3 ms·
Interesting choices. They are mostly relatively obscure. That is, not the top or even secondary tier of popularity. I'd be curious to know his book picking met
by anateus 18y ago
Interesting choices. They are mostly relatively obscure. That is, not the top or even secondary tier of popularity.
I'd be curious to know his book picking methodology. Personal recommendations? Book review publications? Or something else?
- kirubakaran 18y agoAren't popular books usually crap? http://www2.oprah.com/obc/pastbooks/obc_pastdate.jhtml#2008 http://www2.oprah.com/obc/pastbooks/obc_pastdate.jhtml#2008
- edw519 18y agoUsually, except for Elie Wiesel's "Night". Even broken clocks are right twice a day.
- dangoldin 18y agoI also see some Faulkner, Márquez, Tolstoy and Steinbeck.
- deleted 18y ago[deleted]
- Prrometheus 18y agoMost "popular" books that are recognized as literary classics are good. A few may be crap, but I don't feel competent to judge them. A good rule is that any book that people are still reading several decades after it was published is worth your time. Please note that the inverse is not necessarily true.
- cglee 18y agoI don't feel competent to judge them - I guess it's a testament to your self awareness, but why let others choose what's good to you? Your experience is just as valid as anyone else's.
- dcminter 18y agoSeeing Gaudy Night there suggests to me that I should read the others, of which I'm woefully ignorant.