Can't decide between The Return of the King and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The Great Gatsby and The Count of Monte Cristo are close seconds!
Well, I would originally have said The Liar by Stephen Fry, however now I must say Use of Weapons br Iain M. Banks. Seriously, EPIC book. Such a huge twist at the end too! Read it.
American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis....Lolita by Nabokov...Maus by Art Spiegelman...too many to list haha but definitely not American Gods....awful book...just terrible
I dunno what my favourite book is....probably The Escape by Robert Muchamore. The Hitchiker's Guide To The Galaxy by Douglas Adams is also one of the best I've read.
If I were forced to pick just one favorite it would be Gone with the Wind. I loved it so much that I think the movie was a load of crap and I'm not even sure how the plot made sense to people because you just can not cut that much out of that story. But very close seconds would be Pride and Prejudice, Wuthering Heights (which I only just recently read because that title just sounds like something that is going to draaaaag but it certainly didn't!) and Lonesome Dove by Larry McMurtry. And I will admit that I recently just devoured the Twilight series, but I thought the 1st book was just average, the next two I loved and that last one was eh and then the ending was the biggest cop out ever! So disappointing. Oh, and I STILL love Dr. Seuss. The sheer imagination of it (and I might mean more his artwork than his made up words) just inspires me and always puts me in a good mood. And I think its horrible to criticize people's favorite books because you don't think they meet some sort of literary mastermind criteria. People's favorites are their favorites because they had fun reading them and anything can be fun even if it is poorly written. Just like some movies I've seen that have gotten horrible reviews, but maybe I laughed my butt off anyway. Don't be such a book snob that you can't enjoy something that is just fun!
A positively fascinating story! It's one of my very favorites. I'm sure I could read it a dozen times and still enjoy it. "... an extended love poem directed towards writing, reading, and books in general ..." Good description! I may have to consult with you when I finish THE UNBEARABLE LIGHTNESS OF BEING. Which is his books is your favorite? Changed my life at nineteen. Took me years to realize I hadn't already read the very best fiction on earth.
I havent read The Fountainhead yet, but I'm about 1/3 of the way through Atlas Shrugged, and I already think it's one of my favourites. I wish I had picked up her novels sooner. She's perfect, an amazing writer.
What struck me was that FOUNTAINHEAD AND ATLAS SHRUGGED are very similar, and I loved 'em both as a young reader. Then I read WE THE LIVING, and felt like Rand was writing the same story, just in various different ways. It took me several years to be confident that there were equally good (and now I realize consideraly better) writers out there. And, today, I think of her fiction as agenda-driven, which I didn't realize when I read them; and I think she did a great job of growing interesting, compelling fiction out of her personal (and political) world-view. Seemed to me these books held (and probably still do) enormous inspiration for young folks to dare to think for themselves and to follow their dreams in a determined way. I feel like her philosophy has been very badly misunderstood and misinterpreted among both her rabid followers as well as her incensed detractors over the course of time. But that's just my opinion, of course; lots of people disagree with me, and in much louder voices than mine. Me, too. So did my kids. Gave my son "Oh the Places You'll Go" when he graduated from high school. 'Course, he was hoping for a car instead. I'm not sure if I've read HITCHHIKER'S GUIDE or not. I LOVED the film. Have you read Jonathan Safron Foer's EVERYTHING'S ILLUMINATED (the movie doesn't hold a candle to the book, IMO)? I think of these two as being so quirky, original, and funny, yet still with serious implications. Both very intelligent and spellbinding. I've never met anyone who didn't have exceptionally strong (and defensible) feelings about PSYCHO, just based on Ellis's writing style alone. I couldn't finish it, myself, so that tells you which side of the spectrum I was on. And I'm sure it's too bad that was his first book I read (or tried to), because I'm sure he's written some awfully good stuff I haven't even been tempted to pick up. Actually, same thing is true of LOLITA (in terms of polarized opinions, I mean), which I thought was beautifully written and compelling, and equally controversial. I think I have favorite "authors" rather than favorite "stories," for the most part. At least that's how it seems to go. My son just sent me this, and it's just soooo odd! I love it. The story behind the story is equally interesting, too (how the author's mother insisted the publisher read it, following her son's suicide, and for which he, posthumously, won the Pulitzer Price.) ... which is surely how certain books (and their authors) rise to the top of the food chain.
The problem with Ayn Rand is that she's convinced a large number of people (with fallacious arguments) that government restrictions on business are "bad" and that unrestricted business is "good." Unrestricted business practices and laissez faire are exactly why we are in such a financial mess right now. Just a few decades before Ayn Rand wrote her books, the very business policies she favors meant children working in coal mines for 20-hour days, 7-day weeks. Her mistake is in assuming that business is "good" and that greed and the profit motive is all that's necessary to bring all humanity out of poverty. She refuses to recognize that unrestricted business with no checks or balances can be (and often is) as corrupt as (and more corrupt than) unrestricted government with no checks or balances. I loathe the misguided philosophy Ayn Rand has deceived several generations with.
I kind of think it's too bad that the great wonder and (even lasting) benefit of her early novels--at least as I read them as a young person--gets lost in the Ayn Rand legacy, which inevitably seems to lead to bitter devisiveness. I agree with your perception that her philosophy is "misguided," but I'm not sure if that's the consequence of her perceptions alone or that of her avid followers--more likely a mixture of both. I wasn't the least bit turned into a selfish individual by the themes of her fiction, myself (not even in my business life, which has always been rooted in "service"); and it never occurred to me that the sensibility of her novels suggested anything more than a unique vantagepoint from which to explore and develop one's own talents and aspirations (something artists, among others--writers, e.g.--do with a passion, if they pursue this side of themselves at all). Maybe, in part, my appreciation of her novels resulted from my interest (and major) in philosophy; and her fiction actually inspired me to think about how writers are able to give readers a significant, unique, new glimpse into the possible meanings of life. P.S.: Thanks to whoever abbreviated my ramblings into multi-quoted various comments. I'll try to figure out how to do that myself next time.
You're probably correct. I read "Atlas Shrugged" fairly recently, and was personally bothered by the logically fallacious nature of its arguments. Having studied logical fallacies, I recognized her arguments as largely straw-man and slippery-slope arguments, and therefore, errors in basic logic. Even the slightest regulation on business was viewed as a totalitarian enforcement of extreme socialism and a obstacles to productivity that guaranteed widespread poverty. Those who wish to impose such restrictions are presented as whiny imbeciles who believe that every possession should be divided exactly equally among every person. Charity is perceived as an evil action, feeding the lazy, unproductive useless masses. That unrestricted business can infringe on the rights of people as easily, and more easily, as government regulation, was completely alien to her philosophy. It's unfortunate that many of those reading her work aren't versed in logic, and therefore can't recognize her errors. Inspired by this discussion, I quickly scanned some websites on this. Someone pointed out that there are no children in Ayn Rand's world, no children depicted in her books. May be because children don't fit into her philosophy. There's no room for a person who's not a rugged, strong, individualist, in Ayn Rand's world. If you can't fight, according to Ayn Rand's philosophy, you're unworthy, and only unrestricted business, greed and complete self-centeredness can save the world. Charlie Edit: PS. For anyone reading this who doesn't know what I'm talking about... A "straw man argument" is a logical error when a person misinterprets the views of another, then attacks the misinterpreted view. A "slippery slope argument" is a logical error when the most extreme absolute worst-case scenario is assumed to be certain, from the slightest change.
This is really hard. I love too many! I would probably have to list a couple. The Gemma Doyle Triology by Libba Bray is fantastic. I love the Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath. Pretty much anything by J.R.R. Tolkein is wonderful.
