Is there a reason why Guards! Guards! is on there twice?

Lizzie wrote: "Is there a reason why Guards! Guards! is on there twice?"

It is that good. :)

The Picture of Dorian Gray also appears twice (9 and 52)

Good book though

Cidar with Rosie

There are a lot of books listed twice.

Frustrating when the numbers are wrong because there's so many duplicates.

This list needs to be cleaned up and all duplicates removed. Maybe there ought to be a way on Goodreads that duplicates can't be added (including different editions of the same book) to Listopia in the first place?

There are quite a few duplicates. Also for example His Dark Materials is listed as 3 separate books but Chronicles of Narnia is listed as 1 book even though it's 6.

Add to that "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare" okay so I think at a stretch I've read 6 but I know there are miles more than that so is that a currently reading?

The Harry Potter books should perhaps be as a collection, not sure all of the deserve to be on here as individuals.

But then again read my comment above....if you've read 2 out of the collection is that a read, unread or currently reading?

Vanessa wrote: "The Harry Potter books should perhaps be as a collection, not sure all of the deserve to be on here as individuals."

One of the most messy and bizarre book lists I've seen, with duplicates and an excess of mediocre fantasy genre. And not one Iris Murdoch? Gerald Durrell but no Lawrence? A 'boxed set' of CS Lewis but seven individual Harry Potters? Yet no Shakespeare or Bible? This is '100 to read before you die?' I think I'd rather die.

I'd add "The Caine Mutiny"

Ever thought that life's too short to worry about constant list-compiling and that it might be better spent actually reading a book? Yup.

Thomas wrote: "One of the most messy and bizarre book lists I've seen, with duplicates and an excess of mediocre fantasy genre. And not one Iris Murdoch? Gerald Durrell but no Lawrence? .... This is '100 to read before you die?' I think I'd rather die. "

No, this is 100 Books That Amazon Wants You To Buy. A cynical, money-making exercise, pure and simple.

To which I'd like to add that a fair few of these are in the public domain, so you don't need to give money-grabbing, tax-dodging, zero-hours-contracting Amazon your hard-earned cash at all.

This is the most uneven list imaginable; there were no obvious criteria for constructing a "must-read" list that includes Dickens and Dan Brown, Shakespeare and any Harry Potter books. Really! And what about works of pure genius such as Christina Stead's The Man Who Loved Children? And the works of Saul Bellow, Kurt Vonnegut, etc?

Too many children's books one might read in ones youth. How many Pulitzers on the list? Page turners seem to be order of the day and too much fantasy. Maybe Norman Mailer's The Executioner's Song/ Oswalds Tale (takes great time, focus and concentration but well worth it). Surprised there isn't a Philip Roth, American Pastoral or the Plot against America good places to start. Anyway just an opinion. One Paul Auster would be good, maybe Timbuktu with a dog named Mr. Bones that understands Ingloosh (thats also one for the younger generation though with sad but moving narrative).

love

Is this list for readers from the UK or books written by UK authors?

You are all terrible Harry Potter is brilliant and deserves to be separate books although Lord of the Rings should have been further up the list. And why isn't Miss Peregrine's Home For Peculiar Children on here?