Number 64 ???

Camille Scaysbrook (verona_beach@geocities.com)
Tue, 21 Jul 1998 10:41:45 +1000

I'm sure you've all seen the `Century's 100 Great Novels' list put out by
Random House by now, and as the fat comic book store owner on the Simpsons
said `I was on the Internet registering my disgust within minutes'!
`Catcher', number *64*!!! I couldn't believe it (for one horrible moment I
thought it hadn't made it on to the list at all!) - just ridiculous. On the
upside, it was very nice to see Nabokov and Fitzgerald achieve such high
placings, but I honestly can't believe anyone could think `Brave New World'
is a superior work to `Catcher'. In my edition, Huxley himself freely
admits it's not one of his better works. Deeply strange. Let alone the
several notable omissions - Pynchon, Atwood, Patrick White ... who makes
these lists anyway ??? 

Camille 
verona_beach@geocities.com
@ THE ARTS HOLE
www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Theater/6442
THE INVERTED FOREST
www.angelfire.com/pa/invertedforest