Sunday, October 17, 2010

Top 100 Romance Books

AAR's poll for the Top 100 Romance Books is now up and running. *phew!*

I know a few people like to play in the polls so I thought I would let you all know - you can go here to enter your list. I'll post here again when the results are done.

A few years ago I compiled my list and got to number 34 and after that my head exploded. So no stress, how ever far you get is how far you get - just send your list in with 3 or 100 book titles, it's all up to you.

But seriously, I was so frustrated by book 34 I didn't know if I was coming or going. Was J.R. Ward's latest book a smidge better than Singh's latest or am I getting this all messed up. I take things too literally.

I'm thinking in the end, if I can put the book down as one of my top picks for favourites, then who cares if it's 40th or 1st. Not on my own list anyways. Once you get a bunch of people's lists together, then the numbers mean something to me.

For me, the top 20 should be read. Although I can't say I have read all of them. After that, if you have already tried an author then I'm just as happy to let a title in 54th place pass me by.

I'll give you a heart rending example: I'm not reading Jane Austen.

Sorry.

I'm just not that kind of reader. And I'm not ever sure what that means. Maybe if I get kidnapped and locked up in a room with only Jane Austen type books I'll get around to reading them. Since I've got any number of distractions running around my house including a TBR mountain, then I can pass.

And maybe one day I will get around to Diana Gabaldon.

Maybe.

Now, give me the latest Anne Stuart and it's probably on my list around number 86.

You know, if I get that far.

How about you?

Wanna make a list?

Already know which books you aren't really ever planning on reading? (except in that one scenario where you are on a desert island and the only books there are the ones you figured you'd never read but hot damn you are bored and reading is better than sitting so you'll pick up that friggin author that writes books that make your teeth hurt cause that's all there is.)

5 comments:

Kat at Book Thingo said...

So does it matter which order I list the books? I've had the same problem as you in previous years -- head explosion after book 20 or so.

CindyS said...

Kat - you are supposed to put them in order from 1 to 100 but I only go as far as I can go and when my brain snaps I say 'done!!' ;)

CindyS

nath said...

I never sat down to consider top 100. It's just so hard and well, most of the time, I disagree with people LOL.

I don't read classics like Jane Austen. Not going to happen. For me, whoever is too best-seller, I'm skipping ^_^; Except for Nora Roberts, of course LOL.

CindyS said...

Nath - too funny - it's not about agreeing with others - it's about what your favs are. You should see the ballots that come in, some have 100 titles of books I haven't read or heard of. I think that's awesome!
And yeah, NR has a few fans ;)

Cindy

Holly said...

I think I'm just plain too lazy to do a list. Plus, my favorites change. So..eh.

I'm sad for all of you that you aren't reading Austin. She's the queen of historical romance...er, except they weren't historical when they were written. She's just so wonderful! You should try her..really!

Diana Gabaldon, OTOH..blech. I just don't see myself ever reading that. Ever.