The best thing about these lists is arguing about them.
For example, I don't care how many English scholars try to convince me otherwise...Things Fall Apart was a piece of shit. Same with Sons and Lovers. Fvck those books.
They're seriously going to include the Book of Job yet omit the Bhagavad Gita because they've already included the Mahabharata? In that case, why not ditch the Book of Job and just include the entire Holy Bible?
No, Beckett's "trilogy" doesn't belong on the list. Those are three completely different books with different characters. They are not "one" book.
Flaubert's A Sentimental Education has no business whatsoever being on this list if they're going to leave off Joyce's A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man.
Dostoyevsky gets four books, and Hemingway gets one, and not even his best book?
ONE Charles Dickens book? Are you shitting me?
The list includes fairy tales, poems, plays, short stories, and essays, but they leave out graphic novels. Sorry, at this point in history, there are many legitimate classics in that genre, such as Maus and The Watchmen, and to ignore that is the height of academic arrogance.
So Pippi Longstocking is worthy enough for inclusion, but not The Lord of the Rings, which helped mold and influence an entire genre? The lack of genre fiction in this list is ridiculous. Where the fvck is Frankenstein and War of the Worlds?
To be honest I think this list isn't half bad. Of course, it is very far from the one I would have made, and there are some terrible holes.
But it is also quite representative of all times, places and genres.
I especially like that Dostoevskij has the most spots... if the implied message is "he's the GOAT" I agree.
I think one should let everybody vote (except obvious trolling). Sure, you have the risk of having Dan Brown as a ATG writer in the list but hey, that's the internet, that's ISH
I think I would make it like this: Everybody can nominate up to 10 diffrent books maximum. The OP keeps a list updated. A book makes the list as soon as it has 2 votes.
Do we want to aloud an author having multiple books in the list?
Do we aloud a voter to vote for multiple books from the same author?
Let's make a quick poll. Oh wait, there is no poll function in this fucking cheap ass message board......
I'm antidemocratic when it comes to such matters I couldn't stand the view of Dan Brown or Patricia Cornwell and the likes in an all time book list.
But hey, who cares, in the end it's ISH. I guess that making the voters selection would be more problematic.
I like your proposal, here' my thoughts:
- Anyone can propose 10 books, even multiple books from the same author
- No threshold at all for entering the overall list, but...
- the books that have got at least 3 nominations enter the "top tier" for a second voting round aimed at ranking them
- posters who can vote in the second round are those who have proposed at least one book that made the top tier