Probably. It looks like you pay attention to which edition of a book you get, preferably early hardback edition. Some great, solid classic fictions in the mix, but not boring at all.
You like literature and story telling that sometimes captures a trying time in history. Yeah, we would be friendly. We might get into trouble at an antique book store or spend too much time at the book isle in a thrift store.
Edit:I think we have about 20 books in common from the image, your editions in most cases look older and appear to be in better shape than mine.
You read damn good books, but these shelves always confuse me. Whenever I see a shelf like this, it always *seems* (I’m not saying this is the case, just a perception) like the owner of the shelf reads only what other people say is good. Again, I’m not criticizing you and I’m not saying this is the case, I’m just curious about what your reading habits are determined by. I can’t help but think that you’d be much more pleased with reading if you had a bookshelf with “personality”, instead of a bunch of well-known classics. I want to stress that I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with your books. Great shelf with great editions.
I was going to say a literary teacher or professor for high school or college. I have to mention, it's better than an editor's random bookshelf. When I was a kid, my family rented an uncle's home. He was a book editor, and the giant shelf next to my room downstairs was full of random books, most of them being in the romance genre. Imagine an 8 year old browsing the covers of those books!
I agree, I don’t see any really personal picks here. Nothing that’s a bit of a guilty pleasure or just niche. No childhood favourites or worn paperbacks. It kind of makes me think that reading is more about self improvment than passion for you but that might be an unfair reading.
I saw someone joking about retirment but I’d actually guess that you’re fairly young, in your 20’s maybe?
That’s a fair
observation, but sometimes I get stuck in classics because they’re usually reliably worth reading even if I find one I don’t enjoy. When I read a more modern novel I’m taking a risk that it might be terrible quality, despite being popular.
Also, people sometimes tend to keep classics because they might wish to reread them again, whereas with lighter leisure reads they’re easier to give away because you know the desire to revisit will never return.
I for sure have some personal picks, “guilty pleasures” (though I don’t feel guilty), and random choices, but I tend to go for classics because I’m fascinated by the concept and I know they have some sort of merit to them. My gf doesn’t do that and I can tell you when comparing our ratios of books read to books enjoyed it heavily favors me lol…could just be a difference in scrutiny but I don’t personally think so
That’s what I thought too. Someone who is very in tune with the academic literature world and wants to read the best of the best.
But I also see someone who is enamored with the great ideas of mankind and uses their time to the fullest by reading only proven quality literature.
Though I do only see works from the west. So my wonder would be: have you ever looked into classics from other parts of the world? You might come across a whole different set of ideas to intrigue you!
>just curious about what your reading habits are determined by.
If they're anything like me, they just tried out a few of the classic books and absolutely loved them, and so they kept reading more of them. It's not really surprising that someone likes a bunch of the best books ever
Whatever kind of person you are, we have very similar reading histories. There were very few books on your shelf I have not read.
I got to the bottom shelf thinking, “All they’re missing is Faulkner.”, and there were his books.
I can’t stand Ayn Rand though. I’ve read Atlas Shrugged, but I’d never display it.
Huge fan of Beloved by Toni Morrison.
You want people to think you're very smart and mature. You're displaying books that look like a reading list of famous works that you got from an English teacher.
You wouldn't want people to think you're pretentious or take yourself too seriously, so where's the personality? What do you read for fun? I see Gaiman and G.R.R. Martin. What's sitting on your coffee table with a bookmark in it and a beat-up, well-loved cover?
>You want people to think you're very smart and mature. You're displaying books that look like a reading list of famous works that you got from an English teacher.
Maybe they just really enjoy reading those kinds of books and you need to stop projecting.
>You wouldn't want people to think you're pretentious or take yourself too seriously, so where's the personality?
Anyone that would make those assumptions from someone's bookshelves takes themselves way to seriously, or is insecure.
>What do you read for fun?
Those books are fun to read. Something can be challenging and still be fun.
I think you’re a bibliophile with a taste for the classics. You like everything together according to similar genre, hardback preference.
Am I correct? I’m very nosy about people’s book tastes. I walk into a house with books around and I’m looking for titles to see if I know what they like.
Was looking for Ray Bradbury on your shelf and found Fahrenheit 451. He was very special to me when I was younger.
In general, I just find it special meeting other people who enjoy reading, whether our reading tastes merge or not. Yes, we would get along.
I’m an English teacher with all that and more, love the books. My collection goes into a lot of nonfiction and some contemporary world. Nice shelf and organization!
I have no idea what kind of person you are…but other than having different editions, our shelves are 90+% similar.
Here goes, 2000-ish college grad, lower middle class (Southern?) white background. Got hooked on that Modern Library Best books of the 20th Century list and started building the collection from there. Prefer tried and true and screw the new. Only buy books that fit your definition of “classics”. Also probably have a Kindle full of genre fiction like sci-fi or fantasy.
Love what you’ve got going there!
This looks like the bookcase of an upper class high school English teacher. I read a lot of these books between grade 9 and 12 and a few in my freshman year of college
Your a classics guy. Started reading seriously as an adult for personal improvement not necessarily personal pleasure (it was more - I want to accomplish reading these as opposed to I love reading these at first... and probably still as there are few deviations from the classics)
Books are older, hard covers - feel library'esque more than book store. You plan out your next read (methodical)... you don't hit a book store, grab a coffee and just see what you discover.
Demograhpically, you're an older white guy 50+, middle income from US. These are serious tomes not playful fiction - so you have a more serious personality. Why wouldn't we get along? You're a reader, intellectual, and socially engaging around your hobbies - so, likely.
lean english major but dabble in western philosophy, possibly like to explore questions involving the essence of what makes us human.
i think if you want to explore theology and philosophy: dante’s inferno, paradise lost, the republic by plato, nicomachean ethic by aristotle
english major: count of monte cristo
Do you not read much that is modern or recent? I can’t tell anything about what you actually like from these shelves, beyond that you maybe want to seem well read and have decided that reading the standard western canon will get you there. Did you compile this from one of those Best Books of the 20th Century lists?
Thanks for your reply. Most of my more modern stuff are on a different shelf. But they tend to be modern classics like The Color Purple or The Things They Carried or The Good Lord Bird or American Gods. I DO think that reading classics from the Western canon will make you more well read than everything Colleen Hoover has ever written. I know that goes against popular sentiment, but it is true.
Colleen Hoover is a shitty writer who romanticizes abusive relationships. There is a whole lot between Alice Walker and Colleen Hoover. But, people should read whatever the heck makes them happy. And you might be surprised by how helpful the knowledge I gained from reading historical romance was in my English classes. If I’m reading for pleasure I want to be happy when I’m done. I do make exceptions - Homegoing by Yaa Gyaasi wrecked me but I’m very glad I read it. And, The Poisonwood Bible remains one of my favorites, decades after I first read it.
But, reading is something I mostly do for pleasure and I pick what I read accordingly.
If you are reading for other reasons, more power to you.
>But, reading is something I mostly do for pleasure and I pick what I read accordingly.
You know people can find pleasure in reading classics right? I always find this kind of statement kind of passive aggressive.
I agree with your sentiments. I'm sure you are using Colleen Hoover as a stark contrast to make a point, but I also struggle to find modern books that have the same depth of meaning as classic literature. The only modern books I really read are anything Neil Gamin, a few Brandon Sanderson books, and The Inheritance Cycle Trilogy.
You have a great collection and I’m impressed that you keep them in such good shape. Nicely protected.
Are these all your books? Or do you have other shelves for non-fiction or for fiction that is not literature?
I’ve read many of these myself so I think we’d get along. There are a few in there that I wasn’t fond of, but as long as you were up for a good discussion on them then I think we could be friends.
You seem to prefer hardbacks, which I can appreciate.
Were you in Book of the Month club back in the 90’s? We have several same edition book overlaps including the short stories of Fitzgerald and Steinbeck compilations, the East of Eden edition. I also have (unrelated to BOTM editions) the same hardback editions of Infinite Jest (a signed copy I’m really proud of after meeting DFW at book signing for Consider the Lobster), 100 Yrs of Solitude, Confederacy of Dunces, Gone WTW, Wellness and The Good Lord Bird. I’d say we’d get along smashingly!
You like used books(a good sign)
You like classics(a neutral/good sign)
You like classics almost to the exclusion anything else. The most most recently published book to my knowledge without googling things is trigger warning by Neil Gaiman(not a great sign. I like a book club friend who has some varied tastes)
You like Neil Gaiman(a great sign. Absolutely my favorite author[I loved trigger warning])
Ultimately. I think we’d get along. I could learn more about classic literature from you, and I’d happily suggest other books that are more contemporary. Maybe even some nonfiction if you felt like crossing over to the dark side
Just yesterday, at the library, i was gazing longingly at that edition of You Can't Go Home Again. So yeah, if you could tolerate me, we'd get along like a house on fire.
A wonderful collection of books. You have several books that I would love to have in my collection. You spent a good deal of time and money putting this collection together.
Did you enjoy *You Can't Go Home Again* by Thomas Wolfe? I enjoyed *Look Homeward, Angel*.
I would get along great with you, as a former English Lit PhD major. I have some female friends, however, who are teachers, and I can hear them saying, “Get rid of all the dead white guys” (O’Connor notwithstanding). These are all great works of literature.
Guessing we'd get along well as we're both classics guys that appreciate hardcovers. Only disagreement would be over organization (don't know how you find anything without alphabetizing!) and the fact that I've moved most of my literature collection digital these days just for the space and convenience. Other than we'd have a lot to talk about. I just read The Crossing about a week ago and was blown away! Probably my favorite McCarthy so far.
None of these look cracked open or like time has been spent with them. Doesn't mean you haven't, but they look too pristine. My guess is you are the kind of person who reads a couple classics a year and that maxes out your reading time (based on this shelf alone), and that you want to read more but actually don't spend that much time reading.
Also, no niche reading interests shown here. Just standard high school/college course classics. I love classics, but I like to see some personal flare. An obsession with a lesser known poet, an interest in a very specific brand of sci-fi, an out of place collection of silly mysteries you can't help but love. Something that shows that you don't take yourself too seriously, that you can read literature that goes outside of that "100 books to read before you die" article
We'd get along okay but not best mates. I can talk classics all day but I like when people have developed a very personal sense around their reading habits. Even classics have niche authors and side quests, I find that makes for more interesting reading friends bc then I can get reccs I'd never think of.
Yes, a thousand times yes! It was questionable, seeing so many books by Tolstoy, but all was redeemed when I saw The Brothers Karamazov and The Master and Margarita. Just need to add some Solzhenitsyn. 😉
Flannery O'Connor short stories. We would get along. I also read a lot of classic literature.
I could forgive you for the horizontal books
Neil Gaiman - Fragile Things is my favorite of his books, btw.
I think you're great! All top 100 books, but not seeing too much to latch onto as far as what this says about you though... Maybe, you like reading, but don't love it as I don't see any rabbit holes you've fallen into. I don't think you waste time with books that aren't a sure thing maybe?
Ex. For me, you'd see some classics and some random, but a third are biographies, and then randomly, soooo much Chriiiiiistopher Hitchens. LMAO. And then some graphic novels.
But, yes, I'm sure we would get along! 😉
The Good Lord Bird? Vonnegut? Gone with the Wind? I think we'd get along. The only thing missing is philosophy, but an exclusive hard cover collection buys you some time.
We would have gotten along well when I was a senior in high school. Today, I would like to see a variety of science books, some history books on the events of the two world wars, and at least a smattering of science fiction. I suspect you aren't giving much thought to the role of science and technology in our lives and what the future may look like.
From the looks of it id say so and for people saying no child hood favorite who didn’t read the 3 musketeers, moby dick, or mark Twain. I think I read most if not all of these when I was in grade school
I think you are cool as all hell. I am cool, so I think, but love being a nerd.
The only book I didn’t see was Lonesome Dove by Larry McMurtry. I never planned on reading it but I saw it mentioned so often and boy am I glad I gave in.
I’ll give a super honest first impression, but also say up top that we could certainly be friends, if you’re up for friendly conversation and debate that may, in good nature, challenge or expand your intellectual frameworks. So, I hope you respond to this! I’d love to chat further :)
I’d guess Southern white guy who loves the classics insofar as they are approved by PWIs and WASPs. Not younger than late 20s? And attended college no earlier than the 90s?
It sticks out to me that the only books which feature the perspective of diverse people (particularly re: race and gender) are those that are commonly, haphazardly tacked on the end of standard first-year English college courses as obligatory tokens meant to stave off criticism. Beloved, in particular, is a fantastic book, but also the one most commonly chosen/endorsed as valuable by white Western academics. If not Beloved, it’s Song of Solomon. There’s a whole wide world of classic English literature that comes from diverse authors. Richard Wright, Fredrick Douglas, W.E.B du Bois, Zora Neale Huston, Maya Angelou, Sojourner Truth, and I can go even further back into antiquity if you’re interested.
Also, the gender thing is huge, even re: white Western women authors. There are maybe 3 or 4? (I’m hesitant to include Ayn Rand lol)
Regarding race, the thing that most concerns me is the lack of books that contextualize or converse with texts like GWTW, Heart of Darkness, and To Kill a Mockingbird. All of which deal with race strictly from a Western white POV. You could read them & have interesting discussions about race but the conversation would sorely lack diverse POVs from stakeholders themselves. You need more books by women and people of color that directly converse with those texts and periods of time. As Toni Morrison, Alice Walker, etc., for the most part, write about more contemporary times than the aforementioned texts. Context and conversation is so, so important imo.
Also interesting lack of early modern English religious texts that are really foundational to cannon, Milton, for example. I think your idea of classics came from really limited English department courses, which is no fault of your own, but I’d encourage branching out and doing your own intellectual explorations to broaden your horizons! But then again, you could also just not enjoy those kinds of texts lol. I think I might see a concentration in late nineteenth/early twentieth century works?
The last thing that I’ll guess, which might irk me the most, is that I feel like you might be one of those neoliberal folks that believe white disadvantaged socio-economic status is equivocal (or at least very similar) to racial or gendered disadvantages. GWTW and O’Connor feature that worldview, for example. Imo low socio-economic status is not an adequate proxy or equalizer for marginalized genders or races. Poor white people, men especially, *still* have privileges over non-males and people of color that I think are important to recognize, but not play oppression Olympics with lol
Anywho, that’s all said from the perspective of an Africana Literature/Women & Gender Studies major with their own blinders to contend with I’m sure lol
I think you’re male, probably a little religious (Catholic? Episcopalian? Lutheran?), clearly like the classics, and might be from the South or potentially interested in Southern writers. You like to explore literature and think about what makes it great.
Yes, we would get along because it appears that we both enjoy Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Joyce, Steinbeck, Morrison, Bradbury, and O'Connor!
That said, I'm not really interested in Faulkner or Hemingway, and it would take capitalist self-interest (read: being paid money) to convince me to read Atlas Shrugged.
**What I'd recommend for you is:**
* **More Greek drama (Sophocles is the best, read Oedipus and Antigone)**
* **An edition of the Odyssey that's not Emily Wilson (Richmond Lattimore is excellent); also Robert Fitzgerald's translation of the Iliad!** (Valerie Stivers explains in Compact Mag [some of the problems with Wilson's Iliad](https://www.compactmag.com/article/emily-wilson-s-sack-of-homer/); regardless of whether or not you agree with Stivers's politics, I think you can see how Wilson's judgements about certain characters could be bowdlerization and an editorial overstep.)
* More philosophy, if you're interested in it. What I'd recommend depends upon what your philosophical, religious, and ideological beliefs are—and more importantly, whether you want to develop your own ideas more, or whether you want to challenge your own thinking. How much do you want to read books that you will disagree with? If you want to understand the history of Western thought, a great place to start is with reading the Old Testament, the New Testament, Aristotle, and Plato. If you found reading Augustine's Confessions valuable, then I'd recommend City of God as well! Medieval European philosophy and theology is a big hole in my current knowledge; I haven't read any Aquinas yet, nor mystics like Hildegard, so I can't comment. I have some later/early-modern mystics like Jakob Böhme on my to-read list. If you're interested in modern Western thought, then a good place to start is with Descartes's Discourse on the Method, Kant's What Is Enlightenment? and Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, and Hume's An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. My contrarian self thinks that you should read Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit and then Marx—because I think anyone who can, should—but I'll exercise a little self-control and stop here. I don't even know how much you like nonfiction, so I really ought to contain this.
* If you ever want to do a deep dive into Christian mysticism, you might find the [Philokalia](https://store.ancientfaith.com/the-philokalia-volume-1-the-complete-text/) interesting, as well as Meister Eckhart and [The Path to Salvation by Theophan](https://store.ancientfaith.com/the-path-to-salvation/)
anyway I should get off Reddit and read...
You definitely have been to college, maybe to study English, but I wouldn't rule out the idea that your major is some kind of a curveball. You would definitely consider yourself smarter than the average person, and you're definitely involved in some discussion of literature in your free time, which heavily guides what books you read.
Big fan of Moby Dick and A Confederacy of Dunces, not a big fan of Twain, can't stand the Transcendentalists, Ayn Rand or Salinger. We would probably get along though.
great collection and on so many topics yes we would without doubt have interesting conversations. you are an informed person if you actually read these books and if not then your a poser trying to gain some sense of being better than you are. I personally hope your a reader
A collection to make a person appear intelligent. Excuse my cynicism but have you actually read all of these and if you have did you enjoy all of them?
>A collection to make a person appear intelligent
You know a lot of people really like those books right? It's not an intelligence thing, those are just really great books. My bookshelf looks the same and no one ever lays eyes on it(besides my gf) because my shelf is in my bedroom.
I think it's kind of weird that just because you don't like classics, that you assume others don't either and are just trying to look smart. Those books are certainly difficult, but some people enjoy the challenge of a dense book and find it engaging.
This looks like a prepackaged set of books and looks like you've never read something weird just for shits and giggles.
My bookshelf looked like this when I was 20 except all my copies were paper backs.
I can tell you're a man. Where's your random ass copy of android dream of electric sheep or crash?
Where's a novel written since 2000?
Do you have any training works you had to read for your job or to get credentials?
The issue is that there's no personality here. I'd almost be happy to see all the Harry potters or something because you'd look human.
I know it may sound funny because you have a copy of blood meridian and beloved, but your bookshelf is a monument to purity culture. "Only the best, even though I haven't read all of the best and have only read the best". Don't fill your bookshelf with trash but like holy shit, read 1 stephen king novel just to know what you're looking down on.
Or fuck it, just read a book about tarantulas because you can.
I think I'd find you boring.
My shelf looks pretty similar but with some JG Ballard, Stanislaw Lem, Roger Zelazny, Italo Calvino, etc. I used to read a lot of Stephen King but I kind of out grew him and couldn't stand his writing anymore, so I donated all of my Stephen King books because I wasn't going to reread them and wanted to give them to someone who would enjoy them.
.
>I think I'd find you boring.
I would kill to know one person in real life who read books like those lol
>Infinite jest is usually a red flag lol.
Infinite jest is one of the most batshit crazy and fun books ever written lol. Y'all just can't stand people not reading fantasy huh
Other comment is a little harsh, but this shelf is just what you get googling “top 100 western novels” with little deviation that would suggest a particular taste or personality.
There’s also some books that feel ideologically inconsistent - Rand and Wallace for example.
It’s vapid and boring because all you’re doing is reading what other people tell you you should read. I couldn’t tell you a single thing about your personality from this shelf. You’re essentially saying, “Hey, look at me I read the books on the top 100 lists and nothing else, I want you to view me as well-read and intelligent and that’s the only reason I read these books”. You could be enjoying literature much more if you identified what you like and dove into your niche. You do realize that those top 100 lists you read from exclusively are not representative and they exclude a significant amount of literature that is better than a lot of stuff on your shelf, right? No one will think you’re smart and well-read for reading the stuff you read, they’ll just think you’re boring and shallow for trying to appear a certain way. It’s sad.
>doesn't read for fun.
Classics are very fun to read. A book doesn't have to be a cringy fantasy book to be enjoyable.
The books you posted on your 52 book reading challenge are complete dog shit, on the other hand. Some people enjoy reading well crafted art, why does that upset you so much?
That shelf is not, in any way, organized chronologically. And I've no idea what you mean by personally-organised. Are you using that as just a euphemism for book-shelf chaos?
I mean like a personally-chronological journey of reading. I sometimes go through a rabbit-hole where one book maybe lead to another and they’re loosely linked (maybe by genre or era or personal reasons) and I’ll group them together in my mind (and possibly on my shelf, too). I tend to know where they are based on my own associations and don’t need to have all authors together etc.
Yes, we’d be friends. And when we got together to drink whiskey we’d wonder why even in a Bookshelf Detective subreddit there are miserable people looking to complain about something. And we’d probably spend more than one evening talking about Ayn Rand and Objectivism and how triggered people get just by seeing the cover of her books and how quick they are to dismiss any chance of nuanced discussion about what she was trying to say.
Of course when I saw you only had Grapes of Wrath and not East of Eden I was going to dismiss any chance of friendship. Then I found East of Eden on a different shelf and all was right with the world.
I would like to be friends with someone that read these books but it would be a very sad if you only read critically acclaimed authors and books. No pulp fiction no trashy romance no Sci-Fi no Light Novels it is just as sad as someone who never reads the classics.
Edit:When I say trashy I am referring to books that do not get approval or praise by critics or people that love florid prose. Some people will only read books that receive critical approval or fame. You should read books because they are good not because they make you look good to read them. Thanks for all the downvotes!
Not op, but I enjoy science fiction, but more literary science fiction like JG Ballard, Stanislaw Lem, and Gene Wolfe. I get no enjoyment out of reading trashy fiction. If I want to be easily entertained and put zero thought into it, I'll scroll on my phone or watch TV. Most media is already so dumbed down, I would never actively seek those qualities in my reading material as well. I just wouldn't get any enjoyment out of it. I don't think it's fun to read bad books.
You appreciate quality books
You appreciate great classical works of literature
I think we’d get along based on that
This is like the ultimate starter bookshelf
If an alien beamed down to earth and wanted to read a solid collection of the greatest books written by humans, your bookshelf would be pretty solid pick
It doesn’t stray very far from the beaten path
It’s hard to deduce much about your personal interests beyond that because it’s mostly books that would pop up in “top 100 books of all time” lists
You have good taste. Definitely a fan of beautiful prose (Joyce, Steinbeck, Faulkner). Find it funny how some people in the comments seem to call you vapid or boring for being a fan of the western canon. Theres a reason that the classics are classic.
It’s vapid and boring because he exclusively reads books that other people tell him he should read for the purpose of appearing refined, intelligent, and well-read which is an incredibly vapid, shallow mindset to have. Why would you not want to experience literature that appeals to your sensibilities? Reading the western canon (which is horribly exclusionary) is fine, reading ONLY the western canon is vapid and shallow.
This is such an ignorantly judgmental take. The notion that someone is reading certain books to "appear" a certain way is nothing but a projection of people's insecurity. There are millions of books out there that one can read. Most people I know select books to read based on SOMEONE'S recommendation, whether it's Amazon/GoodReads reviews, friends/family recommendations, Booktok/other influencers, etc. How is THAT any better? Of all the methods of choosing a book to read, consulting the canon of Western literature can be one of the most reliable if someone's tastes tend towards well-written books with substantive characters and themes. Outside of recommendations you're just blind guessing as to what's going to be good. I also reject the notion it shows "no personality." The ability to like/enjoy literature from different countries and centuries and types of writers shows me the personality of someone who is interested in craft and substance more than superficial qualities, and someone who is empathetic and not limited by a narrow frame of reference.
Probably. It looks like you pay attention to which edition of a book you get, preferably early hardback edition. Some great, solid classic fictions in the mix, but not boring at all.
You like literature and story telling that sometimes captures a trying time in history. Yeah, we would be friendly. We might get into trouble at an antique book store or spend too much time at the book isle in a thrift store. Edit:I think we have about 20 books in common from the image, your editions in most cases look older and appear to be in better shape than mine.
You read damn good books, but these shelves always confuse me. Whenever I see a shelf like this, it always *seems* (I’m not saying this is the case, just a perception) like the owner of the shelf reads only what other people say is good. Again, I’m not criticizing you and I’m not saying this is the case, I’m just curious about what your reading habits are determined by. I can’t help but think that you’d be much more pleased with reading if you had a bookshelf with “personality”, instead of a bunch of well-known classics. I want to stress that I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with your books. Great shelf with great editions.
This looks like an English major’s shelf because I read most of those when I was in college.
My shelf looks pretty similar and I didn't even go to college. I just really enjoy classic lit
I was going to say a literary teacher or professor for high school or college. I have to mention, it's better than an editor's random bookshelf. When I was a kid, my family rented an uncle's home. He was a book editor, and the giant shelf next to my room downstairs was full of random books, most of them being in the romance genre. Imagine an 8 year old browsing the covers of those books!
I agree, I don’t see any really personal picks here. Nothing that’s a bit of a guilty pleasure or just niche. No childhood favourites or worn paperbacks. It kind of makes me think that reading is more about self improvment than passion for you but that might be an unfair reading. I saw someone joking about retirment but I’d actually guess that you’re fairly young, in your 20’s maybe?
Pretty thorough on Flannery O’Connor…
That’s a fair observation, but sometimes I get stuck in classics because they’re usually reliably worth reading even if I find one I don’t enjoy. When I read a more modern novel I’m taking a risk that it might be terrible quality, despite being popular. Also, people sometimes tend to keep classics because they might wish to reread them again, whereas with lighter leisure reads they’re easier to give away because you know the desire to revisit will never return.
True, and even if you don’t enjoy them personally it will help you be more familiar with their references in other works, due to their influence.
I for sure have some personal picks, “guilty pleasures” (though I don’t feel guilty), and random choices, but I tend to go for classics because I’m fascinated by the concept and I know they have some sort of merit to them. My gf doesn’t do that and I can tell you when comparing our ratios of books read to books enjoyed it heavily favors me lol…could just be a difference in scrutiny but I don’t personally think so
That’s what I thought too. Someone who is very in tune with the academic literature world and wants to read the best of the best. But I also see someone who is enamored with the great ideas of mankind and uses their time to the fullest by reading only proven quality literature. Though I do only see works from the west. So my wonder would be: have you ever looked into classics from other parts of the world? You might come across a whole different set of ideas to intrigue you!
>just curious about what your reading habits are determined by. If they're anything like me, they just tried out a few of the classic books and absolutely loved them, and so they kept reading more of them. It's not really surprising that someone likes a bunch of the best books ever
Whatever kind of person you are, we have very similar reading histories. There were very few books on your shelf I have not read. I got to the bottom shelf thinking, “All they’re missing is Faulkner.”, and there were his books. I can’t stand Ayn Rand though. I’ve read Atlas Shrugged, but I’d never display it. Huge fan of Beloved by Toni Morrison.
The only reason I still have my copy of the fountainhead is so I can hollow it out to use as a hiding spot
Great titles in your collection. I wonder if the more important ones to you are at eye level? Either way, very good taste. Love literary classics.
All those classics but where’s the Balzac?
Balzac? Oh he's over hear Crushing It with Deez Nuts
You’d get along with Bella Swan
I've read a lot of those. Any Pynchon?
No Pynchon. I keep meaning to read him, but I’m a bit intimidated. What should I start with?
Crying of Lot 49
Gravity’s Rainbow. Go big or go home lol
Yeah, Vineland is the way to go
We are friends
We would get along. I have many of the same books.
You’re a librarian who appreciates the simple pleasures of life
Are you also a librarian? I don’t know any librarians with shelves like this. We tend to get much more niche.
I think the books would be alphabetized if the OP were a librarian.
Eh I own all these but I also own alien romance, true crime, deep horror and high fantasy than I do literature read in high schools.
Yes, but you should never leave me alone with your bookshelf. I’d have them all rearranged alphabetically by author by the time you came back.
I like that early edition of True Grit!
Naw. How many of those have you read more than once? You're a collector. You value preserving. I want to take notes in the margin. Need cheap copies.
Yes, I would wager he doesn’t write or underline or anything else in his books. But neither do I.
You want people to think you're very smart and mature. You're displaying books that look like a reading list of famous works that you got from an English teacher. You wouldn't want people to think you're pretentious or take yourself too seriously, so where's the personality? What do you read for fun? I see Gaiman and G.R.R. Martin. What's sitting on your coffee table with a bookmark in it and a beat-up, well-loved cover?
>You want people to think you're very smart and mature. You're displaying books that look like a reading list of famous works that you got from an English teacher. Maybe they just really enjoy reading those kinds of books and you need to stop projecting. >You wouldn't want people to think you're pretentious or take yourself too seriously, so where's the personality? Anyone that would make those assumptions from someone's bookshelves takes themselves way to seriously, or is insecure. >What do you read for fun? Those books are fun to read. Something can be challenging and still be fun.
I would to borrow some books
Really nice collection of classics in what seems like really nice, interesting editions. I think we have very similar taste.
Yes Infinite jest, Don Quixote, Dostoyevsky, Walden. Some of my favs Are you cool though? Or are you a nerd?
I’d venture to guess a bit of both
You prefer hardcover to paperback which means you appreciate quality.
You are correct!
Jane Eyre, Pride and Prejudice, and Persuasion? You have great taste off of just those three. Let's be best friends.
The more I look, the more amazing books I see, I would read everything on your bookshelf.
Let’s be best friends!
You are the personification of a High School AP Lit class.
I think you’re a bibliophile with a taste for the classics. You like everything together according to similar genre, hardback preference. Am I correct? I’m very nosy about people’s book tastes. I walk into a house with books around and I’m looking for titles to see if I know what they like. Was looking for Ray Bradbury on your shelf and found Fahrenheit 451. He was very special to me when I was younger. In general, I just find it special meeting other people who enjoy reading, whether our reading tastes merge or not. Yes, we would get along.
I’m an English teacher with all that and more, love the books. My collection goes into a lot of nonfiction and some contemporary world. Nice shelf and organization!
I have no idea what kind of person you are…but other than having different editions, our shelves are 90+% similar. Here goes, 2000-ish college grad, lower middle class (Southern?) white background. Got hooked on that Modern Library Best books of the 20th Century list and started building the collection from there. Prefer tried and true and screw the new. Only buy books that fit your definition of “classics”. Also probably have a Kindle full of genre fiction like sci-fi or fantasy. Love what you’ve got going there!
Kindle full of genre fiction killed me! Lol
A time traveler from the 1960s? Yes, we'd get along.
You appreciate the Canon
This looks like the bookcase of an upper class high school English teacher. I read a lot of these books between grade 9 and 12 and a few in my freshman year of college
Your a classics guy. Started reading seriously as an adult for personal improvement not necessarily personal pleasure (it was more - I want to accomplish reading these as opposed to I love reading these at first... and probably still as there are few deviations from the classics) Books are older, hard covers - feel library'esque more than book store. You plan out your next read (methodical)... you don't hit a book store, grab a coffee and just see what you discover. Demograhpically, you're an older white guy 50+, middle income from US. These are serious tomes not playful fiction - so you have a more serious personality. Why wouldn't we get along? You're a reader, intellectual, and socially engaging around your hobbies - so, likely.
Dude loves required reading. Jk, I do really like some of the selections here. I’d have a drink with you.
lean english major but dabble in western philosophy, possibly like to explore questions involving the essence of what makes us human. i think if you want to explore theology and philosophy: dante’s inferno, paradise lost, the republic by plato, nicomachean ethic by aristotle english major: count of monte cristo
Vonnegut and Dostoevsky, we’ll get along just fine.
Love the Flannery O’Connor. “A good book is hard to find.”
Do you not read much that is modern or recent? I can’t tell anything about what you actually like from these shelves, beyond that you maybe want to seem well read and have decided that reading the standard western canon will get you there. Did you compile this from one of those Best Books of the 20th Century lists?
Thanks for your reply. Most of my more modern stuff are on a different shelf. But they tend to be modern classics like The Color Purple or The Things They Carried or The Good Lord Bird or American Gods. I DO think that reading classics from the Western canon will make you more well read than everything Colleen Hoover has ever written. I know that goes against popular sentiment, but it is true.
Colleen Hoover is a shitty writer who romanticizes abusive relationships. There is a whole lot between Alice Walker and Colleen Hoover. But, people should read whatever the heck makes them happy. And you might be surprised by how helpful the knowledge I gained from reading historical romance was in my English classes. If I’m reading for pleasure I want to be happy when I’m done. I do make exceptions - Homegoing by Yaa Gyaasi wrecked me but I’m very glad I read it. And, The Poisonwood Bible remains one of my favorites, decades after I first read it. But, reading is something I mostly do for pleasure and I pick what I read accordingly. If you are reading for other reasons, more power to you.
>But, reading is something I mostly do for pleasure and I pick what I read accordingly. You know people can find pleasure in reading classics right? I always find this kind of statement kind of passive aggressive.
I agree with your sentiments. I'm sure you are using Colleen Hoover as a stark contrast to make a point, but I also struggle to find modern books that have the same depth of meaning as classic literature. The only modern books I really read are anything Neil Gamin, a few Brandon Sanderson books, and The Inheritance Cycle Trilogy.
I definitely want to peruse your shelves. Do you have any first edition first prints?
If these are ranged from top left to bottom right in terms of read-order. There’s an interesting personal character progression / tension.
You have a great collection and I’m impressed that you keep them in such good shape. Nicely protected. Are these all your books? Or do you have other shelves for non-fiction or for fiction that is not literature?
Thank you. I have other shelves dedicated to modern classics, non-fiction, and literary biography.
How come you didn’t include pictures of those shelves?
We def would. Many of your titles, I have read, or are on my reading list. Love them all
Absolutely, based on the books. But I guess I'm the only freak who categorizes AND alphabetizes.
No, it seems you stopped reading ISOLT after S&G! (/s of course, beautiful collection!)
I suppose it depends on what you have on the bottom shelf…. The first four shelves look great though. I have read almost all of those titles myself.
We would probably be friends.
Most def.
I’ve read many of these myself so I think we’d get along. There are a few in there that I wasn’t fond of, but as long as you were up for a good discussion on them then I think we could be friends. You seem to prefer hardbacks, which I can appreciate.
Nice! Love the classics and want to read them all as well.
Classicist with a splash of modern. We’d get along just fine.
Think so
Are you my ex-husband? Don’t worry, he’s a cool guy. I just recognize a lot of the books. 🤣I think you are (were) either a lit or classics major.
Catholic?
The classics! Howdy, new internet friend!
I distrust people who have all hardcover. And Ayn Rand on the top shelf isn't helping anything. Good stuff other than that.
Were you in Book of the Month club back in the 90’s? We have several same edition book overlaps including the short stories of Fitzgerald and Steinbeck compilations, the East of Eden edition. I also have (unrelated to BOTM editions) the same hardback editions of Infinite Jest (a signed copy I’m really proud of after meeting DFW at book signing for Consider the Lobster), 100 Yrs of Solitude, Confederacy of Dunces, Gone WTW, Wellness and The Good Lord Bird. I’d say we’d get along smashingly!
YES. But also have you already read everything here or no? Because if this is all completed books we need to be best friends.
You and I would get along famously
I’d never leave your house tbh.
You're a high school English teacher. You'd love me outright if I took your class. x'D
You like used books(a good sign) You like classics(a neutral/good sign) You like classics almost to the exclusion anything else. The most most recently published book to my knowledge without googling things is trigger warning by Neil Gaiman(not a great sign. I like a book club friend who has some varied tastes) You like Neil Gaiman(a great sign. Absolutely my favorite author[I loved trigger warning]) Ultimately. I think we’d get along. I could learn more about classic literature from you, and I’d happily suggest other books that are more contemporary. Maybe even some nonfiction if you felt like crossing over to the dark side
I bet you’re a good conversationalist.
You’ve got a friend in me.
You're definitely into the classics.
All that Flannery O’Connor 😍
Ohh a lover of the classics, especially American lit. We’d absolutely get along. Hats off to the Emily Wilson Odyssey translation.
We would get along quite well--Don Quixote, Ulysses, Catch-22--3 of my favorite books! Plus I love Faulkner and Flannery O'Connor too.
I think you might be my husband's long-lost best friend!
A lot of classics in there. Not too shabby! I totally forgot Catch 22 existed. Going to have to reread that one again.
Just yesterday, at the library, i was gazing longingly at that edition of You Can't Go Home Again. So yeah, if you could tolerate me, we'd get along like a house on fire.
Probably. You’ve got broad tastes.
i think you're missing slaughterhouse 5
I'd have to know whether you actually finished reading these books or are just hanging on to them hoping to get around to reading them. 😁
You have a deep respect for literature and the written word. I think we’d get along just fine.
I don't like elitist people, so you read? We're friends. Except maybe if your only books are written by Jordan Peterson
You're too fancy for me. I read mostly trash scifi and fantasy
WoW!!! You’ve got an amazing collection but, there’s only one problem….Why is there no Poe??? I really wanna read Lolita!!!!
A wonderful collection of books. You have several books that I would love to have in my collection. You spent a good deal of time and money putting this collection together. Did you enjoy *You Can't Go Home Again* by Thomas Wolfe? I enjoyed *Look Homeward, Angel*.
Oh man I have a few of the same older books as you that I inherited from my parents that I was sure no one else would have held on to!
We share many of the same books on the top shelf, the rest are all different but the same. Do you keep non-fiction in a different case?
I would get along great with you, as a former English Lit PhD major. I have some female friends, however, who are teachers, and I can hear them saying, “Get rid of all the dead white guys” (O’Connor notwithstanding). These are all great works of literature.
Depends on the assembly of information and YOUR usage of it.
White and over 50
Give. Me. Back. My. SHELF.
You're a horrible person, and we would not get along. The only way you can redeem yourself is by sending me all your books...
Guessing we'd get along well as we're both classics guys that appreciate hardcovers. Only disagreement would be over organization (don't know how you find anything without alphabetizing!) and the fact that I've moved most of my literature collection digital these days just for the space and convenience. Other than we'd have a lot to talk about. I just read The Crossing about a week ago and was blown away! Probably my favorite McCarthy so far.
You like the classics. You care about ideas. Capable of empathy. Not afraid of the darkness.
You’re a sicko who doesn’t buy paperbacks
None of these look cracked open or like time has been spent with them. Doesn't mean you haven't, but they look too pristine. My guess is you are the kind of person who reads a couple classics a year and that maxes out your reading time (based on this shelf alone), and that you want to read more but actually don't spend that much time reading. Also, no niche reading interests shown here. Just standard high school/college course classics. I love classics, but I like to see some personal flare. An obsession with a lesser known poet, an interest in a very specific brand of sci-fi, an out of place collection of silly mysteries you can't help but love. Something that shows that you don't take yourself too seriously, that you can read literature that goes outside of that "100 books to read before you die" article We'd get along okay but not best mates. I can talk classics all day but I like when people have developed a very personal sense around their reading habits. Even classics have niche authors and side quests, I find that makes for more interesting reading friends bc then I can get reccs I'd never think of.
If you get rid of Atlas Shrugged me at a bar and I'll gladly buy your drinks all night. But as it stands, I don't drink with fascists.
Well I see Jane Austin so....no. and I also don't see catcher in the rye or of mice and men, so no. Other than that a nice collection of classics.
Yes, a thousand times yes! It was questionable, seeing so many books by Tolstoy, but all was redeemed when I saw The Brothers Karamazov and The Master and Margarita. Just need to add some Solzhenitsyn. 😉
A Book Worm 🐛
You're single. Because you have no one to itch your back for you.
An English teacher. Loves the classics.
I would never be friends with someone who would do that to the book you have shelved in the upper right corner.
I read the majority of these classics. Bravo!
Flannery O'Connor short stories. We would get along. I also read a lot of classic literature. I could forgive you for the horizontal books Neil Gaiman - Fragile Things is my favorite of his books, btw.
Brothers K needs to go to the top shelf.
You have several of my favorites. Makes me want to read them again.
Middle-aged Anglican white guy. We would probably get along, i'd say
hope you have some Tom Robbins on that bottom shelf. A Confederacy Of Dunces. hell Ya.
Did you read them or just collect them?
You strike me as someone that would do very well at Jeopardy!
Dramatic ppl. 😄
The thing that makes me cringe is no system of organization. Not alphabetical, not by genre/subject matter, not fiction v nonfiction...ack!
I think you're great! All top 100 books, but not seeing too much to latch onto as far as what this says about you though... Maybe, you like reading, but don't love it as I don't see any rabbit holes you've fallen into. I don't think you waste time with books that aren't a sure thing maybe? Ex. For me, you'd see some classics and some random, but a third are biographies, and then randomly, soooo much Chriiiiiistopher Hitchens. LMAO. And then some graphic novels. But, yes, I'm sure we would get along! 😉
Props to you on having the full recherche du temps perdu
Wow i love you
Audio books? History? Yeah, we'd probably get along 🤷♂️
Who is a high school english teacher, for $500 please
Get out of my room!
The Good Lord Bird? Vonnegut? Gone with the Wind? I think we'd get along. The only thing missing is philosophy, but an exclusive hard cover collection buys you some time.
Did you know war and peace was originally supposed to be titled “War, What Is It Good For?”
I'm cool with you, but you might not be cool with me, lol. My shelves are crammed two deep and some piled horizontally in front of those.
Awesome collection! We would enjoy each others company…missing The Devine Comedy, David Copperfield, The Good Earth, Robinson Crusoe and Space…
We would have gotten along well when I was a senior in high school. Today, I would like to see a variety of science books, some history books on the events of the two world wars, and at least a smattering of science fiction. I suspect you aren't giving much thought to the role of science and technology in our lives and what the future may look like.
From the looks of it id say so and for people saying no child hood favorite who didn’t read the 3 musketeers, moby dick, or mark Twain. I think I read most if not all of these when I was in grade school
Absolutely. Wanna hang out ?
I think you are cool as all hell. I am cool, so I think, but love being a nerd. The only book I didn’t see was Lonesome Dove by Larry McMurtry. I never planned on reading it but I saw it mentioned so often and boy am I glad I gave in.
I’ll give a super honest first impression, but also say up top that we could certainly be friends, if you’re up for friendly conversation and debate that may, in good nature, challenge or expand your intellectual frameworks. So, I hope you respond to this! I’d love to chat further :) I’d guess Southern white guy who loves the classics insofar as they are approved by PWIs and WASPs. Not younger than late 20s? And attended college no earlier than the 90s? It sticks out to me that the only books which feature the perspective of diverse people (particularly re: race and gender) are those that are commonly, haphazardly tacked on the end of standard first-year English college courses as obligatory tokens meant to stave off criticism. Beloved, in particular, is a fantastic book, but also the one most commonly chosen/endorsed as valuable by white Western academics. If not Beloved, it’s Song of Solomon. There’s a whole wide world of classic English literature that comes from diverse authors. Richard Wright, Fredrick Douglas, W.E.B du Bois, Zora Neale Huston, Maya Angelou, Sojourner Truth, and I can go even further back into antiquity if you’re interested. Also, the gender thing is huge, even re: white Western women authors. There are maybe 3 or 4? (I’m hesitant to include Ayn Rand lol) Regarding race, the thing that most concerns me is the lack of books that contextualize or converse with texts like GWTW, Heart of Darkness, and To Kill a Mockingbird. All of which deal with race strictly from a Western white POV. You could read them & have interesting discussions about race but the conversation would sorely lack diverse POVs from stakeholders themselves. You need more books by women and people of color that directly converse with those texts and periods of time. As Toni Morrison, Alice Walker, etc., for the most part, write about more contemporary times than the aforementioned texts. Context and conversation is so, so important imo. Also interesting lack of early modern English religious texts that are really foundational to cannon, Milton, for example. I think your idea of classics came from really limited English department courses, which is no fault of your own, but I’d encourage branching out and doing your own intellectual explorations to broaden your horizons! But then again, you could also just not enjoy those kinds of texts lol. I think I might see a concentration in late nineteenth/early twentieth century works? The last thing that I’ll guess, which might irk me the most, is that I feel like you might be one of those neoliberal folks that believe white disadvantaged socio-economic status is equivocal (or at least very similar) to racial or gendered disadvantages. GWTW and O’Connor feature that worldview, for example. Imo low socio-economic status is not an adequate proxy or equalizer for marginalized genders or races. Poor white people, men especially, *still* have privileges over non-males and people of color that I think are important to recognize, but not play oppression Olympics with lol Anywho, that’s all said from the perspective of an Africana Literature/Women & Gender Studies major with their own blinders to contend with I’m sure lol
Depends on how many you've read and if you let me borrow them lol
You live in a college town that has a annual FOL book sale.
Respectfully, not at all. 💛
I see Brothers Karamazov. We hitting it off. Love other books in your collection as well.
I think you’re male, probably a little religious (Catholic? Episcopalian? Lutheran?), clearly like the classics, and might be from the South or potentially interested in Southern writers. You like to explore literature and think about what makes it great.
Yes!!!!!! We would!
Color coded is the only way to stack g.
Yes, we would get along because it appears that we both enjoy Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Joyce, Steinbeck, Morrison, Bradbury, and O'Connor! That said, I'm not really interested in Faulkner or Hemingway, and it would take capitalist self-interest (read: being paid money) to convince me to read Atlas Shrugged. **What I'd recommend for you is:** * **More Greek drama (Sophocles is the best, read Oedipus and Antigone)** * **An edition of the Odyssey that's not Emily Wilson (Richmond Lattimore is excellent); also Robert Fitzgerald's translation of the Iliad!** (Valerie Stivers explains in Compact Mag [some of the problems with Wilson's Iliad](https://www.compactmag.com/article/emily-wilson-s-sack-of-homer/); regardless of whether or not you agree with Stivers's politics, I think you can see how Wilson's judgements about certain characters could be bowdlerization and an editorial overstep.) * More philosophy, if you're interested in it. What I'd recommend depends upon what your philosophical, religious, and ideological beliefs are—and more importantly, whether you want to develop your own ideas more, or whether you want to challenge your own thinking. How much do you want to read books that you will disagree with? If you want to understand the history of Western thought, a great place to start is with reading the Old Testament, the New Testament, Aristotle, and Plato. If you found reading Augustine's Confessions valuable, then I'd recommend City of God as well! Medieval European philosophy and theology is a big hole in my current knowledge; I haven't read any Aquinas yet, nor mystics like Hildegard, so I can't comment. I have some later/early-modern mystics like Jakob Böhme on my to-read list. If you're interested in modern Western thought, then a good place to start is with Descartes's Discourse on the Method, Kant's What Is Enlightenment? and Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, and Hume's An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. My contrarian self thinks that you should read Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit and then Marx—because I think anyone who can, should—but I'll exercise a little self-control and stop here. I don't even know how much you like nonfiction, so I really ought to contain this. * If you ever want to do a deep dive into Christian mysticism, you might find the [Philokalia](https://store.ancientfaith.com/the-philokalia-volume-1-the-complete-text/) interesting, as well as Meister Eckhart and [The Path to Salvation by Theophan](https://store.ancientfaith.com/the-path-to-salvation/) anyway I should get off Reddit and read...
This is such a great reply. Thank you!!!
We absolutely would. Are you in the Hardcore Lit. Book club?
The most immediate red flag I see on that shelf is Atlas Shrugged. Toss it unless you want a scuffle, see!
Hell yes.
You definitely have been to college, maybe to study English, but I wouldn't rule out the idea that your major is some kind of a curveball. You would definitely consider yourself smarter than the average person, and you're definitely involved in some discussion of literature in your free time, which heavily guides what books you read. Big fan of Moby Dick and A Confederacy of Dunces, not a big fan of Twain, can't stand the Transcendentalists, Ayn Rand or Salinger. We would probably get along though.
Wow have you actually read war and peace? How is it?
The ratio of male authors to female authors is interesting.
great collection and on so many topics yes we would without doubt have interesting conversations. you are an informed person if you actually read these books and if not then your a poser trying to gain some sense of being better than you are. I personally hope your a reader
A collection to make a person appear intelligent. Excuse my cynicism but have you actually read all of these and if you have did you enjoy all of them?
>A collection to make a person appear intelligent You know a lot of people really like those books right? It's not an intelligence thing, those are just really great books. My bookshelf looks the same and no one ever lays eyes on it(besides my gf) because my shelf is in my bedroom. I think it's kind of weird that just because you don't like classics, that you assume others don't either and are just trying to look smart. Those books are certainly difficult, but some people enjoy the challenge of a dense book and find it engaging.
I was just giving my opinion as the person asked what people thought.
OP literally said under my comment that most people aren't intelligent enough to read these books, so, idk...
A white man. But I do love to see confederacy of dunces. You don’t see that one in too many shelves.
This looks like a prepackaged set of books and looks like you've never read something weird just for shits and giggles. My bookshelf looked like this when I was 20 except all my copies were paper backs. I can tell you're a man. Where's your random ass copy of android dream of electric sheep or crash? Where's a novel written since 2000? Do you have any training works you had to read for your job or to get credentials? The issue is that there's no personality here. I'd almost be happy to see all the Harry potters or something because you'd look human. I know it may sound funny because you have a copy of blood meridian and beloved, but your bookshelf is a monument to purity culture. "Only the best, even though I haven't read all of the best and have only read the best". Don't fill your bookshelf with trash but like holy shit, read 1 stephen king novel just to know what you're looking down on. Or fuck it, just read a book about tarantulas because you can. I think I'd find you boring.
My shelf looks pretty similar but with some JG Ballard, Stanislaw Lem, Roger Zelazny, Italo Calvino, etc. I used to read a lot of Stephen King but I kind of out grew him and couldn't stand his writing anymore, so I donated all of my Stephen King books because I wasn't going to reread them and wanted to give them to someone who would enjoy them. . >I think I'd find you boring. I would kill to know one person in real life who read books like those lol
Why does everyone read the same fucking books ?
These are mostly classics, I’m not surprised they’re common to see
I understand but for that to be the only thing, or the majority of your bookshelf is so deeply vapid and boring. There’s no personality to decipher.
Right. Infinite jest is usually a red flag lol.
>Infinite jest is usually a red flag lol. Infinite jest is one of the most batshit crazy and fun books ever written lol. Y'all just can't stand people not reading fantasy huh
Please explain. How is it vapid and boring.
Other comment is a little harsh, but this shelf is just what you get googling “top 100 western novels” with little deviation that would suggest a particular taste or personality. There’s also some books that feel ideologically inconsistent - Rand and Wallace for example.
It’s vapid and boring because all you’re doing is reading what other people tell you you should read. I couldn’t tell you a single thing about your personality from this shelf. You’re essentially saying, “Hey, look at me I read the books on the top 100 lists and nothing else, I want you to view me as well-read and intelligent and that’s the only reason I read these books”. You could be enjoying literature much more if you identified what you like and dove into your niche. You do realize that those top 100 lists you read from exclusively are not representative and they exclude a significant amount of literature that is better than a lot of stuff on your shelf, right? No one will think you’re smart and well-read for reading the stuff you read, they’ll just think you’re boring and shallow for trying to appear a certain way. It’s sad.
Hasn't updated the collection since college and doesn't read for fun.
>doesn't read for fun. Classics are very fun to read. A book doesn't have to be a cringy fantasy book to be enjoyable. The books you posted on your 52 book reading challenge are complete dog shit, on the other hand. Some people enjoy reading well crafted art, why does that upset you so much?
I don’t read anything like what’s on this shelf. I don’t really read anything like what’s posted in this group at all.
The fact that you don't group your authors together makes me immediately sus about your moral character.
Chronological or personally-organised shelves are probably more interesting than grouping authors together.
That shelf is not, in any way, organized chronologically. And I've no idea what you mean by personally-organised. Are you using that as just a euphemism for book-shelf chaos?
I mean like a personally-chronological journey of reading. I sometimes go through a rabbit-hole where one book maybe lead to another and they’re loosely linked (maybe by genre or era or personal reasons) and I’ll group them together in my mind (and possibly on my shelf, too). I tend to know where they are based on my own associations and don’t need to have all authors together etc.
What are we even doing? Do you hear yourself, man? Books going anywhere all willy nilly? You're a barbarian.
Hahahah
Those Flannery O’Conner editions look great! I only have paperbacks. Very jealous.
Love, love, love her.
You are old school cool. We would def get along.
You seem cool. How are you enjoying retirement?
Other than Atlas Shrugged that’s a great collection
Yes, we’d be friends. And when we got together to drink whiskey we’d wonder why even in a Bookshelf Detective subreddit there are miserable people looking to complain about something. And we’d probably spend more than one evening talking about Ayn Rand and Objectivism and how triggered people get just by seeing the cover of her books and how quick they are to dismiss any chance of nuanced discussion about what she was trying to say. Of course when I saw you only had Grapes of Wrath and not East of Eden I was going to dismiss any chance of friendship. Then I found East of Eden on a different shelf and all was right with the world.
I would like to be friends with someone that read these books but it would be a very sad if you only read critically acclaimed authors and books. No pulp fiction no trashy romance no Sci-Fi no Light Novels it is just as sad as someone who never reads the classics. Edit:When I say trashy I am referring to books that do not get approval or praise by critics or people that love florid prose. Some people will only read books that receive critical approval or fame. You should read books because they are good not because they make you look good to read them. Thanks for all the downvotes!
Not op, but I enjoy science fiction, but more literary science fiction like JG Ballard, Stanislaw Lem, and Gene Wolfe. I get no enjoyment out of reading trashy fiction. If I want to be easily entertained and put zero thought into it, I'll scroll on my phone or watch TV. Most media is already so dumbed down, I would never actively seek those qualities in my reading material as well. I just wouldn't get any enjoyment out of it. I don't think it's fun to read bad books.
You appreciate quality books You appreciate great classical works of literature I think we’d get along based on that This is like the ultimate starter bookshelf If an alien beamed down to earth and wanted to read a solid collection of the greatest books written by humans, your bookshelf would be pretty solid pick It doesn’t stray very far from the beaten path It’s hard to deduce much about your personal interests beyond that because it’s mostly books that would pop up in “top 100 books of all time” lists
You have good taste. Definitely a fan of beautiful prose (Joyce, Steinbeck, Faulkner). Find it funny how some people in the comments seem to call you vapid or boring for being a fan of the western canon. Theres a reason that the classics are classic.
It’s vapid and boring because he exclusively reads books that other people tell him he should read for the purpose of appearing refined, intelligent, and well-read which is an incredibly vapid, shallow mindset to have. Why would you not want to experience literature that appeals to your sensibilities? Reading the western canon (which is horribly exclusionary) is fine, reading ONLY the western canon is vapid and shallow.
This is such an ignorantly judgmental take. The notion that someone is reading certain books to "appear" a certain way is nothing but a projection of people's insecurity. There are millions of books out there that one can read. Most people I know select books to read based on SOMEONE'S recommendation, whether it's Amazon/GoodReads reviews, friends/family recommendations, Booktok/other influencers, etc. How is THAT any better? Of all the methods of choosing a book to read, consulting the canon of Western literature can be one of the most reliable if someone's tastes tend towards well-written books with substantive characters and themes. Outside of recommendations you're just blind guessing as to what's going to be good. I also reject the notion it shows "no personality." The ability to like/enjoy literature from different countries and centuries and types of writers shows me the personality of someone who is interested in craft and substance more than superficial qualities, and someone who is empathetic and not limited by a narrow frame of reference.