The Modern Library's Top 100 Novels

Reviews, comments tangents on The Modern Library’s Top 100 novels at http://michaelmenche.blogspot.com/ and at http://www.43things.com/things/view/3037/

It's a great list, but I've read most of them already, with the exception of Zulekia Dobson.

I haven't gotten to it yet either.

I haven't read Zuleika Dobson either, but people I know who've read it definitely consider it one of their favorite books.

OK, so I really hadn't glanced at the Modern Library list in a couple of years, but I found it and there's actually 2 of them I haven't read, the aforementioned Zuleika Dobson by Max Beerbohm, and Henry James' The Golden Bowl.

Wow, I'm surprised you read A Dance to the Music of Time. Superb style, erudite perspective -- but the overall length is probably too daunting for most folks. Well worth the investment, though.

Michael, I couldn't agree more with your estimation of Powell's magnus opus. What's puzzled me over the years is why ADTTMOT is not more widely read than it seems to be, and yes, there's 12 novels all in a row, but they're such little tiny things, hardly any one over 250 pages, and I found than immediately addictive. I still own a few first editions, but in 1995 got the handsome Univ. of Chicago Press 4-vol. edition containing all 12 books, and have never stopped recommending them. Plus, Sir Anthony P.'s 10th novel in the series owns my favorite title of all time: Books Do Furnish a Room.

Sorry folks, but I think many of those entries are of dubious merit. About one third of them are American and that fact alone suggests a bias, or a conservative approach. Of course I would have to come up with an alternative list to give my opinion any credibility. Will get back to you...

#8 it's actually more like 50% being American. There is a severe lack of novels from Australia, Canada, India, NZ, SA, etc. (Perhaps that's because Random House don't have the rights to any of them!).

Even more bizarre is the Reader's List - 4 Ayn Rand & 3 L. Ron Hubbard in the top 10. There are a lot of very disturbed people out there.

Yes, the list, when it first came out, was recognized for its dubiousness. Please note that it concerned English-language novels only--a list of great German (and/or French, etc.) books would be fantastic. The omission of, just to name two books I've admired, Beloved and Their Eyes Were Watching God, was unconscionable. I myself don't endorse the list and I don't rate or rank. That said, I consider these novels a "centathlon" worth running, and I blog out of sweaty, grimy dilletantism.

amanda, I'd be really curious as to which entries you consider of 'dubious merit' and why. I also wonder why the fact that 'one third of them are American' should suggest a bias. If memory serves, the list came out in 1999, and was originally dissed because it didn't feature any substantial percentage of female writers, was loaded with a lot of very un-contemporary 'dead white guys', and didn't include much science fiction either. Modern Library later issued an alternative "Reader's List" which, while it contained a great many titles from the first list, also was overrun with L. Ron Hubbard novels and others of that ilk, most all of which could easily be considered of 'dubious merit', especially in comparison to the original 100 titles.

It's the oddities that puzzle me - Patrick White & J. M. Coetzee are good enough to win the Nobel Prize but not good enough to make this list. Female writers are under-represented - no Margaret Atwood or Angela Carter for example.

I think it's one of the weakest 'best novels' list I've seen. It's so conservative, and full of multiple works by the same authors, that you have to wonder if the panel could be bothered to make an effort.

No Proust either, all of A la Recherche du Temps Perdu published during the century.

It was an English-language list.

Since you mentioned Proust, did you see Little Miss Sunshine, with its "foremost Proust scholar" character? I didn't find that line developed sufficiently. The movie seemed a simple Baby Boomer's dream of Family: the child adored, coddled; the father mistrusted and barely tolerated. They're the two characters that stand out, though, with joy and force. The boomers in the movie are duller, neurotic and coping. The VW bus, that boomer icon, represented the family itself, requiring a communal push to move along. Not a complex story--in prose it would be a short story rather than a novel. But there are plenty of movies like that...

#11 Louis, the number of American novels seemed disproportionate to novels written this century. Some of this is explained by Message 10 -English language novels only. I was thinking: where is Proust? where is Thomas Mann?
As for those of dubious merit and those which I would choose instead, I'm still researching. Having made the big statement I spent a couple of hours last night trying to work out what an alternative list might be. Will definitely get back to you...

Please note it was a 20th century English-language list. There would be much greater general agreement, I think, about the 19th century. Ex. Moby-Dick, Vanity Fair, lots of Dickens, Austen, Brontes...

One thing I'm learning: compiling a list of 100 books is bloody hard.

No one could come up with a list which ALL would agree with...I looked over this list and agree with some (like the Grapes of Wrath, Slaughterhouse Five, The Stand, The Lord of the Rings, and To Kill A Mockingbird), but disagree with others (for example - I HATED Catch-22). There is a notable lack of writers from countries outside of the US. I don't know when the list was compiled, but why no David Mitchell, Chimamnda Ngozi Adichie, Chinua Achebe, etc...?

#writestuff: as someone mentioned above, the time-span of the list is not clear, seems to end about 1980.

##SEE MODERN LIBRARY II THREAD FOR MY ALTERNATIVE LIST

Battlefield Earth? Maybe a Hubbard fan club had a robot voting as joke. :) That's the only really crap one I can see there, unless there were more Hubbard. Doubt I would pick Starship Troopers or IT or The Hunt For Red October though. :) I reckon Shogun would get on first.

It is certainly pretty useless to have as many Henry James or Conrad, books on there as you can think of off the top of your head, and not have Dune, especially if you feel like whacking in The Maltese Falcon??

Same thing with Joyce, anyone actually read Finnegan's Wake?

Multiple multiple writers does make this very lame, does sound a bit like 'top books we like that we might sell some of'? Seems quite absurd to think it is anywhere even close to possible that one writer would come up with several of them.

You're looking at the "Readers' List," which, to my mind, isn't even worth discussing. L. Ron Hubbard--get real.

Although the list was for the 20th Century, the most recent book named was Ironweed from 1983. I discussed this curiosity, and compared it with the "Top 100 Movies" list, in a blog post called "Centathlon v. Centathlon at http://michaelmenche.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2006-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%...

Right, I realise the one on the right is a bit silly.

The one on the left seems to be pretty much rubbish too, for people's reasons stated above. It looks basically like, a few writers that person likes and some others, and no effort to look at all the world.

I've participated in various discussions about the shortcomings of the Modern Library list since its appearance in 1998, and it seems that the harshest critiques of it always come from those who've read the fewest number of books on it. Of course there's almost always a direct corelation between how many of them you've read and your age. As you'd expect a 25 YO will usually have read fewer of them than someone 50 YO, though I once met a 35 YO lit prof who said she'd read a total of 90, so age doesn't always tell the story, with personal taste and circumstance factoring in as well. I'm 60 and have been reading like a wild-eyed maniac for the last 50 years, and the day the list came out, had already read 83, and have caught up on 15 more since then, for a total of 98. So far I'm the only one here who's been willing to fess up on real numbers, and if everyone else would consider doing the same, it might enhance our discussion just a little more.

(And I've no intention of ever reading the last 2 books on the list either. Besides the fact that neither of them interest me in the least, I consider myself a Reformed Completist and am no longer a slave to that peculiar, and rather neurotic urge, which plagued me for so many years.)

I've read a significant proportion of the list, roughly 75-80%. Personally I think the list is full of worthy novels, but it is ultra-conservative. The panel just didn't think inside the box, they were inside a box inside the box.

It just amazes me that they is no Patrick White, no Thomas Pynchon, no J. M. Coetzee, for example, and that they choose 2 Saul Bellow novels, neither of which is Herzog or Humboldt's Gift. My argument would be that most of the works on the list are of a high standard but that there are a number of books of a higher standard missing.

Rather than focus on the list itself, I'm just looking for great books to read. In 1998 I was dismayed to see names and titles I'd never heard of. I feel fortunate and edified to have now read Jean Rhys's Wide Sargasso Sea, Wallace Stegner's Angle of Repose, Richard Hughes's A High Wind in Jamaica, for example. To be sure, there are novels I certainly do not consider great ex. The Catcher in the Rye, a rather despicable work I've argued heatedly about with friends. And there is The Maltese Falcon, which was better as a movie. In this forum, I'd love to discuss a specific book's merits, without high-handed rancor on my part...

I am new to this thread, but excited about it because I am only eight or so books from finishing the list. A couple of thoughts in no particular order:

1) Whatever the flaws in who chose the list, how they chose it, the pool they drew from, I find it to be an impressive list. It provides a solid foundation in English-language literature. Is it the be-all and end-all? No. But there are plenty of alternate lists out there -- many issued in response to this one. It's not like these are the only books I'm going to read.

2) Zulekia Dobson bugged me. It is supposed to be a comic masterpiece. I thought it was goofy.

3) A Dance to the Music of Time is my favorite, hands down.

4) Which brings me to a related point -- there are 121 books on the Top 100 list.

5) The Magus was my least favorite. It may be my least favorite book that I have ever finished.

6) I have, as of this morning, 56 pages left to go in Finnigans Wake. I actually think it is unfair to include FW on the list because it is not a book like any other book. It is impossible to understand (some people spend their lives and careers trying to figure it out) and all but impossible to read. If I weren't so incredibly Teutonic in my task-orientation, I would never have tried. But FW makes it incredibly difficult to finish the list in its entirety. (My hat's off to LouisBranning for reading it.)

(Sorry -- none of the touchstones are loading for some reason.)

It's always great to see Dance mentioned favorably! I haven't gotten to Zuleika Dobson, The Magus or FW yet.

Some thoughts about The Day of the Locust at http://michaelmenche.blogspot.com

What I'm NOT reading now -- Finnegans Wake. DONE!

Har-dee-har. Yeah the Wake, don't even know what to do about that. I got a copy of it along with the Skeleton Key for cheap, and I enjoy leafing through it. Certain passages read clearly (for Joyce) and are bearable, maybe even enjoyable, and then it switches back to mass portmanteaus and babble.

The vagabond boy as the avatar of HUMINT, the taste of Red Bull, Bob Dylan & Woody Guthrie... Thoughts about Kipling's Kim at http://michaelmenche.blogspot.com
Any comments about this novel?

I'm 25 years-old and a reader directed by taste more than education so I've read only 8 from the list, 12 from the readers list. Those that I've read I own bar Grapes Of Wrath.

I think the main problem with both lists is that they contain multiple works by the same author/s. To get a better picture would be to limit one book per author. The reader's list wasn't as terrible as it could have been - my local book shop had a pamphlet of the top 100 books and Dan Brown topped it. You see my point.

Personally, I'm working my way through my librarything lists at the moment. 'Top 100 books that you don't own' is providing me with great material as far as modern literature goes.

The world of modern fiction is so polluted by marketing and the likes of 'chik lit' that it's hard to know what to take a chance on. Librarything lists have helped me with that.

In a way, the ML list is like going to a museum where you'd see multiple works by Picasso or Matisse rather than only one work per artist. That said, it's just one list, not the be all and end all. If you provide some of the elements you prefer, perhaps the folks here can recommend some titles. For example, I read Vanity Fair last year and found it superbly funny and incisive. Of contemporary lit, Zadie Smith's On Beauty was a great read.

Out of 100 authors, only 6 women??!! That's just wrong.

re #35: But there are plenty of other lists to choose from that have lots of women authors. These aren't the only 100 books in the world, thank goodness!

Another list I'm working on is Erica Jong's Top 100 Books by Women, which you can find at www.listsofbests.com/list/14195.

For a great woman author, you might try Elizabeth Bowen. A few thoughts about her superb 1938 novel, The Death of the Heart at http://michaelmenche.blogspot.com/

I just finished Midnight's Children by Salman Rushdie. It is the first of his books that I've read, and I can only say that I regret not reading it 25 years ago!

Now I am on to The Golden Bowl by Henry James. I am the first to complain about the over-abundance of James on this list. TEDIOUS! I have a pretty high tolerance for boring literature (not necessarily something to brag about), but James is almost more than I can take. Just get to the point!!!! I read these only because I am so compulsive about finishing the list.

After reading The Maltese Falcon and watching John Huston's adaptation with Humphrey Bogart, I found that I preferred the movie. This was a surprise--I'm strongly biased toward books, as I suspect most LTers are.

Are there other movies you liked better than the novel? In addition to the Falcon, I preferred the movie version of The Godfather.

ggchickpee, The secret to reading The Golden Bowl lies in paying attention to the technique, not the story. The Golden Bowl is a quite remarkable example of style. Remember, James was writing in the same artistic atmosphere which nurtured Seurat and the pointillists. He is assembling a picture of two worlds, the old world with its faded traditions, and the brash, unsophisticated Nouveau Riche Americans. Feel the ennui in the prince, listen to the English couple, I can't remember their names, kibbitz on the side, marvelous. when you have finished you will have the painting in words that James made for you in your mind.

Hmmmmmmmm . . . interesting idea about James writing like the pointillists painted. Unfortunately, I was reminded less of Seurat and more of those artists who can paint a portrait on a grain of rice -- I appreciate the talent but wonder about the value.

I am just pleased that I finished The Golden Bowl this morning. I am sure I will return some day to finish off the few James novels that I haven't read yet, but I need a good, long break first. It took me longer to read The Golden Bowl than it took me to finish Finnegans Wake, and I think I understood more in Wake!

#15 Actually, the Proust storyline - and Steve Carrell's handling of the character - were my favorite parts of the whole movie. His speech about Proust was beautiful. It was also endlessly entertaining that nobody seemed to give a crap about what I would consider a pretty great achievement.

This list has as much validity as my own personal list would - less, actually, because MY list would include Hunter S. Thompson.

#27 Catcher In The Rye is one of the pivotal books that helped me to survive an truly heinous high school experience. If it is despicable, that is only because of its subject matter.

Yes, ellevee I enjoyed Carrell's performance too. I felt that all the characters were given relatively equal weight, leaving the ostensible hero as the VW/Family.

I wholly respect your engagement with Catcher but regrettably did not share your esteem for the book as a youngster or as an adult. It's interesting to me that the Youth Fallen From Privilege, manifested in the novel and in Bob Dylan's song "Like a Rolling Stone," is such a dominant icon. I guess I prefer my rebels to rise up (or attempt to) from the lower social strata.

That said, how about movies that were better than the books? The Lord of the Rings? Harry Potter? The Wizard of Oz?

With the discussion of Little Miss Sunshine I just couldn't resist a little nugget of trivia from my distant past. Did you know (drum roll please. . . ) Alan Arkin was in a fifties folk group called the Tarriers that had a MONSTER hit with "The Banana Boat Song"? This was before Belafonte's similar song "Day-o".

Movies better than the book: The Fountainhead.

#42 - ellevee - My son (25 years old) says Catcher in the Rye is one of the best books he's ever read. The first time he read it, he turned around and immediately reread it.

#39, MichaelMenche, The Godfather movie was in a completely different class from the book, in my opinion. The movies (1 & 2, not 3) are brilliant; the book is just a run-of-the-mill Mafia story.

Edited to fix typos.

#46 I'm 21, so maybe it's a generational thing. While I logically know that Nine Stories is superior, Catcher in the Rye managed to perfectly capture how much being a teenager sucks - in the most beautiful, heartbreaking, and funny way possible.

I used to be able to recite most of it from memory. I must be getting old.

#43 I think part of the reason it appealed so greatly to me is that it showed me that it was OK to be unhappy, no matter who you are. That suffering and loneliness and disappointment isn't a class structure. As a relatively well-off teenager struggling with depression, it was such a relief to find this book, and essentially be told: It's all right to feel confused and angry and ****ed up, and things do get better.

ellevee, your assessment of Catcher is completely valid, of course, and very moving as well.

With regard to generational discrepancies, did you see the movie American Beauty? There are some intriguing parallels. Lester Burnham (Kevin Spacey) and Holden Caulfield find much of life phony/inauthentic. Burnham takes a "vacation" by assuming another life role--he acts like an adolescent, driving a muscle car and smoking marijuana. Caulfield acts like an adult, going to bars, taking a hotel room. Sexuality plays a role for both on their quests: Burnham won't take the virginity of the high-school temptress; Caulfield won't lose his to the prostitute from Hollywood. And Ricky Fitts (the boyfriend of Burnham's daughter) was institutionalized like Caulfield, and he can look Death in the face, as Caulfield did with James Castle...

While there are many fine books on the list, and I would someday like to be able to say I have read them all, this fact about its creation give it less credence to me than other lists:

From Wikipedia:

The list was compiled via approval voting, by sending each board member a list of 440 pre-selected books from the Modern Library catalogue and asking each member to place a check beside novels they wished to choose. Then the works with the most votes were ranked the highest, and ties were broken arbitrarily by Random House publishers. This explains surprising results like the #5 placement of Brave New World, which most of the judges agreed belonged somewhere on the list, but much lower than the very top.

So you've got:
1) Only books from The Modern Library catalog were considered.
2) The judges simply checked books they wanted included, with no mention of in which order.
3) I have read elsewhere that most judges didn't even choose 100 books.
4) Ties were broken arbitrarily.

Yes, it's a list of great books. Is it the 100 best books of the century? Not by far.

How is it that The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is not on the list?

51 - I haven't read The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe but I did see the movie and thought it was OK (no doubt very condensed). I have read The Lord of the Rings, loved it, and preferred the books to the movies, which were excellent in my opinion.

Lewis was quite the kind mentor to Tolkien at Oxford. There's lots of interesting stuff on the web about their literary group, The Inklings (an intro is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Inklings). I have had a few pints at their hangout, The Eagle and Child--a handsome pub!

#50:

Yes, you definitely have to take the list with a grain of salt -- as with any "recommended reading" list. I think The Modern Library's list got a LOT of attention because it was the first of the bunch and they promoted it well. And it happened to catch people's fancy.

It gets a lot of criticism for excluding this book or that book, but it never claimed to be anything other than a list of the best Modern Library novels. The Modern Library website has always explained that it is a list picked from its own titles. I guess they could have called it The Modern Library's Top 100 Novels of the 20th Century Published by the Modern Library, but that seems a little redundant. ;-)

Luckily, for obsessed list readers like me, there are dozens of "best novels of the 20th century" list to pick from. I only have The Adventures of Augie March to go before I finish all 121 books on this "Top 100" list. Then I can turn my attention to the Radcliffe Publishing list, the Eaton Press list, etc. etc.

www.listsofbests.com makes it easy to keep track.

Now that I have finished The Adventures of Augie March I am done with this list. I have now read all 121 books on the list. Woo-hoo!

#53 ggchickapee: Wow - good on you! I bet marking that last book off the list felt incredibly satisfying.

ggchickapee -- so do you concur that they're the top 100? (or 121....)

Thanks! Yes, it was incredibly satisfying for a task-oriented reader like me cross this off. The German in me was very happy!

The best 100 (or even 121)?? Well, these wouldn't all make MY list. There were some I thought were awful (The Magus), just bad (The Gingerman), or really boring (too many to think of, but everything on the list by Henry James and From Here to Eternity come instantly to mind). But there are some that I would definitely include on any list. Dance to the Music of Time and Sophie's Choice would be on a Top 10 list for me. Many others would make it to a Top 100 list.

Oh, but I should add this: If I had to pick 100 Twentieth Century novels from the list of novels published by the Modern Library, I don't know. Maybe these would be my 100 choices. I don't know the whole pool that was available. Although, I really can't imagine putting The Magus on any list I created.

GGC,
Kudos on a super accomplishment! There can be no question you're a better person for finishing the centathlon. (I've still got about 30 books to go. Yeesh.) You can't just ride off into the sunset--you've got to give us a little more info! How long did it take? Favorite scenes? Memorable characters? Most enjoyable style? As you look back on the whole course, were there any notable themes or images? Given that the list is dominated by books that are more than 40 years old, do you think they were too stuffy? Or less relevant than today's lit? Inquiring minds want to hear more from one who's crossed the tape!

Hmmmmmm . . . . . I've been pondering some of the things you listed Michael. I'll post some thoughts once they are more organized.

51 - Because it's grossly overrated? I'll admit that I found it amusing as a kid, but thought it was rubbish when reading it to my own kids. Throw 'Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator' on that same pile; WORST SEQUEL EVER.

Oh yes. 61- I agree re: Charlie and the great Glass Elevator, worst sequel ever and what a disapointment!

While we wait eagerly for some of ggchickapee's reflections upon completing the centathlon, I recently read A House for Mr. Biswas. The title character reminded me of Ralph Kramden of The Honeymooners, for good or bad, and I cobbled together some thoughts on the subject at www.michaelmenche.blogspot.com. If anyone would like to share thoughts about the book, The Honeymooners, V.S. Naipaul, etc. - please do!

Hello Out There! Having enjoyed The Call of the Wild, I wonder if anyone can recommend other edifying tales about dogs, cats or other pets?

Incidentally, LTers should be delighted to know that Jack London was inspired greatly by his librarian, Ina Coolbrith, who was also a notable poet. A bio of her is at http://www.jacklondons.net/inacoolbrith.html

Great stuff!

Well, I know there's a prize-winning, much-enjoyed novel called The Tenderness of Wolves by Stef Penney but I don't know if there are actually any wolves in it.
Signed
Not Very Helpful

#64 - James Herriot's books about his life as a veterinary surgeon (starting with All Creatures Great and Small) are absolutely delightful. Seabiscuit was a bestseller a few years ago although I have only seen the film adaptation. The only other animal books that come to mind are generally children's stories such as Rascal, Black Beauty and Old Yeller.

It's been a regrettably long hiatus from LT for me. Back in action. Just put down The Magnificent Ambersons by Indiana's Booth Tarkington. Can anyone recommend other Midwestern authors or books?

#67 > Winesburg, Ohio by Sherwood Anderson comes immediately to mind.

>64 MichaelMenche: & 66. I agree that if you love animals you will love James Herriot. I read his first six books in the 1970's, wonderful and hilarious. I have just found another book by Herriot called Every Living Thing. It is just as good as his earlier books.

Michael, you won't be disappointed with Herriot.

- TT

68 - Yes, Rocket, Sherwood Anderson, absolutely--he's on the ML list. And there's another Ohioan, James Thurber. His house in Columbus is a nice visit.

69 - Tortoise, I'm assuming you are slow and steady. And winning the race! It seems I should pick up some Herriot immediately--could even make a great belated birthday gift for my Dad...

Welcome back Michael!

Willa Cather is queen of the midwest. There are a couple of her novels (My Antonia and Death Comes to the Archbishop) that are on the Top 100 list. My Antonia definitely counts as a midwestern novel, but DCA doesn't.

Saul Bellow has some wonderful, Chicago-centered novels, but I can't recall right now which ones made the list. Herzog? The Adventures of Augie March?

Thanks, GGC!

I'm looking forward to the Cather on the List. Bellow is represented by Henderson the Rain King which presents an odd vision of Africa rather than Chi-Town :)

Can anyone recommend contemporary Midwestern books/authors?

Did anyone enjoy Bill Murray's recent appearance on Saturday Night Live's mock presidential debate? He bemoaned the fate of his Chicago Cubs...

I didn't see Bill Murray . . . .

The Corrections by Jonathan Franzen was a good, contemporary Midwestern novel. At least, it strikes me in memory as being Midwestern. But maybe it was Pennsylvania?????

Mr. Bridge and Mrs. Bridge by Evan S. Connell are the quintessential Midwestern novels -- Kansas City through and through -- but are not so contemporary any more.

You know, An American Tragedy is all about the Midwest. Again, not contemporary, but on the list. Have you read that one yet?

Oh, wait, now I am thinking: Dalva and its fantastic sequel The Road Home are set in Nebraska and are lights out good. The Road Home counts as one of my favorite Top 10 novels of all times. If you count Michigan as the Midwest (and to this Nebraska native, Michigan counts as the "East Coast"), then you might enjoy many of Jim Harrison's novels.

Michiganders, I think, would call themselves Midwesterners. About 15 years ago I went on a Jim Harrison bender and read Dalva, A Good Day to Die, Wolf, Farmer, and others. Great stuff, made me want to camp out.

An American Tragedy moved from KC to upstate New York, so I think of it differently. Did you see A Place in the Sun with Liz Taylor--she was great as always but the movie didn't do the story justice, in my opinion.

The Franzen and the Connell look good.

I understand about Jim Harrison benders. Wen I first discovered that the author of my favorite magazine column ever -- The Raw and the Cooked in Esquire -- also wrote fiction, I jumped right on that bandwagon and read all his novels and novellas to date. Just this autumn, finishing his latest novel, The English Major, means I have read all his prose books. I'm not one for poetry, so I skipped those. But the fiction, essays, and memoirs -- done.

Yes, I saw the Liz Taylor movie. I wish I had watched it after I read the book, however, because it tracks enough to spoil the plot.

Of the Board List I've read "The Maltese Falcon", many years ago and I remember absolutely nothing about it.

As for the Readers List, Ayn Rand? L. Ron Hubbard? What were they thinking?

I much preferred the movie version of Jaws to the novel. I also prefer the movie versions of Lord of the Rings, they improved some of the dialogue and cut out a lot of padding.

RH - Bogart looked nothing like Spade (a blond Satan) but the movie bests the book on account of his swagger--and thanks to Lorre and Greenstreet.

I enjoyed the "padding" of the LOTR books--lore, linguistics and leaf!

From Here to Eternity - what a mighty, lush book! Curiously, I've never read a novel about Vietnam or Iraq - recommendations, anyone?

#79> I haven't read any Iraq novels, either. Two excellent Vietnam novels I've read are The 13th Valley and Tiger the Lurp Dog. Those are the first two that come to mind, anyhow.

Dispatches by Michael Herr, about the Vietnam War, is excellent. It's not a novel, but it reads like one.

When i was in High School, way back in the late 60s...i made it a goal to buy as many Modern Library titles as i could..by the time i graduated i had 20 or 30..but could only take a few to college with me...long story short..i think my Mom sold them..along with a lot of other stuff of mine..now, i know i have Dracula left....and The Trial & The Castle....oh well, not bad, after all this time.

80 and 81 - much thanks for the suggestions - will check them out

82 - guess your Mom owes you :)

all - the movie version of From Here to Eternity was, well, condensed, "cleansed," and prettified - but still enjoyable. deborah kerr was great. comments/memories out there?

>83 MichaelMenche:

i guess my Mom would owe me....but she is dead...oh well

;-}

84
Well, maybe read some Faulkner...

>84 jdthloue:

i have been reading Faulkner since i was 14..way before i understood anything except the wonder of his words...i still appreciate him for that...no College Courses for me...

86
Yes, the wonder (and the fury the first time through).

I'm now reading Joker One, an excellent book, to help me ruminate over Eternity and The Naked and the Dead. Any one reading anything on the ML 100 list?

Finished The Old Wives' Tale and then to honor its author, I made Omelette Arnold Bennett. Haddock, grueyere... tasty! Any other authors out there with dishes named after them? Or any signature meals they were known to enjoy?

JK Rowling porridge? A Capote martini?

The Day of the Locust by Nathanael West

Introducing Homer Simpson!

Finished the powerful Light in August. Anyone reading any Faulkner or care to post some thoughts about the author?

My Wife and I are reading the Top 100, and having a great time doing it. We are about forty or so into it. Some have been incredible surprises (The Heart Is A Lonely Hunter, Death Comes for the Archbishop) and some a bit tiresome (Ulysses, please, I want those hours back!) I realize that the list takes a lot of flack, but it has some phenomenal works on it! Plus it is fun looking for them in used book stores!

These are always rather interesting ... but ... The Magus ... eeek! Seriously?

>93 bersk: and 94
Which books do you think were wrongfully left off the list?