Post by dhunt on Jul 3, 2009 7:03:36 GMT -5
There is a discussion over at the Image writing/literature forum about Newsweek's list. The list of the 50 best books includes the rather enigmatic phrase "for our time"; the list of 100 includes the phrase, "past or present". Joseph Pearce recently attempted "10 books every Catholic should read" on the StAR blog and encountered a bit of flack. No one can come up with such a list and meet universal agreement.
Newsweek's list offers a brief explanation for each choice. That's what is kind of interesting--the rationale. The list includes non-fiction, fiction, and poetry. Looking at only the explanations for the fiction choices, I found the criteria implied in the rationale to be the same as that applied to the non-fiction. But a novel shouldn't make this list because "it's the best book about race" or some other such informative/educational purpose. I wonder if anyone agrees with me about this. Fiction and poetry (and much of non-fiction) have no such purpose, though, arguably, the works can perform such a function. One can't impose the commenter's remarks onto Image staff, of course, but still, it's there. I don't think I'd want to read any fiction for "what it says about [anything]".
Newsweek's list offers a brief explanation for each choice. That's what is kind of interesting--the rationale. The list includes non-fiction, fiction, and poetry. Looking at only the explanations for the fiction choices, I found the criteria implied in the rationale to be the same as that applied to the non-fiction. But a novel shouldn't make this list because "it's the best book about race" or some other such informative/educational purpose. I wonder if anyone agrees with me about this. Fiction and poetry (and much of non-fiction) have no such purpose, though, arguably, the works can perform such a function. One can't impose the commenter's remarks onto Image staff, of course, but still, it's there. I don't think I'd want to read any fiction for "what it says about [anything]".
