This list has been put together by the editors of Random House’s Modern Library, and represents the best 100 novels of the 20th century.
Maybe if it were 1959, I was 17, and thinking of becoming a beatnik.
Come on. This book is nothing more than a journal with the names changed, and a few whoppers tossed in for good measure.
That’s what the title should be. Any list including Ernest Hemingway but not Harper Lee has problems to start with. William Faulkner is there, so tales of Southern life are not excluded. As stated before, weak plotting is not a dismissive factor as F Scott Fitzgerald is on the list, as is JD Salinger.
How did “To Kill a Mockingbird” fail to be listed here?
Everyone has an opinion, so to what value is this list? I’d rather see a list of novels the genius editors at Random House passed on and were published to great acclaim elsewhere.
Brazilian newspaper Folha also made a list of 100 greatest novels of the century, but it’s not limited by language. It has a good selection of Latin-American works, as might be expected, but nothing from Africa or Asia. You can see it here:
http://www.listsofbests.com/list/59859
I always find it irritating to see “The Great Gatsby” being included in the lists of great novels. I regard F. Scott Fitzgerald highly, and have heard great witticisms from him, but this book is simply immature. It has no brilliant plot, nor brilliant ideas, not even an engaging meditation on life. When I hear people say that it is The Great American Novel, I just go like, “Are Americans that silly?” To just compare it to Melville’s masterpiece, Moby Dick, makes you shudder. People please remove it from your list.
The reason I started adding comments like a hyped-up fiend this morning is because I have finished reading every one of the 121 books on this list. Finished. Done. Over. Accomplished.
I had read about 20 of the books on the list prior to when the list came out in 1999. I started then trying to read them all, in no particular order. Now that I finished Augie March, I have read every one of them.
Some I liked, some I didn’t. Finnegan’s Wake almost sent me to the bughouse. I became reacquainted with some favorite authors, and learned to appreciate new ones. All in all, I am glad I undertook this goal and glad to have accomplished it.
If you count each book, there are more than 100, because of trilogies, sets, etc. Each of the following books were published separately, so I count them as individual books, even though they are lumped together on the list:
U.S.A = a trilogy.
The Studs Lonigan Triology = same
The Alexandria Quartet = four separate novels.
A Dance to the Music of Time = 12 separate novels, originally published separately, now published in four volumes of three each.
Parade’s End = four novels, originally published separately.
So even though they call it the Top 100 list, there are really 121 books on it.
It is a list of the Top 100 “Modern Library” Novels of the 20th Century — as in, novels published by Modern Library. They picked their own books. It’s their list, so their rules, so their books. That’s why there are great books that didn’t make THIS list.
There are a zillion other “best books” lists, including lists by other publishing companies (Radcliffe, Easton, etc.).
Comments