Here's an old-goodie the SEO peeps over at The Economist shoved my way today -- to start off the next week (#1469222) in the quest for the Great Den B&A sweep:
People are living longer than they did in Schopenhauer’s day, but the number of books has increased by a much bigger factor. So his dictum ought to carry even more weight now than it did then. ... the famously pessimistic philosopher was uncharacteristically optimistic. He thought that readers could reliably discern which books deserved their time and which did not
"the number of texts that people are told they should read seems overwhelming""the number of texts that people are told they should read seems overwhelming"
---
This list of 500(!) is as good as any, I suppose.
I'm sad/shocked (or proud...?) to report that I've got a measly 2.5 out of the top-10.... the .5 because after a hundred-odd pages I couldn't stand the nonsensical and eventless ramblings of Herman Melville (what tha actual fuck is wrong with people, and why for fuck's sake is this garbage so celebrated?)
I doubt I'll make much progress here... On the one hand I understand that the key edifice of English/Western lit is this list of long-lasting, long-standing great novels of the ~19th century (of course, everything -- including boomer bullshit -- was better in the 19th C)... On the other hand, my direct experience with literary/arts people and having read (=tried to read) some of these supposed classics, is that they're all freakin garbage and can go screw themselves (notice the boomer similarity??)
Also, oops?
Most GBOATs were originally written in English and since the start of the 20th century. And the literary compass points almost due West.
Scrolling further down the list of classics, I doubt I'll ever have the attention span for the insane character assortment of the Russian greats. (#1468858)
OK, making an educated guess, this seems like the most probably, top-rated, lowest-hanging, fruit: I might actually pick this up:
...also, you're telling me The Old Man and the Sea would merely take me an hour and a half to read? Gosh, I piss away more time on SN on a weekly (daily?) basis... surely that ought to be possible.
...also, for as much of a J.K. Rowling fan I am (hashtag ninties boy!), it seems odd af to have a Harry Potter book (3!) in this 19thC classic lit list, Plato and Machiavelli and Hemingway etc,e tc. -.- Maybe in a hundred years or whatever. Also, what's up with The Elements of Style?! Surely not belonging.
....and shit spiraled(!) out of control with the double-helix book and Thomas Kuhn's Scientific Revolutions (which I obvs have read!)
....and Keynes(!). And Marx. And Wealth of Nations, jeez (#1465214) And also, wth, Das Kapital is way longer than 1 hour goddamnit:
AH, almost got another point with Edith Wharton... I've been to her house in New England (BEAUTIFUL GROUNDS, fascinating life history) and I've read the one about boy-ish Lily (which google says is House of Mirth, not Age of Innocence!)
= UPDATE: on #150 it shows up, HAHA, points to Den!
SUM TOTAL NUMBER IS..... drumrolls... 29!SUM TOTAL NUMBER IS..... drumrolls... 29!
Out of a list of 500, the famously anti-literature, anti-novel Den scores a neat 6%. (Though if we remove the ridiculous entries like Harry Potter and Narvia and Pippi Långstrump and the ~econ classics... we're down to 3%. OOPS! (remove the handful that high school literature class forced me to, I'd be about half even that.)
Finally, I'll commit now -- before you all and god (Siggy?!) as my witness, I shall read this:
How do the _schtackers_ score?How do the _schtackers_ score?
P.S., I also love how the Bible is in there (...with all the other fiction books!)
archive: https://archive.md/eXr8t
Paywalled... I asked Gemini to summarize:
'It's an EXTRACTION SYSTEM — and you're the parasite on the other side.'
OP @denlillaapan lives in Iceland so he can enjoy the state funded welfare provided to 'creatives'.
I'm fine with Harry Potter making the cut. It is the most popular story ever written after all.
I have mixed feelings about highly influential anachronistic bullshit, like Keynes and Marx. I'd lean towards omitting them, since no one in the field they belong to recommends reading them anymore. There are much better uses of one's time. However, they did basically shape the political and intellectual landscape for an entire century (and counting).
Only someone who read Harry Potter would say this.
Nope, like most of these books, I have not read it.
I say just pick the 500 top grossing books. Money is the moderator.
I bet that would include a lot of romance novels.
So what? That's what people who read books value.
If, ten years from now, people have logged more hours watching short form tiktoks than traditional movies, I think I'll feel bummed.
But, I see your point.
Is there a difference between interesting art and popular art?
Yes, but everyone makes a different distinction and popular art is something like the intersection of lots of Venn Diagrams.
Plus, if a particular short-form TikTok grosses more than Star Wars it'll probably be pretty extraordinary. This is one reason why gross is a better metric than views.
gangnam style
Iiiiidiots, all of em
Ergo, the best books are written for dummies
Neeeeh
Most copies sold is better than grossing.
Nope again. prices matter
$2 for a new hardcover book in 1920.
$17 for Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone when it was first published.
Just convert all the prices to gold then. That'll make it easier to go back to Bible times anyway.
Eeeeeeeeh, imma object. Share of disposable income better
Oh heeeelll no. The plebs have no quality control
Of those, now in my advanced years, the only I consider must reads are the Bible and Dante's Divine Comedy. Everything else is ultimately vanity and chasing after wind, as the preacher may have said.
Ecc 12:12 KJV And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh.
it’s near impossible to read your abundantly conversational drivel sometimes, you ever think about recording your voice?
I really dislike people telling other people what they must read. Going on the journey the author invites one on is solitary, intimate. No one can decide on it for you.
I also resent calculating fiction. That’s SO not the POINT UGH.
"abundantly conversational drivel" is a beauty.
I can interpret this beneficially (so please elaborate on what you mean here, precisely), but what I suspect you mean here is simply incorrect.
would I tell you what paintings to hang in your home? no. I’m not the one living there, you are.
That's not the concern here, not even remotely analogous
I was happy to see Catch-22 and Hitchhiker's Guide in the top 100.
I'll say I've read more than most of these. Many were worth the time. Some were not.
My experience of the last year, going very deep on the cyberpunk "canon", has been that great works sometimes need context. So, picking up Gilgamesh may not really be a fruitful experience, unless you want to muck about in its milieu.
I'll wager most people will have a better experience if they go deep in a genre rather than going broad across the great works of English literature.
more than most?? As in, over 250...?
26
HAAAAAAA, I win!
I did not expect to surpass such as scholarly individual as yourself.
Well, im sort of a lit hater... The econ books saved me!!
I don't read fiction anymore either. I read a lot of it when I was younger but for about the last decade I typically read non fiction only.
Makes me wonder. What our world would be like if more people read old books instead of the NYT best sellers list.
a lot wiser
I am not well read at all. I never claim to be. But compared to most college graduates of any age I know I am a freaking scholar.
The Sonnets should be way higher, this list is all over the place
Truly... Econ classics and harry potter? Wth