Comments on Best Books Ever - page 69

Harry Poter and Twilight in front of All Quiet On The Western Front?

But... but... but why? :(

John wrote: "Harry Poter and Twilight in front of All Quiet On The Western Front?

But... but... but why? :("

First, All Quiet On The Western Front is an old book; second and of course most important, it`s by an author neither American nor even British...
:D
Lots of fine books neglected simply because they are written in languages other than English.

Lee wrote: "Marla wrote: "this is the second list--worst books was the first--and i'm done. this is madness. i mean, how many mormons congregated to vote the book of mormon as a top 100 book? really?"

The ..."

To quote Spitting Image: "My God is Bigger Than Your God!!

Dodo wrote: "John wrote: "Harry Poter and Twilight in front of All Quiet On The Western Front?

But... but... but why? :("

First, All Quiet On The Western Front is an old book; second and of course most import..."

Those would all be fair points if you were talking about books that are powerful in meaning. But you're talking about two fantasy series that are made to entertain and nothing else. I really doubt that people will talk about Twilight with high regard in 80 years.

John wrote: "But you're talking about two fantasy series that are made to entertain and nothing else."

Um... I`m kinda puzzled... Do you mean All Quiet On The Western Front is a fantasy made to entertain?

Fawn-laughing till our ribs get tough but that will never be enough wrote: "Liquid wrote: "This list is biased. The hunger games is a pretty good book, but it's just really POPULAR RIGHT NOW, not THE BEST BOOK OF ALL TIME EVER. And how is twilight even in the top 100? I fe..."

temper, Fay. calm down.

John wrote: "Dodo wrote: "John wrote: "Harry Poter and Twilight in front of All Quiet On The Western Front?

But... but... but why? :("

First, All Quiet On The Western Front is an old book; second and of cours..."

I will talk about twilight with high regard in 80 years.

John wrote: "Harry Poter and Twilight in front of All Quiet On The Western Front?

But... but... but why? :("
*Potter
get it right xD

Hailley Dawn(lovatic for life) - I will love you like I've never been hurt, run through fire for you like I've never been burnt- wrote: "John wrote: "Dodo wrote: "John wrote: "Harry Poter and Twilight in front of All Quiet On The Western Front?

But... but... but why? :("

First, All Quiet On The Western Front is an old book; second..."

Well, that may be your opinion but many, many authors, book critics and readers of all genres the world around think it's turgid (including oneself). Popularity is not a sign of the greatest book of all time, because in eighty years time Twilight may be your favourite book but not the youth of that time. Books that have been ranked by regular thinking readers of the world usually talk about books that change the meaning of what it is to read a book, or even in some ways the world, though not always. For example, William S. Burroughs Naked Lunch (which I have not had the pleasure to read, this is merely the opinion of literary critics and others I have spoken with) is regarded as one of the best books ever written for being so experimental and pushing the boundaries as to what a story is. I am reading Catch-22 at the moment and I find it revolutionary in the sense of what a war novel is supposed to be, being turned upside down by the book. None of the characters are gallant, 99% of them are cowards, but yet instead of depression the books translates their situation into a black comedy of epic proportions. Twilight didn't change the world. Vampire books have been written since the 19th century, and have been just as popular as Twilight, and in my opinion I have read better ones. Twilight's only change in vampire fiction that most people seem to notice is that they "sparkle" in the sunlight, which is just a bad translation of the effects sunlight has on vampires in Stoker's Dracula. On the romance end, Twilight is simplistic and cliched. Hell, it's not even that, there are plenty of simplistic and cliched romance novels at the time that I know for a fact didn't have a female protagonist as bland as Bella Swann, who falls in love at the drop of a hat. If these novels had no happy ending and a tragedy for Bella showing her what love was like, they would be subject to some improvement. Unfortunately for you my friend as much as you and your other fangirls enjoy Twilight, Stephenie Meyer has not done for the Vampire what Bram Stoker or Anne Rice have done, and she has not brought for romance what Jane Austen and the Brontes have.

There may be many of you who disagree with the books on this list, also with the books I have selected and voted for as my own personal favourites. If this is the case then please list your own selections so that I can share them, after all, it wouldn't do for us all to like the same thing, would it?

Sean wrote: "Hailley Dawn(lovatic for life) - I will love you like I've never been hurt, run through fire for you like I've never been burnt- wrote: "John wrote: "Dodo wrote: "John wrote: "Harry Poter and Twil..."

Sorry you lost me, how about we agree we are allowed to like whatever crap books we like *cough* to the person who added hunger games *cough*

Hailley Dawn(lovatic for life) - I will love you like I've never been hurt, run through fire for you like I've never been burnt- wrote: "Sean wrote: "Hailley Dawn(lovatic for life) - I will love you like I've never been hurt, run through fire for you like I've never been burnt- wrote: "John wrote: "Dodo wrote: "John wrote: "Harry P..."
I don't know what you mean, I've never read the Hunger Games, but yes let's just leave it at that.

Where is The Fault In Our Stars! This fail of a list is disappointing!

This list is crazy. Twilight, seriously? Oh jesus!

Half of the good books aren't even on here!

Sean wrote: "Fawn-laughing till our ribs get tough but that will never be enough wrote: "Sean wrote: "The mere idea that this list would contain Atlas Shrugged or Twilight, regardless of rank, shows that there ..."

Atlas Shrugged juvenile? Wow, does this show which way our country is going. Very sad!

There are some last 50 or so pages of War and Peace like fifty pages in Atlas Shrugged, but Rand isn't quite as good as Tolstoy.

Martha wrote: "Sean wrote: "Fawn-laughing till our ribs get tough but that will never be enough wrote: "Sean wrote: "The mere idea that this list would contain Atlas Shrugged or Twilight, regardless of rank, show..."
I'm not from the US I'm afraid, so your country isn't going in any durection. I'm from a country that doesn't think that social services to the poor by our government will bring about concentration camps and evil socialism. Ayn Rand was an alcoholic fool who believed selfishness is a virtue. As a non-believer regarding religion, I'm ashamed to have her in the same camp as I, since her "selfishness is a virtue" angle has inspired many religious nuts to see that religion can damage our morals. Selfishness is not a virtue and a society needs to cooperate in order that insanity does not descend. If we keep going the way of selfishness is a virtue then you lose institutions such as schools and the family, because we'll simply forget about caring for others. I'm sure Rand was just afraid of communism, but she needed to understand the reasons for why there was strong opposition to capitalism which caused an economy based on Marx and Engels to be formed, instead of simplifying it by saying "selfishness is a virtue" and government intervention is bad. Even if you like the book, and the parts I read of it before going briefly insane were decent, its philosophy is wrong. Everyone's entitled to like a book...but in lists like these readability and good prose aren't the only factors. And my comment was largely aimed at Twilight when I said juvenile.

The Skeptics Annotated Bible

This list was just another reminder that our generation is full of plebs.

Sean wrote: "Martha wrote: "Sean wrote: "Fawn-laughing till our ribs get tough but that will never be enough wrote: "Sean wrote: "The mere idea that this list would contain Atlas Shrugged or Twilight, regardles..."

Sean- please pardon me on my assuming you are from the U.S. Now I am assuming you are from the U.K. Same thing. The U. S. has voted so far left for these past two terms, U.S. and U.K. are synonymous. I definitely disagree with you on your "analysis" of her book. I believe her exaggerated storyline is absolutely right on to what is so wrong with the global economy now. And, it is so ironic to me that she wrote this more than four decades ago. How she could see this coming back then is amazing to me. Yes, my ideology is conservative, especially regarding economics, and I wish (as she put it down so extraordinarily) that the "selfish" WOULD stop working and watch the chips fall as they may.

Martha wrote: "Sean wrote: "Martha wrote: "Sean wrote: "Fawn-laughing till our ribs get tough but that will never be enough wrote: "Sean wrote: "The mere idea that this list would contain Atlas Shrugged or Twilig..."

I'm from the Republic of Ireland actually. I don't mind that you like the book, I don't. I'm not a conservative of any kind, I just think a lot of the damages to the modern economy is caused by a lack of regulation as opposed to too much. And I think the right do have some points to make when it comes to the current solution to the crisis. Rand was an intelligent woman, I just find her worldview a little too, simplistic. I've known plenty of people on one side of economic arguments that I have a moderate amount of respect for (Friedrich Hayek), but my politics is far closer to someone like George Orwell or, dare I say it, Marx and Engels. Rand's book jsut came across to me as socialists are bad and capitalists are good. Not even Dickens, who would have been more on the side of the socialists, characterized the world like this, portraying the rich as miserly but yet beneficial to the economy. I will concede that Rand doesn't have many followers here though, her books don't really appeal to Europeans, well me anyway, which could be a bias that causes me to dislike her so.

Ayaz wrote: "This list was just another reminder that our generation is full of plebs."

The Bourgeoisie don't like Harry Potter :( Revolution must occur! Down with the establishment! Career novelists only!

Donna wrote: "Deleted for being nonfiction, according to the Goodreads page: Diary of Ann Frank;."

David Irving won't be very happy :o

Really, ? was this list put together by 12 years old - ALL the Harry Potters? but No Philip Pullman (That's the Amber Spyglass author) - The Twilight books are just dreadful
and then peppered with actual good books to give validity to the list -
Maybe it's just a list of books that have been made into movies or TV series that were actually better than the books themselves

Thesqueeze wrote: "Really, ? was this list put together by 12 years old - ALL the Harry Potters? but No Philip Pullman (That's the Amber Spyglass author) - The Twilight books are just dreadful
and then peppered with ..."

hey its an opinion. people voted so that's their opinions. I agree twilight isn't the best book ever but its peoples opinions. in the nicest way possible, back off. its an opinion. :)
honestly not meaning to be mean, btw.

what? in a list of the BEST BOOKS EVER "the hunger games" is number 1!!! and twilight is 5th!! come on!!!

Twilight and The Very Hungry Caterpillar? Really?

The fact that Twilight is on this list at all, let alone placing higher then To Kill A Mockingbird completely ruins it. And there are many amazing books which should be on this list which aren't.

Also, this list really shows how young some of the people on this website are - no wonder the books ratings are completely wrong.

It's no use, Sean: the rule is, first we comment, then (perhaps) we read what others have already pointed out ....

It really shows how some of the people on this website are. :DDD

Kalin wrote: "It's no use, Sean: the rule is, first we comment, then (perhaps) we read what others have already pointed out ....

It really shows how some of the people on this website are. :DDD"
How many times has Twilight been ridiculed now, I'm really thinking of unfollowing these comments, please an original thought.
We should probably set up a list for best books written before 1990 or something, then we won't get all these disagreements.

Kalin wrote: "...first we comment, then (perhaps) we read what others have already pointed out ....

It really shows how some of the people on this website are. :DDD"


So it does. Alas.

It might have to do with reading books haphazardly, too...

Sean wrote: "I'm really thinking of unfollowing these comments"

I keep following them because now and then, a Goodreader appears whose reasoning I enjoy so much that I send 'em friend invites. ;)

This "best" thing is the bone of contention. At one time (40 pages of comments ago), I suggested it should be changed to "most favorite" or something, but no, they said. It's meant to stay.

And you know--in a hundred years ....

:D

Kalin wrote: "Sean wrote: "I'm really thinking of unfollowing these comments"

I keep following them because now and then, a Goodreader appears whose reasoning I enjoy so much that I send 'em friend invites. ;)
..."
Once every generation a Goodreader worthy of Kalin's friend request was born, born under a star in the West.
And I think most popular or a name like that would be more apt than best books ever. Most critics would disagree about the top ten, though Harry Potter is still pretty good.

Well put, my friend. Indeed. :)

(But if you want a rhyme, try playing around with "request" and "West." :D )

Sean wrote: "We should probably set up a list for best books written before 1990 or something, then we won't get all these disagreements. "

I`m afraid we still would. First, because people like to disagree. I find it fun, as often as not. Second and more important, there are some really good books written after 1990. They seem to go unnoticed either because they are not "trendy", or simply because they are written in a "wrong" language, like, say, this one: http://readaholicme.weebly.com/from-t...

Kalin wrote: "It's no use, Sean: the rule is, first we comment, then (perhaps) we read what others have already pointed out ....

It really shows how some of the people on this website are. :DDD"

I'm allowed to post my opinion on here without getting a passive-agressive comment from you.

It was a tease, Alice. :) A good-natured one.

Or am _I_ not allowed to tease?

Kalin wrote: "It was a tease, Alice. :) A good-natured one.

Or am _I_ not allowed to tease?"

Well you know, nothing comes across very well on the internet, when tone of voice and facial expressions cannot be read :)

Point taken. :)

I apologize if my tone seemed aggressive. (I have a weird sense of humor, too. ;)

Kalin wrote: "Point taken. :)

I apologize if my tone seemed aggressive. (I have a weird sense of humor, too. ;)"

No problem, just a misunderstanding I guess :)

Dodo wrote: "Sean wrote: "We should probably set up a list for best books written before 1990 or something, then we won't get all these disagreements. "

I`m afraid we still would. First, because people like to..."

I've read many a good book post-1990 my friend and I will admit that many ingenious creations came after it (not to blow my own trumpet). But pre-1990 offered better literary fiction in general such as the post-war American literary movement, the pro social justice 19th century English writers, Cold War fiction, the comic novels of the Angry Young Men and of course pre-Hunger Games dystopia e.g. 1984, Brave New World. Also, most books before 1990 that will make it to the list will be ones that have stood the test of time and be regarded as classics, therefore no panned shit like Twilight will make it (that is unless the 1915 equivalent is nominated by an 113 year old Goodreader). Will books I don't like such as John Grisham's early work seep through the cracks. More than likely, though I doubt even Grisham's fans consider him superior to crime writers like Leonard and Christie, whose fans have outlived them both. Also, the bulk of the work by great writers still alive today was done pre-1990 with some choice exceptions as Ian McEwan and Martin Amis. And of course people should disagree just a list that ranks Twilight so high is illegitimate to me.

How is the Percy Jackson series not here? Or the Lorien Legacies? Or Gossip Girl? Or even Heroes of Olympus?

Well, they should rename it as the most famous book (at present)...

Deep wrote: "Well, they should rename it as the most famous book (at present)..."

Agreed, though I doubt Twilight is more famous than A Christmas Carol, a truly timeless story which has been retold for 170 years, so the list would still lack legitimacy.

Sean wrote: "But pre-1990 offered better literary fiction in general"


Cannot but agree! But that was the pre-Web era...


Sean wrote: "Also, the bulk of the work by great writers still alive today was done pre-1990 with some choice exceptions"

Yes again. But there are exceptions. Yet I doubt another Terry Pratchett is likely to come anytime soon. Still, he is on the list, even though the list does not give him his due. But, say, Святослав Логинов is not even on the list, and his Свет в окошке ( http://readaholicme.weebly.com/lit-li... ) is something really unique. Wrong language again...

Matter is, folks all over the world are being (purposely?) weaned away from reading books. From the tender age, too ( http://readaholicme.weebly.com/very-i... )! As a translator, I`ve been watching the process for at least a decade. And with Good Readers gone, Good Writers must go as well, no?

I would dearly like to disagree with the post of yours, Sean, but I must sadly admit I cannot...

Showalter. Kelsey Cole Heather killouough

I question whether less people are reading. What's more likely is that more people are reading but they have simpler tastes which dilutes a list like this from being highbrow. Think how many people were illiterate pre-20th century.
I'm a Primary school teaching student in England and the National Curriculum demands that children read as much as possible: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads...
(See pages 10-15)
Seeing as the purpose of a book is to entertain and inform the most complicated books aren't the "best" anyway. They only cater for a tiny amount of humanity who have the time, desire and competency to read and understand them. They may be the most "profound" but then that merits another list ;-).

On a side note I don't like the one book per author thing. The top ten may have been swamped by J.K Rowling books but then if they are the most treasured books by the largest amount of people they deserve those places. I also think this list should include non-fiction books. Just my opinion. :-)

Pretty accurate.