Quote:
Originally Posted by Dazrin
I don't think it is meaningless that not all the books have been read, it might just speak to the popularity of some books which is one way this could have been interpreted. The top two books had twice as many votes as any of the others (except Kim by Rudyard Kipling, barely) which is a surprising spread to me. I was expecting a tighter grouping.
Certainly the most valuable part of this will be in adding to my want-to-read list though.
|
I suspect that one of the reasons why some books appear to be more popular than others is because other nominated books were not introduced into the voter's orbit in their junior reading years.
For example, Anne of Green Gables being part of the Canadian education system, and The Getting of Wisdom part of the Aus ed system. Other books however may have not been widely introduced to the readers attention until university or some other experience, say Henry James.
Other books have been made into movies, say like Kim, and Hound of the Baskervilles, and I know that the reason that I haven't read those books is because I've seen the movies.
As to the end result being 'meaningless', I refer to trying to decipher the outcome of a poll where not all books had to be read as a prerequisite to voting ..... so statistically, interpreting the votes can't be tested unless you know how many books each voter had read. (Well, I'm numerically illiterate but that's my take on it)