Hey /lit/, Where can I find a top books list based on user

goodreads?

Those lists are shit and so are book ones

>>8029590
This is correct

Rym has Radiohead and Pink Floyd in the top 3 come the fuck on man get some actual taste

>>8029567
>Where can I find a top books list based on user ratings?

those ratings usually have the contemporary genre fiction at the very top

>>8029567
>>8029984

Holy shit, this is the lowest tier of effort ever excreted in any shit post I have ever seen barring tech questions on /g/.

Your inability to google or look at the wiki is beyond redeemable. I pray you're just a troll and aren't as retarded as this post makes you out to be.

File: 1434943292898.jpg (1MB, 1820x4348px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1820x4348px

This is all you need

>>8031086
>137 posters
>100 books
So its like a 3 different ties?

File: 1406182251503.jpg (87KB, 682x1024px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 682x1024px

>>8031086
>that list

>>8031221
Don't read
>>8031086
It's meaningless.

>>8031086
Why would you post the older list?

>>8031369
great criticisms here, pal. I'd rather trust 137 /lit/ posters than any number of plebs from an IMDb-tier site

>>8029567
http://thegreatestbooks.org/

>>8031634
It's a meaningless collection of the unrelated titles. Sure, let's mix a Greek epic poem with old English tales, a post-modern novel, some high fantasy, a slip of philosophy and the Bible. It makes so much sense.

>>8031679
Who said, at any point, that they needed to be related? Shawshank Redemption and Guardians of the Galaxy aren't related yet they're at the top of the IMDb list (I really hate that site if you can't tell)

>>8031697
In the best way, it's a—bad—starter list. The ridiculousness of having 137 votes to elect 100 titles aside, I don't see the point of following the mediocre opinion of a bunch of people who constantly circlejerk on books I'm sure many haven't even read. How many threads are open with the Pynchon picture right now? How many times a week someone posts the fart letter of Joyce? This isn't a list of the 100 most popular books on /lit/, it's merely a list of which titles /lit/ have heard of. This list is hypocritical and silently suggests the names have been elected among a pool of discussed authors, whereas we never talked about another Existentialist French philosopher but Camus, nor a Greek poet but Homer, or a contemporary English writer besides the stupid Pynchon/Wallace/Joyce triumvirate. This picture stinks and should be shred.

>>8031034
Kill yourself, my man.

Donald Barthelme and Larry McCaffrey both have cool lists.

>>8031742
>I am hurt in the butt because my favourites didn't make the list

>>8029567
The Western Canon baka desu