I think the people who complied the list need to really, really examine their bias.
I cannot believe that 70% of books are written by men. I'd guess the ratio is more like 60f/40m although that may just be my reading habits.
Assuming that it is a 50/50 split in gender, the odds of the entire list being male by chance are 1 in 1024. Obviously a best books list is based on skill, not chance but the numbers suggest a flat out bias. #booklists
This is just ... so obvious to me. Why does it never occur to these supposedly top-of-the-food-chain-esque literary critics that the very foundation of their critical methodology -- as well as the pedagogy which shapes the methodology -- is informed by these very same prejudices?
I mean, duh. You go to the Oxford University reading list and, year after year, you see the very same 18th and 19th English authors held up as classics.
Dusty, musty, rusty, fusty. Never a difference. Nothing from Asia. Nothing from Africa. Nothing from Iceland. Or Norway. Nothing from the 20th damn century, even.
The only conclusion I can come to is that they get it and just don't give a damn. Which, as far as I'm concerned, is even more of a reason to just completely invalidate their "lists."
Just -- don't designate your critiques the mostest wellest-informedest of the well-informed the next time if you can't see past your own noses, Cri-Tee-Kays, okay?
Wolf Hall, written by Hilary Mantel, won this year's Booker Prize. The Children's Book, by AS Byatt, and The Little Stranger, by Sarah Waters, were short-listed. I'm not saying that the Booker Prize is the authority on the best books (especially as it is self selecting to Commonwealth nations), nor that all readers have the same tastes, but it is seen as reputable book list. It found plenty of women writers, what was Publisher's Weekly's problem? #booklists
@TheGintheCity: I'm glad to hear it. I love her writing as well. I picked it up from the library but it was a 14 day book and I knew it would take me longer to tackle it (Possession beat me up the first time I read it). #booklists
@hfree: I'm finding this easier than Possession. Rather than long passages of poetry to muddle through, this one has eerie, creepy, awesome fairy tales. #booklists
@hfree: That's exactly what I was going to say. Of course, the Booker is only the most prestigious book award in the world, so what do they know? #booklists
"What we like" is always going to have biases. It's about personal taste and judgment. It's really stupid to try to deny that, and pretty insulting to suggest that "what we like" is definitively THE GREATEST and THE BEST.
Talking about how they "ignored gender and genre" reminds me of the discussion around Justice Sotomayor, when she dared mention that her race and gender had an effect on her world view. What they almost certainly mean by that is that they didn't give special consideration to female authors nor did they attempt to set up a quota system for books within different genres. What they almost certainly DIDN'T do was question whether their gender or race or class played a part in what books they chose to read in the first place, whether they undervalued certain genres because of personal biases, etc. etc. "Ignoring gender and genre" and attempting to construct a fair list for both men and women? Those are not the same things. #booklists
I don't know, I've only read one book the PW list (Dan Chaon's, which I thought was brilliant), so I can't really speak to quality of the books on this list. In general top 10 lists seem pretty arbitrary, and aren't something I look to when trying to find books to read.
@applejuice: ...And then we scroll to the comments and the honeymoon is OVER.
"I love women and have tried all my life to read their novels but I finally gave up this year.
I am 78 and read only classic lit. Have read about half of the commonly accepted "greatest novels of all time"
Women just don't write like men. They write for other women.
They try too hard and they are too structured, too perfect in thier grammer and formatting etc. The avergae length of a sentence in all the women's novels written in the past 100 years is approximately 17 words.
The average length of a male writer in the same time frame is 28 words."
And it only took two comments to make me throw up my hands in disgust! #booklists
@Zombie Ms. Skittles: "They write for other women."
To which I say,"Whatever, dude. Since more women than men read books, if you say this like it's a bad thing, feel free to imperiously opine yourself right out of a job, there, windbag."
*massive eyeroll* #booklists
PW is increasingly irrelevant in today's publishing world--they've been overtaken by smarter, nimbler, more thoughtful on-line publications like Publisher's Lunch and Galleycat.
Laura Miller is 1000% right when she says that the list is just proof of how narrow PW's editors' horizons really are. It's pretty amazing, since women constitute a significant majority of book buyers, editors and publishers. #booklists
Sarah Palin's book isn't even out yet so I don't understand how this list can possibly be complete. I can tell you right now, come November 17 this list will read:
Yay yay yay!
I've been reading this list for awhile now...down to the last 20 or so.
There are some truly amazing books on this list....Native Son, Invisible Man, Lord of the Rings, The World According to Garp, The Naked and the Dead...LOVED them....
So excited to see you posted this!
I'm stunned at some of the books on the list. Winnie the Pooh is the one that really stumps me. Being in the media, I get a lot of phone calls from people demanding we take a stand against certain books and getting upset when I tell them if we do, it would be on the other side - we newspaper people want MORE people reading, not fewer. But any controversial subject (sex, violence, religion or lack of it, witchcraft, magic, the supernatural, rebellion against authority figures, the general angst that goes with adolescence) will do it, but who objects to Pooh Bear? Because he's gluttonous?
It's too bad no one objects to the books that are REALLY offensive, like Glenn Beck's book. But I guess that just means people who truly love books and understand the point of reading them also understand even the stupidest books shouldn't be burned.
The school bookstore here always has a display of books to buy that are frequently challenged or banned. I bought "A Wrinkle in Time", as well as the other books as part of a boxed set.
Why was this book challenged? Interestingly, for two very opposite reasons. The first, the "obvious witchcraft" (where was that exactly?) and use of the Medium--unsurprisingly, this challenge started in my home county. The other reason it was challenged was because they listed Jesus as a hero who, along with others, fought the darkness invading this world.
It reminds me of a Rorschach test--you see in the book whatever you want to see. You're heightened to religion? Boom, you'll see anti-Christian themes. Or, in other cases, a mention of Jesus as a hero becomes offensive. Of course, this is not how most people operate, but generally people who want something to rail against will usually be able to find their reason, however illogical it may seem to everyone else.
11/06/09
I cannot believe that 70% of books are written by men. I'd guess the ratio is more like 60f/40m although that may just be my reading habits.
Assuming that it is a 50/50 split in gender, the odds of the entire list being male by chance are 1 in 1024. Obviously a best books list is based on skill, not chance but the numbers suggest a flat out bias. #booklists
11/06/09
I mean, duh. You go to the Oxford University reading list and, year after year, you see the very same 18th and 19th English authors held up as classics.
Dusty, musty, rusty, fusty. Never a difference. Nothing from Asia. Nothing from Africa. Nothing from Iceland. Or Norway. Nothing from the 20th damn century, even.
The only conclusion I can come to is that they get it and just don't give a damn. Which, as far as I'm concerned, is even more of a reason to just completely invalidate their "lists."
Just -- don't designate your critiques the mostest wellest-informedest of the well-informed the next time if you can't see past your own noses, Cri-Tee-Kays, okay?
/mini-rant #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
Talking about how they "ignored gender and genre" reminds me of the discussion around Justice Sotomayor, when she dared mention that her race and gender had an effect on her world view. What they almost certainly mean by that is that they didn't give special consideration to female authors nor did they attempt to set up a quota system for books within different genres. What they almost certainly DIDN'T do was question whether their gender or race or class played a part in what books they chose to read in the first place, whether they undervalued certain genres because of personal biases, etc. etc. "Ignoring gender and genre" and attempting to construct a fair list for both men and women? Those are not the same things. #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
"I love women and have tried all my life to read their novels but I finally gave up this year.
I am 78 and read only classic lit. Have read about half of the commonly accepted "greatest novels of all time"
Women just don't write like men. They write for other women.
They try too hard and they are too structured, too perfect in thier grammer and formatting etc. The avergae length of a sentence in all the women's novels written in the past 100 years is approximately 17 words.
The average length of a male writer in the same time frame is 28 words."
And it only took two comments to make me throw up my hands in disgust! #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
To which I say,"Whatever, dude. Since more women than men read books, if you say this like it's a bad thing, feel free to imperiously opine yourself right out of a job, there, windbag."
*massive eyeroll* #booklists
11/06/09
Laura Miller is 1000% right when she says that the list is just proof of how narrow PW's editors' horizons really are. It's pretty amazing, since women constitute a significant majority of book buyers, editors and publishers. #booklists
11/06/09
NPR's series where they ask an author to choose three books within a particular genre or theme is great. #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
1. Going Rogue
2. Going Rogue
3. Going Rogue
4. Going Rogue
5. Going Rogue
6. Going Rogue
7. Going Rogue
8. Something by Dan Brown
9. Going Rogue
10. Going Rogue #booklists
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
09/28/09
09/28/09
I've been reading this list for awhile now...down to the last 20 or so.
There are some truly amazing books on this list....Native Son, Invisible Man, Lord of the Rings, The World According to Garp, The Naked and the Dead...LOVED them....
So excited to see you posted this!
Actually this list...
[www.ala.org]
09/27/09
It's too bad no one objects to the books that are REALLY offensive, like Glenn Beck's book. But I guess that just means people who truly love books and understand the point of reading them also understand even the stupidest books shouldn't be burned.
09/27/09
Why was this book challenged? Interestingly, for two very opposite reasons. The first, the "obvious witchcraft" (where was that exactly?) and use of the Medium--unsurprisingly, this challenge started in my home county. The other reason it was challenged was because they listed Jesus as a hero who, along with others, fought the darkness invading this world.
It reminds me of a Rorschach test--you see in the book whatever you want to see. You're heightened to religion? Boom, you'll see anti-Christian themes. Or, in other cases, a mention of Jesus as a hero becomes offensive. Of course, this is not how most people operate, but generally people who want something to rail against will usually be able to find their reason, however illogical it may seem to everyone else.