Catching up on Classics (and lots more!) discussion
Archived Chit Chat & All That
>
How well read are you? (Buzzfeed Quiz)
Bob wrote: "I enjoy looking over various lists, but I give no credence to their objectiveness. I have always been puzzled by how a list can neglect so many well renowned authors by not listing a single book, w..."Ha! I agree, Bob. I love the ones that say something like "Perhaps reading isn't your thing." Hmmm--wonder what it is I've been spending so much time doing then. :-)
So no feeling pathetic, Ashley!
Kyle wrote: "Newbie - 19/155Good thing I joined this group!"
18 I read huge amounts a year (somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 books) and still am a newbie!
41/155 for me. About half of the books I have read with the 1001-books group within the last 5 years.
48/155. Interesting list -- not as Eurocentric as some. A little inconsistent, too, eg they list "the Aubrey-Maturin series" but only one individual title of the Harry Potter books. At least I've heard of almost all of them!
54 out of 155. Kind of irked some of my favorite classics/authors weren't represented as well as they should be, to my mind, but fun list! To be fair, I included books I attempted to read and gave up on, about three titles. Many of the books read are thanks to majoring in English and being "forced" to read them! I can't wait to compare with this time next year!
Hayley wrote: "Kyle wrote: "Newbie - 19/155Good thing I joined this group!"
18 I read huge amounts a year (somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 books) and still am a newbie!"
I read 100+ books a year, and I'm *trying* to do a classic a month, and I'm still scoring in the 14 range.
And not all classics appeal to everyone.
76. Partly because I was an English major -- though there were some favorites of mine on the list, books I didn't read in school: Under the Net, The Golden Notebook, the Bowen and DH Lawrence. Not a bad list!
Mod
22 - several books I hadn't heard of and of those I had I am not much attracted by! One Dickens! No Hardy! Not impressed much ...
Yep. The older books (pre-20th century) were picked by an international group, so there's not as many older English writers.
Two of my books I abandoned (temporarily)at just over half way.
Sara wrote: "67/155. Also an English major, but like Simone didn't find a lot of my favorite authors on the list. No Hardy!"Didn't think of Hardy -- and he's one of my favorites.
Only 56/155. The list does seem to well represent world literature drama (Naipal's "House of Mr. Biswas" and Rushdie's "Midnight's Children" are absolute MUST reads) but why only list the first movement of Powell's "Dance to the Music of Time"? A reader who hasn't read all four movements didn't even get to the best portions! And as far as I am concerned, this kind of list, without Agatha Christie's "Murder of Roger Ackroyd", is one that has skipped what is probably the most popular genre in the world: mysteries. Yes, true, Edgar Allan Poe is mentioned, but still...
Connie wrote: "I have read 70/155. Better get started on some of the others!"Congrats Connie, you're in the lead here! Therefore, what isn't here that should be?
Mod
You checked off 41 out of 155 on this list!You're doing well - you're clearly an avid reader. Keep at it, pal!
That is a little disappointing. But there are a lot of books I own and haven't read yet on this list...
Sara wrote: "These kinds of lists are always a bit of fun, but I don't think this one would determine if you are "well read" or not."Sara, agreed. I like to read a little bit of everything, so that shades my personal definition of well-read. I don't have a literary degree, nor do I have any experience in the academic world of literature. But a better title for this particular list might be "well-read in classical literature." I've read 56 books on this list, and yes, there are a number of books listed I want to read. But within my claim of "reading a little bit of everything", I've read current YA blockbusters ("Twilight", the first two "Hunger Games") a current soft-core porn blockbuster ("Fifty Shades") and consider two fiction books from this century among my favorites of all time: Harbach's "Art of Fielding" and Yanigihara's "A Little Life." While list such as this are interesting, no list can be definitive. After all, who in their right mind would get all their current news of the world from one source?
72 out of 155 and I own quite a few of the ones I need to read
48/155 an amusing exercise, but meaningless as others have noted. I suggest no list of books can separate the well-read from the none-of-the-above. To paraphrase President Clinton, it depends on what the definition of "well read" is. I consider a person well-read if books and reading have played and continue to play an important role in their life. They were read to as a child and grew up in homes where books and reading were valued and have fond remembrances of books and reading. Alternately, someone or some event sparked their interest in reading. They learn more about reading outside the classroom than in. They learned that there is more to reading than grammar and comprehension. Just as a good fisher person knows where to look and how to catch a fish,a well-read persons develop a reading self-identity that strengthens with experience and allows them to survey potential books to read quickly and select those that are worth closer examination while placing many back on the shelf. A well-read reader is curious and willing to try and read outside their comfort zone and learn where to find reliable guidance on other books that might interest them.Based on lurking in this group for several years, I pronounce you all well-read based on the above. The thread moderator will give you your lollipop.
Dave wrote: "48/155 an amusing exercise, but meaningless as others have noted. I suggest no list of books can separate the well-read from the none-of-the-above. To paraphrase President Clinton, it depends on wh..."Thanks for reviving this. I scored 65/155, which got back the rating: "Wow, you're basically a professional reader."
At the same time, utter contempt for some of the books on this list.
If I took it in reverse, "how many of these books will you never read?," I might score 35 or so.
Go tell it on the mountain, I read about half and really liked it and mean to get back to it.
Same with Conscience of Zeno.
Gave myself some leeway on "Stories" by Chekhov and "Essays" by Montaigne. I'm assuming two of each qualifies.
Doesn't Montaigne have an essay "On Pedantry"?
My "eff you I'm too old for this!" score (Harry Potter? Gone with the Wind?) was 39.Which means 155- 39= 116 -65= 51 books I want to read or might read, but haven't.
Not counting books I've read but don't remember.
eta: Too old for this, or too young for this. Baby Boomers can pretend Gravity's Rainbow is still "a thing," but trust me, it's not.
Dave wrote: "48/155 an amusing exercise, but meaningless as others have noted. I suggest no list of books can separate the well-read from the none-of-the-above. To paraphrase President Clinton, it depends on wh..."Beautifully said, Dave.
..I don't think I will ever read..22/155
Yes, a lot of "nope" there for me too. Another shortcoming is too little non-fiction.
I've read 72 of the books on this really interesting list. Well read is defined as knowledgeable and informed as a result of extensive reading. Most of the people in this group, I imagine, are pretty well read by that definition. What this list should have been titled is "Are You a Well-Rounded Reader?" This list not only includes authors from all over the world, but highlights a broad range of styles and covers works that date back from BC to present day. What this list shows is how comfortable the reader is jumping from a Greek Tragedy to a post-modern novel to 11th century Japanese lit to social satire to a modern stream of conscious style to Romanticism to a popular fiction and so on and so on.
47/155. Some books I hope to read. Others I will hope to never read. Then I wondered why other books were not listed.
I took this quiz in January, 2017 and had read 54 at that time.I just took it again and have read 70/155 now! I'm surprised to have read 16 more in the last year and a half (kind of by accident!) :)
Tammy wrote: "I've read 72 of the books on this really interesting list. Well read is defined as knowledgeable and informed as a result of extensive reading. Most of the people in this group, I imagine, are pret..."Good description, Tammy!
Mod
Awesome, Terris! And I agree with that definition
Christopher wrote: "My "eff you I'm too old for this!" score (Harry Potter? Gone with the Wind?) was 39."Don’t dismiss Gone with the Wind for what you think you know about it. It is a really good and much deeper book then its reputation that just happens to have a love story in it.
I fell hard for GWTW. I mean hard. Scarlett is one of my all-time favorite heroines.
J_BlueFlower wrote: "Don’t dismiss Gone with the Wind for what you think you know about it. It is a really good and much deeper book then its reputation that just happens to have a love story in it. ..."I don't know how many 1,000 pagers are 'worth it' to ME. Probably none.
I don't want to be dismissive of anyone's favorite book.
How about Atonement? Is that anyone's favorite?
GWTW is by far my favorite movie. I watched it about 60 times before I was 50. I have always owned it in the latest format. But I have not watched it in 20 years. Not sure why. I carry it around with me in my mind. I can quote most dialogue and describe ever scene. I acknowledge that the book is undoubtedly richer and deeper. But I would never consider reading the book. Why? Probably fear that I would have to make judgements about the merits of the book versus the movie.I can't remember avoiding a book due to length. I've read plenty of long books, fiction and non-fiction. On the plus side a longer book delays the sometimes tedium of deciding what to read next. On the negative it gives me more opportunity to get bored, get frustrated, or have to set it aside when life gets in the way of reading.
I haven't read a lot of books on this list and I mean to keep it that way! Rebel readers stand up. I wont be defined by what every one else is reading. Good luck and all but I rather like reading books that I like. Sometimes the words just find you, or does that just happen to me? I'm addicted to the discovery aspect of reading. I love the classics group because they hip me to something new even if its old. But better still is reading books that ppl raved about and not diggin them. (I'm looking at you Dune and The Once and Future King.) Honestly if it were not for some awesome interactions with some phenomenal goodreaders I wouldnt have finished those two.
28/155. I'm more well-read than 77% of people who take the quiz, apparently. :)
32/155. The comment was I need to either read more or forget it! Charming!😜 then it said I’d read more than 83%. Make up yer flippin’ mind!Comment:surface coverage of most authors. Once you find someone you love you go for the deep dive surely.
I think cultural bias is too strong a term for it but it’s totally natural. Difficult to imagine an English quiz setter not including Hardy or Jane Eyre.
Always stimulating to see another list. Or maybe I should just jack it in. 🤪(as if)
It apparently took me a year and a half to read three books, as I'm now at 89/155. Ah well. Back to forgetting about this.
I am now at 99/155. And I wasn’t even trying! I totally forgot about this list
I’m up to 63/155, that’s an increase of 25 books over the past 3 years, without trying. There’s still plenty on the list that I’d like to read... it’s just getting round to them all!
49/155, though some of them I read so long ago I don't remember them.
128/155. According to this Buzzfeed list, that makes me a "professional reader". Um, perdóname? I don't get paid for this. This is an act of love: nothing more, nothing less. If they're going to commodify reading, then they can choke on their list. I sure as hell don't need Buzzfeed of all things to tell me whether I'm well read or not (I am, which in the real world means absolutely nothing). My library would make their random list look like a 5th grade summer reading assignment.
Pink wrote: "I’m up to 63/155, that’s an increase of 25 books over the past 3 years, without trying. There’s still plenty on the list that I’d like to read... it’s just getting round to them all!"I'd be at 106 if I read all the entries that I still have on my shelves. Things to look forward to at least.
I didn't remember taking this.Go figure, I actually scored LOWER than I did a year ago.
(63 now vs. 65 then)
And I thought I was giving myself a lot of leeway.
Catching up on Classics (and lots more!)
Books mentioned in this topic
To the Lighthouse (other topics)1984 (other topics)
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (other topics)
Animal Farm (other topics)
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (other topics)
More...
I think this comes from a compilation of 3 different lists. One of them was a Norwegian list which had a goal of being as international as possible, and the other two were limited to 20th century books with one having a seeming bias towards heavily literary selections rather than popular/influential selections.
Literary critics don't necessarily have the same tastes as avid readers.
I'm up to 61 with a couple more partially read, a handful abandoned, and a handful on Mt. TBR.