Ten classics people claim to read but haven't

From this article: http://www.cbc.ca/books/2013/09/top-10-books-people-claim-to-have-read-but-haven...

The result of this British study lists these as the top ten classics people claim to have read but haven't:

1984 by George Orwell - 26 per cent
War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy - 19 per cent
Great Expectations by Charles Dickens - 18 per cent
Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger - 15 per cent
A Passage to India by E.M. Forster - 12 per cent
The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien - 11 per cent
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee - 10 per cent
Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky - 8 per cent
Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen - 8 per cent
Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë - 5 per cent

Some surprises there, especially 1984 being at the top.

This list made me feel pretty good, since I've read seven and two of the others are on my TBR pile, with the third landing there eventually (I'm reading Dickens in publication order and Great Expectations will be near the end.) Obviously we should all ensure we've read these so that we can sniff out the liars! :)

YAY the only one I havent read is A passage to India.

People always say they've read Don Quoixte and when I ask them about something besides the windmill scene they say well, it was a long time ago. I ask, did it take a little bit of time to read? And they say, well, I didn't read the whole thing...

Read 7, did not finish 1, and have 2 on Mount TBR!

I've read all but one of them, but I usually pretend not to have read Lord of the rings as well.

Interesting study. I've read 8 of them, but have to catch up on the Russians. I haven't read either War and Peace or Crime and Punishment. Never claimed to have read these 2, but have felt guilty about not having read them.

I can say I've read two of them, though LofR is not one of the two I've read.

I've read them all, but I've never met someone who pretended (or I've never caught them). Either I'm friends with spectacular liars, or I don't talk about books with friends/acquaintances as much as I thought...

O my Lord. Think of all the people who quote -- or misquote -- Samuel Johnson, or Gibbon, without having read more than a particle of Boswell or the Decline and fall of . . . Ditto (mutatis mutandis), Spengler, or Dr Karl Marx, or John Maynard Keynes, or Thorstein Veblen, or Aldo Leopold, or -- in the Western world, The Glorious Quran. And going from the parlour to the pigpen, how many people have actually slogged all the way through that insufferable Poisonwood Bible by the otherwise praiseworthy Barbara Kingsolver?

I am pleased to see that I have read all except A Passage to India and The Lord of the Rings.

And I've read all 52 chapters and 625 pages of my Franklin Library (1979) Don Quixote -- but unfortunately that edition contains only Part One, and I must confess I have not yet gotten to Part Two!

8> Me either; most folks just say "I wish I had time to read" with that annoying "you obviously have too much time on your hands" tone of voice.

9> Yes, read Poisonwood. My memory of it has been revoked, however, so I may as well not have. I don't know what I was thinking, really.

10> But I think it's Part Two that has the lions. The lions are the best! :)

This is an interesting series of lectures on DQ. Maybe I'll watch them in my free time and change my opinion on that second part.

http://oyc.yale.edu/spanish-and-portuguese/span-300/lecture-20

>11 Cecrow: oh I hate that tone of voice!

I've read them all except Great Expectations

I have read 7 - but as with others here, I have never claimed to have read books that I haven't. Why do that?

BTW, my 3 unread ones are War and Peace, Crime and Punishment, and Catcher in the Rye.

In re #15. People are often insecure, and want to project a strong image, especially when it can't be disproven. As to your trifecta, of-course, taste is personal, but let me suggest that you can safely skip Salinger. I know the grouping of the three is coincidental, but on paper it looks like matching-up Mozart and Monteverdi with Michael Jackson. Have fun with the old Russians. -- GG

I absolutely loved War and Peace and I remember liking Crime and Punishment and how I Hated capital H Catcher in the Rye never understood why everyone raves about that book. I know personal taste. But then I was told by a co-worker WHAT YOU DIDNT LIKE LORD IN THE RINGS??? YOU JUST HAVE NO IMAGINATION AT ALL! But oh well there are too many books to read and not enough time.

In re #17. Best thing about the inescapable LORD is the excuse it gave for the National Lampoon take-off Bored of the rings. Therein we find Bilbo Baggins transfigured into Dildo Bugger. For some of us, this is High Humour. Keep laughin' -- G

I've a soft spot for the Rings trilogy; first book on this list I read (when I was ten), and have been a fan of that genre ever since as a result. But I'll admit it looks out of place among the other nine. Catcher in the Rye was forced on us in Grade Twelve, but I had no regrets; it was right for me at that age. Perhaps what it and Rings have in common is: best served to the young.

My older brother works in finance helping the 1% and inexplicably read Cather in the Rye a few years ago. There is a hype surrounding it that I don't think the average reader can see past. Of course he was underwhelmed but then again he doesn't do much reading anyway so I think he thought he was exposing himself to some great literature in a conveniently ~200 page length work and that's not necessarily what he got.

Salinger is first and foremost a short story and novella-length story teller. I'm not sure Catcher has aged that well but if you haven't read other things he's written you aren't close to getting a good understanding of Salinger's genius. But, it was a very important book for fifties early sixties America and still holds up today, for different reasons perhaps...

I always recommend War and Peace only because it's not as difficult as it is long and has an wonderful cast of very empathetic characters. Glad to see others have found it enjoyable. Maybe one day someone will take my suggestion to heart and I'll have someone to talk to about it.

I've read all of the books but 1984 and A passage to India I read Catcher a couple years ago mostly because my niece loved it and I thought it was all right but mostly underwhelming. I think it's one of those books that should be read before you're 21.

I've read all but A Passage to India, though I may read that by the end of the year. 4 of them I've read twice.

I'm surprised Ulysses is not on that list. It's one I haven't been able to finish, and I'm very tempted to just not finish it and say I have. But I'm just too honest, I guess.

Most people are honest about not reading Ulysses for some reason. Funny...

8, 15> I don't recommend this book, but your comments about never meeting people who have faked reading a classic reminded me of Pierre Bayard's snarky pseudo-psychoanalysis, How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read. According to Bayard, we all lie about which books we've read all the time, and we're all pompous and intellectually deficient because of this habit. I suspect he wrote the book in lieu of reading the works he mentions in it.

I've also never understood why it's so hard for people simply to say, "I haven't read this book. What are some of the things you enjoyed most about it?" Verso, if you have friends who make fun of you for not reading a certain book, maybe it's time for new friends. Everything is not a competition.

(end rant)

As for me, I proudly own the fact that Jane Eyre is the only book that ever has inspired me to make like Dorothy Parker and toss it across the room. But there are lots of other classics I've started and then abandoned, e.g., Crime and Punishment.

>20 DanMat: Love War and Peace, but I find people scoff at that notion. "How could you possibly love that long, boring treatise?" Oddly enough, I feel that very way about Anna Karenina.

>20 DanMat: I loved War and Peace but didn't care for Anna Karenina. I thought it was tedious. With the possible exception of the train I found the characters to be unlikable, uninteresting, or both. It had some important things to say but Levin's digressions on hunting, agriculture, and Russian politics were too long and dull. I tell people to Read Madame Bovary instead.

>25 Betelgeuse: I was with you until you said Madame Bovary.

Ironically, I too, liked the train. But I generally like trains, anyway.

And the relationship it had with Anna, well, I can't say I'm surprised it ended the way it did. ;)

>24 LibraryPerilous:, 25 Ditto. I loved War and Peace, once I got into it, but I didn't like Anna Karenina at all.

I also don't understand why anyone would lie about having read a book (unless it's to their parents/teachers). Now, I have read Tess of the d'Ubervilles and I remember liking it and even remember writing at least two essays on it, but I have no idea what the book is about anymore. Same goes for Tale of Two Cities. Great book. Plot anyone?

And then Jane Eyre and Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility. I've read Jane Eyre but sometimes I get its plot mixed up with Wuthering Heights. And then I read either P&P or S&S but don't remember which. So I know I'm not lying, just becoming forgetful. :P

But I'm not going to tell you I've read such and such book if I haven't. I can just read it later. Don't need to lie!

I've read six of them. I'll never read them all because I will never, ever read LoTR. But here's the 99 second version for those of you not familiar with it:

LoTR in 99 Seconds

>29 karenmarie: Karen, I felt that way too, and then fell in love with it, without even being a fan of the fantasy genre.

Are you opposed to that, or just feel it's not right for you? Just curious, it seems to incite very strong feelings of love and hate.

Hi DianaNowling - I don't hate it, I just don't get it. I tried to read it several times in my early 20s, and then, when daughter seemed interested, I bought the audio books and tried listening to it. To no avail. It just doesn't appeal to me. Watched the movie(s?) once with husband and daughter. I liked the trees. And Orlando Bloom with elf ears. Meh.

Not trying to incite a riot, just don't care for it. And it prevents me from having a perfect 10 eventually.

Harry Potter, on the other hand.......

>31 karenmarie: Hee! I tanked on HP after she killed off my favorite character in book 5. It all just went so . . . dark. But the first three books are grand fun.

I had the same problem with The Hobbit and LotR the first few times I tried to read them. I particularly couldn't handle the medieval syntax. I don't mind characters talking that way, but do you have to construct your entire paragraphs in the same way? "Dark were the trees in the dense forest, and thick was the air. Fell was the eye that circled above them." (Not an actual quote, but you get the idea.)

Anyway, I tried again later because of my love of medieval romances and it just clicked. Isn't it funny how that happens to us sometimes? Of course, the reverse happens sometimes, too. That's always a sad moment. But who's to say it won't change later, too . . .

Yeah, well, I not only claim to have read all of them, I have read all of them.

But I must say I think the list is weird. I don't think most folks have heard of A Passage to India, much less claim to have read it.

33> To Kill a Mockingbird surprises me the most, because that seems to be a book everyone I know--but me--read in high school. Maybe that's the answer: Cliff Notes were used, not the book itself.

I still haven't read it.

> 34

Or they watched the movie, which, while excellent, is nowhere near as complex and nuanced as the book.

>35 lilithcat: Yes, I do like the film. Thanks for your mini-review. It's been on my TBR list for quite some time. Bump time, maybe?

Similarly: Have you read A Tree Grows in Brooklyn? I saw the movie when I was young and it happened to be on TV; I remember being quite moved by it. I've not read the book, but it gets bandied as a classic frequently.

Also, just riffing on how books become entangled in our minds, I can't bring myself to read Catcher in the Rye because I disliked A Separate Peace so much. The two are linked in my brain. It must be the teenage boy angst at prep school motif.

>33 lilithcat: I don't think most folks have heard of A Passage to India, much less claim to have read it.

The poll was done in the UK, by "a leading research team" according to the Torygraph. They don't provide a link to the original research, so it's presumably something they commissioned themselves. I don't imagine A passage to India would appear on the list if you did a similar survey in the US, but in Britain most educated people have heard of it and know that it had Peggy Ashcroft in it...

#36 - I read A Tree Grows in Brooklyn when I was in high school and adored it. I also read two others by Betty Smith - Joy in the Morning and Maggie-Now. I'm not sure I'd ever re-read them, but I remember loving the characters.

J.D. Salinger's other works - short stories and novellas - are much, much better than Catcher in the Rye, although I loved IT when I read it in high school. Again, not sure I'd ever re-read it. But I re-read his other books frequently. My copies are in tatters. I remember going on a card catalog quest in high school and finding and reading every story published by Jerome David Salinger - read them right there in the library in the original magazines, as published. Ah the card catalog. A lost tool for a lost medium.

>36 LibraryPerilous: Coincidentally I just finished A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. I thought it was excellent. A darker, sometimes more graphic book than To Kill a Mockingbird but similar in some ways.

>38 karenmarie:, 39 Maybe I'll do a double read. I have Brown Girl, Brownstones in my library haul right now. Maybe I'll do a triple read even, as that strikes me as a book that would provide an interesting counterpoint.

Thanks, both, for the feedback.

I'll get around to Salinger eventually, I guess, if only because I'm a classics completist. Thanks for the tip, karenmarie; perhaps I'll start with another of his books.

Re: short stories, I think that is one area where card catalogs acutely are missed. Even the local college's library, which does have its journals and magazines cataloged online, doesn't have all their contents listed online.

What fun you must have had finding your favorite author in magazines: The lost art of the card catalog quest.

>36 LibraryPerilous: I've also read and adored A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. Read it years ago in early high school and still think about it from time to time. It really resonated with me.

41> And me, though I didn't read it until my thirties. Just something about it - speaks to that tenuous connection we all retain to our childhood glory days, despite the day we had to put it behind us.

amazing. I have read every single one. Virtually all within the last 5 years or so.

I agree completely about War and Peace. I think its reputation as being difficult is not deserved. I found other books, Don Quixote being one of them, to be much more difficult to get through.

Yes, Don Quixote was a surprising slog for me. What we know of the story was more fun than actually reading it.

44, 45 -
Ooo I wish Don Quixote was on the list. (or maybe I don't) I loved that book and couldn't stop chuckling throughout.

Read 8 of 10. Haven't read the Russians.

War and Peace is a wonderful, long, easy-to-read soap opera. You can even skip the epilogues, if you'd like!

I own all of them but thus far have only read Catcher In The Rye. Really should get on that...

Hmm... I have only read five of the titles on the list. But it is a good list of what to read. Now I have five new titles on my wish list :)

Now that I have read A Passage to India, I can honestly say I have read all the books on the list.

I've only read 4 of this particular odd little list, but 4 more are on my shelves and just haven't had their turn come up yet. I loved the Hobbit when I was young, but never got around to reading the LotR books.

I've certainly never felt the desire to lie about having read/not read any book. Even in high school the one time I hadn't done the reading to the point we were supposed to I admitted it and was sent to read in the study area instead of watching the movie (which I didn't mind at all, lol).

I've read half of these 10:

Read:
1984 by George Orwell - A great book, especially for its era, but it is overshadowed these days by everyday current events. Even Orwell couldn't predict how insidious the Newspeak was going to get.
Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger - I read this in high school and had a fantastic English teacher, so I have a warm spot in my heart for it. Among other things, my teacher used the book to teach the concept of the unreliable narrator. I have no idea how well it would stand up for me upon a re-read.
The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien - I've read the whole thing many times, although not for several years. I did reread The Hobbit this year, though, and loved it all over again. Bottom line for me: great storytelling
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee - Simply exquisite
Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky - In the mid-80s, aseveral years after graduating college, I decided to go to grad school and got into the English Lit/Creative Writing MA program at San Fransisco State University. About a month before making the necessary move from New Orleans to San Francisco, I suddenly went into a panic because I realized I had never read Crime and Punishment and was convinced that everyone in the graduate program would therefore instantly peg me for a fraud. So the last book I read before moving was this one. Of course, I got through three years of grad school without taking a class on Russian literature and nobody ever mentioned Crime and Punishment to me at all! Anyway, I enjoyed it and, upon a re-read a couple of years back, enjoyed it even more.

Not Read:
War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy - One of these days
Great Expectations by Charles Dickens - I read A Tale of Two Cities in high school and wasn't a big fan (different teacher). My wife likes Dickens but I'm not in a big rush.
A Passage to India by E.M. Forster - One of these days
Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen - One of these days. I will say that Emma is on my top 10 of funniest books I've ever read.
Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë - Not that interested. Don't know why.

I don't know that I've ever caught anyone lying about having read a particular book.

I have managed eight out of ten. I tried To kill a mockingbird years ago after watching the film and couldn't bring myself to finish. The same goes for The catcher in the rye. I don't see myself trying again in the near future. There are so many classics out there that look more interesting.

I've read most of them but I think the list reflects the average age of the people that were originally asked - my sons (both in their twenties) are avid readers but probably have only even HEARD of three or four....their classics and 'must-read-one-day' books are completely different....it's a bit like children's books - my classics (Wind in the Willows, Alice, Pooh) are not the classics for youngsters today (she said from the great age of 50+!)

>53 rocketjk:, I finally read Jane Eyre last year, after years of ignoring it (romance is for girls!!!), and it was the best book I read all year - seriously.

>55 JanetMerza: I disagree completely. There may be "newer" books added to those considered "classics" as time goes on, but a classic is a classic. I'm kind of concerned of an avid reader in their 20s who hasn't heard of nearly all these books (A Passage to India being the only one I would let slide through). How is that possible?? Many of them are taught in school and all of them are lauded classics. The specific date it was written doesn't change that, and something that came out 10 years ago is not at all a "classic," so I don't get what you're attempting to say about that. Yes, modern fiction changes and I wouldn't expect a 10 yr old now to read most of the things I read at that age, but that's no bearing on the classics. And, yes, Wind in the Willows, Alice, and Pooh, are very much classics and are very much loved by many young people today.

>55 JanetMerza: I have the same reaction as PolymathicMonkey. None of these books has stopped being a classic (as far as I'm aware) and I would have thught that anyone with any interest in books would have at least know of them all. Indeed, for a UK reader, I would have thought that Orwell's 1984 would be of supreme relevance today. I know British education has slipped a bit, but surely not to this extraordinary extent?

Possibly these titles tie to high school reading lists, which may not be a good time to read some of them. If you've sat through schoolroom lectures/discussion you might have a good feel for the book without necessarily having read them. I feel like I've read To Kill a Mockingbird, but I actually haven't.

I've read 5, and expect to read the rest eventually, except for Catcher in the Rye. "Spect I'm too old to appreciate it.

Heaven will be the ability to read everything I want.

>56 Cecrow:, 53 I read Jane Eyre for the first time a few years ago and I have to echo what Cecrow said. I thought it was a great book.

>59 2wonderY:, I totally feel like I've read Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, what with so much study of Greek mythology in school, several novels I've read that closely reference them (The Firebrand, Ilium, Mountain of Black Glass, etc.), movies that deal with the Trojan war, etc. But nope, never read them.

War and Peace is one I wonder if I would ever finish. Great Expectations is one of my most favourites and was one of the thicker novels I managed to read quite happily, while Jane Eyre has been much loved my myself since the age of twelve, and a novel I'm reading at the moment.

I was really surprised by War and Peace. I approached it with something like dread, but mostly I found it a page-turner.

I spent a summer reading War and Peace when I was supposed to be studying French. I didn't do so well with the French thing.

>64 varielle:, you should have read a French translation! :) Then again, I tried that strategy and couldn't even get through a French copy of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone - so, never mind then.

Completely agree War and Peace is wonderful and like everyone says it is so well worth it. I was completely scared for of this book for many years. FYI there is a BBC movie that is really good but it is long, but of course if the book is over 1000 pages it has to be wrong. Pick it up you will not regret it.

>65 Cecrow: Ha ha! I tried that strategy with the French edition of The Hobbit years ago -- I still remember that Bag-End was translated as "Cul-de-Sac" which I found amusing!

Glad to hear all the positive remarks about War and Peace as I am planning on reading it starting next month.

I have a real problem differentiating all the Russian names for some reason, so W&P and other Russian classics have mostly stayed off my "Read" list.

It's the only reason I'm not reading one of my favorite author's books - Shanghai Station, much less Russian classics.

>68 karenmarie: Can you explain to me what it is that's so hard about Russian names? This is not at all a dig at anyone, but I've just never understood when people say that (I've seen it a bunch). Their names are barely different, with first, patronymic, last, and nicknames. For example, Pavel Fyodorovich Gromeko, nicknames Pasha and Pashenka. Just like somebody named Elizabeth Jane Smith, nicknames Liz and Lizzie. Can you clarify what is it that's so difficult?

I'm an American born in the US of English-Scots-Irish descent on my father's side. English names are a familiar construct for me. Plus I am an Anglophile and have always read about and cared about this part of my heritage to a disproportionate degree.

But, I'm 1/2 Czech-American on my mother's side, so Holec, Becicka, Chadima, etc. are familiar and easily differentiated as last names. Just because I grew up with those names.

For some reason Russian names just blend together to me. Go figure.

hm. I just don't get that. To me it's no different to remember Pasha than Dylan. Just because a name isn't one I encounter on a regular basis doesn't mean I have trouble with it in a story, just the same as with Bilbo Baggins or Saruman etc.

I think in my case, since I'm so bad with names (I've been known to introduce myself to the same person within ten minutes; guess I'm bad with faces too), I rely on picking up something unique about the name in order to remember that character. Usually what I latch onto is the first letter, so I prefer not having lots of A names, B names, etc. With Russian names I think I latch on to the things that seem "weird" to me, like the "ilych" or whatever - then discover because it's a Russion novel there's tons of "ilych" and pretty soon I'm lost, because I used the wrong token to keep everybody straight.

>72 Cecrow: That makes a little more sense, you're referring to the patronymic I assume, which by its nature has the same few endings. But that's only one part of one name. It's not like everyone in Russia is actually named Ivan ;) In Doctor Zhivago, for instance (because it's my recent Russian novel and is nearby), many of the male characters shared their fathers' names, so there was "Nikolay Nikolayevitch" "Alexander Alexandrovitch" "Pavel Pavlovitch" and so forth, but I do not believe there's any more common same-letter different-names than any other language.