nobody cares, nerd.

who reads books anyway? its 2011

I do

.

since buying Kindle, im reading like a motherfucker

I bought enders game a while back ,but haven't got round to reading it .Maybe I will dig it out and give it a go, but being the lazy bastard I am it's doubtful

its endor not ender

you're thinking of star wars

it is endor

what are you talking about?

its not ender its endor

Oh thanks for clearing that up. I thought you were talking about Ender's Game, but instead you're talking about something else entirely.

man u dont get it, the op spelled it wrong, thats what im saying

geez u dont have to be so difficult

I think he's trying to tell you that your correction is incorrect.

no these 2nd language guys get confused with er and or sound so that why they all saying ender for endor

its endors game

so, how do you like Ender's Game?

i dont

Asimov>all

lotr #1?

invalid list

I agree Dune was soooo much better than anything. Lord of the Rings deserve it though. But Dune should be #2. But the second book for Dune sucked ass. Total disappointment. But honestly, the 1st novel was so perfect, the ending perhaps abrupt though, but I still loved it and it left an amazing taste in my mouth.

I agree that the second is the worst in the series, but it picks up again after that. The best in the series is the 4th one.

The second one killed it so much for me that I stopped with the saga after that, does it really recover? I was happy to see the two Bradbury chronicles that have a bunch of short stories

Oh yes. It builds in Children of Dune and then God Emperor of Dune just blows your mind. The next 2 books are equivalent to the first one.

After that his son decided to rape the franchise for all it's worth. :(

You actually get the feeling that the second book is just filler to get rid of Paul. That said I only read the second one once or twice, the others I've read over and over.

I stopped after the second one aswell. I might start the 3rd book on your recommendation, so if it stinks, ill keel you.

the first of his 'son + helper' book was good, I thought

Yeah the "House" series, I also thought they were ok. Unfortunately they got worse. I can't believe they did what they did with Dune 7. Assholes.

More importantly, Neuromancer way back at 14. WTF

At least the Dragonriders of Pern got a mention.

I was 14 years old when I red it:)
(I remember that fucking book was so awesome it made me cry)

how does this approach anything like informed, useful discussion? bla bla, lol ur book is worse then my book xddd!!!

this entire list is infused with cultist fantasy books whose only popularity derives from the virginal adoration afforded them by 35 year olds who still live in their mothers' basements. lo grade chili would fall under this category.

I own and have read the overwhelming majority of these, and I quite like many of them, but there are only legitimately 5-10 serious, classic novels on the entire list.

you're taking this a bit too seriously...

I don't think so.

People applauding and giving recognition to hugely influential and often genre-defining books, wow that's insane and unexpected.

you're not very bright.

Whatever you say, champ.

no, it has nothing to do with what I say. you just aren't very bright.

Sure thing, sport.

No dragon lance books :/

Could be cos they're shit?

The trilogy is better than half the books on there

Ender's Game has that easy appeal of a story about a kid coming of age. It's extremely light weight and no where near the league of Dune. These are just books people voted for, it doesn't mean they're the best. Frankenstein being on the list is ridiculous, I wonder how many of the people voting for it have actually read it? It's only interesting in an archaeological sense. Ian M Banks' Culture series being so far down is certainly surprising and Piers Anthony stories are children's books which I thought the intro said they were omitting.

frankenstein being on the list is ridiculous. lol. spoken as someone who truly has no clue about the history of science fiction.

hahaha i know

"It's only interesting in an archaeological sense"

wtf

The list is 'Top 100 sci-fi and fantasy books', not seminal books in the genre. Frankenstein was important as one of the first pieces of science fiction but as a story it's not very interesting. Why should it be in the list?

light weight does not equal bad imho. it all depends on what you are looking for

i dont know why the first book is always seperated from the series though. reading it was a lot of fun, all the books are so different and yet belong together, would recommend reading a few of them and not just the first one, enders game.

(i really like dune aswell)

I thought the characters in Dune were a bit dull. I love the setting and the ideas of dune but it lacked emotion. not that i dislike the book or anything but i can see how people wouldn't enjoy it as much as enders game.

I agree, emotion wasn't its strong point but it was an amazing fantasy novel that just took you so in

IMO many classic idea-driven sci-fi authors, especially those with a science background (and esp. the eastern european ones) lack basic writing skills like storytelling and character development. Asimov is pretty terrible too - nice ideas but bad execution. Dont like Lem's writing style much too, even tho he has some intersting stories.

asimov's execution was fine. It was a bit bland at some points but I felt it to be simplistic in a good way.

I'd agree with that but I think sci-fi is about the ideas far more than the characters. Most of Philip K Dick's characters are hardly even there for example.

Extremely lightweight, the fuck?! Are you Ronnie Coleman by any chance?

I recently read Seeds Of Earth by MIchael Colbey, and I'm currently reading the second part Orphaned Worlds. Pretty addictive & epic shit! Anyone else read this trilogy?

it makes sense if you value adventure and "can't put it down" kind of qualities over "put it down and think about it" kind of book. any list like that is inherently unfair.

a lot of those books make you think. The foundation series is based on the premise of studying and modelling human populations the way you would for ideal gases

Did anyone else read the Chronicles of Amber, such a fucking good book, Corwin being a bamf and smoking cigs all day ereday and kicking ass, was such good shit to read and addicting too, books 5-10 was disappointing though, but I still loved Merlin

The Malazan Book of the Fallen by Steven Erikson being so low is quite surprising. It's amazing! Much better on a second read, it can be quite overwhelming at first. I am also very surprised NOTt to see Julian May - Saga of the Exiles on the list, one of my all time favourites..

HowSteven Donaldson - The Chronicles of Thomas Covenenant series ranks so low on this list is beyond me... It has to be by far the best fantasy series I've read. I also loved his Gap Series.

Very strange list... :/

I couldn't get anywhere with the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, it's hard to care about a rapist as a character.

I can see what you mean of course, but stick with it. :)

Having read both, more than once, I'd say it IS a bit of a toss up. Dune is approached as more of an Epic, however. I'd put The Last Question and Stranger in a Strange Land right up there, too.

Okay, now I've looked at the list, and I'd say it's spot on. H2G2 is my bible. Really.

That any of asimov's work is below ender's game is a serious insult. I'm actually fuming right now. I'm mad enough to boil a pot of tea. I'm thirsty so it almost works out.

lol @ lotr first

Unless everyone who voted has read all of the nominated books, it doesn't mean much.

I am just glad that the Dark Tower series got recognized, don't care about the listing # of the others as each is good in a different way.

I think dragonlance is emitted because its pure fantasy but it should still be there I agree

First few books of dark tower were nice, but the last couple ruined it for me

Yeah I agree. I loved the first few but by the end it felt so stretched and lost a lot of the original appeal.

Me too!

Was also happy to see that the Hyperion Cantos got on that list, incredible series of books.

whats a good sci fi book to think about som funky shit

Ubik

1984 should be on the top of that list. Of any list anyways

brave new world is scarier

Probably, but it is less transcendental. I think 1984, even though it has a very specific plotline, relates to human experience as a whole. Brave New World is more sciency

What do you mean by relates to human experience as a whole?

The search for love and adventure, and the reenactment of instinct

You must have a very romanticized view of humanity to think that the search for love and adventure characterizes all of it. What do you mean by the reenactment of instinct ?

basically 1984 society is against instinct. The idea is to (as in most modern societies) reduce or eliminate every trace of instinct in man (eat, fuck, sleep, do what you will), by setting a lot of rules in order to have a functioning society. The main character thrives to get back to his core, to what he really is.

You know I do have a romanticized version of mankind, no need to go into that again.

I'm not saying it characterizes ALL of it, but 1984 main ideas are subjects to which anyone can relate, making the book way bigger and more impactful than it's original subject. 1984 resonates in everyone differently, Brave New World is pretty straight forward and has no other meaning than what it states. (Scary eugenism, fair point but not bigger than it is).

Funny, I find them the other way around. BNW seems much more scarier because it seems much more possible.

http://www.recombinantrecords.net/images/2009...-Death.png

They are both important books, one warning us of giving too much control to those that govern us; the other of falling prey to endless trivialities, consumptionism etc.

Yeah I thought about that, I think the resulting society would be the same but Orwell was wrong as to how it would happen that is true. I just think 1984 is a way more personal novel than Brave New World. The pleasure idea of BNW is spot on though

btw if you're into these kinds of books, I hope you read the Giver. It's intended as a children/adolescent book, but it's what got me into anticipation and politics

I'm quite positive that 1984 has actually existed for several million people around the world.

I'm just waiting for the movie

Needs more Philip K. Dick.

The fuck?! LotR got 1st place??? Obviously the guys who made that list don't know shit about what a good book is... LotR was boring as fuck with it's long introductions and stuff. People don't want to read why some random hobbit-tribe is scared of water and therefore can't cross a river, noone cares about this.

Apart from LotR being horrible itself, there are books like "1984", "Animal Farm" and "The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy" on that list and they are placed below Tolkien's trilogy. No way someone who understands something about how a good book must look/read like would pick LotR over one of those three.

Next is why the fuck did they mix two different genres together?

*Edit: Ah they were elected by user-vote, no wonder LotR got first place... Most of those 60'000 voters probably have never read the better books on that list and then there are the die hard LotR-fans that would pick it over any book no matter what critics and even Tolkien himself would have said.*