Comments on Best Books of the 20th Century - page 5
Comments (showing 201-250 of 326) (326 new)
The Good Earth (Pearl S. Buck)The Good Soldier Schweik (Jaroslav Hasek)
A Dance to the Music of Time (Anthony Powell)
The Search (C.P. Snow)
Giovany wrote: "apoyen a Proust!!!!!!lets stand for proust!!!!
aller Marcel, il est fantastique"
Lo apoyo de todo corazon. Es una maravilla de libro.
Cindy wrote: "The Harry Potter books enticed countless numbers of kids, who would never normally pick up a book when they could be playing a video game, to read. In my opinion, any book or series of books, that ..."I'm thrilled about Harry Potter and all the kids who loved the books and now(one hopes) love to read. But it is definitely not one of the 100 best books of the 20th century! I read the first one when it came out; expecting Tolkien, I was deeply disappointed. I just checked out the 2nd since there's been so much fuss recently about the series. It is derivative, uninspired writing. It is certainly not great; it is barely even good.
Sharjeel wrote: ""One Hundred Years of Solitude" for its profound impact on the global literary scene"I completely agree. But the goodreads link said you had commented on my comment. Did you?
I love science fiction, but I enjoy the mix of scifi with romance and dabs of paranormal. I am biased, but I love Shifter Evolutions, books 1-6. When I'm bored with tv, I'll read them again and again. amiblackwelder.blogspot.com
The database won't let me add A Pale View of Hills (1982) or The Hopkins Manuscript (1939). Can someone fix this please? Thanks.
Your comment can't get a reply because it was sent to me rather than to the webmeister, and unfortunatelyI can't do anything about the problem. You probably want to redirect it.
I would delete:361 Treasure Island
503 Walden (page 6)
Thoughts From Walden Pond (page 6)
491 Cyrano de Bergerac (page 5)
1683 Travels of Marco Polo (page 17)
787 The Art of War (page 8)
1500 Shutter Island (page 16)
1319 The Book of Mormon (page 14)
The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson (page 14)
1031 The Holy Bible (page 11)
2059 Shopaholic Takes Manhattan (page 21)
2059 E=MC2... (page 21)
Of Marriageable Age (page 18)
1677 The Holy Bible (page 17)
59 Heart of Darkness
601 Grapes of Wrath/Cannery Row/etc (these are separate books!) (page 7)
And I would seriously consider removing the three separate novels:
34 Fellowship of the Rings
43 Return of the King
47 The Two Towers
because The Lord of the Rings is already present and should be considered one long novel (same characters, plot lines, etc)
I agree with Molly. every book she cites is drudgery waiting to happen, except for a few books by Steinbeck, these books hardly belong a on a list of the "Best books of the 20th Century." If some alien found this it'd fall asleep just reading the list!Tom
Yes, that's a good point, also. All the more reason not be on the list. I have a different theory altogether about the ". . .best of proposition. . .", anyway.Tom
I see the King James Bible is still on the list, even though it was nearly 300 years old by the time the 20th Century began.
If I wanted I could have added Tao Te Ching on the list, which is a fine book but its like over 2000 years old.. ;)
Harry Potter deserves to be on this list for sure. No book, series, or author has been able to do what this phenomenon has. It is exquisitely written from the Sorcerer's Stone until the very last line of the Deathly Hallows. No one who has read the books would disagree with me.
Matthew wrote: "you couldn't be more right, throw in Kafka, as well. then the non-20th century books, along with the pop fiction books on the list?"agree! does my search works right? I cant find any of Kafka for literature's sake!
I think Harry Potter is a good book for children... Not as good as Treasure Island or The Jungle Book, or any other that may crosss my mind... Still ,is a good book. Could be the best book for somenone... What good is a top anyway? Reality is subjective. I strongly dislike Turgenev. That makes him a bad writer?
Ruth wrote:"I'm thrilled about Harry Potter and all the kids who loved the books and now(one hopes) love to read. But it is definitely not one of the 100 best books of the 20th century! I read the first one when it came out; expecting Tolkien, I was deeply disappointed. I just checked out the 2nd since there's been so much fuss recently about the series. It is derivative, uninspired writing. It is certainly not great; it is barely even good." I completely agree.
Laura wrote: "If you think so, why not add Vonnegut to the list? Seems simpler than complaining about it."THANK YOU! : )
I am sorry, but these comments are atrocious! I do have issues with book snobs (along with every other type of snob)...but this is not about that. Is there not some way to send a private message to the person instead of displaying all of this ridicule and criticism to the entire world??!!! Just because it is the internet, does not mean your comments might not EMBARRASS the person who composed this list! Do you guys go around embarrassing people frequently?I would also like to add, that just because you like an author/book, does not mean the person who composed this this does!
For all the people who mentioned Vonnegut...I, personally, am not a fan. It is a little like food. Do you not like something (e.g. avocado, peanut butter, chocolate) that everyone seems to love??
Thanks for listing these. It's hard to find them otherwise.Molly wrote: "I would delete:
361 Treasure Island Gone
503 Walden (page 6) Gone
Thoughts From Walden Pond (page 6) I left this in, since it seems to be a new work albeit with content provided from Thoreux. It baffles me why something described as a calendar should even be on Goodreads, but that's not my call.
491 Cyrano de Bergerac (page 5) Gone
1683 Travels of Marco Polo (page 17) Gone
787 The Art of War (page 8) This is a 20th Century translation, and the blurb suggests that it's been edited as a 20th Century business book… or possibly 21st Century. Removal is draconian, and I had sufficient doubt, so I left it.
1500 Shutter Island (page 16) Couldn't find this one
1319 The Book of Mormon (page 14) Gone
The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson (page 14) Gone
1031 The Holy Bible (page 11) Gone
2059 Shopaholic Takes Manhattan (page 21) Gone
2059 E=MC2... (page 21) Again, published 2000, so belongs in the list
Of Marriageable Age (page 18) Left in. It was published in 2000, so it's still 20th Century.
1677 The Holy Bible (page 17) Gone
59 Heart of Darkness Gone, though I left another edition because it was paired with a later (1904 work)
As for the combined editions, I wish people wouldn't put them in the list (Grapes of Wrath/Cannery Row/etc), though some would claim that each Lord of the Rings book is a separate novel. The same goes for Asimov's Foundation trilogy, which is here as a single entry alongside the separate novels. I haven't touched them, since deleting one or the other would destroy a lot of honestly cast votes.
Paula wrote: "I'm not really thrilled that the Harry Potter books made this list....they really don't belong here !What about : The Red Tent by Diamont ??
: The Celestine Prophies ??
..."
Wifey wrote: "Why isn't Celine or Saint Exupéry or Borges on this list? I call bullshit. Or i don't know... Vonnegut?"Two of Vonnegut's unremarkable books are on the list
This list should have a pull down menu to sort it. Too many books. By rating, by author, by votes by genre... Etc...
After going through this list, I realize how out of touch I am with most readers. As a retired English teacher,history buff, Anglophile and good mystery lover, I hardly recognize many of these books. And they are the best? But then, these people are keeping publishers going and literacy alive.... they are reading... and that is a good thing.
I'm happy that J.R.R. Tolkien appears quite high up on the list; he's one of, if not my most, favourite author. A lot of these books are great, and really deserve to be on this list.
Patrick wrote: "Thanks for listing these. It's hard to find them otherwise.Molly wrote: "I would delete:
361 Treasure Island Gone
503 Walden (page 6) Gone
Thoughts From Walden Pond (page 6) I left this in, si..."
Just about the Lord of the Rings, they're not actually three separate novels; Tolkien originally intended it to be one book, but the prices of publishing back then were too high, and so the publishers got him to split the book in three. Just saying.
Although it's one of my Favourite books, Phantom of the Opera is not 20th century. It was published in 1898 I think...
Remove the books that aren't from 20th Century, and please streamline this list. There are some very good titles in this list, but they are mixed with some B.S.
David wrote: "Sometimes a Great Notion is a Masterpiece.The Harry Potter books are entertaining enough, but hardly in the same league. "
same opinion here
First time on this site and I am amused by the comments about WHEN some of the bookd were written and whether they should be on the list. If you don't like them or think that they belong, DON'T VOTE FOR THEM! Perhaps one point might be that they are still being READ in this century...how cool is that?? Read on!
Paula wrote: "I'm not really thrilled that the Harry Potter books made this list....they really don't belong here !What about : The Red Tent by Diamont ??
: The Celestine Prophies ??
..."
Paula,
You have a right to your opinion. But Harry Potter is one of the most influential books of my lifetime. I think people may have bad feelings because of the movies and merchandising. However, the books themselves are extraordinary. I am not surprised to see it on this list.
(:(:(:greenplanet:):):)