NationStates Jolt Archive

As a public service follow-up, here's a poll to see whether your literature literacy and your computer literacy are on par.

Yay, a real thread about classics! :)

*waits for the poll to load*

Your only gonna find two of those currently on my bookshelf, but I have read about 3/4 of your list.

My literary literacy is far and away superior to my computer literacy. I havent heard of Arthuer Koestler though - who is he and why is he important.

I own the kids version of Ulysses. Unfortunatly, I own none of the others, but I intend to read them, I've heard good things.

I wonder why you don't have 1984 by George Orwell on the list, its one of the best classics, since you have Brave New World.

If we are going to make suggestions about others to include, might i suggest the two great russian novels, 'War and Peace' and 'Crime and Punishment'.

I own the kids version of Ulysses. Unfortunatly, I own none of the others, but I intend to read them, I've heard good things.The kid's version of Joyces Ulysses? about half are currently on my shelf and a few have gone missing or I have no real interest in them. I am puzzled by why Sons and Lovers was chosen for Lawrence, isn't Lady Chatterley's Lover the more cannonical classic (as well as being on my bookshelf)?

If you've actually read Ulysses, and I mean read all the way through, from cover to cover, no skimming or cheating, I'd congratulate you. The book was a literary in-joke. It's nearly impossible to read it. It's meant to be that way.

If we are going to make suggestions about others to include, might i suggest the two great russian novels, 'War and Peace' and 'Crime and Punishment'.


The only thing great about those novels, are their size.

The only thing great about those novels, are their size.
I think you're wrong there Squatch. W&P is a fattie Crime and Punishment is a reasonably slender novel.

In what way are those books "classics" ?

subjective opinion relecting bias of an American education.

Does it count if I listen to the band Catch 22?

In what way are those books "classics" ?

That's what I was wondering...


Surely, a list of "classics" would involve atleast one Shakespeare...maybe plays don't count...?

I think my literature literacy, as you put it, is pretty good, though I havn't read any of those. Know of most of them.

what about farenheit 541?

subjective opinion relecting bias of an American education.

we can ony choose from what we know, but lots of those books would be considered classics anywhere in the english speaking world. I don't rate dh lawrence that much though.

Every american, imo, should be forced to read The Grapes of Wrath at school.

Any poll defining classics and not including Dante's "The Divine Comedy" is unworthy of being taken seriously.

I think you're wrong there Squatch. W&P is a fattie Crime and Punishment is a reasonably slender novel.


Hmm..apologies.

I always assumed C&P was a fattie too.

Honestly, I did try reading War and Peace once, when I was fifteen.
I just couldnt do it.
I had to keep referring back to see who certain characters were, it was just too long...and too boring.

The prose was very nice....but..

we can ony choose from what we know, but lots of those books would be considered classics anywhere in the english speaking world. I don't rate dh lawrence that much though.

Every american, imo, should be forced to read The Grapes of Wrath at school.


I also believe that everyone should have to read 'Of Mice and Men.'

I've heard of some of the books on the list, but I haven't read any of them. I'm surprised that Jane Austen's 'Pride and Prejudice' isn't on the list.

Hmm..apologies.

I always assumed C&P was a fattie too.

Honestly, I did try reading War and Peace once, when I was fifteen.
I just couldnt do it.
I had to keep referring back to see who certain characters were, it was just too long...and too boring.

The prose was very nice....but..
I don't know why so many starts with War and Peace when they want to read Russian classics. Don't start with the "tiles", try Bulgagov's Master and Margarita or Dead Souls, Dostojevski's The Idiot or if you want something really light and bizarre, read Daniil Harms' short essays. Not just you, I think everybody should read at least The Master and Margarita.

I've heard of some of the books on the list, but I haven't read any of them. I'm surprised that Jane Austen's 'Pride and Prejudice' isn't on the list.

Exactly. This poll is a farce. Jane Austen, Oscar Wilde, Leo Tolstoy are missing not to mention (as I already have) my favourite of Dante's "The Divine Comedy".

Exactly. This poll is a farce. Jane Austen, Oscar Wilde, Leo Tolstoy are missing not to mention (as I already have) my favourite of Dante's "The Divine Comedy".
Dante certainly knew how to write. Divine comedy is a masterpiece, that's for sure.

But a question to everyone else too. Which books you were forced to read in school? Every country has their own classics of course, but for example almost everyone had to read Hermann Hesse's Steppenwolf (which is brilliant, by the way)
also Salinger's Catcher in the Rye was a must to all teenagers.

I also believe that everyone should have to read 'Of Mice and Men.'


We had to do that at school, i liked it so much i nicked the book... :D

I also believe that everyone should have to read 'Of Mice and Men.'

Forced to read?! That's the best way to encourage people to have a love of books.

Dah! I'm pretty well-read, but I only checked 3 boxes here...and then realized that i didn't read the Grapes of Wrath, I read Of Mice and Men....wrong book, same author :)

What about Lord of the Flies by Golding? Animal Farm or 1984 (already mentioned)? I guess it's not considered as much a classic as the rest, but what about A Separate Peace (i forget the author)? I really liked that one. And don't for get Catcher in the Rye...definately a classic there. And The Hobbit, and as someone mentioned, Fahrenheit 451. Any Kurt Vonnegut books (Breakfast of Champions, Timequake, Slaughterhouse 5)? Ok, you get my point now :)

This list is certainly better than the other one though, so don't take my criticism too hard.

I wouldn't have thought it necessary to mention, but apparently some of you don't realize that the "post new poll" option of this message board only allows 10 options. The titles I chose happen to be the top 10 novels (written originally in the English language) of the 20th Century as selected by the editors of the Modern Library, an imprint of Random House Publishers. As an English teacher and as someone who has read all but the Lawrence, I find all ten to be worthy of inclusion on such a list.

Shakespeare and Dante didn't write novels. The novel is a fairly recent literary invention. And of course, a survey of world literature would include Tolstoy, Dostoyevski, and a host of others, while this is simply a necessarily-abbreviated list of novels written originally in English.

Nauseatingly, one can find on the Random House site a parallel top-100 list of novels chosen by "readers" who "voted" for their favorite English-language novels of the 20th century, and that list is completely dominated at the top by Ayn Rand and L. Ron Hubbard. Anyone here happen to believe that Battleship:Earth is one of the ten greatest novels of the 20th century? Ulysses doesn't show up on the "readers" list until position 11.

Yes, I actually have read Ulysses. The way to do it is to read it aloud, acting out all the parts as one goes along. I'm sure the book is not meant to be read quietly to oneself, because it's so much more fun to do stream-of-consciousness while actually talking to yourself.

Re: some of the posts here so far -- I find it interesting that, rather than use the poll as a springboard for an intelligent discussion about literature, some posters have used it as just another target for their unrestrained contempt for just about everything. To those of you so unrestrained: Does the notion of taking something in the intended spirit ever occur to you?

But any list is entirely subjective. I've only read Catch22 from the list but didn't like it. I've never heard of a couple of those listed.

Am I poorly educated or have I merely got a different taste in books.

In my opinion a list of classics should include several by Dickens, at least one Orwell, and either Milne.

I wouldn't have thought it necessary to mention, but apparently some of you don't realize that the "post new poll" option of this message board only allows 10 options. The titles I chose happen to be the top 10 novels (written originally in the English language) of the 20th Century as selected by the editors of the Modern Library, an imprint of Random House Publishers. As an English teacher and as someone who has read all but the Lawrence, I find all ten to be worthy of inclusion on such a list.
Ah. I was under the impression that these were just novels you decided on. I'm a little surprised at this list, nevertheless. I've personally never even heard of Sons and Lovers or Darkness at Noon, or their respective authors. Although, to be fair, I don't have much time to read for pleasure anymore, school takes up so much of my time, and I rarely get a good English course here (my college is primarily focused on computers and technology). Most of the "classics" that I've read, I read while still in high school, and I guess some of these books are too high-level for most high school courses. Damn computer science, I should have been an English major! I'm much better at it, at any rate. It's just that I hate writing papers all the time.

I also believe that everyone should have to read 'Of Mice and Men.'

I happen to think that 'East of Eden' is Steinbeck's best novel. 'Eats, Shoots and Leaves' should be on the list too, but not as a classic. It should be compulsory reading.

I've read 6 of them, and of those six own 5.

Most of the "classics" that I've read, I read while still in high school, and I guess some of these books are too high-level for most high school courses. Damn computer science, I should have been an English major! I'm much better at it, at any rate. It's just that I hate writing papers all the time.

I had Gatsby, Catch-22, and Grapes of Wrath in high school. And I had Brave New World in 8th grade. Public schools in Los Angeles weren't all that bad 899 million years ago.

Catch-22 probably had the biggest personal impact on me. In many ways, I see it as the ultimate novel -- that is, the last authentic literary expression to take the form of the novel. Sort of the literary equivalent of Beethoven's 9th. It's probably no coincidence it took author Heller over a decade to come out with another novel, which was wryly titled: Something Happened. Indeed.

Anyway, don't feel too bad about focussing on comp sci for your education. If they ever outlaw outsourcing, you might even get a decent entry-level position in a potentially financially-rewarding field... whereas with English, the best you can hope for is a tenure track.

No.

But any list is entirely subjective. I've only read Catch22 from the list but didn't like it. I've never heard of a couple of those listed.

Am I poorly educated or have I merely got a different taste in books.

In my opinion a list of classics should include several by Dickens, at least one Orwell, and either Milne.
you didnt like catch 22?? that doesnt seem possible.

hey yeah, there was NO dickens on the top 10? id much rather read great expectations than ulysses. i think ulysses is included on those lists for the same reason that "citizen kane" is voted the best movie ever. some kind of snobbishness by people who never really read it but think it must be great because they couldnt get through it.

tell the truth, untidy. you READ it, but did you really LOVE it?

Nope..

I do have a copy of the Iliad somewhere..

I don't know why so many starts with War and Peace when they want to read Russian classics.


Turgenev is a pretty gentle introduction to the Russians as well.

What? A list of classic literature with no Jules Vern, Mark Twain, Charles Dickens, Oscar Wilde, Edgar Allen Poe nor William Shakespeare listed?

I only have one from the polled list.

No.

What about All Quiet On The Eastern Front or Hunt for Red October?

Every american, imo, should be forced to read The Grapes of Wrath at school.
In my school we were forced to read it, but i'm special, i got grandfathered in and didn't have to read it. i read it anyway, but by my own choice

If you've actually read Ulysses, and I mean read all the way through, from cover to cover, no skimming or cheating, I'd congratulate you. The book was a literary in-joke. It's nearly impossible to read it. It's meant to be that way.
Now, now... you just need a kowledge of intermediate Angelology, Scottish mythology, all romance languages, medieval literature, and to know the author's personal life deeply so that you don't consider it "profane."

Compared to some things, such as Finnegan's Wake, this is nothing whatsoever.

Also, It appears you mis-spelled Aeneid on your poll choices.

I was supposed to read Grapes of Wrath in high school but it bored me greatly, so I found an online synopsis and notes and used that info in my essay (which was/is the highest essay mark I've ever had). I would much rather have read Of Mice and Men. The only other book from the list I've read is Brave New World, which I didn't hate, but was hardly enthralled. And Animal Fram as some have mentioned, I absolutely loathed. If I hear "four legs good, two legs bad" again ever, I'll probably snap.

On a more positive note, the unabridged version of Thomas Mallorey's (sp?) Le Morte d'Arthure is really good, if difficult to read. If I remember correctly it predates Shakespeare by about 50 years, to give you an idea of the English used.

I haven't read any of those, but I HAVE read "East of Eden" by John Steinbeck. I thought it was a GREAT book. My mom read it, and wanted my opinion. Only reason I read it was so I could explain it to her. I had ZERO interest in it. But, after reading the first few pages, I was kooked.

I also read Dante's "The Divne Comedy". Not just "The Inferno"(it really pisses me off to see this WHOLE work referred to as the "book"), which is only the first part, but MOST of the whole thing. I say MOST, because you have to read a few lines, then check the back for info, 'cuz its pretty obscure. The stuff he writes about was obscure when HE wrote it. Which was around 600 years ago. I thought it was great, but I stopped reading when he got to Heaven, 'cuz it was SO hard for me to understand. WITH the liner notes.

Right now, I'm on Book 4 (of 7) of Stephen King's "Dark Tower" series. That's some good reading, right there. I don't care who you are, if you can't enjoy that, you shouldn't be here.

/Larry The Cable Guy

On a more positive note, the unabridged version of Thomas Mallorey's (sp?) Le Morte d'Arthure is really good, if difficult to read. If I remember correctly it predates Shakespeare by about 50 years, to give you an idea of the English used.

More like 150 years.

More like 150 years.

Could have sworn that it was written mid 16th century, but I'll take your word for it.

Could have sworn that it was written mid 16th century, but I'll take your word for it.

1485. Call it a round 100 years before Shakespeare, how about that?

1485. Call it a round 100 years before Shakespeare, how about that? So then it's barely modern English then. No wonder it was a tough read :p

Well, I never made it through Ulysses, never read A Portrait of the Artist, Lolita, Darkness at Noon, or Sons and Lovers, but the other books on here are pretty good. Interestingly, not one of them was ever required reading for me at school. Quite a few of the other classics we /did/ read in gradeschool, I might rate above these, but that point has already been made.

What am I missing about these books? I mean, Lolita? Really? I'd read them if I had a good reason, but none of them ever appeared on a top list I've been introduced to (until now) and I haven't seen them sitting on hardly /any/ shelves of "classics" in the bookstores I visit.

I haven't read the last five yet, though apart from DH Lawrence, they are on my list to read (along with several others.)

tried Sons and Lovers once and did not enjoy Lawrence's writing. I would agree he was a great writer, though, just not for me.

and I feel this applies to things like Ulysses as well. I've read everything Joyce wrote (yes, including Finnegans Wake, and yes, I own a copy, and semi-regularly sit down and read passages to myself.)

Ulysses is not a difficult book. Anyone who has read anything like Foucalt's Pendulum by Umberto Eco, or Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon, should have no problem withs omething like Ulysses. It's a fairly straightforward, funny and engaging story about ordinary people. Sure, it's couched in mythology, and yes, it does help to know sometihng about Joyce (but then it helps for Protrait as well, and definitely for Finnegans Wake,) but it is not necessary.

The last chapter of Ulysses is incredible. I read it all in one go without a break, as intended, and wow.

but it still comes down to personal taste. I think Dickens was possibly the most boring writer I have ever tried to read (well, ok, when I was really young I tried one of my mother's Danielle Steele books, talk about bland.)
but many people love his work, and I can't really fault them. I just don't.

so, you can say you don't like Ulysses. You can say you don't understand it. But do not assume that because you don't, other people who claim to like it and/or understand it, don't actually understand it and didn't really enjoy it. I would never say I liked something I didn't, which is why I am happy to say that I could not finish the Divine Comedy because I got bored, and same goes for Tolstoy. doesn't diminish their greatness in any way, because it's just my personal reaction based on my personal tastes.

Finnegans Wake, Gravity's Rainbow, and Foucault's Pendulum would have to top my list of interesting, well-written and very funny books.

there are also many other more modern authors I could say I think write just as great stuff, but I know I'd probably be dismissed since none of them are considered classic authors, and someone somewhere will have a reaason why they don't qualify. My favourite is "oh, but he writes popular fiction for the masses." -- well, folks, so did Shakespeare and Dickens. Joyce considered himself a writer for the common man, and disdained the idea that h is books were intended for intellectuals. Ulysses is almost a love letter about the common men and women of Dublin, and Finnegans Wake is centered around one of the most ordinary families you can imagine.

ah well, I've said it elsewhere, the word "classic" is now (and possibly always has) being abused to mean "these are better than anything else not on this list." it's about time we just started saying, "this is what *I* consider great," instead of "this is great and if you disagree or don't enjoy it, you are stupid and wrong."

Mac the Man asked :

"What am I missing about these books? I mean, Lolita? Really? I'd read them if I had a good reason, but none of them ever appeared on a top list I've been introduced to (until now) and I haven't seen them sitting on hardly /any/ shelves of "classics" in the bookstores I visit."

well, see above. the only reason to ever read something is because you want to. Don't let anyone tell you different. You are not a lesser person for not wanting to read these books. I would recommend that you try them, but if you don't enjoy them, don't waste your time forcing yourself. and do not trust the "classic" bookshelves as an indicator of what to read and what not to read. There are many authors who are equally good who may never make it onto those shelves because they don't satisfy whatever personal criteria are used by the people putting those collections together. Think for yourself, and decide for yourself. Anyone who belittles you for not having read/seen/heard/done something has a personal problem that has nothing to do with you.

. Anyone here happen to believe that Battleship:Earth is one of the ten greatest novels of the 20th century?
Hey, it's Battlefield Earth and it probably is the greatest novel of all time. In size, not in quality (it's bad space opera), what is it something like 14,000 pages long?

How can this list not include The Iliad or The Odyssey?

I also read Dante's "The Divne Comedy". Not just "The Inferno"(it really pisses me off to see this WHOLE work referred to as the "book"), which is only the first part, but MOST of the whole thing. I say MOST, because you have to read a few lines, then check the back for info, 'cuz its pretty obscure. The stuff he writes about was obscure when HE wrote it. Which was around 600 years ago. I thought it was great, but I stopped reading when he got to Heaven, 'cuz it was SO hard for me to understand. WITH the liner notes.

HERE HERE! The Inferno is just a part of the book people! A masterpiece wouldn't you admit though?

Hey, it's Battlefield Earth and it probably is the greatest novel of all time. In size, not in quality (it's bad space opera), what is it something like 14,000 pages long?
not just a great book but a great movie as well! a comedy classic that made me laugh the whole way through

as halva said there are so many book that have been written in english in the last......500 years that its silly to have one definitive list of whats best. if you dont like dickens or joyce there are about 10,000 other books just as good to choose from.

Ya no, that list is missing so many books, like Slaughterhouse-Five, The Fountainhead, etc

I feel that I am very well read, yet I've only read one of these books. Catch 22 has been sitting on a shelf for a year, I started The Great Gatsby, but only got about two chapters in. I did read The Sound and the Fury, and thought it was amazingly terrible. Sure, stream of conciousness is supposed to be this great literary idea, but really it was just confusing. I still have no idea what the heck happened in that book.

Another classic that just confused me was The Catcher in the Rye. So its a story about some high school kid that has a lackluster attitude toward life? Sounds like 95% of all the kids I know.

On a different topic, not a single book on this list, or mentioned in the thread, was required reading for me. I actually don't recall a single book that could be called a classic that was required reading.

ULYSSES is the only one I own from your list.
I also own several copies of the collective works of Poe.
Shakespeare.
Several Mark Twain pieces(An entire collection of his work was stolen from me,bastards).
Some Baudelaire
Along with my Mark Twain I had an Antique collection stolen that contained the Works of Dumas,
The Count of Monte Cristo
Homer
A tale of Two Cities,
all in all about fifty books, some as old as a hundred years.
My mother had been collecting them for me from a very early age, from auctions.
They are/were completely irreplacable to me, I will never have the money/time to replace those books.
I just bought a 1976 copy Von Clauswitz On War.
Though I must admit I know little about literature truly, I do know what I like.
I love books.

A list of "classics" that is only 20th century works is not a list of classics.

What about All Quiet On The Eastern Front or Hunt for Red October?

Both of which are better candidiates for eventually being classics than some of the books on the list.

*ticks BNW*

That may be the only English text I don't regret reading

Ya no, that list is missing so many books, like Slaughterhouse-Five, The Fountainhead, etc
Yeah, I agree. Where's The Lord of Rings or Of Mice and Men also? Heck I don't even see anything on that list by Mark Twain. The list is missing a lot. I mean you could easily expand that thing way beyond the size it is now.

From books written in English since 1900

Chosen by the "Modern Library Board"

How many have you read?

1. ULYSSES by James Joyce
2. THE GREAT GATSBY by F. Scott Fitzgerald
3. A PORTRAIT OF THE ARTIST AS A YOUNG MAN by James Joyce
4. LOLITA by Vladimir Nabokov
5. BRAVE NEW WORLD by Aldous Huxley
6. THE SOUND AND THE FURY by William Faulkner
7. CATCH-22 by Joseph Heller
8. DARKNESS AT NOON by Arthur Koestler
9. SONS AND LOVERS by D.H. Lawrence
10. THE GRAPES OF WRATH by John Steinbeck
11. UNDER THE VOLCANO by Malcolm Lowry
12. THE WAY OF ALL FLESH by Samuel Butler
13. 1984 by George Orwell
14. I, CLAUDIUS by Robert Graves
15. TO THE LIGHTHOUSE by Virginia Woolf
16. AN AMERICAN TRAGEDY by Theodore Dreiser
17. THE HEART IS A LONELY HUNTER by Carson McCullers
18. SLAUGHTERHOUSE-FIVE by Kurt Vonnegut
19. INVISIBLE MAN by Ralph Ellison
20. NATIVE SON by Richard Wright
21. HENDERSON THE RAIN KING by Saul Bellow
22. APPOINTMENT IN SAMARRA by John O'Hara
23. U.S.A. (trilogy) by John Dos Passos
24. WINESBURG, OHIO by Sherwood Anderson
25. A PASSAGE TO INDIA by E.M. Forster
26. THE WINGS OF THE DOVE by Henry James
27. THE AMBASSADORS by Henry James
28. TENDER IS THE NIGHT by F. Scott Fitzgerald
29. THE STUDS LONIGAN TRILOGY by James T. Farrell
30. THE GOOD SOLDIER by Ford Madox Ford
31. ANIMAL FARM by George Orwell
32. THE GOLDEN BOWL by Henry James
33. SISTER CARRIE by Theodore Dreiser
34. A HANDFUL OF DUST by Evelyn Waugh
35. AS I LAY DYING by William Faulkner
36. ALL THE KING'S MEN by Robert Penn Warren
37. THE BRIDGE OF SAN LUIS REY by Thornton Wilder
38. HOWARDS END by E.M. Forster
39. GO TELL IT ON THE MOUNTAIN by James Baldwin
40. THE HEART OF THE MATTER by Graham Greene
41. LORD OF THE FLIES by William Golding
42. DELIVERANCE by James Dickey
43. A DANCE TO THE MUSIC OF TIME (series) by Anthony Powell
44. POINT COUNTER POINT by Aldous Huxley
45. THE SUN ALSO RISES by Ernest Hemingway
46. THE SECRET AGENT by Joseph Conrad
47. NOSTROMO by Joseph Conrad
48. THE RAINBOW by D.H. Lawrence
49. WOMEN IN LOVE by D.H. Lawrence
50. TROPIC OF CANCER by Henry Miller
51. THE NAKED AND THE DEAD by Norman Mailer
52. PORTNOY'S COMPLAINT by Philip Roth
53. PALE FIRE by Vladimir Nabokov
54. LIGHT IN AUGUST by William Faulkner
55. ON THE ROAD by Jack Kerouac
56. THE MALTESE FALCON by Dashiell Hammett
57. PARADE'S END by Ford Madox Ford
58. THE AGE OF INNOCENCE by Edith Wharton
59. ZULEIKA DOBSON by Max Beerbohm
60. THE MOVIEGOER by Walker Percy
61. DEATH COMES FOR THE ARCHBISHOP by Willa Cather
62. FROM HERE TO ETERNITY by James Jones
63. THE WAPSHOT CHRONICLES by John Cheever
64. THE CATCHER IN THE RYE by J.D. Salinger
65. A CLOCKWORK ORANGE by Anthony Burgess
66. OF HUMAN BONDAGE by W. Somerset Maugham
67. HEART OF DARKNESS by Joseph Conrad
68. MAIN STREET by Sinclair Lewis
69. THE HOUSE OF MIRTH by Edith Wharton
70. THE ALEXANDRIA QUARTET by Lawrence Durell
71. A HIGH WIND IN JAMAICA by Richard Hughes
72. A HOUSE FOR MR BISWAS by V.S. Naipaul
73. THE DAY OF THE LOCUST by Nathanael West
74. A FAREWELL TO ARMS by Ernest Hemingway
75. SCOOP by Evelyn Waugh
76. THE PRIME OF MISS JEAN BRODIE by Muriel Spark
77. FINNEGANS WAKE by James Joyce
78. KIM by Rudyard Kipling
79. A ROOM WITH A VIEW by E.M. Forster
80. BRIDESHEAD REVISITED by Evelyn Waugh
81. THE ADVENTURES OF AUGIE MARCH by Saul Bellow
82. ANGLE OF REPOSE by Wallace Stegner
83. A BEND IN THE RIVER by V.S. Naipaul
84. THE DEATH OF THE HEART by Elizabeth Bowen
85. LORD JIM by Joseph Conrad
86. RAGTIME by E.L. Doctorow
87. THE OLD WIVES' TALE by Arnold Bennett
88. THE CALL OF THE WILD by Jack London
89. LOVING by Henry Green
90. MIDNIGHT'S CHILDREN by Salman Rushdie
91. TOBACCO ROAD by Erskine Caldwell
92. IRONWEED by William Kennedy
93. THE MAGUS by John Fowles
94. WIDE SARGASSO SEA by Jean Rhys
95. UNDER THE NET by Iris Murdoch
96. SOPHIE'S CHOICE by William Styron
97. THE SHELTERING SKY by Paul Bowles
98. THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE by James M. Cain
99. THE GINGER MAN by J.P. Donleavy
100. THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS by Booth Tarkington

And Animal Farm as some have mentioned, I absolutely loathed. If I hear "four legs good, two legs bad" again ever, I'll probably snap.

You mean like this:
Four legs good, two legs bad.
Four legs good, two legs bad.
Four legs good, two legs bad.
Four legs good, two legs bad.
Four legs good, two legs bad.
Four legs good, two legs bad.
Four legs good, two legs bad.
Four legs good, two legs bad.
Four legs good, two legs bad.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Sorry, I just had to do that.

I would like to state that the list in my previous post is MLB's, not mine. It lacks a number of amazing works that are leaps and bounds better. But alas, I'm afraid I have no power when it comes to defining a classic.

I believe someone mentioned Lord of the Rings. That was by far my largest disappointment with the MLB's findings. What an injustice.

A classic - "something that everybody wants to have read and nobody wants to read." Mark Twain

If ever a book met that definition it is the one at the top of the list - James Joyce's Ulysses. I have plunged into it several times, but it has defeated me each time.

well, see above. the only reason to ever read something is because you want to. Don't let anyone tell you different. You are not a lesser person for not wanting to read these books. I would recommend that you try them, but if you don't enjoy them, don't waste your time forcing yourself. and do not trust the "classic" bookshelves as an indicator of what to read and what not to read. There are many authors who are equally good who may never make it onto those shelves because they don't satisfy whatever personal criteria are used by the people putting those collections together. Think for yourself, and decide for yourself. Anyone who belittles you for not having read/seen/heard/done something has a personal problem that has nothing to do with you.

I'm not even remotely worried about what other people think regarding the books I've read. What I was asking is why I should even pick up those specific books to begin with? There's so many books to read and so many that I'm interested in, that I probably won't buy or borrow a book without a good recommendation for it or unless I find it (and its subject) independantly interesting. Those books, I have neither for. If they're really, truly, good books / stories / novels, whatever, I'll pick them up at some point, but what does anyone have to say that's good about them other than they made this list of "classics"?

I have read

BRAVE NEW WORLD by Aldous Huxley
CATCH-22 by Joseph Heller

of that list

but what does anyone have to say that's good about them other than they made this list of "classics"?

I can speak for a many of them, but I will regulate my list to a few select favorites:

Brave New World: Insightful book about a possible future. One in which people have become so utterly complacent that they have become basic commodities. If you enjoy science fiction, it will appeal to you.

1984: Another book about the possible future. The future in the hands of a ubiquitous and powerfully oppressive government (known as Big Brother). For a reasonable man (in my humble opinion), this book could be catagorized as horror. Again, if you like SciFi, this is great.

Slaughterhouse-Five: Set in WWII, this book is about five men trapped in a slaughterhouse during the conflict. While the setting isn't all that amazing, the dialogue and emotion that can be read is astounding. Many authors have tried to capture this and failed.

Animal Farm: A satirical work about the fledgling Russia after the the fall of the Tzars. Many hate this book because it was required reading in school, but the work itself is priceless.

Clockwork Orange: An amazing book set in the near future about crime and punishment. The author is absolutely amazing at making his pschotically evil main character sympathetic. Another one for SciFi fans (like me)

I can speak for a many of them, but I will regulate my list to a few select favorites:

*sigh* I agree with you on those books (though clockwork orange was simply disturbingly fascinating). I should have re-referenced my post. The books I was questioning most specifically were: Lolita, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, Darkness at Noon, and Sons and Lovers. These are books I've heard neither good nor bad about and as such, I'd generally ignore since I have so many others I'd like to cover.

I would hardly consider The Grapes of Wrath to be an actual classic. That book is just awful.