok, but then the bigger the list, the less the controversy.

[TurquoiseSunset]

I agree with you over the limited value and purpose of such lists. I suppose my thinking is that to list a thousand books shows a certain indescision. The list itself is ok, but then the bigger the list, the less the controversy.

It's a silly number; way too big...
I just checked, and if you read 3 books a month for basically 27 years the total amount of books read would amount to 1000. That's completely ridiculous. When will you have time to read the new classics and other books? :sick:

[stlukesguild]

it's a silly number; way too big...
I just checked, and if you read 3 books a month for basically 27 years the total amount of books read would amount to 1000. That's completely ridiculous. When will you have time to read the new classics and other books?

You obviously need to read faster.:D

[TurquoiseSunset]

Listen, I love to read and I really want to brush up on my classics, but even if I read faster it will still take about 15 years... And's there A LOT of books I want to read that's not on that list. I'll never finish! :D

I said 3 books a month, because you might have work commitments, social commitments, or a really thick or difficult book :p