Should have read classics discussion

I saw this on someone's status update here on Goodreads and thought that it was too cool not to share. Maybe, some of you could do this with your own libraries at home?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np450x...

That was pretty cool.

Lisa wrote: "I saw this on someone's status update here on Goodreads and thought that it was too cool not to share. Maybe, some of you could do this with your own libraries at home?
http://www.youtube.com/watc..."

Well, cool, maybe, but as to doing it with my library, I'll spend the time actually reading the books rather than setting them up like that.

Nice that so many people had so much free time they though was well spent that way. It was amusing to watch. Thanks for posting.

My first reaction was to feel sorry for the staff who had to re-shelve all those books. But it was fun to watch. I particularly liked the part where the fallen books spelled out "READ."

Casceil wrote: "My first reaction was to feel sorry for the staff who had to re-shelve all those books."

Good point! They did have 27 volunteers to help, but still, I wonder how many books will wind up in the wrong places and never get back where they belong.

Everyman wrote: "Casceil wrote: "My first reaction was to feel sorry for the staff who had to re-shelve all those books."

Good point! They did have 27 volunteers to help, but still, I wonder how many books will w..."

The books had all been withdrawn from the collection and were destined for a book sale evidently.

Interesting announcement: http://www.stylist.co.uk/life/jane-au...

Ella's Gran wrote: "The books had all been withdrawn from the collection and were destined for a book sale evidently. "

Amazing that they would have that many books withdrawn! But maybe they also included books that people had donated for the book sale -- for our library, donated books are the vast majority of the books in the annual Friends of the Library book sale.

But thanks for the reassurance. I'm glad they didn't have to reshelve them all.

I thought it was fun that they used "The Fall" as the first book. I did have evil thoughts that one of the camera men would knock over some books in their attempt for a better shot. Not nice, I know.

☯Emily wrote: "Interesting announcement: http://www.stylist.co.uk/life/jane-au..."

That is interesting! Thanks for the link! Did you see the thread we have about the idea that Jane Austin was murdered? I wonder if Jane would be thrilled with all the attention she still gets?

I would love just the house that could accommodate one of these libraries

http://bookriot.com/2012/10/01/the-bo...

Here's another treat for the eyes - repairing vellum documents beautifully, medieval style

http://cheezburger.com/7591943680

Ella's Gran wrote: "I would love just the house that could accommodate one of these libraries"

I had my wife give me a delightful book,

which has a few p;ages, with many photographs, on wonderful libraries, including a few of those in the blog posting.

Another interesting link for Jane Austen fans: http://www.londonlovesbusiness.com/li...

A giant statue of Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy submerged in a river. Now I think that I can say that I have seen it all! LOL!

Useful? and entertaining
http://realbusiness.co.uk/article/213...

Ella's Gran wrote: "Useful? and entertaining
http://realbusiness.co.uk/article/213..."

That is very funny! I love the quote from Hugh Hefner, just hilarious.

Some more Jane Austen news, funny how she keeps popping up in the news.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/0...

I found this list. How many have you read? I've read 46, the majority have been because of this group!


http://www.listchallenges.com/kaunism...

60

Longhare wrote: "60"

I'm really impressed!

68

Everyman wrote: "68"

Wow!

Lisa wrote: "Everyman wrote: "68"

Wow!"

Well, I'm pretty old. You can get through a lot of books if you live long enough!

Everyman beats me - I've read 62 of them.

I feel like a piker. I'm tied with Lisa at 46.

Ella's Gran wrote: "Everyman beats me - I've read 62 of them."

That is still impressive!

Casceil wrote: "I feel like a piker. I'm tied with Lisa at 46."

It just gives us more opportunity to read some fabulous books!

I ended up spending way too much time playing with the lists on that website.... and grew my TBR list significantly. :)

Ella's Gran wrote: "Everyman beats me - I've read 62 of them."

In the end, though, it's not how many books you've read, it's what you have changed in your life as a result of reading great books.

I've read 48, and I'm fine with that number since there are plenty of books that are just as valuable that I've read that didn't make the list! But as Nicole said, those lists are fun because they remind you of (or introduce you to) books you want to read in the future.

Lisa wrote: "I found this list. How many have you read? I've read 46, the majority have been because of this group!


http://www.listchallenges.com/kaunism..."

I've only read 31 so far :( I am currently reading two, though, and about 5 others are on my list to read very soon.

on the list challenges site, I only got 25.

33 plus 2 more that I gave up on.

39, 1 in progress, quite a few on my TBR list

Only 48. Mostly cause I've read all of Jane Austen's books.

Apparently, I need to brush up on my Pulitzer winners. I got 7 out of 87.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/isaacfitzgera...

Lisa wrote: "Apparently, I need to brush up on my Pulitzer winners. I got 7 out of 87.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/isaacfitzgera..."

I only got three when I took the test yesterday.

37 for me; but here's the rub: that list is bizarre. What rhyme or reason went into its making? There are duplicate items; strange over-emphasis of mediocre works (political-correctness? Why so many Austen and Dickens?) and scads of contemporary (aka, 'no earned place in literature') titles represented there. P.S. What the hell, 'Holy Bible'???

I'd say that as many as half of the titles are bogus, and have no rationale whatsoever for being cited as part of any 'yardstick' measure. Me, I deliberately wouldn't bother with most of that shyt for any possible purpose. If anyone's read 62 of those titles I can only say: stay with more genuine classics.

I mean, come on: A.S. Byatt?? Can anyone --even the creators of the list itself--explain why A.S. Byatt is on a list of all-time great literary classics? Much less... DAN BROWN ?????

Feliks wrote: "37 for me; but here's the rub: that list is bizarre. What rhyme or reason went into its making? There are duplicate items; strange over-emphasis of mediocre works (political-correctness? Why so man..."
Yes, Feliks, clearly some of the books are in there to represent popular contemporary fiction rather than true classics. Maybe so many Austen and Dickens because it's a British list. I agree it's not the best list to aspire to reading in its entirety.

I would have to agree. Not just the fact that the majority of those books, I had never ever heard of before. I take Buzzfeed with a grain of salt and just thought it would be fun to introduce to the group. Isn't Dan Brown a literary classic in the making? :)

8 of the Pulitzer winners for me. There are a few in there I have read reviews of and decided not to read:
Goldfinch, Oscar Wao, The Road.
Funny that the William Faulkner books on the Pulitzer list are ones I've never heard of.

Lisa wrote: " Isn't Dan Brown a literary classic in the making?"

As far as I'm concerned, that's a definite No.

Everyman wrote: "Lisa wrote: " Isn't Dan Brown a literary classic in the making?"

As far as I'm concerned, that's a definite No."

Agree with you, Everyman.

Nicole wrote: "I ended up spending way too much time playing with the lists on that website.... and grew my TBR list significantly. :)"

Sure happens to me, also. I find more & more I like. Because of Goodreads, I found Sarah's Key and really like it.