The Best 75 Books of the Last 75 Years

[Wonky3]

I almost missed this. I seldom read "Parade" but my good wife saved this for me and left it on my desk. It's a June 26th issued from the MT. Unfortunately the introduction is missing (I thought it was interesting what they "allowed" and had to "reject". Whatever, a great list in my very humble opinion. 

See what you think: (The "body" didn't copy over well: Sorry. Still, readable if you are curious) 



The 75 Best Books of the Past 75 Years

Parade asked award-winning author Ann Patchett, whose novels include Bel Canto, e Magician’s Assistant and Commonwealth (coming out in September), to help us celebrate our 75th anniversary by picking the best 75 books of the past 75 years. Here are her picks—chosen with the help of the sta at her bookstore, Parnassus Books in Nashville. Read more about Patchett’s choices at Parade.com/patchett.
1940s

• __  A Tree Grows in Brooklyn by Betty Smith
  
• __  Brideshead Revisited by Evelyn Waugh
  
• __  The Hero With a Thousand Faces
  by Joseph Campbell
  
• __  All the King’s Men by Robert Penn Warren
  1950s
  
• __  The End of the Affair by Graham Greene
  
• __  Foundation by Isaac Asimov
  
• __  Charlotte’s Web by E.B. White
  
• __  Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison
  
• __  The Old Man and the Sea
  by Ernest Hemingway
  __ Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury
  __ The Long Goodbye by Raymond Chandler
  __ A Good Man Is Hard to Find and Other Stories
  by Flannery O’Connor
  
  • __  Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov
    
  • __  Giovanni’s Room by James Baldwin
    
  • __  The Civil War, Volumes 1–3, by Shelby Foote
    
  • __  The Once and Future King by T.H. White
    
  • __  Nine Stories by J.D. Salinger
    1960s
    __ Night by Elie Wiesel
    __ The Rabbit Angstrom novels by John Updike
    __ Mastering the Art of French Cooking
    by Julia Child
    

• __  To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
  
• __  The Moviegoer by Walker Percy
  
• __  The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath
  
• __  One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
  by Ken Kesey
  __ Silent Spring by Rachel Carson
  __ The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
  by Thomas S. Kuhn
  __ A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L’Engle
  __ The Guns of August by Barbara W. Tuchman __ Where the Wild Things Are by Maurice Sendak
  

__ The Autobiography of Malcolm X
by Alex Haley
__ In Cold Blood by Truman Capote
__ The Double Helix by James D. Watson __ Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut
1970s
__ Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee
by Dee Brown
__ Burr by Gore Vidal
__ Song of Solomon by Toni Morrison
__ Suttree by Cormac McCarthy
__ The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
by Douglas Adams
1980s
__ The Collected Stories of Eudora Welty
by Eudora Welty
__ Housekeeping by Marilynne Robinson
__ Maus by Art Spiegelman
__ A People’s History of the United States
by Howard Zinn
__ So Long, See You Tomorrow
by William Maxwell
__ A Perfect Spy by John le Carré
1990s
__ The Things They Carried by Tim O’Brien __ All Over but the Shoutin’ by Rick Bragg __ The Secret History by Donna Tartt
__ The Stone Diaries by Carol Shields
__ The Collected Stories by Grace Paley __ Last Train to Memphis by Peter Guralnick __ The Color of Water by James McBride
__ The Harry Potter novels by J.K. Rowling __ American Pastoral by Philip Roth
__ Interpreter of Maladies by Jhumpa Lahiri __ On Writing by Stephen King
__ Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson 2000s
__ The Blind Assassin by Margaret Atwood __ Old Filth by Jane Gardam
__ Collected Poems by Jane Kenyon
__ Consider the Lobster
by David Foster Wallace
__ Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro
__ Team of Rivals by Doris Kearns Goodwin
__ We Tell Ourselves Stories in Order to Live
by Joan Didion

• __  What Is the What by Dave Eggers
  
• __  Brother, I’m Dying by Edwidge Danticat
  
• __  The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie
  
• __  The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao
  by Junot Díaz
  __ The Lion and the Mouse by Jerry Pinkney __ Wolf Hall by Hilary Mantel
  2010s
  __ New Selected Stories by Alice Munro
  __ Collected Poems by Jack Gilbert
  __ The Patrick Melrose Novels
  by Edward St. Aubyn
  __ My Name Is Lucy Barton by Elizabeth Strout
  __ When Breath Becomes Air
  by Paul Kalanithi
  __ Brown Girl Dreaming
  by Jacqueline Woodson 
  

[chuck white]

Are they all on google books?

[Wonky3]

Are they all on google books?

Really? That's what you want to know?

They are BOOKS! Some fiction, some nonfiction, but things people worked hard to produce and turn words into sentences, sentences into paragraphs, that became pages, and pages that became books. And we get to read them!

Maybe on Google books. 

But if not maybe on Kindle, Barnes and Noble readers, or maybe at our local book store or library. 

It's all about content Chuck. And, if your comment was yet another feeble attempt at humor it misfired. 

Without books, we would still be living in caves.

[cletus1]

Are they all on google books?

Really? That's what you want to know?

They are BOOKS! Some fiction, some nonfiction, but things people worked hard to produce and turn words into sentences, sentences into paragraphs, that became pages, and pages that became books. And we get to read them!

Maybe on Google books. 

But if not maybe on Kindle, Barnes and Noble readers, or maybe at our local book store or library. 

It's all about content Chuck. And, if your comment was yet another feeble attempt at humor it misfired. 

Without books, we would still be living in caves.

I have a book shelf with some of my favorite books on it, but I don't read as much as I once did. When I'm on vacation I read more. Still, I think ebooks are cool; you save a little paper by reading on your device and they are cheaper. The point is, you almost don't need paper books anymore. Nothing wrong with that, right?

[chuck white]

OK the point is, books are becoming old fashion, like 8 tracks.

I should have ask, Did they make them into movies? You can tell a great book by how many times they made it into a movie.

[bbqboy]

Another Wonky longing for bygone days thread. We're never going back, but don't tell him.

[Wonky3]

Another Wonky longing for bygone days thread. We're never going back, but don't tell him.

Bygone days? 
Books are books. I now read mostly on a Barnes & Noble reader, a Kindle APP, and some things on an iPad. (My failing eyesight makes it difficut to read "normal" size font.) 

But I do read, Barbie, and it's kind of hilarious that the reading I do is almost exactly contrary to the snarky remarks you made. (I kind of miss my paper books...something special about the original thing. I'd love to find corrective lens that would work so I could read more of them again) 

And the point remains, it's about the content of books suggested here, not about how they are read. I thought this was a prettty decent list and might be a great reading list for those who are interesting in catching up with things they may have misssed. 

Too bad you again missed the point. 

Measure twice, cut once.

[bbqboy]

I didn't miss the point.

[tvguy]

I didn't miss the point.

Or the chance to be a dick.

[GPnative]

I didn't miss the point.

Or the chance to be a dick.

nailed it

*but of course he did in fact miss the point.

[Wonky3]

I didn't miss the point.

Or the chance to be a dick.

nailed it

*but of course he did in fact miss the point.

Well, I guess we all do from time to time (miss the point). But there are times when it's so far off the mark one wonders if it was maybe intended for another thread. 
Whatever: I have no sore spots. 


Anyone see a "very favorite (or two) book on that list. I've read a lot of 'em but spotted a few I want to write down and make sure I read. I always intended to get around to Phillip Roth's "American Pastoral" and never did, so I plan on getting to that soon. Then there are the ones I haven't read and have not interest in. 

Whatever: Thank the gods for books!

[Wonky3]

More about books (as if anyone really really cares) 

1st: Splain this Lucy: I had cataract surgery and all went well, the Doc telling me I'd have to use drug-store "cheaters" to read maybe, but I'd be able to see the movie screen at the local movie house. All well and good. 

So...I tried several magnification levels and found that 1.75 works well for seeing the computer screen on my laptop and large print on news headlines, etc: However, 1.75 just doesn't work for reading most books and magazines. Next logical step, try magnification 2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explaint this? 

So, I use an electronic reader. My default for reading books is a Barnes and Noble Glo-Light and I like it fine. However, the Kindle Paper White gets better reviews and I know a couple of people who have them and really like them. (I got started with the B&N thing because my wife started there and...well you know. 

I like magazines. And again, the 1.75 glasses just dont' cut it for the print size of the paper edition and the 2.0 are too "strong" or otherwise not suitable (?) so I read New Yorker, Atlantic, and Harpers on an iPad with the 1.75 glasses. Works well, and even includes occasional video which of course the magazine can't offer. 

If any of that is of ANY value to anyone, I'm glad. If not...."Never mind". 

[tvguy]

More about books (as if anyone really really cares) 

1st: Splain this Lucy: I had cataract surgery and all went well, the Doc telling me I'd have to use drug-store "cheaters" to read maybe, but I'd be able to see the movie screen at the local movie house. All well and good. 

So...I tried several magnification levels and found that 1.75 works well for seeing the computer screen on my laptop and large print on news headlines, etc: However, 1.75 just doesn't work for reading most books and magazines. Next logical step, try magnification 2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explain this? 

So, I use an electronic reader. My default for reading books is a Barnes and Noble Glo-Light and I like it fine. However, the Kindle Paper White gets better reviews and I know a couple of people who have them and really like them. (I got started with the B&N thing because my wife started there and...well you know. 

I like magazines. And again, the 1.75 glasses just dont' cut it for the print size of the paper edition and the 2.0 are too "strong" or otherwise not suitable (?) so I read New Yorker, Atlantic, and Harpers on an iPad with the 1.75 glasses. Works well, and even includes occasional video which of course the magazine can't offer. 

If any of that is of ANY value to anyone, I'm glad. If not...."Never mind". 

 
2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explain this?

How about you try an optometrist instead of the dollar store? That's my tip.

[Wonky3]

More about books (as if anyone really really cares) 

1st: Splain this Lucy: I had cataract surgery and all went well, the Doc telling me I'd have to use drug-store "cheaters" to read maybe, but I'd be able to see the movie screen at the local movie house. All well and good. 

So...I tried several magnification levels and found that 1.75 works well for seeing the computer screen on my laptop and large print on news headlines, etc: However, 1.75 just doesn't work for reading most books and magazines. Next logical step, try magnification 2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explain this? 

So, I use an electronic reader. My default for reading books is a Barnes and Noble Glo-Light and I like it fine. However, the Kindle Paper White gets better reviews and I know a couple of people who have them and really like them. (I got started with the B&N thing because my wife started there and...well you know. 

I like magazines. And again, the 1.75 glasses just dont' cut it for the print size of the paper edition and the 2.0 are too "strong" or otherwise not suitable (?) so I read New Yorker, Atlantic, and Harpers on an iPad with the 1.75 glasses. Works well, and even includes occasional video which of course the magazine can't offer. 

If any of that is of ANY value to anyone, I'm glad. If not...."Never mind". 

 
2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explain this?

How about you try an optometrist instead of the dollar store? That's my tip.

And a GOOD tip is is. I have been reluctant only becasue when they did the cataract thing, they removed my "lens" and put in some plastic ones with fixed optics. (Standard, I hear). So, I thought (without thinking  ) that since the lens are fixed they could do noting to correct vision. Of course I did not try to reasearch it...that would have been too logical and obvious.

So now I will. 

Thanks.

[tvguy]

More about books (as if anyone really really cares) 

1st: Splain this Lucy: I had cataract surgery and all went well, the Doc telling me I'd have to use drug-store "cheaters" to read maybe, but I'd be able to see the movie screen at the local movie house. All well and good. 

So...I tried several magnification levels and found that 1.75 works well for seeing the computer screen on my laptop and large print on news headlines, etc: However, 1.75 just doesn't work for reading most books and magazines. Next logical step, try magnification 2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explain this? 

So, I use an electronic reader. My default for reading books is a Barnes and Noble Glo-Light and I like it fine. However, the Kindle Paper White gets better reviews and I know a couple of people who have them and really like them. (I got started with the B&N thing because my wife started there and...well you know. 

I like magazines. And again, the 1.75 glasses just dont' cut it for the print size of the paper edition and the 2.0 are too "strong" or otherwise not suitable (?) so I read New Yorker, Atlantic, and Harpers on an iPad with the 1.75 glasses. Works well, and even includes occasional video which of course the magazine can't offer. 

If any of that is of ANY value to anyone, I'm glad. If not...."Never mind". 

 
2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explain this?

How about you try an optometrist instead of the dollar store? That's my tip.

And a GOOD tip is is. I have been reluctant only becasue when they did the cataract thing, they removed my "lens" and put in some plastic ones with fixed optics. (Standard, I hear). So, I thought (without thinking  ) that since the lens are fixed they could do noting to correct vision. Of course I did not try to reasearch it...that would have been too logical and obvious.

So now I will. 

Thanks.

OK and since you seem so receptive this morning how about you stop tucking your pants in to your socks?

[Wonky3]

More about books (as if anyone really really cares) 

1st: Splain this Lucy: I had cataract surgery and all went well, the Doc telling me I'd have to use drug-store "cheaters" to read maybe, but I'd be able to see the movie screen at the local movie house. All well and good. 

So...I tried several magnification levels and found that 1.75 works well for seeing the computer screen on my laptop and large print on news headlines, etc: However, 1.75 just doesn't work for reading most books and magazines. Next logical step, try magnification 2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explain this? 

So, I use an electronic reader. My default for reading books is a Barnes and Noble Glo-Light and I like it fine. However, the Kindle Paper White gets better reviews and I know a couple of people who have them and really like them. (I got started with the B&N thing because my wife started there and...well you know. 

I like magazines. And again, the 1.75 glasses just dont' cut it for the print size of the paper edition and the 2.0 are too "strong" or otherwise not suitable (?) so I read New Yorker, Atlantic, and Harpers on an iPad with the 1.75 glasses. Works well, and even includes occasional video which of course the magazine can't offer. 

If any of that is of ANY value to anyone, I'm glad. If not...."Never mind". 

 
2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explain this?

How about you try an optometrist instead of the dollar store? That's my tip.

And a GOOD tip is is. I have been reluctant only becasue when they did the cataract thing, they removed my "lens" and put in some plastic ones with fixed optics. (Standard, I hear). So, I thought (without thinking  ) that since the lens are fixed they could do noting to correct vision. Of course I did not try to reasearch it...that would have been too logical and obvious.

So now I will. 

Thanks.

OK and since you seem so receptive this morning how about you stop tucking your pants in to your socks?

Oh! Come on now! I've been doing that since 1955. (Prior to that I rolled my jeans up. See, back in the day you bought waist sizes but were at the mercy of the store about inseam length) 

PS: "She Who Must Be Obeyed" has insisted that when we go to weddings and funerals and i'm I wearing a suit an tie, I NOT stuff my pants in my socks. Hard ass woman, I tell ya.

[Valuesize]

More about books (as if anyone really really cares) 

1st: Splain this Lucy: I had cataract surgery and all went well, the Doc telling me I'd have to use drug-store "cheaters" to read maybe, but I'd be able to see the movie screen at the local movie house. All well and good. 

So...I tried several magnification levels and found that 1.75 works well for seeing the computer screen on my laptop and large print on news headlines, etc: However, 1.75 just doesn't work for reading most books and magazines. Next logical step, try magnification 2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explaint this? 

So, I use an electronic reader. My default for reading books is a Barnes and Noble Glo-Light and I like it fine. However, the Kindle Paper White gets better reviews and I know a couple of people who have them and really like them. (I got started with the B&N thing because my wife started there and...well you know. 

I like magazines. And again, the 1.75 glasses just dont' cut it for the print size of the paper edition and the 2.0 are too "strong" or otherwise not suitable (?) so I read New Yorker, Atlantic, and Harpers on an iPad with the 1.75 glasses. Works well, and even includes occasional video which of course the magazine can't offer. 

If any of that is of ANY value to anyone, I'm glad. If not...."Never mind". 

I use the same numbers with the same results. It would be great if they made something in the middle. Try a brighter light with the 1.75 and see if that works.

[Wonky3]

More about books (as if anyone really really cares) 

1st: Splain this Lucy: I had cataract surgery and all went well, the Doc telling me I'd have to use drug-store "cheaters" to read maybe, but I'd be able to see the movie screen at the local movie house. All well and good. 

So...I tried several magnification levels and found that 1.75 works well for seeing the computer screen on my laptop and large print on news headlines, etc: However, 1.75 just doesn't work for reading most books and magazines. Next logical step, try magnification 2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explaint this? 

So, I use an electronic reader. My default for reading books is a Barnes and Noble Glo-Light and I like it fine. However, the Kindle Paper White gets better reviews and I know a couple of people who have them and really like them. (I got started with the B&N thing because my wife started there and...well you know. 

I like magazines. And again, the 1.75 glasses just dont' cut it for the print size of the paper edition and the 2.0 are too "strong" or otherwise not suitable (?) so I read New Yorker, Atlantic, and Harpers on an iPad with the 1.75 glasses. Works well, and even includes occasional video which of course the magazine can't offer. 

If any of that is of ANY value to anyone, I'm glad. If not...."Never mind". 

I use the same numbers with the same results. It would be great if they made something in the middle. Try a brighter light with the 1.75 and see if that works.

More light does help, but not a complete solution. Thanks for the thim anyway.

[tvguy]

More about books (as if anyone really really cares) 

1st: Splain this Lucy: I had cataract surgery and all went well, the Doc telling me I'd have to use drug-store "cheaters" to read maybe, but I'd be able to see the movie screen at the local movie house. All well and good. 

So...I tried several magnification levels and found that 1.75 works well for seeing the computer screen on my laptop and large print on news headlines, etc: However, 1.75 just doesn't work for reading most books and magazines. Next logical step, try magnification 2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explaint this? 

So, I use an electronic reader. My default for reading books is a Barnes and Noble Glo-Light and I like it fine. However, the Kindle Paper White gets better reviews and I know a couple of people who have them and really like them. (I got started with the B&N thing because my wife started there and...well you know. 

I like magazines. And again, the 1.75 glasses just dont' cut it for the print size of the paper edition and the 2.0 are too "strong" or otherwise not suitable (?) so I read New Yorker, Atlantic, and Harpers on an iPad with the 1.75 glasses. Works well, and even includes occasional video which of course the magazine can't offer. 

If any of that is of ANY value to anyone, I'm glad. If not...."Never mind". 

I use the same numbers with the same results. It would be great if they made something in the middle. Try a brighter light with the 1.75 and see if that works.

A brighter light or maybe a BETTER light. Meaning a light that somewhat duplicates natural light.


I had one I think it was called an Ott light. It sat on the edge of my desk and had a flexible shaft like a snake light. It was precarious sitting there and I told my wife I was going to run a long screw right threw the heavy base before it fell off the desk.
She said NO so we made a compromise. So I didn't screw it down.
A couple of weeks later it fell off the desk and broke.

[Wonky3]

More about books (as if anyone really really cares) 

1st: Splain this Lucy: I had cataract surgery and all went well, the Doc telling me I'd have to use drug-store "cheaters" to read maybe, but I'd be able to see the movie screen at the local movie house. All well and good. 

So...I tried several magnification levels and found that 1.75 works well for seeing the computer screen on my laptop and large print on news headlines, etc: However, 1.75 just doesn't work for reading most books and magazines. Next logical step, try magnification 2.0. Nope...feels like it's pulling my eyes out of my head and not real easy to read anyway. Don't understand. Anyone got any tips or info to explaint this? 

So, I use an electronic reader. My default for reading books is a Barnes and Noble Glo-Light and I like it fine. However, the Kindle Paper White gets better reviews and I know a couple of people who have them and really like them. (I got started with the B&N thing because my wife started there and...well you know. 

I like magazines. And again, the 1.75 glasses just dont' cut it for the print size of the paper edition and the 2.0 are too "strong" or otherwise not suitable (?) so I read New Yorker, Atlantic, and Harpers on an iPad with the 1.75 glasses. Works well, and even includes occasional video which of course the magazine can't offer. 

If any of that is of ANY value to anyone, I'm glad. If not...."Never mind". 

I use the same numbers with the same results. It would be great if they made something in the middle. Try a brighter light with the 1.75 and see if that works.

A brighter light or maybe a BETTER light. Meaning a light that somewhat duplicates natural light.


I had one I think it was called an Ott light. It sat on the edge of my desk and had a flexible shaft like a snake light. It was precarious sitting there and I told my wife I was going to run a long screw right threw the heavy base before it fell off the desk.
She said NO so we made a compromise. So I didn't screw it down.
A couple of weeks later it fell off the desk and broke.

My wife uses an OTT light. Remarkable things. If she wants to know the TRUE color of something, she shines the OTT light on it. (She tried to explain the science to me then saw the blank look on my face and gave up) 
I tried it for reading...not so great.