Modern Library Best Novels-Reader's List

[BenG]

Between them it seems L. Ron Hubbard and Ayn Rand have written six of the ten best novels ever.
Hmm...

http://www.modernlibrary.com/top-100/100-best-novels/

[astrangerhere]

I don't put all that much stock in these lists as they are apt to cycle over into new modern classics every 40 years or so. I also find it hard to believe that two authors can account for that great a percantage of any list, much less the top ten of that list. Booth Tarkington might have found a place much closer to the top ten 40 years ago when his book was just reaching its senior citizens age, just as Charles dickens might have 40 years before that. I use this lists for amusement and occasionally for finding gems I've missed. But the bottom line is that reading and appreciation is, at the end of the day, a subjective art, and no two lists will ever be the same.

Thanks for the interesting post

[edbro]

That is the Reader's list, not the editors list. The list can only be a reflection of the readers they polled. It appears the poll wasn't a good crossection of the reading public. The list on the left appears to be more of what is expected.

[queentess]

A link to this was posted a while back, and I remember looking up the stats then. Here they are again:

The readers’ poll for the best novels published in the English language since 1900 opened on July 20, 1998 and closed on October 20, 1998, with 217,520 votes cast.

In other words, a very old poll (in internet age) with a very small base of votes. And given the bias towards a couple authors, not a very diverse group of voters.

[beppe]

Thank you for the stimulating thread

the list on the left.
it is a promotional affair. Old stuff by the way.
So many by D.H. Lawrence (do they have any literary value ? I am asking this naively as I am not a native English language reader or expert).

Deliverance but nothing of Richler?
Just one of Roth? and not his best by far, maybe just the best known.
Malamud?
Fante? He is American, not Italian.
Chatwin?
Carver?
D.F. Wallace?
McCarthy?
...



And the foreigners? Maybe they do not publish them so they do not matter?

[randyflycaster]

This list sounds like it was compiled by academics who never lived in the real world.

IMHO, Ulysses is unreadable, and the Great Gatsby is filled with one-dimensional characters I don't care about.

How can Don Quixote, Crime and Punishment and Madame Bovary not top the list?

Again IMHO, this shows what's wrong with literature today.

Randy

[Loomings]

Don Quixote, Crime and Punishment and Madame Bovary were not written between 1900 and 1999. The list only counts books written in the twentieth century.

I'm using the editors' list as my reading list. I've read very little fiction so decided to get though this list to broaden my horizons. I'd read very few of these before I started and have not been disappointed so far.

I agree the readers' list is a but silly.

[Aurora13]

Originally Posted by randyflycaster

This list sounds like it was compiled by academics who never lived in the real world.

IMHO, Ulysses is unreadable, and the Great Gatsby is filled with one-dimensional characters I don't care about.

How can Don Quixote, Crime and Punishment and Madame Bovary not top the list?

Again IMHO, this shows what's wrong with literature today.

Randy

/C

[BenG]

From an articles over at Violet Books about the Reader's list.

The other source was a "populist list" which Randians & Scientologists simultaneously inspired by crabbing at Random House after they promoted the 100 Most Important American Books & failed to put Hubbard or Rand on the list. When the Modern Library subdivision got deluged with complaints from Randians & Scientologists, Modern Library responded by setting up an on-line voting system that Randians & Scientologists blitzed to try to get Rand & Hubbard top ratings. The ad hoc net-poll was not well publicized, was not a "study" in even the loosest sense of the word, it was self-selecting for Randians & net-nerds. Therefore all of Ayn Rand's books placed in the top quarter of the list, & Atlas Shrugged placed #1 (the bible did not place at all, so Rand is bigger than God). I remember well when this voting-page was first put up & Usenutter Randians were telling each other how to pad the voting right away. Modern Library liked the free publicity & called this the "Populist List" but never misrepresented it as any kind of "study" nor did they suggest it had any credibility to match the actual best-100 list which did not include Rand at all.

http://www.violetbooks.com/aynrand.html

[carld]

I enjoyed Battlefield Earth, but I read it knowing what it was. It's schlock, filled with well-worn Sci-Fi tropes that we've seen a hundred times over. It's enjoyable in the way a 1950s B&W flying saucer movie is, not because it's good, but because it's comfortable and familiar. But, it's still schlock.

And the less said about Ayn Rand the better.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Loomings

Don Quixote, Crime and Punishment and Madame Bovary were not written between 1900 and 1999. The list only counts books written in the twentieth century.

If the list is for books written during the 20th century, surely it should be 1901 to 2000, should it not?

[Nyssa]

My husband is terrified by that Readers List. He thinks it is awful (the first 3 books in particular). Of the 3 I have only read the Fountainhead (which I remember enjoying). I think I mentioned it before, but one of my English teachers actually told me NOT to read Atlas Shrugged, and I've never had any interest in Battlefield Earth.