SDMB - Straight Dope discussion
Depressed
date
newest »


Guess I need to reorganize, reprioritize, or otherwise overhaul parts of my life.
The one thing that cheers me up is that I'll never have a shortage of things I want to read. I never really have to wonder for long what I should read next, because I have this handy list....

And you know the people who wrote the stupid book haven't read every one of them, but now they make us feel like we're inferior because we haven't.
And I've read like 30 of them, and there's a spreadsheet that says I have to read 31 a year now because the spreadsheet knows WHEN I'LL DIE.

I looked at the entire 1001 books to read before you die list too and counted something like 70 odd of the books that I had read. It's lucky for me that there were a fair number of Margaret Atwood's novels, Austen and Bronte sisters, a few Douglas Adams, and Dorothy Sayers and Agatha Christie because those few authors comprised the majority my book count. Still, I'm okay with that. A lot of books on the list I'm not all that interested in reading.

But in the meanwhile, I chip away at the list, little by little... commiserating with you folks who share my bibliophilia.

I was relieved to see that many of the books I haven't read are ones I'm not about to waste time on.

I used to get depressed after finishing a really good book - left with the awful certainty that I would never again find anything I liked as well. But I expanded my horizons, and I'm much more optimistic now.

I need to stop looking at lists.
The New Classics: The 100 best reads from 1983 to 2008

That reminds me, I have to update my "read" list with about three more books not on either "reading" or "to-read".

(Count me in as someone who'd like to see that 1001 booklist spreadsheet too. Dammit.)

Now when I see "The Corrections" on any booklist, my eyes roll so hard that they fall out of my head and tumble across the floor. Horrible book. But then I also feel the same way about "Catch-22" and "Catcher in the Rye". I realize that everyone's tastes are different etc etc.
I think this will be a nice list to find some new titles (I didn't recognize some books on there) and may have to keep it handy. I have no plans on reading the titles I have no interest in. Life's too short for that. :)

The 1001 books list struck me as waaaaay too heavy a representation of certain authors. I love Jane Austen, but should Northanger Abbey be on such a list? I'd say no. Should the 2000's have 69 books? I'd say no again. Should the Dirk Gently books be anywhere near this list? No. Should at least one book by Pratchett be on it? Yes! Is the Nine Tailors in the top five of Sayers's books? NO!
On the 100 list, how is The DaVinci Code even in the running? HP and the Goblet of Fire isn't the best HP book (again, in my opinion)! And on and on.

Lonesome Dove made it okay to read westerns, Presumed Innocent set a high standard for legal thrillers, Bonfire was compellingly readable.
But On Beauty? I haven't read it but I haven't heard anything good about it. Why not White Teeth instead? Praying for Sheetrock was dry and lifeless, IMHO.
What is Eat Pray Love doing on the list? Isn't that just a run of the mill self-help book?

Lonesome Dove and Cold Mountain are on my to-read list.
I've only read 37 of the 1001 list, not counting a few I only vaguely remember being required to read in school. I'm fairly confident I'll never break 20% of that list.
I've read 33 of the 100 and have about 10 others on the stack. I think it's a bad list. Eat, Love, Pray? Really? I don't want to live in a world where that's a "new classic."

I think the 1001 Books to Read before You Die (what a stupid title, for gods' sake) list is far, far worse than the EW list, not the least reason for which is the former has about three Bret Motherfucking Easton Ellis books on it. As far as I'm concerned, that alone is enough to send the whole shebang straight to File 13.
And I'll admit to being a bit puzzled by the notion that anyone would be made to feel anxious or inferior because she or he hasn't read enough of the books on any list, especially a list whose title was very likely dreamed up by some corporate peon in a Sales and Marketing meeting. I can understand saying, "Hey, nice list -- I'd like to use it as a springboard for new ideas on what to read." But "Oh, I feel depressed now because someone made a list and I won't get to finish everything on it"? Huh? Seriously, I don't get it. I mean, who cares what some random list says? I find the whole thing pretty counterproductive, as it doesn't seem to serve much purpose other than to make reading an anxiety-provoking chore.

It's not remotely inferiority or anxiety. It's sadness. There isn't enough time in the day.

You MUST read them. This is not a springboard for new ideas, it's an imperative. And any spreadsheet that KNOWS WHEN I'LL DIE is too smart to be questioned on matters such as what are the good books.
I think I have a reading disorder.
Julie