GQ published a list of 21 books you don’t have to read. It lists Huckleberry Finn twice, so I am only showing 20 below.
Two are on my list of books I have read twice, even. Those are highlighted in green.
I found it surprising and refreshing that I have actually read six of the books on this list (green and yellow) and tried to read another five (orange) but couldn’t finish them.
What I found most valuable about the GQ article itself is that it provides a rich list of alternative books to read instead – and thus my reading list has just been expanded tremendously.
I found the article has no literary value and shows the incompetence of the author. Adjectives (words that describe a noun) like; boring, racist, misogynist, white, male, as used in this article are intended to imbue disdain for the novelist, but have nothing to do with the novel. Claiming the immorality of the novelist equates to a worthless novel is ignorant, article author is virtue signaling in lieu of a literary synopsis.
I do agree that any encouragement to read and expand ones mind are worthwhile. However trying to stop all reading altogether that doesn’t conform to a specific ideology is reprehensible and inexcusable.
I like your forceful response. Thank you for this angle.
I don’t have to read Gravity’s Rainbow? Thank goodness! On my fourth try, I got about 1/3 through and promised to come back to it, but that was over a year ago. I have read Pynchon’s Against the Day three times and will probably read it again, because I still might have missed something. Since I love that book so much, I’ve felt guilty, like I’m just not trying hard enough, with Gravity’s Rainbow. I’ve even considered spending $290 for a book with pictures of what happens on every page. Thank you for this absolution!