ahem... some news just in

Hmm, interesting (and two books I have read are dropped out, none are brought in).

However, I am a bit concerned that the several books dropped are non-anglophone while nine of the ten books brought in are anglophone, are they just not making an effort for diversity anymore?

I also noticed the "diversity issue" and to someone new to the 1001 books editions, I agree it's not the best direction. For myself, I always have read from the combined lists, so I don't ever lose a book that has been on the list at some point. I was happy to see that so many of the new books are by women - though several of them were already on the list with previous books.

Still no Hilary Mantel - sigh . . .

And I've not read any of the new additions, though three of them are on my library list already.

Wow! I thought (and maybe hoped) the day would never come.

I own several of the new books so will need to move them from my “Books to read after I die” pile to the other one.

The choice of books dropped is I suspect driven by practical printing considerations rather than these being the top books not to read before you die. Find an author with several books on the list and pick the last one chronologically from the last 10 years so that we minimise the repagination required.

Sorry to see several of the ones I’ve enjoyed dropped, including the lengthy but engrossing Your Face Tomorrow.

This is great! Since my goal is to read a total of 1001 from all combined lists, this just increases my choices. And at least a couple of the added books are ones I'd like to read anyway. So now I'll have a good reason to do so.

I'm a little disappointed, really, that they didn't change more books. There are some definite losers that, as far as I know, are still on the list.

>3 japaul22:, yes, the strange lack of Hilary Mantel is really a glaring problem. Maybe somebody on the committee had a bad breakup with her? Because Wolf Hall should definitely be there.

That is great news, Arukiyomi. Although I’m not too impressed with the changes. Another Dave Eggers? And no Mantel indeed? I do love that Ferrante is added though (would that be all four books in the series?).

I read five of them so that’s good for my counting until 1001 out of the combined lists!

>1 arukiyomi: BTW if you are updating the app, can you please look at the "Take a Picture" function. I'm on the latest iPhone and iOS version (11.4.1) and when I "Take a Picture" the app closes down. Using the Camera app to take a picture and then uploading from "Your Photo Album" works fine, so not a big deal but wasn't sure whether there is a simple fix.

Hooray! Thanks for the update.

I read The Life of Insects just a couple months ago, and loved it. I'm sad to see it bumped.

I was thinking both the Ferrante Neapolitan series and Knaussgard's My Struggle would make the list, but was really hoping for the latter, since I have read four of the six volumes.

I have read two on the outgoing list, and two on the incoming list. My goal is also to read a sum of 1001 off the combined list, so all is well.

And aren't there still a couple of books not translated into English that they didn't remove? That puzzles me. It is obviously a list intended for an english-speaking audience.

There are several on the new list that I know enough about to not feel I need to "read them before I die" :-)

But that's fine with me as it isn't my goal to read every book on the list - just to use it to broaden my reading.

>9 japaul22: it isn't my goal to read every book on the list - just to use it to broaden my reading. Same here, but I'd still really rather they got rid of the losers on the list (along with the overwhelming number of author-repeats, there is truly no reason for any author, amazing as they may be, to have more than 2 on the list!!) and made a full list of worthy books, than simply giving me more titles to ignore.

I'll look into that puckers but no promises as I don't do iOS development. I'm trying hard to realise the dream of a hybrid app that will work on both platforms but don't hold your breath.

This is great news!

I am, like others, disappointed by the ones they have removed from the list. I have read most of them and I would recommend them. There are still a number of authors on the list that baffle me as to their continued presence - Michel Houellebecq jumps out in my memory.

Edited to add - Odd that they have picked out only one of My Brilliant Friend books, I read them as a novel in multiple volumes and would be hard pressed to separate them.

Also - 3 books from the Spanish speaking world off - did the Spanish specialist not turn up to the meeting?!

So interesting to see what stays, what is removed and what is added. I read from the combined list myself so that just means more books to add but I'm glad to see that I have already read two of the additions (The Goldfinch and H is for Hawk). I agree with The Goldfinch being added but I didn't think H is for Hawk was so terrific it had to be added as a book to read before you die. Only one book that I have read was removed--The Childrens Book. It is perhaps not as good as Byatt's Posession but it was better than lots that are left on the list.

Hmpf... except for last year (11/13) I've read the complete Booker longlists since 2013, and only one shortlisted book (Ali Smith's Winter) made it into the new edition? Okay, with Mantel I'm sure they'll add the trilogy once finished. But thinking how many mediocre winners were added to the list in earlier years it's strange that they're now completely ignored.
So I gained two, the Smith and the Ferrante. Better than nothing I guess. :)

Simone, you said "Another Dave Eggers?" AFAIK, there wasn't an Eggers on the list at all prior to this update.... hoping I didn't miss something.

I read none of the books leaving, but one of the books going in so that's nice. I really enjoyed The Goldfinch, but moving in the direction of less diversity to add more contemporary American novels seems unnecessary.

Adding Wolf Hall would be logical, but I feel the omission of Herta Müller and Svetlana Aleksijevitj more disturbing - both Nobel Prize winners, brilliant authors and would add a bit to the diversity, since they are both women and non-English writers.

I think they added The Goldfinch as it won a Nobel prize; although I wasn't wild about it.

er... apart from the fact that people, not novels, are awarded the Nobel prize, I think you might mean the far less impressive but nonetheless worthwhile, Pulitzer Prize.

>18 arukiyomi: lol yes!

>1 arukiyomi: If you are updating the app you might want to update the page count for Pilgrimage. The full work is published in 4 volumes which in the Virago paperback edition totals 2109 pages (rather than the 100 pages in the app). I'm almost finished it and would like to see my average page count go up rather than down!

great feedback puckers. Funnily enough, with me completing The 1001 Nights earlier this year, I've updated that to the 3650 pages it should be (for those of you who have skipped over it in an abridged edition!)

unfortunately, I've already submitted the Books app to Apple and had it approved pending release on the 4th of Oct. I should be submitting the updated Movies app this weekend and then I have the two spreadsheets to work on. Once all that is done, if there's time, I'll get the books app updated with the Pilgrimage word count and the fact that one of the new films added to the Movies list is a 1001 Book title too (The Handmaiden/Fingersmith) which I forgot to include.

BTW, I did look into the crash issue with the camera, but couldn't make head or tail of why that might be an issue. It isn't an issue for me but then I have an iPhone 4 running iOS 8 only for testing purposes!

Working on a long term solution for the Apple-dependency but no promises.

>21 arukiyomi: Thanks and good luck with it all. As I said above the camera problem is not a big issue - I’m on an iPhone 8 running iOS 11.4 and it only started when I upgraded to the 8.

I had the first Movies app but should update. My self-created spreadsheet has me on 940 movies, but progress halted in recent years. Books are easier to dip in and out of with young kids in the house.

v6 of the spreadsheet is now available at

http://arukiyomi.com/?page_id=4230

if you have already purchased v5, email me at arukiyomi AT gmail DOT com and I'll send you over a free v6 (which has instructions to import your data). If you have your PayPal receipt or payment ID that would be very helpful.

>23 arukiyomi: *squeak!* ~happy dance~

>23 arukiyomi: does the spreadsheet contain all books that have been removed from previous editions, as well as the 1001 listed in the current edition?

@Helenliz oh yes indeedy... all 1300+ of them

that made me smile ELiz_M ;-)

>26 arukiyomi: ha! That was said with far too much relish! It makes the list even bigger, but I suppose that gives me the opportunity to put off the ones I really don't want to read until even later.

Thank you. purchase imminent.

You're all being very diplomatic about this update! To be honest, I find this update pretty depressing. It feels badly-done and lazy, and - worst of all - indicates that there's no rational process behind the list whatsoever.

Let me justify that statement:

* Firstly, the removals: almost all international, and all to some degree internationally-regarded authors. Deliberately going against the purposeful 2008 update.
* The two worst removals for me are Haasse and Gutierrez. Hella Haasse's only book on the list is now gone, despite her being a staple of Dutch literature. Gutierrez was (I believe) the only Cuban writer on the list, representing a nation rich with literature, now not on the list at all (at the expense of a load more Americans).
* Franck's and Cercas's sole books were both removed. Arguably minor writers, but both books were well awarded, and best-sellers in their respective countries (Germany, Spain).
* What's interesting is that most of the authors on the list of removals seem to be perennial Nobel Prize rumoured candidates: Marias, Kadare, Byatt, Kelman. All had their list trimmed, and with books that were well regarded and highly-rated (on LT at least). Are the editors making a deliberate push-back against over-inflated literary reputations? Somehow I doubt it.
* These books were removed rather than, for example, The New World, which is literally unavailable in English and has no literary reputation to speak of. Or by resolving any of the many inconsistencies in the list, such as children's literature (ref: The 13 Clocks but no Peter Pan), short story collections (ref: Pastoralia but no Dubliners), or graphic novels (ref: Watchmen but no Maus).

* Okay, fine - but what about the additions? We could forgive some painful removals if the additions were worth it. But...
* All Anglo-American (except Ferrante), and none - with the possible exception of The Goldfinch - with a reputation deserving of pushing out any of the books above
* H is for Hawk is a non-fiction memoir: furthering yet another inconsistency in the list. I loved it, but it shouldn't be on the list.
* Most of these books were well-reviewed, but none are remotely near the top ten books since 2012. The Flamethrowers was the worst of the 2013 National Book Awards. 10:04 hasn't been nominated for anything to my knowledge. H(A)PPY is supposed to be good, but Darkmans/The Yips are supposed to be better. The Circle is a Dave Eggers novel, on a list which doesn't include A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius or Hologram for the King. They've traded an average Ali Smith novel with an average Ali Smith novel. Fine, but why bother? If any Smith should be on the list, you'd assume it'd be The Accidental, or Autumn.
* As others have said: where's Wolf Hall? I'd add: where are any of the past 6 years of Booker winners? Or National Book Award winners? Priz Goncorte? Costa Book Awards? Any of the recent winners of the Nobel/Booker International/Neustadt prizes? Are the editors of this list really claiming that 10:04 is better than all of those books?

They've had 6 years of publishing to catch-up on since the last edition (2012). I don't feel they've taken the responsibility of choosing 10 new books from that period with any degree of responsibility at all.

/rant.

>29 sometimeunderwater: all good points. I wonder why they bothered with this update at all.

At the end of the day the publisher is in the business of selling this book for a profit. It is 6 years since the last edition and it has disappeared from all the booksellers I visit. The publisher has all the layouts and plates available and is not getting any income from them. New people with an interest in books and lists have developed over these six years so a new edition could likely sell. You can’t appeal to them by just reprinting the 2012 book as the potential purchaser would like to see something they’ve bought in recent years. The Goldfinch and H is for Hawk were both highly visible books during this period so you add them. You need to add a few more from this period, and you need to still have a book that adds to 1001 so out with the dartboard....

The changes are so slight that I doubt anyone who has the 2nd edition onwards will be rushing out to buy it.

Having said that, good luck to them. It’s good to know they still have an interest in publishing a list of (some of) the great novels of the last 300 years and sparking interest in books you are unlikely to have stumbled upon but for the 1001 book. At the end of the day it’s why I’ve been with this group for six plus years and this new edition may attract a few more people to join the discussion.

I too feel mostly ambivalent about the changes and agree with everything @sometimeunderwater (are you reading Day of the Dolphin???) says. In fact, with your permission, I'd be happy to send that feedback directly to one of the sub-editors responsible for the new edition.

On the other hand, @puckers is exactly right. Look, for example at both the 1001 Movies and 1001 Books editions. 1001 Movies has had an update every single year. Why? Because they have sold millions of them. The 1001 Books list just doesn't attract the same sales. Now, arguably you could say that if they kept up with the literary world they'd sell more copies.

Maybe we should lobby the publishers for a people's edition of 1001 Books for 2020 and massively crowdfund the list changes.

@arukiyomi Please do feel free to share my feedback with the sub-editors (although they may find it more ranty than useful!)

You and puckers are of course completely right, it's a commercial product and they have to be led by what will sell/what changes they can afford. The only person this reflects badly on is me: I've no idea why I set so much stock by this list, when I know it's no more authoritative than any other long-list of books out there!

I don't think I've heard that perspective before and you're absolutely right. Good on you.