Your dalliance with The Classics (1 Viewer)

[Markazzo]

I couldn't find a thread about it, so for those who care...

According to Time Magazine these are the 100 greatest novels all time:

Taken from http://www.time.com/time/2005/100books/the_complete_list.html

So how is everyone's grasp of the classics? Shamingly, I've only read a measly eight of the top 100 here, therefore next uni holidays I must devote myself to getting revenge on that dastardly Time magazine.

 

[BronwynKate]

You will be, you will be!

I've read quite a few of them, probably not as few as the original poster.

 

[jhakka]

I've read even less. How embarassing.

The downfalls of liking new pop-fiction. Oh well.

 

[walrusbear]

well i've only read 19
but intend to read most of them

it's worth noting they're modern classics too (after 1923 on that list)

 

[sarevok]

not a single dickens in that list?

 

[Ellie_Belly]

I've only read 3... how pitiful.

 

[walrusbear]

not a single dickens in that list?

like i said, the list is only for english language books written after 1923

 

[Markazzo]

For more 'greatest novel ever' lists, check out

http://www.adherents.com/people/100_novel.html

 

[Ellie_Belly]

For more 'greatest novel ever' lists, check out

http://www.adherents.com/people/100_novel.html

Buahahaha! I've only read one of those books!

 

[Markazzo]

Does the fact that we have all read so few of these alleged 'classics' reflect poorly on us, learned BOS folk, as readers? Surely not; it is the list that is wrong.

 

[nwatts]

"Classics" as in, of the modern era. These aren't classics as the term is conventionally used. I'd only read 14 from the Time list. There are some ridiculous omissions, but you find that with any list like this. And only 10 from the other list.

I'm fairly picky with what I read, though.

 

[nwatts]

though from this list http://www.angusandrobertson.com.au/products/top100.asp Ive read 40.

I've read 32 from the A&R top 100. But, it's a pretty stupid list. Any list by measure of quality with the words Dan Brown featured is rendered completely and utterly void.

 

[nwatts]

Yeah its a pretty dodgy list. But I actually liked the da vinci code. Keep in mind its the top 100 list of books most read by AUSTRALIANS.. On the global radar, we are nothing but a bleep

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if it topped a worldwide poll of favourite books. Doesn't make it any less ridiculous.

 

[genavania]

ive read 9 from the times. they all look pretty good though. i thought it would be the other classics like Austen and that


i found the da vinci code such a bore. i read the first few chapters and got very bored. heaps of people have said they couldnt put it down though

 

[Mr Lovepony]

though from this list http://www.angusandrobertson.com.au/products/top100.asp Ive read 40.

I prefer the Borders list, though I've only read 2 books from it.

As for the Times, I've read 5. Not picking up another book till I finish HSC. Shit, I shouldn't even be here.

 

[walrusbear]

For more 'greatest novel ever' lists, check out

http://www.adherents.com/people/100_novel.html

only read 14 of those

 

[rific]

I can't stand these sort of lists, if a book is good, someone will read it. If it is not good, someone will still read it, several million someones normally. Why do we need to be told if something is a classic, or worth reading? And people that believe they must read a book because it's an 'identified classic', or because 'everyone's reading it, quick, go buy a copy', quite simply, irritate me. There are many more books out there than you can ever possibly read, so why spend all your time catching up to everyone else and read what they are? Look around. Be different. Be surprised.

Lists of most-read are interesting from a sociological perspective, but even most of these are based on sophisms.

 

[nwatts]

It's important to read/have knowledge of "identified classics" because they are often complied on a the basis of a work's literary significance. People enjoy reading things that have influenced (or been influenced by) other writers. Gives a sense of cohesion for those who are avid readers.

Popularlity based lists (like the A&G list) give you an idea of what the general readership values, which reflects what society values within literature. It was important to read The Da Vinci Code because it shows us how most readers read. Having an awareness of popular fiction will help you understand how society works, which is fundamental to communication. End of the day - want to relate to people better? Read what they're reading.

 

[Markazzo]

I can't stand these sort of lists, if a book is good, someone will read it. If it is not good, someone will still read it, several million someones normally. Why do we need to be told if something is a classic, or worth reading? And people that believe they must read a book because it's an 'identified classic', or because 'everyone's reading it, quick, go buy a copy', quite simply, irritate me. There are many more books out there than you can ever possibly read, so why spend all your time catching up to everyone else and read what they are? Look around. Be different. Be surprised.

Lists of most-read are interesting from a sociological perspective, but even most of these are based on sophisms.

I posted the thread for a bit of fun, just because I happen to like both books and lists. I'm not suggesting these novels are the greatest ever written, or even that they are good, its just like, a conversation topic.

There's no need for anyone's feathers to be ruffled or brows to be furrowed, if people want to contribute to the thread then go ahead, but there's no reason to become all curmudgeonly.

 

[Sarah168]

i like older novels anyway. There are great Russian and English novels from the 18th and 19th century.

I'm a classics addict. I first found the language difficult after being immersed in rubbish teen novels but find it so rewarding once you grasp the language of each writer.