SolKane said:I'm surprised LOTR beat the Bible, for once.
i laughed way too hard at this.
SolKane said:I'm surprised LOTR beat the Bible, for once.
Yes it does. Such a brilliant series.ZephyrFate said:The Hyperion Cantos deserves to be in the top 10.
I like Endymion a bit more than the first I think.Tapiozona said:Lord of the Rings is too high. It's obviously riding the movie success. Great books sure, but best all time? Not even remotely close. The story is rather blah if you really think about it. ASOIAF is far far better plot/character development and actually has real plot twists.
I'd move Hyperion up much higher as well. First book was a masterpeice and the second was fantastic in its own right. (I'd say 3rd and 4th too but I'd loose a lot of credibility by doing so).
Perdido had a lot of interesting ideas and a really flat execution. It needed about three passes by an editor and it could have left out a good 2-300 pages.Sirpopopop said:Bullshit.
It should be much higher, if anything.
MUCH HIGHER.
I can't get over the strong Communist influence of that book. I tried... but it's that and just how fucking weird it is that I can't get into it.The_Technomancer said:Perdido had a lot of interesting ideas and a really flat execution. It needed about three passes by an editor and it could have left out a good 2-300 pages.
markot said:I dont think Orwell belongs there at all >_<
They werent what I would call sci fi or fantasy...
One of my favourite lines in all of fiction.Alpha-Bromega said:dystopian futures are pretty sci fi, 451 is on that list.
ALSO
Anyone else relieved to see Neuromancer so high? it's what i ctrl f'd first
"the sky was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel"
xbhaskarx said:Crap-lousy list, ratbrain!
The_Technomancer said:Perdido had a lot of interesting ideas and a really flat execution. It needed about three passes by an editor and it could have left out a good 2-300 pages.
I might be shooting myself in the foot here, but 1984 is surprisingly not as mindblowing as its hype makes it out to be. The concept is golden, and bears repeating in an age of increasing censorship... but the book itself has really, really wonky pacing. Its imagery is often deliberately obtuse, and I don't like the ending.Misanthropy said:ASOFAI higher than 1984?
nope.jpg
Pretty much this. While Sir Terry's work can be read standalone, (especially Small Gods and Going Postal, maybe that's why they made the cut?) Discworld works best as a whole. Very few authors can pull off a constantly evolving and developing world, ESPECIALLY in fantasy where everyone is so in love with the idea of a stagnant setting. Agree about Nightwatch, but it's definitely one of those novels where you wouldn't get the same out of it without reading the previous novels. That for me should be the criteria for listing a series instead of just one work. Discworld always get screwed over in lists like these though, just because everyone voting will have a different favorite novel from the series.Gaborn said:I'm more or less ok with this list (not because I wholly agree with it but because everyone is entitled to their opinion), however I do have one significant objection. Considering the signifigant number of SERIES represented {Shannara, the Dark Tower, WoT, ASOIAF, LOTR... etc etc etc etc) I see little reason to merely single out two exceptional books (Small Gods and Going Postal) from what is, in it's totality the better known (and overall excellent) series of Discworld. I voice this objection ESPECIALLY since Xanth made it as a series not as any slight on Piers Anthony except to the extent that I would consider Discworld a considerably stronger work with a more dedicated following. Also, for the record although I do not wish to remove either of those works (or rank them in any way) I consider Nightwatch to be Sir Terry's strongest Discworld book, not the two represented. Personally however I would rather have Discworld as a whole ranked rather than treated piecemeal as the list does.
I've read the book you don't have to tell me what it's like. Orwell's book aren't the best written out there, just like how James Joyce isn't that popular with people because of the stream-of-consciousness writing, but would you place that above Ulysses as well? The writing style isn't supposed to be the only factor in what makes a good book. The concept is by far greater than the style. Also, I might be attracting the fanboys to kill me right now but at least it doesn't take Orwell like 5000 pages and over 20 years to get a concept through. (jumps into bunker).ZephyrFate said:I might be shooting myself in the foot here, but 1984 is surprisingly not as mindblowing as its hype makes it out to be. The concept is golden, and bears repeating in an age of increasing censorship... but the book itself has really, really wonky pacing. Its imagery is often deliberately obtuse.
There's a difference, though. ASOIAF is an epic fantasy series with a scope many, many times larger than 1984's. The plot of 1984 itself takes place in a very small world overall, with several condensed scenes and not a ton of action. The writing style is fine, the way it is expressed is off. Writing style is very important to me when it comes to judging books within not only the context of their time but against established canon. Heart of Darkness, a novel of similarly short length, comes off being written MUCH, MUCH better than 1984.Misanthropy said:I've read the book you don't have to tell me what it's like. Orwell's book aren't the best written out there, just like how James Joyce isn't that popular with people because of the stream-of-consciousness writing, but would you place that above Ulysses as well? The writing style isn't supposed to be the only factor in what makes a good book. The concept is by far greater than the style. Also, I might be attracting the fanboys to kill me right now but at least it doesn't take Orwell like 5000 pages and over 20 years to get a concept through. (jumps into bunker).
Action + Scope =/= Good bookZephyrFate said:There's a difference, though. ASOIAF is an epic fantasy series with a scope many, many times larger than 1984's. The plot of 1984 itself takes place in a very small world overall, with several condensed scenes and not a ton of action.
If GRRM wrote like Orwell, ASOIAF would have only been one novel that takes place in exactly three areas with little action.
Books don't work in such a black and white fashion. I'm not acting on them, either. You are the one who used page length + time as some sort of justification for ASOIAF being worse. Why you're even comparing the two is beyond me. Apples and durian fruits.Misanthropy said:Action + Scope =/= Good book
Condensed + 0.01*Action =/= Bad book
SolKane said:I'm surprised LOTR beat the Bible, for once.
Pau said:Came to post this. Ursula K. LeGuin's fantasy books are some of the few fantasy novels that actually feel like old folktales or legends that have survived through the ages. Definitely my favorite fantasy series, along with Discworld.
Glad to see The Last Unicorn. Absolutely beautiful book that most people will look over thinking it's simply a children's novel.
A Wizard of Earthsea (1968)Mumei said:What is the appropriate order in which to read them? The Earthsea books, that is.
A Wizard of EarthseaMumei said:What is the appropriate order in which to read them? The Earthsea books, that is.
It's the most boring book I've ever read. Don't.Ashes1396 said:Always meant to read 'The Silmarillion.'
The idea that Ender's Game is beter than Dune is one that Orson himself would laugh at. Ender is awesome in it's own way, but as different from Dune as Potter is from Lord of the Rings.GillianSeed79 said:Just happy that Dune is in the top 10. Enders Game must be amazing if it beat out Herbert. It just saddens me that no one has read The Jesus Incident, Lazarus Effect or Ascension Factor. It's like no one bothered to read anything else by Herbert.
Also, is No. 21 still in print? I searched for that for years in the pre-internet days and could never find a copy.
Mumei said:What is the appropriate order in which to read them? The Earthsea books, that is.
That's another thing I totally missed. When did Ender's Game become even close to Dune? Dune is in a whole 'nother STRATOSPHERE compared to any other sci-fi series.GillianSeed79 said:Just happy that Dune is in the top 10. Enders Game must be amazing if it beat out Herbert. It just saddens me that no one has read The Jesus Incident, Lazarus Effect or Ascension Factor. It's like no one bothered to read anything else by Herbert.
Also, is No. 21 still in print? I searched for that for years in the pre-internet days and could never find a copy.
GillianSeed79 said:Enders Game must be amazing if it beat out Herbert.
Well, I did.GillianSeed79 said:Just happy that Dune is in the top 10. Enders Game must be amazing if it beat out Herbert. It just saddens me that no one has read The Jesus Incident, Lazarus Effect or Ascension Factor. It's like no one bothered to read anything else by Herbert.
ZephyrFate said:Nah you wouldn't. Go for it. Endymion and The Rise of Endymion are incredible books.
Dresden said:The Scar > Dune
Did you make sure to speak the language of the living and the dead, and hear the music of the spheres?Tapiozona said:Endymion and more so, The Rise of Endymion, are better books than the first two books in the Hyperion Cantos.
There I said it. I appreciate the support.
You can skip books 8~12 with no trouble. Wiki them.rando14 said:Question for Wheel of Time readers who are up to date with the series: could I legitimately skip a couple of the crappy slow books without being hopelessly lost?