Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

From the Big Short to Normal People: Books That Defined the Decade

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 45 posts

Re: From the Big Short to Normal People: Books That Defined the Decade

#21

Post by ralfd »

EliRivers wrote: post #19
mellosouls wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The list as a whole reflects their curious priorities in a definition of the decade. As for Gone Girl itself, I'm struggling to see it's importance.

After that novel's success, there was a noticeable upsurge in novels that shared a number of features and styles and themes. I suspect that it was something of a Pulp Fiction effect; reading it again now makes it seem almost derivative, much as Pulp Fiction now looks like a homage to itself. Granted, this is of importance to the publishing industry and the novel reading public rather than, say, the economy or politic…

Whatever the influence of “Gone Girl” on the decade is, it certainly can’t be bigger than “50 shades of Grey” from 2011/2012.

Re: From the Big Short to Normal People: Books That Defined the Decade

#22

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew »

mellosouls wrote: post #13
pottertheotter wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question, what do you mean by this? In your opinion, what is The Guardian’s bias / “politically loaded view of the decade”?

[flagged]

Setting aside the fact that you're listing event/issues, and not books: In what universe can anyone believe a single Olympics should rank anywhere near the term "defining a decade"?

There's winter and summer, so every decade sees five and your top-10 is half full. Personally, I think the Soccer World is at least as important, and that, considering their singular relevance for the fate of the world, some tournaments surely see two books written about them, the list is full. So maybe that "book" about some regional independence in a has-been empire, which isn't even independent, just didn't make the cut.

By the way: half a million people died in Syria this decade.

Re: From the Big Short to Normal People: Books That Defined the Decade

#23

Post by EliRivers »

ralfd wrote: post #21
EliRivers wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After that novel's success, there was a noticeable upsurge in novels that shared a number of features and styles and themes. I suspect that it was something of a Pulp Fiction effect; reading it again now makes it seem almost derivative, much as Pulp Fiction now looks like a homage to itself. Granted, this is of importance to the publishing industry and the novel reading public rather than, say, the economy or politic…

Whatever the influence of “Gone Girl” on the decade is, it certainly can’t be bigger than “50 shades of Grey” from 2011/2012.

That's interesting; I genuinely haven't noticed that impact. I don't read much bondage-light (or whatever genre 50 Shades was). Was there a sea change in that section of the industry? The book itself was, from what reviews I read, pretty badly written (although this review alone made it worth it! - https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/340987215 ), so I guess the impact can only be mainstreaming bondage-light; is there a new thriving sector of the industry providing that to people?

Re: From the Big Short to Normal People: Books That Defined the Decade

#26

Post by 9nGQluzmnq3M »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #18
mellosouls wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Have there been any canonical or defining books on these topics? Most of them are still playing out so a definitive book would be a huge surprise, and in most cases downright impossible. Austerity is a policy choice, so any exploration will be deeply and inherently political. Economically, there have been wider views of the current cargo cults in economics, such as Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century, or Keen's Deb…

Agreed, Piketty was a very surprising omission (particularly given the lambasting here about the Guardian's left-wing bias). Agree with it or not, it certainly had a much larger impact on real-world policy making than any of the literary award winners listed.

Re: From the Big Short to Normal People: Books That Defined the Decade

#28

Post by mashby »

IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #20
mellosouls wrote: post #3

It's The Guardian, so more of a list that defines their rather politically loaded view of the decade. Obviously that sort of bias is not unique to The Guardian, but I'd prefer a list that genuinely sheds light on the times we are in.

Isn't this the institutional version of an ad hominem ? Every article from the Guardian, the NYT, or really any other large publisher gets this comment, and it's often voted to the top. It adds nothing. Everyone knows half of the population doesn't trust any newspaper to get the date on the front page right. So the Guardian thinks #metoo and the financial crisis were among the topics of salience on the last year? I w…

"Guardian journalism is free from commercial and political bias"

The quote is from the donation plea box under this list.

This list is only commercial and political bias.

It even ends with a corporate sponsered book award. :)

Re: From the Big Short to Normal People: Books That Defined the Decade

#29

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew »

oxymoran wrote: post #25

And here I thought the normal people reference was to “The War on Normal People” by Andrew Yang which,10 years from now will look like a glaring omission.

I do have quite a lot of sympathy for Andrew Yang, and I don't doubt the book is a well-crafted long essay of his central thesis of economic disruption.

But if it looks like a glaring omission ten years from now, it almost by definition is the defining book of that decade, not the last one.

It would not even surprise me if Yang, if asked, would name some work that came before his book to be more deserving of distinction. Because while he is a very effective promoter of UBI and why it's needed, it isn't exactly his idea.

Re: From the Big Short to Normal People: Books That Defined the Decade

#30

Post by NeedMoreTea »

mashby wrote: post #28
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this the institutional version of an ad hominem ? Every article from the Guardian, the NYT, or really any other large publisher gets this comment, and it's often voted to the top. It adds nothing. Everyone knows half of the population doesn't trust any newspaper to get the date on the front page right. So the Guardian thinks #metoo and the financial crisis were among the topics of salience on the last year? I w…

"Guardian journalism is free from commercial and political bias" The quote is from the donation plea box under this list. This list is only commercial and political bias. It even ends with a corporate sponsered book award. :)

Love them or loathe them they are free from the usual bias of the major newspapers. They are not owned by an individual of extreme wealth setting the agenda, sometimes on day to day issues and prospective governing party e.g, Murdoch doing a deal with Blair. They're owned by a trust which, since before the war, aims to keep the paper's liberal position, without party affiliation.

I don't think there's another UK paper without a sugar daddy, and suffering in reporting as a consequence.

Post reply on HN