<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Further Thoughts on 80s and 90s Classics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bibliographing.com/2008/09/04/further-thoughts-on-80s-and-90s-classics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bibliographing.com/2008/09/04/further-thoughts-on-80s-and-90s-classics/</link>
	<description>or, writing about books</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 04:34:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: nicole</title>
		<link>http://www.bibliographing.com/2008/09/04/further-thoughts-on-80s-and-90s-classics/comment-page-1/#comment-147</link>
		<dc:creator>nicole</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 21:44:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lifeinbooks.wordpress.com/?p=253#comment-147</guid>
		<description>Lloyd&#8212;I would definitely recommend McEwan, he is not as pop as he seems, though I would possibly not start with &lt;em&gt;Atonement&lt;/em&gt;, or with &lt;em&gt;Saturday&lt;/em&gt;, for that matter. I myself started with &lt;em&gt;Amsterdam&lt;/em&gt;.

Certainly Ryan&#039;s list varies a lot even within the US. I myself have not yet read &lt;em&gt;The Jungle&lt;/em&gt;, while we did read several things by Wilde.

I, too, have ended up thinking a lot more about this than I anticipated, and I&#039;m actually mulling some thoughts that could turn into another post. The horror!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lloyd&mdash;I would definitely recommend McEwan, he is not as pop as he seems, though I would possibly not start with <em>Atonement</em>, or with <em>Saturday</em>, for that matter. I myself started with <em>Amsterdam</em>.</p>
<p>Certainly Ryan&#8217;s list varies a lot even within the US. I myself have not yet read <em>The Jungle</em>, while we did read several things by Wilde.</p>
<p>I, too, have ended up thinking a lot more about this than I anticipated, and I&#8217;m actually mulling some thoughts that could turn into another post. The horror!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lloyd</title>
		<link>http://www.bibliographing.com/2008/09/04/further-thoughts-on-80s-and-90s-classics/comment-page-1/#comment-146</link>
		<dc:creator>Lloyd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:18:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lifeinbooks.wordpress.com/?p=253#comment-146</guid>
		<description>Norwegian Wood&#039;s a great choice and one I was also considering. When I decided against it, I couldn&#039;t give a reason why, but I just had this &#039;feeling&#039; that it wasn&#039;t suitable.

By the look of this list, maybe I should break my McEwan cherry? I&#039;ve always shied away from his books as they seem too popular to be truly good. &#039;Pop fiction&#039;, you could say.

But even then (back on topic), is a list like this ever &#039;complete&#039;? Looking at Ryan&#039;s original list of &#039;classic&#039; books, it&#039;s different to UK schools&#039; reading lists due to our different histories. Who says The Jungle is more representative as turn of the century literature than The Picture of Dorian Gray?  Totally different books, for our totally different histories.

I&#039;ve thought about this seemingly simple question more than I expected.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Norwegian Wood&#8217;s a great choice and one I was also considering. When I decided against it, I couldn&#8217;t give a reason why, but I just had this &#8216;feeling&#8217; that it wasn&#8217;t suitable.</p>
<p>By the look of this list, maybe I should break my McEwan cherry? I&#8217;ve always shied away from his books as they seem too popular to be truly good. &#8216;Pop fiction&#8217;, you could say.</p>
<p>But even then (back on topic), is a list like this ever &#8216;complete&#8217;? Looking at Ryan&#8217;s original list of &#8216;classic&#8217; books, it&#8217;s different to UK schools&#8217; reading lists due to our different histories. Who says The Jungle is more representative as turn of the century literature than The Picture of Dorian Gray?  Totally different books, for our totally different histories.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve thought about this seemingly simple question more than I expected.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kristynwinters</title>
		<link>http://www.bibliographing.com/2008/09/04/further-thoughts-on-80s-and-90s-classics/comment-page-1/#comment-145</link>
		<dc:creator>kristynwinters</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:49:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lifeinbooks.wordpress.com/?p=253#comment-145</guid>
		<description>Interesting.  I like the idea of thinking about books in terms of recent decades.  It seems easy for most of us to match older books with their time period, but for the last 30 years, not so much.

I&#039;m glad I found your blog.  I love reading blogs about people who read.  I&#039;ll have to add some of these to my to-read list.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting.  I like the idea of thinking about books in terms of recent decades.  It seems easy for most of us to match older books with their time period, but for the last 30 years, not so much.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m glad I found your blog.  I love reading blogs about people who read.  I&#8217;ll have to add some of these to my to-read list.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
