Comments on Best Books Ever - page 88

What an utterly ridiculous list. No Kafka? No Goethe? Only 'Atlas Shrugged' and not 'The Fountainhead' (which is a better book IMO)? No 'A Confederacy of Dunces'? No 'American Psycho'? Some of the books on this list are absolute drivel and how anyone who loves books could think that they should even be mentioned in the same breath as some of the literary greats, of centuries both past and present, is beyond me.

Bee wrote: "why are none of Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials Trilogy on here?"

Exactly what I thought... can't be more biased than that.

This list prooves that this website is a group of idiots (probably high school students who only read the classic books for a book report, and didn't care at all) who don't respect the classic books that are good. How does the Harry Potter books all have a higher rating than the Iliad and Odyssey, and every single book written by James Joyce, Jane Austen, Voltaire, George Orwell, Mark Twain, Virgil, Dante, Sophocles, Leo Tolstoy, Ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner, Dr. Seuss, Lord Byron, Aeschylus, Lewis Caroll, Victor Hugo, Hernik Isben, John Steinback, Jorge Luis Borges, F. Scott Fitzgerald, W. H. Auden, Miguel de Cervantes, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Frederick Douglass, T. S. Eliot, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Oscar Wilde, Brothers Grimm, Herodotus, Franz Kafka, Edgar Allan Poe, Ezra Pound, Marcel Proust, Walter Scott, William Shakespeare, Sun Tzu, Henry David Thoreau, Thucydides, Max Weber, Walt Whitman, William Wordsworth, Mary Wollstonecraft (and her daughter, Mary Shelly), W. B. Yeats, Francis Bacon, Augustine of Hippo, George Bernard Shaw, D. H. Lawerence, Winston Churchill, Geoffrey Chaucer, Anton Chekhov, Roque Centurión Miranda, Søren Kierkegaard, H. G. Wells, Jules Verne, Marquis de Sade, Charles Dickens, André Gide, Pablo Neruda, John Milton, Alan Moore, Robert Musil, Gustave Flaubert, Aesop, Honoré de Balzac, Philip K. Dick, Daniel Defoe, Hesiod, Günter Grass, Cicero, William Blake, the Brontë sisters, and at least 125 other authors.

I love how book lists like this cause so much debate. People comment with their own definitions of "literature." Love it (but sometimes hate it)! 😂😂😂😂

The Hunger Games, Harry Potter and Twilight are definitely not the greatest works of all time- ever. People forget about classics by Plato, Shakespeare & more. Can you only remember the most recent great creations? Sure, The Hunger Games & Harry Potter are good books but there are also many others, across many other decades as well.

My best books ever are:
Ransom by Julie Garwood;
Knight In Shining Armor by Jude Deveraux;
Four Hundred series by Joanna Shupe
Uptown Girls series by Joanna Shupe
The Lady Gets Lucky by Joanna Shupe
Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee;
Reminders of Him by Colleen Hoover;
An Impossible Dream by Jude Deveraux;
Just This Once & Decoy Date by Mira Lyn Kelly;
Pack Up The Moon by Kristan Higgins;
The Kiss Quotient by Helen Huang;
The Thunder Point series by Robyn Carr;
Love Is Blind by Lynsay Sands
Boyfriend Material by Alexis Hall
Blue Heron series by Kristan Higgins
One and Only Series by Melanie Harlow
Rockton series by Kelley Armstrong
The Wisdom of Wolves: Lessons From the Sawtooth Pack by Jim Dutcher and Jamie Dutcher
Night Huntress series by Jeaniene Frost
Night Rebel series by Jeaniene Frost
Broken Heart Paranormal Romance by Michele Bardsley
It's Better This Way by Debbie Macomber
Hideaway by Nora Roberts

Liam wrote: "This list prooves that this website is a group of idiots (probably high school students who only read the classic books for a book report, and didn't care at all) who don't respect the classic book..."

Required reading lists suck and people are right to call them out also Orwell and Moore are hugely overrated, Kafka’s unfunny, and Shakespeare is a PLAYRIGHT not an author.
PS Kilala Princess so rules!

I'm not big on Shakespeare; the only play I've read, that I liked, was Romeo and Juliet.
I read Turn of The Screw which I didn't like. It wasn't as scary as I thought it would be. And the wording of the story confused me.
I did like Last of the Mohicans and Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee. I also liked Jane Eyre and Little Women.
I read Wuthering Heights, but I wish I read the book, before I saw the movie.

this list makes me want to quit the internet forever

I sincerely don't understand the appeal of harry potter. Why is it that not only children (who usually don't have especially great taste) but grown adults who should know better obsess over such mediocre (at times genuinely awful) books? They're just corny kids books, not some sort of brilliant life-changing literature, you ought to have outgrown them by the time you're old enough to responsibly use the internet.

Werefox by moonlight: wrote: "I sincerely don't understand the appeal of harry potter. Why is it that not only children (who usually don't have especially great taste) but grown adults who should know better obsess over such me..."

Sounds like someone doesn't like Celtic mythology or the King Arthur myths.
Besides, Shun Takumi's Battle Royale, A million random digits, Atlas Shrugged, Thomas Covenant, The Turner Diaries, anything S&M Stirling, and Hungary Games are all far worse than Harry Otter.

Jeffrey wrote: "Werefox by moonlight: wrote: "I sincerely don't understand the appeal of harry potter. Why is it that not only children (who usually don't have especially great taste) but grown adults who should k..."

That's an... interesting... mix of books. The only one I'm interested in reading is Battle Royale (I basically only read horror).

Mavis wrote: "Jeffrey wrote: "Werefox by moonlight: wrote: "I sincerely don't understand the appeal of harry potter. Why is it that not only children (who usually don't have especially great taste) but grown adu..."

I'm not sure if that really qualifies as fiction, literary or otherwise.

Mavis wrote: "Jeffrey wrote: "Werefox by moonlight: wrote: "I sincerely don't understand the appeal of harry potter. Why is it that not only children (who usually don't have especially great taste) but grown adu..."

I think otherwise.

I sure do-none at all!
Also, I can’t stand Wimpy Kid or Catcher in the Rye so analogy backfired!
PS How about leave it there? I’m not fighting any more nonessential wars!

Mavis wrote: "Jeffrey wrote: "I sure do-none at all!
Also, I can’t stand Wimpy Kid or Catcher in the Rye so analogy backfired!
PS How about leave it there? I’m not fighting any more nonessential wars!"

There is..."
I think you should please stop trying to make me change my thoughts on A Million Random Digits knowing that is not possible.
Also, your Goodreads friend test question is impossible to pass!

I wasn't expecting my comment to spark such a heated argument about a different, entirely unrelated book.

Well, don't read Battle Royale; I can tell you it stinks.

Jeffrey wrote: "Well, don't read Battle Royale; I can tell you it stinks."

I doubt it's as bad as than Harry Potter.

Werefox by moonlight: wrote: "Jeffrey wrote: "Well, don't read Battle Royale; I can tell you it stinks."

I doubt it's as bad as than Harry Potter."
It's worse; Far worse.
Also it's Otter!

Why don't you guys like Harry Potter?

Lucy wrote: "Why don't you guys like Harry Potter?"

It's OTTER and it only started backstabbing me starting with that darn Cursed Child play. Since then, there hasn't been very much good Harry Otter content and Just Kidding Rowling falling off the deep end is the last straw. Besides, Little Witch Academia, the Riordanverse, and Lord of the Rings are better anyway

Lucy wrote: "Why don't you guys like Harry Potter?"

I found it boring and corny, as well as fairly generic and uninspired, plot wise; the characters were also uninteresting. It's excessively popular, which tends to negatively impact my opinion of books (and other things). Also it isn't horror, which is all I really care about anyway (if this list was organized along my criteria for what makes a good book, it would be functionally identical to the 'Scariest Books Ever' list).

Mavis wrote: "Lucy wrote: "Why don't you guys like Harry Potter?"

We've given you some reasons, now the burden of proof rests upon your shoulders to explain why hp doesn't suck ass and is in fact a classic, if ..."

What is it with you and A Million Random Digits, anyway? I feel like this is some sort of personal joke that I'm not in on.

Mavis wrote: "Lucy wrote: "Why don't you guys like Harry Potter?"

We've given you some reasons, now the burden of proof rests upon your shoulders to explain why hp doesn't suck ass and is in fact a classic, if ..."

Well, first of all, the last time I read the Harry Potter series was in fifth grade, so my opinions on the series might change if I read it today (four years later), but I did recall enjoying it at the time. I am not trying to say that Harry Potter is comparable to prominent classics by authors like Jane Austen, Charles Dickens, William Shakespeare, and a couple of others, but I think the reason why I enjoyed Harry Potter at the time was because I thought it set the foundation for fantasy and was different---sort of like how "Star Wars" set some of the foundations and standards for science fiction cinematics, or maybe even how A Million Random Digits set some of the foundations for statistical analysis and number theory. (I've never read the actual book, though, so I might want to look into it someday.) Sure, Star Wars might seem clichéd, A Million Random Digits might seem to be nothing more than a list of numbers, and, of course, Harry Potter might seem a bit overrated to people who have been accustomed to classics like Great Expectations and Rocannon's World, but I honestly think it set a good foundation for modern fantasy.

In the series, witches and wizards go to a school of magic, but it does parallel with school experiences in real life, such as exams, friendship, school spirit, and popularity, which make the characters and setting more relatable; these can be some elements that can end up being missing in other fantasy books/series, where there is more fantasy than relatability. I suppose this made this book so amazing, groundbreaking, and fundamental to YA fantasy.

In addition, the series actually reaches out to the fans, as opposed to just staying in Hogwarts. There are multiple different characters that can be discussed and analyzed, there are four Hogwarts houses that people can try to fit themselves into, and there are wands and Patronuses people can think about. There are even quizzes on JK Rowling's Pottermore that can determine your wand, Hogwarts house, and Patronus. The fact that a fantasy series can reach out to fans in this way is probably what gives this book such a large fanbase.

Once again, I am not trying to say that the HP series is comparable to some great classics, but I think there are reasons why so many people love the HP series.

I would like to reiterate that the last time I read the series was in fifth grade, so my opinions on the series might be different from what they were back then; I guess I might need to reread the series to see how I feel about it. Maybe I'll try to look at A Million Random Digits to see how they compare, although I do have 111 books on my want-to-read shelf, so it may take some time before I get to those books.

At the time I am writing
Please try to remove books that are repeated[to kill a mockingbird is both #3 and #96...similarly alchemist and many more]
Try representing short series by only their first book or box set[Hunger games 1 is #1 and its box set is #186....similarly lord of the rings and many more]

WHERE IS LEIGH BARDUGO ON HERE I DEMAND TO SEE HER

There's some decent stuff on the list, but not much of it really belongs in the top 100. I would eliminate the children's books and put them on a separate top 100, as well as eliminate anything released after the year 2002 (time buffer). I'm not clear why adult and children reading material are combined, and why recent books are permitted. I wouldn't include any of the incredible books I read in my own childhood in my own personal top 100, as a reference. I would separate the two.

Edit: I took a closer look and noticed another type of book I would remove: collections. The collected works of Edgar Allan Poe is on the list, so which of his works are we talking about? If we're talking about all of them, then that contradicts what the list is trying to do.

Not concerned whether the list is perfect or completely flawed but I enjoy voting for the books I read and enjoyed. Taking the list as a fun and interesting list but not the final word.

Bryan wrote: "There's some decent stuff on the list, but not much of it really belongs in the top 100. I would eliminate the children's books and put them on a separate top 100, as well as eliminate anything rel..."

…You have got to be kidding! I determine the definition of classic and not some out of touch critic!

Mavis wrote: "Jeffrey wrote: "Bryan wrote: "There's some decent stuff on the list, but not much of it really belongs in the top 100. I would eliminate the children's books and put them on a separate top 100, as ..."

I’m not fighting a pointless war.
You had the choice between war and dishonor. You choose war, but you will have dishonor.

I still can't tell if all this A Million Random Digits stuff is some kind of weird joke or not.

Lucy wrote: "What is ironic is that I have seen Twilight on "Best Books Ever" lists and "Worst Books Ever Lists!" As of right now, Twilight is #6 on this list, and on the "Worst Books of All Time," it is #1! XD..."

I've never read Twilight, but as a connoisseur of macabre literature who happens to be asexual, I can say that generally speaking, the best vampire stories tend to be found at short story lengths.

Man, no "Crash" (1973)?? Cowards!

To KIll a Mockingbird is on here twice! haha

Lain wrote: "Man, no "Crash" (1973)?? Cowards!"

Doesn’t sound interesting.

Jeffrey wrote: "Lain wrote: "Man, no "Crash" (1973)?? Cowards!"

Doesn’t sound interesting."

Unfortunate for you!

Lain wrote: "Jeffrey wrote: "Lain wrote: "Man, no "Crash" (1973)?? Cowards!"

Doesn’t sound interesting."

Unfortunate for you!"
I’ll never find car crashes sexy and besides, I find samurai>>>>>>>>>>cars.

If Shakespeare is not out of your depth you mean Shakespeare's Plays or Comedies, Histories, and Tragedies by William Shakespeare but any 17th century Folio, not just the First, is definitely out of your depth.

Mavis wrote: "Jeffrey wrote: "Lain wrote: "Jeffrey wrote: "Lain wrote: "Man, no "Crash" (1973)?? Cowards!"

Doesn’t sound interesting."

Unfortunate for you!"
I’ll never find car crashes sexy and besides, I find..."
The samurai class was wiped out in 1877, a few years BEFORE cars were getting made in Japan.
Raymond wrote: "If Shakespeare is not out of your depth you mean Shakespeare's Plays or Comedies, Histories, and Tragedies by William Shakespeare but any 17th century Folio, not just the First, is definitely out o..."
Shakespeare is no author; He’s a playwright!

jas wrote: "WHERE IS LEIGH BARDUGO ON HERE I DEMAND TO SEE HER"
Who?
Jason wrote: "What an utterly ridiculous list. No Kafka? No Goethe? Only 'Atlas Shrugged' and not 'The Fountainhead' (which is a better book IMO)? No 'A Confederacy of Dunces'? No 'American Psycho'? Some of the ..."
All of Ann Runt’s objectivist drivel stinks and Kafka is unfunny. American Psycho sounds totally uninteresting IMO. Dinosaur Lords>>>>>>>>anything from Ann Runt.

This is the most mediocre list I've ever seen

Jeffrey wrote: "jas wrote: "WHERE IS LEIGH BARDUGO ON HERE I DEMAND TO SEE HER"
Who?
Jason wrote: "What an utterly ridiculous list. No Kafka? No Goethe? Only 'Atlas Shrugged' and not 'The Fountainhead' (which is a..."

With your preferences, I'm not surprised you think so negatively of things like American Psycho, Kafka, or even Crash as I have mentioned.

The list is lacking the Avant-Garde novels that I think define Prose so well. Kafka, JG Ballard, etc etc.

I recommend you trying a Avant-Garde novel at some point, It's a fascinating form of literature!

And end up with a “book” of gibberish? No thank you!
I’m also not taking reading advice from someone who thinks 1984 and Catch-22 are deserving of their unearned reputations.

Jeffrey wrote: "And end up with a “book” of gibberish? No thank you!
I’m also not taking reading advice from someone who thinks 1984 and Catch-22 are deserving of their unearned reputations."

You’re obviously incredibly pretentious and rude, blinded by Fantasy YA despite being 27. Grow up, lol. Have a good life, god speed! <3

Lain wrote: "Jeffrey wrote: "And end up with a “book” of gibberish? No thank you!
I’m also not taking reading advice from someone who thinks 1984 and Catch-22 are deserving of their unearned reputations."

You..."
Look who’s talking. No means no not keep pestering me.

One Shakespeare play Charles Dickens James Joyce, huh?
Tibet in book of the dead who pixies.

That’s just a bunch of printouts!

why does goodreads have such an inexplicably favorable bias toward juvenile young adult books?
proves that this list is nothing more than a popularity contest .....................

Logan wrote: "why does goodreads have such an inexplicably favorable bias toward juvenile young adult books?
proves that this list is nothing more than a popularity contest ....................."

Pfft. The Dinosaur Lords>>>>>>>>>anything from Orwell>Catcher in the Rye.