Really? From both a mythological and philosophical standpoint, the Bible is extremely influential. Solomon, David, Moses, Judith, Esther, Jesus himself etc have all been portrayed and referenced countless times throughout art and literary history. The philosophy within the book sparked the most influential and largest religion of all time (currently).

I don’t believe in a lot of stuff within the Bible, but it definitely earned it’s place.

I wouldn’t put it in my top 10 but maybe around top 20/30 because of it’s influence not only as a classic novel but also on the romance genre as a whole. I know some people prefer The Brontës more ‘grim’ work than Jane Austen, and I actually agree.

I agree, but that’s why I don’t put too much stock into lists like this. Your list might be different, but that doesn’t mean it’s any less valid from a cultural and literary point of view. Unless it includes something insanely bad like the 100 Days of Sodom.

But you can say this for all genres. I’m saying that people who dislike most romance probably won’t like Pride and Prejudice, however it’s still a classic of literature. I dislike most romance in general, but I like Pride and Prejudice. Although I prefer some of her other books.

If someone doesn’t agree with Nietzchean philosophy, they would probably dislike Beyond Good & Evil. It’s still a classic book.

That’s the problem with ‘100 Best Books of All Time’ lists in general. Most people do not read all the classics, and most people do not read classics that their culture isn’t familiar with. Most Westerners haven’t read Journey to the West or other literature from Asia and other continents that greatly influenced the culture.

I prefer Odyssey to the Iliad but I just preferred the subject matter more in general.

That’s a safe bet. It’s a 99% chance that it’s true.

According to you. Not everybody is going to agree. Pride and Prejudice is a classic of romance and social satire literature. If you don’t like romance, you probably won’t like the book.

The rest are just dumbasses calling each other trannies and also somebody at the end complaining about women being on the list which is peak comedy. 4chan really is a cesspool.

Mein Kampf aside… Atlas Shrugged? Also, The Odyssey at 20 but Iliad at 4? Shouldn’t they be close together?

Other than that, the rest are mostly shit you see on regular top 100 books of all time lists.

Even Mussolini thought Mein Kampf was shit. Granted, Mussolini hated Hitler in general.

Jordan isn’t Jungian. Although he has a lot of Jungian beliefs. Clarissa is much more interested in ‘spirituality’ than he is.

Possible that Margaret, who is a religious fanatic who abuses her daughter, is an unreliable narrator who lied about Carrie’s father dying. Also possible that, since this is Stephen King’s first book, he was still getting used to both writing and writing on cocaine.

It’s a Hannibal backstory that I think the author wrote mostly because he feared that somebody else would write it. It’s not as well-written as Red Dragon or Silence of the Lambs, but I think it tied in nicely.

No kidding but it felt like it was written by shippers.

I genuinely liked the last two books, and think Hannibal Rising got the worst reputation, but they’re not as good as the first two.

I understand the symbolism, it’s just really gross. When somebody goes in depth about something like that constantly, it’s not hard to understand why audiences will come out having negative thoughts.

They mean that the attitudes of specific Polynesian cultures towards homosexuality was less prejudiced and repressive.

I understand why it was disliked. For me it had WAY too much talk about constipation.

Generally it’s because the last books are much more over-the-top than the first two. Specifically Hannibal. The film also got a mixed reaction because of how ‘ridiculous’ it was + Clarice hooking up with Hannibal seemed to go against her character.

The reviews for really ridiculous romance books are generally good. VC Andrews reviews are also hilarious.

Love Moby Dick but I think the amount of whale facts (half of which turned out to be not very accurate) may have turned people off.

Honestly thought that Mistle could’ve been handled well if Sapkowski ever actually acknowledged in the text that she, a rape victim herself, sexually assaulted Ciri but that shit is like a romance.

It reminds me of those garbage 80’s romance novels for housewives where the main man treats the heroine terribly but they fall in love anyway. It’s comedy.

Honestly, I do not think the books would be that popular without the games. Cirilla is ridiculously overpowered and almost every character wants to rape her or falls in love with her to the point of absurdity, very few characters get any development except for the main ones, most of the villains are either utterly incompetent and unlikable like Philippa and Radovid or get defeated in a very anti-climatic way.

Also, Mistle and Ciri are portrayed rather romantically even though she basically sexually assaults Ciri. Everybody wants to rape her. Girls, boys, sorcerers, relatives etc.

Meanwhile, the games give a bigger role to Triss, Shani, Djikstra, Philippa, Syanna, Henrietta, other sorceresses like Keira etc. They also integrate elements from stories like The Last Wish and Sword of Destiny in the form of side quests.

The first two books were the best because Sapkowski is WAY better with short stories.

Usually prostitutes just say they’re cops and try to arrest me for soliciting sex. Weird.

So Barcelona prostitutes watched Full Metal Jacket decades before it came out? I’m glad Kubrick was kind enough to do that for them.