I had considered myself well-read until.....

[catorman]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Rachel Bray" <bray.262 at o...> 
> wrote:
> > I printed off the 100 Best Characters in Fiction Since 1900 
> > (thanks to the Leaky Cauldron for the link: 
> > http://www.npr.org/programs/totn/features/2002/mar/020319.ch
> > aracters.html  )
> > 
> > After going through and highlighting all that I've read on 
> > their list.....I am rather embarrassed.  I've only read 18 
> > of them and 6 of those are considered "children's" books 
> > (Winnie the Pooh, Cat In the Hat, Harry, etc.) and most of 
> > the 18 was required reading in high school. 
> 
> Hmm...I've read thirty-six. A taste for mysteries and spy novels 
> will take you far, I guess. But I'm probably twice your age, so I  
> shouldn't be bragging.
> 
> Pippin
> wondering why there's no science fiction on that list

OK - I'm upping the ante with 52 (but I was am an English graduate 
and did a lot of 20th Century literature), but some of this really is 
stupid, as To Kill a Mockingbird is in there three times.  A very 
strange selection IMO.  Very male dominated, apart from Virginia 
Woolf (I've read her work and don't rate it).  Why no Science 
Fiction?  It also seemed to me that there were a lot of cult American 
novels in there, and none of the English equivalents - the last 20 
years in UK literature was really badly represented.  

BTW:  I think Lolita is superbly written - erudite, witty, cultured, 
eccentric (and monstrous).  It's definitely well worth reading IMO.


Catherine