I forgot to explain my rankings back when I finished book #70, so today’s post is a make-up post.
This is something I do after every five books, just so you can get an overall gauge on how I felt about these novels compared to all the others I’ve read.
Here’s how I’ve ranked the last 6 novels I’ve read from the Time list. Read more
It’s time for me to talk about my utterly meaningless and completely subjective rankings of the recent books I’ve read from the Time list.
If you’re new to the blog, this is a little exercise I do after every five novels. It allows me to explain why I ranked each novel where I did, with the understanding that, ultimately, ranking a list of novels like this is a pretty pointless endeavor. But I do it anyway, ’cause it’s fun.
So let’s take a look at the last 5 novels.
It’s time for me to explain my highly subjecting and totally pointless rankings.
As you may know, I go through my rankings after every five novels. It’s a nice way to close out some of my recent reads and explain why I ranked them where I did. It’s also a great way for you to bash me in the comments and tell me how stupid I am.
So let’s take a look at the last five novels:
Here’s my latest attempt to explain my highly subjective, totally meaningless, pretty much idiotic rankings of the first 55 books I’ve read from the Time list.
I try and do this every five books or so, so it’s about that time.
Here’s how I ranked the last several books and why I ranked them as I did.
So, as you may know, Time Magazine chose not to rank the 100 All-Time novels when they created this list, but I thought I’d be a dove and help them out. So I rank each novel after I’m finished with it. I like to call these my totally meaningless and highly subjective rankings.
After every 5-6 books, I take a little time to explain why I ranked each book as I did. It’s my way of staying accountable to you and letting you rain down hate upon me in the comments section, if you so choose.
So, here’s how I ranked books 46 through 51:
Not long after I started this blog, I thought it would be a good idea to start ranking the books based on my opinions.
When I interviewed Lev Grossman, he explained why Time didn’t rank the books, which makes sense. But I’ve kept at it anyway, fully realizing these are completely subjective and, most likely, pointless rankings.
Every five books, I take a little time to explain my thoughts on where I’ve ranked each novel. This last batch of five was one of the best groups of books I’ve read yet.
Three of the five are in my top 10, with Under The Volcano being the only real stinker of the bunch.
Here’s how I broke them down:
It’s that time again. It’s time for me to try and make sense of the last five novels, and attempt to place them somewhere in my meaningless rankings. Never before has such a pointless, inconsequential act been undertaken.
Aren’t you excited now? All right, then. Let’s carry on.
So it’s time to dive in the wonderful world of my highly subjective and completely pointless rankings of the first 35 books I’ve read from the Time list.
If you’re interested, you can see previous updates through book 31: Never Let Me Go.
Now, to somehow justify my rankings for books 32-35.
Somehow I let this post slip by.
For newcomers, I usually stop and explain my latest rankings after each set of five books. Book #30 (Animal Farm) came and went and I totally forgot to recap. So today’s post is a quick explanation of my rankings for the last set of books (26-31).
Remember, these are my highly subjective and totally opinionated rankings of the first 31 novels.
Well, it’s that time again.
Time for me to justify my nonsensical, totally arbitrary, ridiculously-easy-to-criticize rankings of the books I’ve read to this point. Lev Grossman explained why Time didn’t rank the novels in my interview with him, but I guess the football fan in me decided I had to do rankings of some sort.
So, without further needless explanation, here’s my explanation of my rankings of the books I’ve read since my last ranking update.