In total there are 24 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 23 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes) Most users ever online was 1000 on Sun Jun 30, 2024 12:23 am
Most people who say "Hmmm, they didn't include X" and cite some literary classic usually haven't looked at the actual 1001 books book itself but judge the work simply from the list online. The 1001 book explains clearly in its introduction that the list is a collection that attempts to trace the history of the novel with each work contributing something important to the development of that genre.
Thus, plays, religious texts, poetry etc, with very few exceptions (Eugene Onegin being a notable one, but the only one I can think of off the top of my head) are not included in the list. Hence, Goethe's Faust and the Divine Comedy do not feature. You may, of course, be critical of this focus on novels and I think there's weight behind the argument that it should be called 1001 Novels... and not just books. But I hope that explanation explains what seem like glaring omissions.
Last edited by arukiyomi on Mon Jun 21, 2010 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Yeah, that list is a bit depressing. It's hard to not feel like an illiterate loser when comparing your own list of books to that 1001 list. I think a better list would be the "100 Greatest Books Ever Written" by Easton Press. I'll create a thread for that list to see what you guys have read.
"From childhood's hour I have not been as others were
I have not seen as others saw
I could not bring my passions from a common spring
From the same source I have not taken my sorrow
I could not awake my heart to joy at the same tone
And all I loved - I loved alone"