As of this writing (on Tuesday), the New York Times has posted numbers 100-61 of their best books of the 21st century, 20 each day this week, as decided by 503 critics, writers, poets, and other book lovers. When I saw they were doing it, my first reaction was, I hope it’s a better list than the Time Magazine best books of the 20th century, which had only one book on it written by a woman, if I am recalling correctly. (I take that back. There were 20. However, the list I just looked at doesn’t seem to exactly be the one I remember, so maybe they revised it. And anyway, really, guys?) And two by Philip Roth, which, gag me with a spoon. (Bad news, because these new lists already have two by Philip Roth.) My other reaction was that 24 years into the 21st century was a bit early to be doing this.
Regardless, I thought I’d write a post about my reaction to the lists so far.
First of all, how many have I read? Not as many as I might have.
For books 100-91:
- Tree of Smoke by Denis Johnson
- how to be both by Ali Smith
- Bel Canto by Ann Patchett
- Bring Up the Bodies by Hilary Mantel
- On Beauty by Zadie Smith
For 90-81: none
For 80-71:
- An American Marriage by Tayari Jones
- Exit West by Mohsin Hamid
- Olive Kitteridge by Elizabeth Strout
For 70-61:
- All Aunt Hagar’s Children by Edward P. Jones
- Demon Copperhead by Barbara Kingsolver
Obviously, I haven’t read enough of these to make any overarching comments. One thing is obvious. There are more books by women writers, 22 (if I counted them right) out of 40. So much better. And there are quite a few by minorities.
Of the ones that I read, I personally thought several were excellent but not all. In particular, I liked Bel Canto, Bring Up the Bodies, and Olive Kitteridge best. I liked how to be both, On Beauty, All Aunt Hagar’s Children, and Demon Copperhead well enough, A few others I felt indifferent to, but at least I didn’t actively dislike any of them.
But there is Philip Roth again, two of his books in the bottom 40 (admittedly, I haven’t read any of them, but I read several of his books and those were enough for me), the guy who writes the same book over and over again. There aren’t two books by any other authors listed twice in the list so far. Usually when I make my top 10 lists for the year, I have a rule that only one book per writer can be on the list. That makes for hard decisions, but I think it’s a good choice.
What about you? Take a look at the complete list at the link at top. Have you read any from the list so far? What do you think of the choices? I will be reporting back later this week once the rest of the list is published.
What? Me Read? 
My initial thought was the same as yours: it seems much too early in the 21st Century to be writing a “best of” list. But I can’t help but admire anything being accomplished by 500 critics and authors, especially a comprehensive list based on subjective decisions. Give them an A for effort at least……
Sure. It’s not really clear, though, how many people chose each book. That would be interesting to know. In one case, it says Sarah Jessica Parker chose the book. Was that the only person to choose it? Do we care that it was Sarah Jessica Parker? In most cases, they don’t tell whose list it was on or even how many lists, which I would think is more important.
I see now that you can go in and vote for your own.
I’m enjoying the list in a mild kind of way, although I haven’t read that many of the books (14 I think). On the whole, I did find it a little blah, as I wasn’t that interested in the many selections I haven’t read.
I plan to look into some at the top of the list. I hope that as it gets nearer to 1, I might have read more of the books.
This is SUCH a strange list! I don’t get why they have to combine fiction with nonfiction. Mind you, I was surprised to see “Small Things Like These” by Claire Keegan on the list, which was published by a mid-sized indie publisher (Faber & Faber). I’m with you on Philip Roth, by the way. After he died, I felt bad that I’d never read anything by him, so I bought a few of his books (used, heavily discounted) and read his “Portnoy’s Complaint.” Well, that was enough to put me off him forever, and I donated all those books to a library! That said, so far, I’ve read four books – “Olive Kitteridge,” “Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow,” “Middlesex,” and of course, “Small Things Like These.” The only book so far I’d be interested in reading is “On Beauty” by Zadie Smith (I really liked her short stories, a copy of which I found in a free public library, of all places).
Oh, I haven’t read any of her short stories. They didn’t really explain their process for choosing the books except to say how many people they consulted. Are these the books that got the most votes? How many books did each person pick? Were they limited to a number, or did they just pick as many as they wanted? It’s a mystery.
To answer my own question, if I’d read a bit more carefully, I would have realized that each person submitted a list of 10. Then I suppose they picked the overlaps. I wonder what they did if they didn’t get 100 overlaps?
In reply to your own reply: Yeah, but… there are some that just have a “Why I love it” blurb, with no attribution, and some that don’t even have that – they’re just on the list. Very strange.
I just noticed that yesterday. It is odd. Maybe lots of people voted for books but didn’t make any comments.
Yes, way to early and I agree only one book per author, sometimes we have to make tough decisions! But most of all I love ‘gag me with a spoon’!
🙂