Well, TIME did say they limited the books considered to all those published 1923 and following (that's the year Time began publishing), and those books only originally written in English, so there goes Dickens and Moby Dick, etc. Still, lots missed. I was surprised they included a graphic novel, Watchmen, which is interesting, but so many others were more appropriate, I think. Thanks for your comments!
4 Comments:
I would guess about one in three.
Couple interesting entries, the Highly disturbing, The Painted Bird.
The Invisible Man? It was okay, but hardly top one hundred.
And so many left out, but I'm not even gonna try.
Okay, a little of the left out.
No Charles Dickens at all?
No Moby Dick? Yeah, I know, but it is a fundamental in examining conflicts, man v man, man v nature, man v ideal, in kindof a holy grail kind of way.
No Dostoevsky, No Twain, No Rand,
And probably the novel that affected me the most, no Heart of Darkness?
I'm gonna let this go here, because this is one of those things that could really bother me.
Okay, two more.
No Little Women? How many people has that affected?
And as a darkhorse outsider in the modern genre, I'd offer Ordinary People by Judith Guest.
It's the only novel I have ever had to put down because I was crying too hard to read.
I quit. I promise.
Well, TIME did say they limited the books considered to all those published 1923 and following (that's the year Time began publishing), and those books only originally written in English, so there goes Dickens and Moby Dick, etc. Still, lots missed. I was surprised they included a graphic novel, Watchmen, which is interesting, but so many others were more appropriate, I think. Thanks for your comments!
Post a Comment
<< Home