This is a ridiculous list. Two cases where one of the books is a part of another "book" listed (Lion, Witch and Wardrobe/Narnia; Hamlet/Complete Works of Shakespeare), two that have no answer (!!)- would be better if you stripped the list down to 50 or so, said that all the books appeared on the list/meme in question and gave less time.
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is part of the Chronicles of Narnia series. It, and the other six in the series, were all originally published as stand-alone books, even if today they're sometimes packaged together in a single volume.
And Moses, Daniel, Ezra, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Paul, James, Jude... and we're still not to half of the authors. I suppose you could say they were all ghost writing for God...
No it wasn't. Even devout believing Christians who know what they are talking about know this. I'm not being disrespectful I'm trying to save you from looking silly. This is just flat out wrong and we know it to be wrong.
I thought it was a great quiz, but I did used to work in a bookshop, so that makes it easier. I got 65/80 and there were another half dozen that were on the tip of my tongue but my brain froze.
Coming from Canada, I was surprised as to how much Canadian lit there was (Anne of Green Gables, Life of Pi, The Handmaid's Tale). It seems Canadians do produce good novels after all!
I'm fairly well-read and I only got 45. I would've gotten 46 if I remembered that Thackeray was spelled with an "ay" at the end rather than just a "y." Still, I'm okay with my result, because I tend to stick to the classics and not knowing the author of books like The Lovely Bones is fine by me.
Nobody asked me, but my personal vote for most over-rated book is "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". Never has a book gotten so much mileage out of a great title. Many people claim to like it. Fewer have read it. Even fewer can explain it (probably because it's mostly nonsense).
I read it and I really liked it! I cant remember much about it though, cause it was about 20 years ago. I can almost only remember that a teacher asked his class to look at a coin and keep looking at it and write everything they see. And another part about how input goes through several filters of the mind. Things about perception.
Other than that I dont remember much so, I can't tell you much about what is was about, but I remember the things I felt reading it. (atleast parts of the book could be the rest wasnt interessing) I found it very interesting, refreshin and inspiring if i remember correctly. Completely different than other books, quite weird, but touching subjects I was allready interested in
thoughI feel like I am the only one in my country that has ever heard of it. Well at least one other person, cause I think I got it via a friend of my sister. I wonder where that book went... maybe I should reread it. no idea if I just loaned it or if it is in possesion ( I have got wayy too many books, and I give a lot of them away very often, but they still take up an entire room (and are scattered around all the other rooms expect, usually.. the kitchen haha)
I'd probably go with The Bible or the Koran. Impossible for a book to be rated more highly than those too, and at the same time, very difficult to write a book worse than either. Even Dan Brown would be hard pressed. And it fits what you said about "Zen." Many (to the tune of billions) claim to not only like the books but that they are perfect, peerless, documents so amazing that they could not possible have been written by mortal men. Almost none of those making this claim about the Bible have actually read more than a couple verses. Those making the claim about the Koran usually have read it, but usually not in a translation that they can understand. And they are both full of nonsense (and much worse).
In a very literal sense, that is true. Very hard to get more overrated than those two. I would say if we're assessing them on literary merits the Bible is probably worse than the Quran. Mainly because the Quran at least has a certain amount of commonality of tone and purpose. The Bible is a bizarre, messy collage which alternates between mindbogglingly inane genealogies; long lists of strangely specific, nonsense rules; fairly bland stories that would hardly rate on online collections of amateur fantasy; and obvious, commonsense morality plays. The New Testament improves somewhat on the Old's feckless rambling, but nonetheless doesn't offer much apart from a generic rehashing of older Messianic myths. Now the Quran ain't great, but it is at least a little more focused and consistent.
What's your source? Did you individually survey each of the roughly three to four billion people who claim to believe in the Bible or the Quran/Koran/Qu'ran/Qur'an? Or are you just making a blanket statement in a place that doesn't even have much of anything to do with religion?
You know that I'm right. And I know that you know I'm right. but you feel the compulsion to nitpick anyway. Why is that? Trying to muddy the waters or just feeling defensive? Isn't honesty supposed to be something that Christians value? What percentage of your Christian friends have read the Bible in its entirety? Be honest.
Well said, Hinesbrothers. It's a shame that there is such a lot of anti-religious bigotry on this site (mostly from a small handful of people). Clearly knowing loads about Geography doesn't qualify one to be wise about Theology. Look, I respect peoples' right to follow atheism (however illogical that "religion" may seem to me) , but hearing ignorant criticisms of the value of religious texts such as the above is not going to influence my fundamental philosophy. A happy Advent to all!
For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken. No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the Lord made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God." (Leviticus 21:18-21)
But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you." (Deuteronomy 22: 20-21)
"But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days." (Leviticus 12:5)
Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property. (Exodus 21:20-21)
Hines: I don't believe you. Not for a second. And I didn't say that there weren't parts of the Bible that were interesting. I said it's among the worst books ever written. Something can be interesting and horrible at the same time. I never read the whole thing cover to cover in exact verse order but over the years I think I probably have read all of it, skipping forward and backward. It's in parts horrifying, in parts grotesque, in parts nonsensical, in parts ridiculous, in parts boring beyond belief... but also in parts poetic, in parts beautiful, in parts historically or anthropologically fascinating, in parts structurally impressive... but taken as a whole it's still a horrible read and also morally abominable.
The Koran is much shorter and much easier to read, and full of poetry, but similarly morally repugnant.
Missed 18 for a 78% pass rate, which surprisingly beats 98% of takers!
Did The Guardian really list Hamlet separately from the Complete Works? Old Billy Shakes is the only name with an extraneous final letter that you require to type in. Ironically some of the ones I couldn't remember are ones I've actually read (Curious Incident, Capt Corelli).
I think I'd be just fine doing without Dan Brown. That said, I think overall it's a good list. Is it exactly the list I would have chosen? No, but on balance, not bad.
My quizbowl knowledge wasn't good enough for 5 points - I only got 51. I maybe should have gotten Zola, Toole, and Khaled Hosseini, but it still wouldn't have been enough. Shocking that I am not good enough! :)
No Haruki Murakami, Peter Carey, Mickhail Bulgakov, Thomas Pynchon, Henry Miller or Anthony Burgess. But somehow Dan Brown is on here, JK Rowling and Jane Austen 3 times!? Also, it's amazing how a movie series can give credence to a series of books. When I was younger, The Lord of the Rings was only considered serious reading by mega-nerds and people who smoked too much pot.
Every true JetPunker should read 'Extreme Cosmos' by Bryan Gaensler.......... this book is the ultimate non-fiction book regarding the extremes on Earth and the Universe:......... did you know the Sun loses between 4 and 5 Million tons of mass EVERY SECOND!
Dickens is good. But six books in a list of only 100 seems a bit excessive. (As well as Shakespeare and C.S. Lewis each getting the same book on there twice.) Especially when Twain is left out entirely.
The Guardian is crazy. Some of these books are utter rubbish and some all time great books are missing. The list was distinctly slanted towards snobby books. Catcher in the Rye was dreadful.
Where are Homer's Iliad and Odyssey? Where is Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics? Where is Dante's Divine Comedy? Where is Machiavelli's Prince? Well, this seems to be a very poor list to me.
Perhaps zoom out and consider: does everyone need or want to have access to Homer, Machiavelli, or Dante? I love me some Homer, but as one of the earliest to give us the major Western archetypes, anything after will reflect some of that pretty well. As for Machiavelli, are we all studying to overthrow our political enemies all the time? Are we, in fact, princes? And Aristotle: Christian and Ancient Greek thought got married beautifully by Sts. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and even Dante. While I agree with you that these works are still somewhat relevant, I'm not sure the average perhaps Needs them, ya know?
Heavens... around 10 of these were originally written in a language other than English, mostly Russian and French. I know this simply reflects the literature Guardian readers are most likely to be exposed to, but it's so bizarre to me how few translated works are well-known by Anglophones
It would however be a completely different story in countries without very strong national literatures and incredibly low rates of literary translation.
Other than that I dont remember much so, I can't tell you much about what is was about, but I remember the things I felt reading it. (atleast parts of the book could be the rest wasnt interessing) I found it very interesting, refreshin and inspiring if i remember correctly. Completely different than other books, quite weird, but touching subjects I was allready interested in
Having a daughter makes you super dirty...
The Koran is much shorter and much easier to read, and full of poetry, but similarly morally repugnant.
Although The Great Gatsby is right up there with it.
Did The Guardian really list Hamlet separately from the Complete Works? Old Billy Shakes is the only name with an extraneous final letter that you require to type in. Ironically some of the ones I couldn't remember are ones I've actually read (Curious Incident, Capt Corelli).
It's very important for students!