As I stated earlier, I had plans on making 'American Psycho' book 1001 - but I'm currently reading 'The Rules of Attraction' by Bret Easton Ellis and might have to change my opinion of him. I actually rather like it so maybe I will read 'American Psycho' after all...
And I love 'Hitchhiker's guide...' - just shows how diverse the list is!

I personally wont get through the second book by Douglas Adams. I tried to read The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Quandary Phase 4 times, in 4 different contexts of my life, different years even... and even though I never got successfully through it, I counted it in my "read" list because I did give it a good try. But there is another book of his on the list, and it would probably one of the last books on the list I'd read!

Laura wrote: "I couldn't agree more about Coelho. I loathed The Alchemist. I mean, really, really hated it. He has no business being on the list. However, I think Shakespeare didn't make the list because his wor..."

Yeah, I guess you have a point. It's more of a novel-driven list.

But The Name of the Rose is really good! It's not the easiest book to read in the world, but it's definitly not the hardest. It's not even one of the hardest in the list, if you ask my opinion. I personally found Moby Dick much more tiresome. But I guess that changes from person to person.

Laura wrote: "I couldn't agree more about Coelho. I loathed The Alchemist. I mean, really, really hated it. He has no business being on the list. However, I think Shakespeare didn't make the list because his wor..." Laura: True. You do The plays, then you've got to include Arthur Miller and all that rot. Bother.

I couldn't agree more about Coelho. I loathed The Alchemist. I mean, really, really hated it. He has no business being on the list. However, I think Shakespeare didn't make the list because his works are plays and poems and the list is more focused on novels. Just a thought.

I don't know if there's anything on the list I won't read (though The Devil and Miss Prym is certainly in the running) but I'm not looking forward to Name of the Rose because I've watched so many people take four months to read the damn thing.

I'm not a big fan of Paulo Coelho either. I've only read Veronika Decides to Die and it made absolutely no impression on me. I have been warned away from The Alchemist.

In college there were some books that I only half-assed read because they just did not appeal to me. I read only enough to pass the tests and write the papers. These books include Sons and Lovers, Moby Dick (in high school), and Lord Jim.

I'm also staying very far away from Bret Easton Ellis. I read Less Than Zero and some of American Psycho and that was more than enough for me.

Luiza wrote: "Ok...I know his books will most likely be very easy and quick to read, but from all..." No Shakespeare sucks the big one.

Margaret wrote: "And Lolita definitely comes off as being in control much of the time, enough so that Nabokov makes you forget sometimes that she's only a child, and a 12-year-old when it begins at that...."

That is because the story is told from the unreliable perspective of Humbert. In his twisted, pedophile mind, she was in control and he felt like he had no power. But you're right that as you read you get sucked in to empathize with him rather than Lolita. I think that's why it creeped me out.

Really, I have no idea how any Paulo Coelho ended up in a list of must-reads. As said in another topic, if you're going to pick a Brazilian Author, Machado de Assis totally deserves that position. I would pick him for a list of must-reads anytime ;)

Kristi wrote: "I read both Coelho novels on the list, and I didn't like them at all. Everyone else I've met thinks they're awesome, though. "

Coelho = Way, way, way, way overrated. People are dumb. :) Just kidding!!!!


Sorta.

American Psycho. I do not want to be that disturbed.

Luiza wrote: "Ok, I know there's a bit of prejudice in what I'm about to say, but I'm not looking so foward to reading Paulo Coelho. I know his books will most likely be very easy and quick to read, but from all..."

I read both Coelho novels on the list, and I didn't like them at all. Everyone else I've met thinks they're awesome, though.

Cynthia - Yeah, I didn't enjoy The Reader as much as Lolita. Nabokov's language is just so rich that it's a pleasure to read him, even when the subject matter is disturbing. And Lolita definitely comes off as being in control much of the time, enough so that Nabokov makes you forget sometimes that she's only a child, and a 12-year-old when it begins at that. I'm kind of amazed at myself that I didn't take the young narrator's age into consideration with The Reader, because you raise a good point that he's only a child, too. My view was definitely skewed by the fact that he's male.

Ok, I know there's a bit of prejudice in what I'm about to say, but I'm not looking so foward to reading Paulo Coelho. I know his books will most likely be very easy and quick to read, but from all I've heard of him, at least from literature teachers and all people with a minimal amount of reasonable reading taste, I've never been particularly curious to read his books.
Honestly, I don't know he is doing in a list like that. Two Paulo Coelhos and no Shakespeare?

Margaret wrote: "Cynthia, that's an interesting point your son (I'm guessing son?) made. I wonder if you've given it any thought? Lolita is one of my all-time favorites and I enjoyed The Reader, as well. I never co..."Margaret: My 19-year-old daughter was the one asking me about differences between Reader and Lolita. While I did not finish the Reader, I definitely felt the girl in Lolita was in some ways sophisticated, something of a temptress, while still a child. She certainly did not seem an innocent victim. Still, While reading Lolita I knew she was literally a child, which of course creeped me out big time. I guess this is the magic of Lolita. You are simultaneously drawn in/ the voyeur and repelled. For some reason the Reader left me simply repelled.

I read Dubliners when I was in college during one of those times when I was trying to read everything you're supposed to read if you are to be considered "well-read". It didn't make much of an impression on me and I really don't remember much about it anymore. There are actually quite a ew books on the list I wouldn't read just because they don't sound interesting to me and there are tons of other books out there that do sound interesting.

Re Proust: If Ulysses is #1001 for me, then I'm guessing In Search of Lost Time will be #1000. However, if I start to try to get some of my once-decent French back, maybe by the time I get to #1000 I'll be able to read it in the original. Of course I'll be doing this (studying French) in all the goo-gobs of time I have to read all these books...

Cynthia, that's an interesting point your son (I'm guessing son?) made. I wonder if you've given it any thought? Lolita is one of my all-time favorites and I enjoyed The Reader, as well. I never considered the affair in The Reader to be child/sexual abuse, but now that I think of it I'm pretty sure that comes from my own gender biases (thinking that a young boy can't be taken advantage of in the same way a young girl can). Lolita was very hard for me to stomach, especially since it involved several obvious instances of rape as well as kidnapping, whereas The Reader did not. Did you have a hard time with Lolita, too?

I had pretty much determined before I even bought the list book, that I would never read Marcel Proust's Remembrance of Things Past (or In Search of Lost Time, as many now prefer and as is a more accurate translation). A 7-volume, 3200-page novel? This might not be for me. I had problems getting through Don Quixote.

On the other hand, I know that there is so much intertextuality between this and other things, that it makes me consider changing my mind.

Maybe I could start the first volume, and if I liked it, keep going, if not, give up. Like Kristin, I am a completist. I like to finish the books I start. But there have been exceptions in the past, and I could certainly see making this one of them....

I've been joking with that I will only read 1000 - I tried reading 'American Psycho' several years ago, and when I came to the part with the beggar and the dog, I couldn't go on...
I will give it another go, though, just not sure if I will succeed...

I intend to at least crack open every book on the list but, as I said when I joined, Ulysses will be the very last one.

There are quite a few on the list that I will NEVER get to. One of them is "The Reader." I started it and realized it involved a sexual relationship between a 14?-year-old boy and a grown woman. As the mother of two teenagers, I could not stomach it. Although, my oldest asked me yesterday how I managed "Lolita." Good question. I did not LOVE Lolita, but the bit of "The Reader" I made it through really turned my stomach.

I'd like to read every book from the list but that's highly unlikely! Seriously though, if I start reading a novel I ALWAYS complete it no matter how "bad" I think it may be. One of my pet peeves I suppose.

Oh, I thought of another one. Don Quixote. I guess some people like it, the ratings aren't so bad, but I don't think I could get through it.

I've read some of Dubliners, which I don't think is so bad, but everyone seems to dislike Ulysses so much.

Yup, Ulysses here too and for the same reason. I read a little James Joyce in college and I'm not sure I could do 700+ pages of him. I have a copy of Dubliners so I will start with that eventually and see how it goes. Maybe I'll change my mind. Maybe I'll love it and then I'll have to work on conquering my fear of Finnegans Wake.

I am pretty scared of Ulysses...

Which book(s) from the list do you have no intention of reading?