Top 100 SF /Fantasy works

[pendell]

According to NPR (http://www.npr.org/2011/08/11/139085843/your-picks-top-100-science-fiction-fantasy-books).

*My * favorite book -- Mote in God's Eye -- clocks in at #61 on the list. Glad to see Terry Pratchett has several entries. Am somewhat surprised Rowling isn't on any of the lists even though Lewis and Ursula K. Le Guin are.

Tolkien hits the top of the charts. I suppose it's too mainstream to be geeky any more, what with the motion pictures and #1 on the list et al.

And I'm surprised and gratified to see that some of the Star Wars novels -- specifically, Zahn's Thrawn Trilogy -- made the list.

I guess that settles ONE thing, though. Note that Star Trek isn't anywhere on the list, but Star Wars is. So clearly Star Wars beats Star Trek where it counts :).

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Axolotl]

Fairly good list overall, nice to see Sandman getting the love it deserves. A few minor things I'd move (Fahrenheit 451 should be lower, the Culture series deserves to be higher) but the main thing that stands out is why the Discworld books were listed seperately when other series were counted as one entry. Seing Star Wars on the list surprised me but I haven't read it so I can't judge.

The big thing that really shouldn't be there is The Sword of Truth, it doesn't belong on the list at all but at 62? Above other fantasy series including Elric, Conan, Malazan and The Book of the New Sun? No, just no.

[Tyndmyr]

I am pedantically annoyed that they count an entire series as one entry, making it something like three hundred and change books.

If I only count things I recall reading the entire series/book of, I'm 50/100 for that list. A lot of the misses are intentional, though.

Edit: Also, Dresden Files should be on there instead of Codex Alera. The Codex series is alright, but it's not even close.

[McStabbington]

Would probably move a few things around (Watchmen and the Zahn trilogy should be higher, for instance; the Drizzt Do'urden saga and Martin's series lower), but overall I think that's a pretty fair list. It included works like the Zahn trilogy that I think should fairly be included in any such list but usually aren't, and it left off some works that often are but really shouldn't be.

Admittedly, I'm not a superfan of the genre, and I've noticed that plays a significant role in whether you accept a listing like this or not. I still have ugly memories of AFI's Top Westerns, for instance. . .

[Joran]

Just a couple of clarifications.

This is a top 100 SF/Fantasy works as voted on by the public. So, this is a fan poll, albeit through NPR.

Second, this list excludes Young Adult or Youth Fiction. That's why there's no Harry Potter, no Wrinkle in Time.

I've read 12 of the top 15 and I'm working on Neuromancer at the moment.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

I've only read 21 of those... I did much better on IMDb's top 100 movie list, I got closer to 40 of those...

[Dienekes]

Why is the Sword of Truth on this list? Really? People voted for it? Ughhh.

Anyway decent enough list. I'm not sure on the numbering of some of the books but mostly I'm just happy some personal favorites got noticed at all.

[Elder Tsofu]

but the main thing that stands out is why the Discworld books were listed seperately when other series were counted as one entry.

It might be because the Discworld is more like an setting than a series, each novel being on its "own" (or in different more or less official and chronologically intertwining mini-series, like the Rincewind series, the watch series, the death series). They listed "the Belgariad" independently of "the Malloreon" and the same with "the sword of Shannara triologies" and its 3 (-5?) other trilogies to name a few.

[Axolotl]

It might be because the Discworld is more like an setting than a series, each novel being on its "own" (or in different more or less official and chronologically intertwining mini-series, like the Rincewind series, the watch series, the death series). They listed "the Belgariad" independently of "the Malloreon" and the same with "the sword of Shannara triologies" and its 3 (-5?) other trilogies to name a few.But they're much more connected than say the culture novels, but the culture is liosted as a series while Diskworld are treatred individually.

[Serpentine]

I think I'm going to print off that list and take it to the library where I work.

[H Birchgrove]

I'm trying to not judge the people who have voted, but I get a bit sad that no Eastern European (R.U.R., War with the Newts, Solaris, Aelita, Roadside Picnic, Noon Universe series, etc), Latin American (the whole Magical Realism genre), Asian (Cat Country, Japan Sinks etc), Australian (On the Beach, John Grimes series etc) or African books have been mentioned. :smallfrown:

(Then again, I don't know any African SF or Fantasy novels, unless you count the works by John Buchan and J.R.R. Tolkien as South African.)

[Dr.Epic]

Well, they got the number one spot right.:smallwink:

Kind of shocked Sword of Truth did.

[Elder Tsofu]

But they're much more connected than say the culture novels, but the culture is liosted as a series while Diskworld are treatred individually.

Maybe they just don't know what they're doing? :smallwink:
Haven't read culture so I can't really comment on it.

[Joran]

I'm trying to not judge the people who have voted, but I get a bit sad that no Eastern European (R.U.R., War with the Newts, Solaris, Aelita, Roadside Picnic, Noon Universe series, etc), Latin American (the whole Magical Realism genre), Asian (Cat Country, Japan Sinks etc), Australian (On the Beach, John Grimes series etc) or African books have been mentioned. :smallfrown:

(Then again, I don't know any African SF or Fantasy novels, unless you count the works by John Buchan and J.R.R. Tolkien as South African.)

Considering it's NPR, it's mostly Americans, so judge away. We're very provincial and anything that's not originally printed in English is unknown to us.

We do love our Brits though.

P.S. I thought R.U.R. was a play and thus ineligible.

[Weezer]

Apparently I've read 77 of the top 100, I had no idea I was so well versed in the top sci fi/fantasy.

All in all I must say it's a great list, none of my favorites stand out as missing which is unusual in this kind of list.

[sihnfahl]

Just a few missing...

Where in the world is the Black Cauldron!? Or The Stars My Destination?

[Weezer]

Just a few missing...

Where in the world is the Black Cauldron!? Or The Stars My Destination?

I'd assume black cauldron falls under Young Adult/Children's and is thus disqualified. Never heard of the second though...

[Axolotl]

Or The Stars My Destination?Hery they gotta make room for Goodkind.

That is one of the books that stands out as being absent from the list, it really shoud be there.

[H Birchgrove]

Considering it's NPR, it's mostly Americans, so judge away. We're very provincial and anything that's not originally printed in English is unknown to us.

I feel the same with Swedes and crime fiction.


We do love our Brits though.

Who doesn't? :smallsmile:


P.S. I thought R.U.R. was a play and thus ineligible.

Good point. War with the Newts is a great read though, and The Absolute at Large seems downright hysterical (in a good way).

[Bouregard]

According to NPR (http://www.npr.org/2011/08/11/139085843/your-picks-top-100-science-fiction-fantasy-books).

*My * favorite book -- Mote in God's Eye -- clocks in at #61 on the list. Glad to see Terry Pratchett has several entries. Am somewhat surprised Rowling isn't on any of the lists even though Lewis and Ursula K. Le Guin are.

Tolkien hits the top of the charts. I suppose it's too mainstream to be geeky any more, what with the motion pictures and #1 on the list et al.

And I'm surprised and gratified to see that some of the Star Wars novels -- specifically, Zahn's Thrawn Trilogy -- made the list.

I guess that settles ONE thing, though. Note that Star Trek isn't anywhere on the list, but Star Wars is. So clearly Star Wars beats Star Trek where it counts :).

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Looks like a good shopping list to me if I'm in need of a good book again.
However I kinda miss a bunch of Terry Pratchetts books in the first 20 entries.

And "Soon I will be invincible" should be somewhere...

[sihnfahl]

Never heard of the second though...
Highly recommend looking it up. While it is over 50 years old, it is ... really good speculative fiction.

[Klose_the_Sith]

Pretty good list, but I wish that there'd be one or more things like this with the guts to put LotR in the good-but-not-great position it deserves. Number one for Tolkien is just a joke :smallsigh:

[Velaryon]

Pretty good list, but I wish that there'd be one or more things like this with the guts to put LotR in the good-but-not-great position it deserves. Number one for Tolkien is just a joke :smallsigh:

I feel this way as well. The Lord of the Rings is a good story, and very important and influential and all that, but it's not the best. Top 10? Sure. Maybe even top 5. But not #1.

[toasty]

I feel this way as well. The Lord of the Rings is a good story, and very important and influential and all that, but it's not the best. Top 10? Sure. Maybe even top 5. But not #1.

Lord of the Ring is, at least its perceived as, THE Novel, that created Modern Fantasy. Maybe other authors helped, but Tolkien was the guy that cemented the deal. It was a hit when it was published, always popular since then, and then was made into what I think is three of the greatest blockbuster movies of all time very recently. No matter the quality of the actual writing, with that kind of fame its hard for it NOT to be the #1 book. I'd rate it up there as one of the greatest books of all time (but I'm biased).

Malazan SHOULD NOT be #81, its really damn good, its at least top 25 in my opinion.

[Greensleeves]

It's fairly obvious the list is a popularity list and not a actual list of quality (sorry, The Belgariad and Legend of Drizzt, for example, aren't terribly good works, from a literary point of view, even if they're fun to read) and I do have some complaints about some of the choices. 1984? Animal Farm? Not really fantasy or sci-fi. Brave New World I can accept to a larger extent, but calling it sci-fi is still pushing it, in my mind.

I am glad to see that Asimov got a fairly high place and I'm also very glad to see Brandon Sanderson on the list, twice even.

[Traab]

Surprised there was no mention of His Dark Materials. Nice series, if a bit heavy handed with the "subtext" Also, I loved the riftwar saga by feist. I was an even bigger fan of the Serpentwar Saga though. Same world, a generation in the future. A group of "desperate men" are given the options. Be hung for your crimes against the kingdom, or train for an expedition to the other side of the world to infiltrate an army that is bent on world conquest. AMAZING stuff imo.


It's fairly obvious the list is a popularity list and not a actual list of quality (sorry, The Belgariad and Legend of Drizzt, for example, aren't terribly good works, from a literary point of view, even if they're fun to read) and I do have some complaints about some of the choices. 1984? Animal Farm? Not really fantasy or sci-fi. Brave New World I can accept to a larger extent, but calling it sci-fi is still pushing it, in my mind.

I am glad to see that Asimov got a fairly high place and I'm also very glad to see Brandon Sanderson on the list, twice even.

Now here I have to disagree. I mean, yes, this was obviously meant as a popularity list, but how is that wrong? These are the top 100 most enjoyed titles in the genre. I LOVE belgariad. Its like a freaking classic style of story, and one of the series that really got me into fantasy novels. I still reread that and all eddings other books constantly. (Just finished reading redemption of althaus for the 20th time, lol) My only complaint about drizzt was that it just kept going and going and going. I think I stopped at the 35th book in the never ending series. It got so formulaic and repetitive feeling to me that I just couldnt bring myself to keep reading. But I loved the first 6 books.

[The_Snark]

It's fairly obvious the list is a popularity list and not a actual list of quality (sorry, The Belgariad and Legend of Drizzt, for example, aren't terribly good works, from a literary point of view, even if they're fun to read) and I do have some complaints about some of the choices. 1984? Animal Farm? Not really fantasy or sci-fi. Brave New World I can accept to a larger extent, but calling it sci-fi is still pushing it, in my mind.

Animal Farm is a little strange, though you could make the argument that it's an allegorical fantasy (even if the only fantasy element is the presence of talking animals). But I'm surprised to see you questioning that 1984 and Brave New World are science fiction. The former focuses more on social change than technology, but linguistics and psychology are still scientific fields. The latter is, to me, one of the quintessential examples of science fiction.

Out of curiosity, what defines science fiction to you?

[Kindablue]

Hyperion, The Illustrated Man and The Mote in God's Eye all should've been much higher, but I agree with a lot of that list.

[NikitaDarkstar]

Malazan SHOULD NOT be #81, its really damn good, its at least top 25 in my opinion.

I agree with you there. But lets face it, this is a popularity list and the Malazan book of the Fallen is not nearly as well known as A song of Fire and Ice and is to massive and confusing for A LOT of people, so when people get to vote.. well it's amazing it made it into a top 100 list at all.
My personal opinion is it deserves to be in the top 20's at least.

And now I got my xmas wishlist done. I just need to scratch out the books I've already read. :)

[turkishproverb]

I'm trying to not judge the people who have voted, but I get a bit sad that no Eastern European (R.U.R., War with the Newts, Solaris, Aelita, Roadside Picnic, Noon Universe series, etc), Latin American (the whole Magical Realism genre), Asian (Cat Country, Japan Sinks etc), Australian (On the Beach, John Grimes series etc) or African books have been mentioned. :smallfrown:

(Then again, I don't know any African SF or Fantasy novels, unless you count the works by John Buchan and J.R.R. Tolkien as South African.)

Well, part of that is because it's a popular opinion poll, and part of it is because the snootier academics consider "magical realism" to be something different and "better" than fantasy. Usually using it as a term to label any fantasy they don't want to treat like crap.

[Joran]

Surprised there was no mention of His Dark Materials. Nice series, if a bit heavy handed with the "subtext".

Filed under Youth Fiction, just like the Chronicles of Narnia.



Animal Farm is a little strange, though you could make the argument that it's an allegorical fantasy (even if the only fantasy element is the presence of talking animals). But I'm surprised to see you questioning that 1984 and Brave New World are science fiction. The former focuses more on social change than technology, but linguistics and psychology are still scientific fields. The latter is, to me, one of the quintessential examples of science fiction.

I wouldn't define Animal Farm as science fiction or fantasy. Otherwise, I need to consider Maus or Charlotte's Web as fantasy.

I don't remember anything in 1984 that I would consider sci-fi or fantasy. It didn't really stretch beyond what was possible in George Orwell's time. No tech that I can recall, no supernatural effects. The setting felt like it took place with alternate history (or future events), but nothing marked it as notably different mechanics-wise from our current world.

Brave New World is one of my favorite science fiction novels and obviously science fiction. I'm also much more scared of the world of Brave New World than 1984 or Animal Farm.

P.S. What do people think about alternative history being a subset of science fiction? I just finished the Yiddish Policemen's Union by Michael Chabon and it won the 2009 Hugo Award for best novel. However, reading through it, it didn't feel at all like fantasy nor did it feel like science fiction; it seemed grounded in the present day except in a alternate history.

P.P.S. I don't always like to argue, but when I do, I prefer arguing semantics (or taxonomy)

[turkishproverb]

I don't remember anything in 1984 that I would consider sci-fi or fantasy. It didn't really stretch beyond what was possible in George Orwell's time. No tech that I can recall, no supernatural effects. The setting felt like it took place with alternate history (or future events), but nothing marked it as notably different mechanics-wise from our current world.


Well, the monitoring tech was more than a bit ahead of it's time. Particularly in it's speed of response to reception (IE, the toe touching incident)

[factotum]

Surprised to see Stephen King's Dark Tower series on there...read the first book and really didn't think much of it myself. I'll have to look through the whole list when I've got time and figure out how many others I've read!

[Vonwalt]

On the subject of the discworld ones being one category: Really, although Prachett's stuff mostly takes place in the same universe, there's just so much of it and it takes so many different shapes that one would be hard pressed to compare, for example, The Amazing Maurice with Feet of Clay. Or, in the case of this list, Small Gods with Going Postal.

[Vonwalt]

Surprised to see Stephen King's Dark Tower series on there...read the first book and really didn't think much of it myself. I'll have to look through the whole list when I've got time and figure out how many others I've read!

According to my friend, who I shall refer to here as Stevedave, it gets considerably better and more fantastical as it goes on.

[Tirian]

The young adult distinction is a pretty flimsy one. I just picked up Ender's Game for the first time earlier in the week, and it was sorted in YA as it should be. It's about nothing but rotten ways to raise children for great justice. I'm also not sure that I agree that the Arthurian legends are fantasy, especially not at least two the three stories that made the list which primarily focused on the mundane relationships.

Mostly, I think that there are a LOT more than 99 stories out there better than Lewis' Space Trilogy. I won't deny that Out of the Silent Planet is a strong story, but the quality drops off a cliff two chapters into the second book and starts digging lower the moment it hits rock bottom. But, hey, no list is perfect and you'll keep busy reading through a lot of great stuff in this list.

[turkishproverb]

According to my friend, who I shall refer to here as Stevedave, it gets considerably better and more fantastical as it goes on.

It downright goes to crap at #5. 1-4 are the good ones, at least comparatively.

[H Birchgrove]

Well, part of that is because it's a popular opinion poll, and part of it is because the snootier academics consider "magical realism" to be something different and "better" than fantasy. Usually using it as a term to label any fantasy they don't want to treat like crap.

I hate that type of snobbery. :smallannoyed:

BTW, I don't mind seeing Aesop's Fables, The Revolt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C5%82adys%C5%82aw_Reymont#Revolt), Animal Farm, Charlotte's Web, some of Richard Adams' fiction, etc as fantasy, since the animals really are talking/intelligent animals in their respective setting.

Maus, however, can not be seen as fantasy since the anthros aren't being animals; they are humans drawn as anthros.

[Serpentine]

I'm also not sure that I agree that the Arthurian legends are fantasyWhat else would you call them? They're certainly not historical fiction...

[Greensleeves]

Now here I have to disagree. I mean, yes, this was obviously meant as a popularity list, but how is that wrong? These are the top 100 most enjoyed titles in the genre. I LOVE belgariad. Its like a freaking classic style of story, and one of the series that really got me into fantasy novels. I still reread that and all eddings other books constantly. (Just finished reading redemption of althaus for the 20th time, lol) My only complaint about drizzt was that it just kept going and going and going. I think I stopped at the 35th book in the never ending series. It got so formulaic and repetitive feeling to me that I just couldnt bring myself to keep reading. But I loved the first 6 books.

I never said I didn't like them. I've probably read the Belgariad 10-15 times, and I've always enjoyed it. Same thing with The Legend of Drizzt. I read the first 18-20 books and enjoyed them, but I do agree with your assessment of the series.

However, I'd be kidding myself if I called it high literature or books with a high literary value on the scale of, say, Shakespeare, Mary Shelley, or Joyce. But they're not supposed to be either, and I don't fault them for not being highly literary works.


Animal Farm is a little strange, though you could make the argument that it's an allegorical fantasy (even if the only fantasy element is the presence of talking animals). But I'm surprised to see you questioning that 1984 and Brave New World are science fiction. The former focuses more on social change than technology, but linguistics and psychology are still scientific fields. The latter is, to me, one of the quintessential examples of science fiction.

Out of curiosity, what defines science fiction to you?

As Joran said, the only really sci-fi element of 1984 are the two-way screens. I'd call it social commentary, not sci-fi.

Brave New World I can accept to a larger extent, as I said, but I don't know. Calling it sci-fi just doesn't really feel right, even though it is just as much as a sci-fi as Fahrenheit 451, if not more.

I don't know, I'm probably just rambling and going with an incorrect gut feeling anyway. :smallwink:

[H Birchgrove]

Utopian and dystopian tales are generally considered to be Social Science Fiction.

[factotum]

As Joran said, the only really sci-fi element of 1984 are the two-way screens. I'd call it social commentary, not sci-fi.


It was science fiction by the standards of the world of 1948, when it was written, just like Verne's work and Frankenstein--it doesn't stop being SF just because science has overtaken it!

[Eldan]

Heh. That makes me think of dark age science fiction.

"In the strange world of the 16th century... books will come from presses, and no one will need monks anymore! Men will walk around clad in suits of metal, and use tubes to spit metal projectiles at each other!"

[hamishspence]

Some older science fiction is even more ambitious than that:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_science_fiction

[Kato]

My one major complaint on the list is the treatment of Prattchet's works. Two seperate entries in rather low slots? Blasphemy! :smallmad:

But otherwise... well, I guess it is popularity... thing is. LotR was, all argument on quality aside, a, if not the, defining work for fantasy. I guess you gotta give it credit for that. I haven't read too much on the list to be honest but I guess nothing there is horrible (as I have read very little horrible fiction unless forced in school)

[Tirian]

What else would you call them? They're certainly not historical fiction...

The Crystal Cave is no more "fantastic" than Shogun. The very point of the book is that Merlin is just a smart guy and it only seems like magic because it happened in the Dark Ages and people were too stupid to recognize good sense.

It's also a really good series of books, so I don't want to get weighed down in why I wonder why it's on the list.

[Traab]

Im actually surprised his dark materials is considered young adult, its kind of a dark series imo. But then, the wrinkle in time series is also young adult and its got people trying to avert nuclear holocausts. :p Id have put animal farm in young adult myself, they even admit its standard reading for 9th graders. So that means its main new audience are 13 year olds. Isnt that within the young adult range?

[Serpentine]

The Crystal Cave is no more "fantastic" than Shogun. The very point of the book is that Merlin is just a smart guy and it only seems like magic because it happened in the Dark Ages and people were too stupid to recognize good sense.Eeeeh. It's still just a retelling of a very old mythology.

I'm really curious to see their Young Adult list. I'll be surprised and disappointed if there's not a bunch of Australian books on it... And especially if Tamora Pierce isn't on it.

[Axolotl]

Looking back over the list there's several things that are missing that really belong. For a start The Stars my Destination as mentioned earlier should be on the list. As well things like Gormenghast, Star Maker, The Man in the High Castle, Roadside Picnic, Lord of Light and We. It also lacks any books by Jack Vance, Brian Aldiss, John Wyndham, JG Ballard and Poul Anderson.

aIt's not a bad list and it's got alot of good stuff on it but it's just surpirsing some of the things that are missing given what did make it onto the list. I'm guessing it's mainly down to more modern works being better known but it still stands out to me.

[Tyndmyr]

Well, they got the number one spot right.:smallwink:

Kind of shocked Sword of Truth did.

I'd argue that. LOTR deserves a spot somewhere on the list because of it's huge influence on fantasy, sure. However, it is certainly not the best of sci fi and fantasy.

Hell, the Silmarillion shouldn't have been there at all. It's a terrible read.

[Eldan]

Hell, the Silmarillion shouldn't have been there at all. It's a terrible read.

Speak for yourself. I loved it.

[Greensleeves]

I'd argue that. LOTR deserves a spot somewhere on the list because of it's huge influence on fantasy, sure. However, it is certainly not the best of sci fi and fantasy.

Hell, the Silmarillion shouldn't have been there at all. It's a terrible read.

I actually liked Silmarillion better than I did Lord of the Rings, so...

[comicshorse]

I've read 51 of them (if you count series where I've only read a couple of the books).
Big suprise to me is no Clive Barker. Weaveworld is one of the greatest fantasy novels of all time IMHO

[Akiosama]

Here's a different list - one that seems a little more in tune with the genre.

http://www.bestfantasybooks.com/fantasy-genre.php

Now I was a little surprised at Song of Fire and Ice being higher than LotR, but not because it's worse writing. I think that Tolkien still deserves that distinction until someone else's writing can inspire a whole genre of fiction - which is pretty much what it did with high/epic fantasy. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a fantasy writer out there who wasn't influenced by Tolkien.

But that's just my take on what the list represents. Both lists, this one and the NPR one, have great choices on them.

And Goodkind wasn't that bad at the beginning, it's just there's a lot out there that's better. :smalltongue:

My 2 yen,

Akiosama

[thompur]

I guess that I'm out of the mainstream, since my favorite author didn't make the list: Robert J. Sawyer. The Neanderthal Parallax, The Quintaglio Ascention, Starplex, Calculating God, Flash Forward, Mindscan, all would have been worthy. He's won every award there is for Science Fition writing. Where's the love people?:smallannoyed:

[Traab]

Here's a different list - one that seems a little more in tune with the genre.

http://www.bestfantasybooks.com/fantasy-genre.php

Now I was a little surprised at Song of Fire and Ice being higher than LotR, but not because it's worse writing. I think that Tolkien still deserves that distinction until someone else's writing can inspire a whole genre of fiction - which is pretty much what it did with high/epic fantasy. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a fantasy writer out there who wasn't influenced by Tolkien.

But that's just my take on what the list represents. Both lists, this one and the NPR one, have great choices on them.

And Goodkind wasn't that bad at the beginning, it's just there's a lot out there that's better. :smalltongue:

My 2 yen,

Akiosama

You know, I agree with the idea that tolkien deserves to be ranked number 1 because of how he basically jump started the genre. To me, that would be like listing the top 100 martial arts films and NOT giving bruce lee top billing. There may be martial arts movies out there now that are better, but his was the whole reason martial arts movies entered the world wide stage in the first place. The entire genre would possibly be nearly nonexistent right now if it hadnt been for him and his films. Just for that he deserves to have his work in the number 1 slot.

Its the same for tolkein, there may be books I enjoy reading more than his, but its a sign of recognition for his immeasurable contribution to the genre to rank him number 1.

[EccentricCircle]

Its nice to see Hitchhikers at such a high position.

[Tirian]

I can take both sides on the Silmarillion. First time through I couldn't keep track of all the characters and stopped reading partway through. I gave it another chance a few years later and I'm glad I did. It may have helped that I went into it expecting a history textbook rather than a novel.


I'm really curious to see their Young Adult list. I'll be surprised and disappointed if there's not a bunch of Australian books on it... And especially if Tamora Pierce isn't on it.

Have a supplementary list on hand for us when the time comes. This is a poll of American radio listeners (albeit particularly well-read ones, I suppose). There are complaints on their website that the list was heavily biased towards US/UK writers, and I have a hunch if I went back to my livejournal haunts I'd find out how much it left off writers of color. Not that these books aren't generally excellent, as before, just that they might lack diversity.

I trust it isn't too derailing to ask here, since it's one of the books on the list. How does one follow up on Ender's Game? It didn't seem like there were a lot of room for sequels there, but now I'm told that the next two is where it really gets going. I've also been warned by other people that Orson Scott Card can get preachy when he really gets going, so if people have opinions I'd appreciate them.

[turkishproverb]

What else would you call them? They're certainly not historical fiction...

Mythology?

[Tavar]

Mythology?

I think that depends on the version used. Le Morte d'Artur and earlier? You're probably right. Ones much later than that? Edging more towards fantasy, with stuff like The Once And Future King definitely falling into fantasy. Of course, I'm not really qualified to put firm boundaries on it or anything, but those are my opinions.

[Serpentine]

Mythology?...which is, I believe, at least generally lumped in with fantasy.

[Klose_the_Sith]

Its the same for tolkein, there may be books I enjoy reading more than his, but its a sign of recognition for his immeasurable contribution to the genre to rank him number 1.

The problem with that logic is that this isn't a list measuring impact and influence on the fantasy genre, it's a list about which books are the best. In terms of a written story, when placed on an even playing ground, LotR loses out to a fair chunk of its competition.

[turkishproverb]

Hard to say. There's a reason it was so influential, after all. Especially since tolkien wasn't quite the only game in town.

Mind you, much of Tolkien's work may not be to someone's tastes...

[Tebryn]

The problem with that logic is that this isn't a list measuring impact and influence on the fantasy genre, it's a list about which books are the best. In terms of a written story, when placed on an even playing ground, LotR loses out to a fair chunk of its competition.

How do you measure what's best?

[The Glyphstone]

How do you measure what's best?

Utility as a blunt trauma weapon?


Though by that standard, War and Peace and Atlas Shrugged would both be equal to or better than LotR...never mind.

[turkishproverb]

Not my copies. :smallbiggrin:

[Tebryn]

Utility as a blunt trauma weapon?


Though by that standard, War and Peace and Atlas Shrugged would both be equal to or better than LotR...never mind.

Well the words are heavier sure. :smalltongue:

[Eldan]

In that case, I suggest my father's complete collection of everything Goethe has ever written :smalltongue: It fills an entire shelf (all in one cardboard box).

[H Birchgrove]

I guess that I'm out of the mainstream, since my favorite author didn't make the list: Robert J. Sawyer. The Neanderthal Parallax, The Quintaglio Ascention, Starplex, Calculating God, Flash Forward, Mindscan, all would have been worthy. He's won every award there is for Science Fition writing. Where's the love people?:smallannoyed:

Another Canadian I miss (though he did live several decades in USA) is Alfred Elton van Vogt, one of Sawyer's favourites and along with Fredric Brown Philip K. ****'s major influence. His first novel, Slan, was extremely popular among teen and young adult fans of the genre, The World of Null-A confused readers more than Matrix could ever hope for and popularized General Semantics, while The Voyage of the Space Beagle has interesting similarities with both Star Trek: The Original Series and Alien.


In that case, I suggest my father's complete collection of everything Goethe has ever written :smalltongue: It fills an entire shelf (all in one cardboard box).

Hey, Goethe is a dangerous author. The Sorrows of Young Werther made young men kill themselves. No hyperbole, sadly. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sorrows_of_Young_Werther#Cultural_impact)

[Eldan]

Hey, Goethe is a dangerous author. The Sorrows of Young Werther made young men kill themselves. No hyperbole, sadly. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sorrows_of_Young_Werther#Cultural_impact)

Werther does not exist. I certainly never read it.

No, seriously. That book was just bad. I should have read it for an exam, but gave up a few chapters in.

[H Birchgrove]

Werther does not exist. I certainly never read it.

No, seriously. That book was just bad. I should have read it for an exam, but gave up a few chapters in.

I couldn't finish it either. Those who did in my class, said they were thinking "KILL YOURSELF ALREADY!!!" :smallamused:

Voltaire's Candide, which I read about the same time, felt much more constructive.

[Eldan]

Of course, it was an oral exam of fifteen minutes. There were six books we had to read, and we would be questioned on one of them, randomly chosen for each student. I read all the five others. Did background research on them, and so on.

And Werther came up.

I still managed to bull**** myself through the exam with a good mark, though.

[IcarusWings]

I'm both surprised and pleased that Johnathan Strange and Mr. Norell got in there, it's a great book, but I never thought it received much recognition. It's also nice to see Hitchhiker's Guide at #2 (although I would say that Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency is better, but not as well known), and for Watchmen to be fairly high.

I'm sad that the Abhorsen Trilogy didn't make the cut, likewise with any of the works of Catherine Webb or Trudy Canavan. But other than that, it seems like a good list.

Oh, and Neil Gaiman deserved every place he got in that list tenfold. The man's a true artist.

[Traab]

Utility as a blunt trauma weapon?


Though by that standard, War and Peace and Atlas Shrugged would both be equal to or better than LotR...never mind.

An unabridged copy of The Stand would do some respectable damage as well. One of the legs broke off my bed frame. Im using my hardcover copy of The Stand as a replacement for it. Does that count as fantasy?

[Joran]

I'm both surprised and pleased that Johnathan Strange and Mr. Norell got in there, it's a great book, but I never thought it received much recognition.

Does winning a Hugo count? Or a World Fantasy Award? Or heck, Time Magazine's Novel of the Year? ;)

Sure, I tend not to hear about it very often as a "classic", but whenever a thread is started on fantasy, it doesn't take long for someone to recommend it.

[IcarusWings]

Does winning a Hugo count? Or a World Fantasy Award? Or heck, Time Magazine's Novel of the Year? ;)

Sure, I tend not to hear about it very often as a "classic", but whenever a thread is started on fantasy, it doesn't take long for someone to recommend it.

Really? I'm surprised (and, once again, pleased). The only time I've ever seen it referenced is in the Inspirations section of C:tL. Well, good for it.