6 for me. Most of them are so old and wordy, I probably will never read them. War and Peace.... c'mon!
I would bet that if you started it, it would keep your interest.
I think people are overlooking how this was selected
The World Library is a list of the 100 best books, as proposed by 100 writers from 54 different countries, compiled and organized in 2002 by the Norwegian Book Club. This list endeavours to reflect world literature, with books from all countries, cultures, and time periods. Eleven of the books included on the list are written by women, eighty-five are written by men and four have no known author.
Each writer had to select his or her own list of ten books.
The 100 books selected by this process and listed here are not ranked or categorized in any way; the organizers have stated that "they are all on an equal footing", with the exception of Don Quixote which was given the distinction "best literary work ever written". The following list organizes the works alphabetically by author.
and the list of authors they asked is pretty impressive. Frank McCourt, Ben Okri, V.S. Naipaul, Robert Bly, John Fosse, etc. Basically, some of the best authors of the time (early 90s).
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.