Books You Need to Read to be Considered Well-Read
Contemporary or classic novels, plays, poem and short story anthologies, that any serious reader should read at least ones in his or her life.
Joe
19 books
0 friends
0 friends
Ricki
5171 books
1478 friends
1478 friends
Sara
2900 books
45 friends
45 friends
Diane Wakely-Park
20 books
4 friends
4 friends
Susan
477 books
5 friends
5 friends
Benjamin
301 books
0 friends
0 friends
Hweeps
1469 books
34 friends
34 friends
Carrie
2832 books
33 friends
33 friends
More voters…
Comments Showing 1-41 of 41 (41 new)
date
newest »

message 1:
by
[deleted user]
(new)
Sep 16, 2012 09:31PM
Why the hell is "To Kill a Mockingbird" at number 1 and "Ulysses", the very definition of "literature", only 78. And no "Molloy" either?
reply
|
flag


Probably because nobody ever actually reads "Ulysses" and people actually read "To Kill a Mockingbird"

Obviously you completely missed the point of the entire book.

I voted for both but you certainly have a point there.
It also sort of works the other way around: I disliked The Catcher in the Rye for instance but would have read it anyway should I have known beforehand, even if it hadn't been compulsory reading for me at the time. Animal Farm and Lord of the Flies aren't quite my thing either but I'm still glad I've read them.
I noticed by the way that there's an emphasis on books originally published in English, as there are only a few exceptions in this Listopia at present. For me 'being well read' is not only a work in progress but it also means having read important books published originally in other languages than English (whether in a translation or in the original language) and I was wondering how others felt about this. I'm moderator of a Dutch/Flemish group and our seasonal challenges take us around the world, which made me come across some classics I'd never even heard of before. like The Rose Garden (Gulistan) of Saadi, The Book of Dede Korkut, The Ring Of The Dove or the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, for example.
By the way, have a look at the Listopia for Forbidden books (now often considered classics), because there are certainly "Books you need to read to be considered well-read" on there. The number of titles which can be found on both Listopias is stricking...

oh right... you get that it's a political fable that millions of people have identified with?


Just ignore the title of this Listopia and vote for the books you liked or loved (a lot). That's what I did :-)


I have to say I don't understand the draw to Gatsby... I found it no better than average. Atlas Shrugged however...

By the way, did anyone have a look at 12 Books You NEED On Your Bookshelf :-) Very similar...



One should always read a book for its own sake; the purpose of lists (better than this one) should be to direct you to books that many people have enjoyed and been enriched by. Since joining groups focused on reading classics, I have been delighted and edifies that books I had either not heard of or might have overlooked before. Certainly, if you are reading a book with the sole goal of saying that you have, you are wasting your time.

I'm always interested in comments like this. I don't ever consider the gender of the author. If I read something I like I will up more by that person. If GR, or a friend recommends something I will look into it, but I never consider the writer's gender. I like most genres, and have enjoyed books by men and women to be sure, but gender, race, religion... whatever of the writer simply don't enter into it.


I'm always interested in comments like this. I don't ever consider the gender of..."
Hello, thanks for your comment. I understand why it wouldn't occur to someone to look at the gender-- there is so much fabulous work out there. Why should the background of the author make a difference? The reason why I started looking at the gender is that I realized we are not picking up good books indiscriminately.
There are good books by people of all backgrounds, yet the ones that come into our sphere-- through networks on Goodreads, friends, publishers, articles, bookstores, etc. are not randomly ordered, because there is a historical gendered logic of access and exclusion to it. Because of this, lots of good books by men make this list here, for example, but the equally fantastic books written by women do not.
One more comment- the concept of "women exclusion" assumes an "inclusion" default, in which men are already found. If the men "category" is the default and women is the exception, then the complexity of gender in art and social spaces is already knotty. Lots to be said on this :-)

I am sorry, do you realize its an allegory of the Russian revolution, and everything in the book actually happened in real life? How is that simplistic?

And then there are books that even those who enjoyed them could not conceivably think are literature, much less belonging on this list (Twilight being a flagrant example)! Maybe I should create a new list...

Agreed! Many of then are, of course, excellent books, but if you only read English plus a sampling of other European works, one could hardly be considered well-read.

In Europe most authors were/are white...

In Europe most authors were/are white..."
This all too familiar argument is really a side step (or worse, a pretense) to qualify white reading canons. There is such a fantastic history of literature from other populations. If we say that most authors from these places are white we are simply blinded to the rich contributions of women and non-white authors. Fantastic lit created by other people is minimized because we make blanket biased acceptances of what is of merit and who is producing it in Europe and America.

In Europe most authors were/are white..."
That’s completely irrelevant. The problem is that this list, like many, is overwhelmingly authors of Europe or European descent as if the “Western canon” were the only literary tradition in the world when nothing could be further from the truth. Great works are and have long been produced around the world and one cannot be considered well-read at all if their reading has been confined to only a single tradition.

Being from The Netherlands, I agree to disagree."
I agree with you Booklovinglady.


No, it really is that dumb.

I agree. It is awful and I only gave it one star.


Totally agree with you, but some people are used to think they are the center of the universe.... sad to see such blatant ignorance even in places where people are supposed to have a wider view of the world....

In Europe most authors were/are white..."
This all too familiar argument is really a side step (or worse, ..."
Totally agree with you but arrogance and ignorance usually go well together....

Very smart! Didn't school make you read some things?"
Not all of those were worth it.

Very smart! Didn't school make you read some things?"
Not all of those were worth it."
I sure had to read them in order to pass the tests. Some of them I liked for instance Jane Eyre. Did you have to read that one? I also had to read Romeo and Juliet.

Very smart! Didn't school make you read some things?"
Not all of those were worth..."
Romeo and Juliet yes and I liked it. I didn't get assigned Jane Eyre though.
Horacio wrote: "As usual this kind of lists are ridiculously anglo and english language centered.... gringos think the world was created like 200 years ago but always forget that humanity has been writing for like..."
I know! Dream of the Red Lotus alone blows the vast majority of required reading lists for ABRHS out of the water!
Related News
Here at Goodreads World Headquarters, we spend a lot of time stacking and sorting and thinking of interesting new ways to encourage the vital...
Anyone can add books to this list.