I R GUD REEDAR
Jun. 28th, 2008 01:21 pmThe Big Read thinks the average adult has only read six of the top 100 books they've printed below.
1) Look at the list and bold those you have read.
2)Italicise those youintend to read/read part of but never finished. (If I italicised the books I want to read, everything would be italicised.)
3) Underline the books you LOVE (or at least really, really liked a lot).
4) Reprint this list in your own LJ so we can try and track down these people who've read 6 and force books upon them.
(Extra rule from
supplanter: strike out the ones you disliked.)
( My list )
So, 37/100? (Plus a couple unfinished because they sucked so much.) Not bad, if I do say so myself...though it feels a little unfair, what with me working on my English lit Ph.D. and all. Though to be fair, NOTHING from my actual time period (medieval) turned up on the list...wtf? If they had room to put Hamlet and the first Narnia book twice, then they freaking had room for something like, oh say, The Canterbury Tales? Or Gawain and the Green Knight? Or hell, even Malory's Morte Darthur (or one of the derivations thereof, like T.H. White)? In fact, I think the only things on this list pre-1800 are Shakespeare and the Bible, right? Admittedly, this seems to be in step with a lot of the way literature is taught and perceived in modern society, but pfeh on that, I say.
1) Look at the list and bold those you have read.
2)Italicise those you
3) Underline the books you LOVE (or at least really, really liked a lot).
4) Reprint this list in your own LJ so we can try and track down these people who've read 6 and force books upon them.
(Extra rule from
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
( My list )
So, 37/100? (Plus a couple unfinished because they sucked so much.) Not bad, if I do say so myself...though it feels a little unfair, what with me working on my English lit Ph.D. and all. Though to be fair, NOTHING from my actual time period (medieval) turned up on the list...wtf? If they had room to put Hamlet and the first Narnia book twice, then they freaking had room for something like, oh say, The Canterbury Tales? Or Gawain and the Green Knight? Or hell, even Malory's Morte Darthur (or one of the derivations thereof, like T.H. White)? In fact, I think the only things on this list pre-1800 are Shakespeare and the Bible, right? Admittedly, this seems to be in step with a lot of the way literature is taught and perceived in modern society, but pfeh on that, I say.