Vote for MobileRead's best fiction book of 1921-1930

[gmw]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

I remember sitting in a high school English class and being moved by that brief author's statement, which prefaces All Quiet on the Western Front. We went on to read the book and then watch both the 1930 film and 1979 television re-make then having discussions about the novel and comparing/contrasting the films against each other and the book. I think because of all of this (the length & depth of discussions) the book has "stuck with me" all these years since and remained a favorite.

The novel does an excellent job of showing the mental and physical stresses a soldier faces in war. It's not a war story that tells of big acts of bravery and adventure, but rather just brings us along as we follow every day soldiers and what they encounter, how they felt. Waiting for the artillery to come, day to day boredom, and the detached feeling towards civilian life when visiting home. IMO whether one ends up liking the book or not it is an important book that everyone should read at least once.

My reading experiences are with the Arthur Wesley Wheen translation. There is a newer translation by Brian Murdoch which I've seen quite a bit of criticism about (as in highly flawed), but haven't read.

As odd as it may seem when you see what I nominated, this book is probably my next pick from the nominations. I was (high) school age when I first read it but I didn't study it at school. My copy is also a translation by A.H. Wheen. It had a huge impact on me. The terms "favourite" and "enjoy" don't really come into it, or not for me, but I definitely agree that this is an important book.

[caleb72]

I looked through what I had read and found that We, by Zamyatin stands out as a novel I think is important and a valuable reading experience.

I think the idea of reducing humanity to mathematical equations and logic is something I see now in subtle and not-so-subtle ways as much as the author might have seen it back when he wrote this book. The society being examined had been crystalised into a proof that needed to be validated at every opportunity. To an extent I feel that we are subject to similar manipulation and I tend to like books that make me create the links from the page to the world around me like this.

Having written this though, I feel that there are many books on this nomination list that I may have nominated had I read them. I will be trying to remedy that in the future, but for now, I believe We is at least a creditable choice.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by gmw

Winnie-the-Pooh by A.A. Milne. I'm assuming the book doesn't need a lot of introduction. Winnie-the-Pooh is a bear that likes honey. He and his friends, Piglet, Rabbit, Owl, Eeyore, Kanga, Roo and Christopher Robin have adventures in a forest.

This book is, I guess, targeted at an even younger audience than my earlier nomination, The Wind in the Willows. The stories, characters and prose are all even simpler, more ... childish, is probably the most suitable word. It is a book designed to be read aloud to your children.

So how does such a book make it onto this list? One word covers it: Joy.

We avid readers here on this list are used to books that enthral us, that frighten us, that intrigue us, that make us cry or make us laugh. We are used to books full of conflict and mystery and depth. But how often do we pick up something that clearly and simply expresses heartfelt joy? That is the wonder of Winnie-the-Pooh.

There is something in the prose of A.A. Milne that I find very appealing. It's like listening to someone telling you the story, someone with a constant quiet smile on their face that is infectious in its intensity. Winnie-the-Pooh expresses the simple joy of childhood. I can't pick it up without thinking that I am watching Christopher Robin with his toys (the illustrations by E.H. Shephard in my copy make a perfect accompaniment).

Feeling depressed? Put aside all your notions of grown-up and pick up Winnie-the-Pooh.*

My personal reaction to the book might not, on its own, have convinced me to nominate it. But the ongoing popularity of the book and its characters has convinced me that it is an important part of the decade, and the century.

* I was going to say that it doesn't matter what age you are, but that's not entirely true. There is a certain age, that I think most of us go through, where such simple children's stories seem beneath us. But gather a bit more age, and a bit more experience, and you see that complexity, conflict, mystery and misery abound - they are commonplace things. In this light it becomes apparent what is so rare and special in a book like this one.

Winnie the Pooh ROCKS and I was fortunate enough to rediscover those stories when I was in my thirties. Joy and friendship. Great books.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

I remember sitting in a high school English class and being moved by that brief author's statement, which prefaces All Quiet on the Western Front. We went on to read the book and then watch both the 1930 film and 1979 television re-make then having discussions about the novel and comparing/contrasting the films against each other and the book. I think because of all of this (the length & depth of discussions) the book has "stuck with me" all these years since and remained a favorite.

The novel does an excellent job of showing the mental and physical stresses a soldier faces in war. It's not a war story that tells of big acts of bravery and adventure, but rather just brings us along as we follow every day soldiers and what they encounter, how they felt. Waiting for the artillery to come, day to day boredom, and the detached feeling towards civilian life when visiting home. IMO whether one ends up liking the book or not it is an important book that everyone should read at least once.

My reading experiences are with the Arthur Wesley Wheen translation. There is a newer translation by Brian Murdoch which I've seen quite a bit of criticism about (as in highly flawed), but haven't read.

Thanks for this. I used the book for my blog today as it appropriate for the weekend and that preface is so powerful.

[HomeInMyShoes]

I don't think anything needs to be said about Franz Kafka's The Trial. A book that can be read on so many levels. Whether you read it as the state gone mad or the paranoia of one individual it is equally effective.

Many point to Kafka being a one-trick pony, but that should not take away from the genius of that pony and this book. It'll club you over the head and drag you kicking and screaming until you believe it still can and will happen in our society.

Just reading all the comments on Nancy Drew should make one realize that the best book is obviously the one that points at the madness of bureaucracy.

Originally Posted by HomeInMyShoes

I don't think anything needs to be said about Franz Kafka's The Trial. A book that can be read on so many levels. Whether you read it as the state gone mad or the paranoia of one individual it is equally effective.

Many point to Kafka being a one-trick pony, but that should not take away from the genius of that pony and this book. It'll club you over the head and drag you kicking and screaming until you believe it still can and will happen in our society.

Just reading all the comments on Nancy Drew should make one realize that the best book is obviously the one that points at the madness of bureaucracy.

Yes, for me The Trial tops any book of the decade, or book of the century, list.

I found the discussion of how the Nancy Drew novels were edited from as first published interesting. I believe that the Mary Poppins novels went through that as well and for some of the same reasons. It's always a question if or how to alter any work that contains language or depictions that were current when the book was written, but now are recognized as offensive. There are people that would like to do the same to even great works like Huckleberry Finn. To my mind unless it is the original author doing the edit it should just not be done. I'd correct you slightly on the Nancy Drew edits. Done in response to public opinion, but I don't believe that the "bureaucracy" [government] would have mandated it. Not in the US at least.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

I found the discussion of how the Nancy Drew novels were edited from as first published interesting. I believe that the Mary Poppins novels went through that as well and for some of the same reasons. It's always a question if or how to alter any work that contains language or depictions that were current when the book was written, but now are recognized as offensive. There are people that would like to do the same to even great works like Huckleberry Finn. To my mind unless it is the original author doing the edit it should just not be done. I'd correct you slightly on the Nancy Drew edits. Done in response to public opinion, but I don't believe that the "bureaucracy" [government] would have mandated it. Not in the US at least.

Well, in a sense the Nancy Drew revisions were done by the author. The original books were the product of the Stratemeyer Syndicate, headed by Edward Stratemeyer, which conceived the stories and hired the ghostwriters behind the Carolyn Keene name under which the books were published. Mildred Wirt Benson wrote most of the Nancys for the first 20 or so years of the series as works for hire, along with other ghostwriters, who were contractually bound not to reveal their names.

When Edward's daughter, Harriet Stratemeyer Adams, took over the operation, she spearheaded the revisions. The Syndicate was the original author, and the Syndicate did the updating. The ghostwriters never had any rights to the material, and indeed their names stayed hidden for a very long time.

Stratemeyer was behind many other series (Bobbsey Twins, Hardy Boys, Dana Girls, Tom Swift, Rover Boys, Kay Tracey, etc.).

[HomeInMyShoes]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

Yes, for me The Trial tops any book of the decade, or book of the century, list.

I found the discussion of how the Nancy Drew novels were edited from as first published interesting. I believe that the Mary Poppins novels went through that as well and for some of the same reasons. It's always a question if or how to alter any work that contains language or depictions that were current when the book was written, but now are recognized as offensive. There are people that would like to do the same to even great works like Huckleberry Finn. To my mind unless it is the original author doing the edit it should just not be done. I'd correct you slightly on the Nancy Drew edits. Done in response to public opinion, but I don't believe that the "bureaucracy" [government] would have mandated it. Not in the US at least.

Bureaucracy is not just government, it is within any large organization, including the public realm. I do see your point, but just want to clarify that bureaucracy is not exclusive to government.

Perhaps an over-attempt to be a little more colorful in describing a book I deem the best.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

Yes, for me The Trial tops any book of the decade, or book of the century, list.

I found the discussion of how the Nancy Drew novels were edited from as first published interesting. I believe that the Mary Poppins novels went through that as well and for some of the same reasons. It's always a question if or how to alter any work that contains language or depictions that were current when the book was written, but now are recognized as offensive. There are people that would like to do the same to even great works like Huckleberry Finn. To my mind unless it is the original author doing the edit it should just not be done. I'd correct you slightly on the Nancy Drew edits. Done in response to public opinion, but I don't believe that the "bureaucracy" [government] would have mandated it. Not in the US at least.

I don't think "corrections" are necessary. Books give a sense of history and culture at the time. It's important to REALIZE that it was/is offensive. It's important to read stories like Huck Finn and see how casually blacks/slaves were treated and to understand that time period. When you erase that, you take a piece of history and write over the truth. It's up to parents and people to BE offended and point out that it wasn't right, and why things are different now--not write over the top of it as though we have always been some sort of perfect society.

But that is probably a discussion for some other thread.

I picked the Nancy Drew books because they represent the start of a great genre for many readers (mystery). While many of the other books on the list are hard hitters when it comes to lessons, morals or meaningful ideas, I believe that the sheer joy of reading/entertainment starts young and leaves an impression. So that is why I picked Nancy Drew as opposed to some of the other choices that are also very, very important. Because you really can't pick just one book per decade.

[mandy314]

+1 to the comments by HomeInMyShoes and Hamlet53

For this decade my vote will go to Kafka's Prozess. Reason: It is one of the few pieces of fiction that can irritate me deeply.

"The process has been set in motion already ...". The book has seen more different interpretations than it has chapters, perhaps even pages. Mainly I read it as a dissection of modern procedural rationality (sic!). The irritating bit: Does it leave us readers in a state of resignation, or can we do something about it as we are part of it all?

Written in the 1910's, published in the 1920's, a fragment? So what. A timeless book for the 20th and imho for our 21th century too. The process is running still ...

I have read two thirds of the nominated books - no Nancy Drew though.

[treadlightly]

I nominated The Murder of Roger Ackroyd by Agatha Christie, #4 in her Hercule Poirot series. I have read a number of Christie's mysteries, and this is my favourite. There is a lovely twist in the plot that will keep you guessing as to the murderer. In fact, a number of popular modern mysteries have a shared characteristic with this story, and it is one that fascinates me, but to say more would be a bit of a spoiler.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by treadlightly

I nominated The Murder of Roger Ackroyd by Agatha Christie, #4 in her Hercule Poirot series. I have read a number of Christie's mysteries, and this is my favourite. There is a lovely twist in the plot that will keep you guessing as to the murderer. In fact, a number of popular modern mysteries have a shared characteristic with this story, and it is one that fascinates me, but to say more would be a bit of a spoiler.

You're in good company. While sorting and searching for a mystery on GR the other day, many an Agatha came up in the very first pages of the searches. The stories obviously stand the test of time!

[AnotherCat]

This is getting difficult .

There are a number of books among this decade's nominations that I like equally well but for different reasons, e.g. quality of the prose/innovation, message, storyline . I might have to put their titles in a hat and draw one.

[issybird]

I think this is a very strong list and there are at least three other books I could vote for, Ulysses, To the Lighthouse and The Sound and the Fury. However, my choice ultimately goes (not surprisingly) in favor of my own nomination, The Great Gatsby.

So as not to get into a shouting match with aficionadoes of Huckleberry Finn or Moby Dick, I'll merely claim the Gatsby is the great 20th century American novel. Anticipating Don Draper by close to a century, it raises the perennial American issues of whether and to what extent you can not only remake yourself, but also reimagine yourself, and seemingly incongruently, whether the past can be recreated or transcended.

All of the four novels I've mentioned are perfect realizations of the stories they're telling, but Gatsby has one clear advantage. It's a good read as well as being a literary masterpiece. I won't be seeing Ulysses on the beach this summer, but Gatsby would be perfectly at home.

[pdurrant]

Voting is now open. Closes in about four weeks.