Occam’s Razor

September 26, 2007

Buti Na Lang

Filed under: Uncategorized — lesturla @ 6:14 pm

What the fuck am I doing up this late when I gotsta go to work in the morneng? I can’t sleep. I’m having one of them “too-many-shit-cycloning-in-my-mind” spells. Was having terrible migraine already this afternoon because of too much thinking all day so I had to take 2 glasses (not cups) of unadulterated Vietnamese coffee. Migraine gone but shit cyclone went on full throttle. You guessed it right, migraine looms anew in a few hours unless of course I get to sleep. Which won’t happen because of the freakin effective coffee.

Anyway, on a positive note, buti na lang TJ brainwashed me to drop the Bangkok Open at buti na lang din I found out that Rafa will be in KL on November so I willingly obliged with no hard feelings to forego Bangkok — why? Coz Rafa, Nole, Roddick (the top three seeds) withdrew from the poor tournament in Bangkok. Which means Tommy Haas na lang the one worthy to watch. Other almost worthy names also got eliminated during the early rounds so if ever I pushed through I would have probably be cursing at the high skies by now.

These big tennis stars what I hate about them is how obviously Asian tourney are no biggie for them. They withdraw from the tournament with no remorse and can cite a plethora of reasons. The easiest of course will be injuries. At the same time it’s hard to blame them coz these are like latak tournaments na, what with all the 4 Grand Slams done already obviously they’d only want to win these small tourneys if number 1. they need the money, 2. they need those points to end the year at number 1. Eh does not apply to any of them, it’s not like anyone can topple Roger at the top anytime soon. And since they are the top players, they get millions from endorsement deals so what for do they need the barya they can win from say the Bangkok Open?

You know it’s a bad thing that I am up at this time coz fuck I’m speaking this horrible hybrid language again. Must get sleep and hopefully tomorrow I’m a normal person again sans this horrible language deficiency.


September 20, 2007


Filed under: Uncategorized — lesturla @ 7:34 am

Over the past few days I have been thinking a lot on how classmates from grade school, high school and college are doing now. My hope of course is that everyone’s enjoying their bliss or at least are having a great time pursuing them.

It started with a YM conference that I had with Joy and Ryan. We were having casual discussion on how life has been for us. Joy is now an expectant mother and has since established a career as an Industrial Engineer. Ryan has passed the Medical Board exams and is keen on becoming an extraordinary doctor along the lines of Burke of Grey’s. A lot of our classmates have made it big already and quite a number of them are at least pursuing their dreams. I’ve always maintained that the pursuit of dreams often provides for more meaningful joy than its achievement, so I had my peace. In essence I was glad that people are doing well.

It disturbs me however that last night, I was laughing my head off upon discovering that one of our classmates is now pursuing a career as a Jollibee mascot. Right there on his online profile, was a photo of him wearing Jollibee’s costume with Jollibee’s head in his right hand as though it were some helmet that he just took off. The caption read: I’m Jollibee. How freaky is that? He is Jollibee and it dawned to me that fuck, I used to be classmates with Jollibee!

I first thought that it was some really good albeit sick joke that he was playing but then when I clicked for the next photo, he was with ten other Jollibee mascots.

Apparently, the Jollibees were in a meeting of sorts. Imagine how the boardroom talks go with them bees all in one room.

At this point I couldn’t hold my laughter anymore and I had to share it with someone, so I pinged Stine in Chicago and showed her the pictures. We spent the next 15 minutes or so in a good cross continental laugh.

And then I started to think, was it such a mean thing for me to be laughing that way?

I’m giving myself a break here, after all I chunk mimes, clowns and mascots into the collective freak category. Call me a wuss but they scare me on end although from a distance I find them a bit hilarious. I am laughing not because of the odd career choice but with the fact that I can now call Jollibee a former classmate. Perfect! Even more, the sight of ten Jollibees in one place making weird poses is much too freaky funny for me. I immediately imagined being in a room full of Jollibees and I imagined myself scared at wits end possibly screaming with fear like a total wimp.

Is it possible that I have turned into a horrible human being who laughs at possibly another clear reminder of the lack of choices in our homeland? Or perhaps, was I ridiculing what could be a downright passion to being a mascot? Or is it because I laugh at almost anything that I see?

Whatever it is, the laughter sure didn’t last long.

September 17, 2007

It’s Final!

Sealed it! Nailed it! It’s final!

I am going to see Roger “mindworks”Federer play against Pete Sampras on 22nd November in Kuala Lumpur (they called the event Clash of Times: Roger Federer vs Pete Sampras.) My tickets are confirmed and will be arriving via courrier next week. Seats are Section West – Category C. The tickets started selling last Saturday and quickly got sold out for Categories A & B which are the prime seats but my seats aren’t too bad in fact I was told they have better view although di masyadong center.

But wait, there’s more! I just found out today when I purchased the tickets that Rafa Nadal will also have an exhibition match 2 days before the Federer-Sampras showdown vs. Richard Gasquet another very promising and highly talented young tennis pro. So what did Lesley do? I bought tickets for their match, too. I love it! This means I won’t have to go to Bangkok later on this month to see Rafa in action. Plus I got a prime seat North Category B, baby! Which means prime view of the players during changeovers. Woohoo!

Alright, now I just have to catch my breath and take this moment in. Need to get in touch with friends in Kuala Lumpur for pasyal buddies! Thea, Cullen and I will be there from 20th November and will leave for Hanoi on the 23rd. The 21st will be free for pasyal as well as daytime of the 22nd. So for those who’ve been to KL, suggestions for best pasyal places are most welcome!

Weehee! Literal I was jumping like a kid sa yosi area kanina! Love it! Love it!


Thanks Ric for the help!

for those lookin for tickets, you can buy online from here

September 13, 2007

Harvard Commencement Remark of Bill Gates

Filed under: Uncategorized — lesturla @ 6:06 am


(Text as prepared for delivery)

President Bok, former President Rudenstine, incoming President Faust, members of the Harvard Corporation and the Board of Overseers, members of the faculty, parents, and especially, the graduates:

I’ve been waiting more than 30 years to say this: “Dad, I always told you I’d come back and get my degree.”

I want to thank Harvard for this timely honor. I’ll be changing my job next year … and it will be nice to finally have a college degree on my resume.

I applaud the graduates today for taking a much more direct route to your degrees. For my part, I’m just happy that the Crimson has called me “Harvard’s most successful dropout.” I guess that makes me valedictorian of my own special class … I did the best of everyone who failed.

But I also want to be recognized as the guy who got Steve Ballmer to drop out of business school. I’m a bad influence. That’s why I was invited to speak at your graduation. If I had spoken at your orientation, fewer of you might be here today.

Harvard was just a phenomenal experience for me. Academic life was fascinating. I used to sit in on lots of classes I hadn’t even signed up for. And dorm life was terrific. I lived up at Radcliffe, in Currier House. There were always lots of people in my dorm room late at night discussing things, because everyone knew I didn’t worry about getting up in the morning. That’s how I came to be the leader of the anti-social group. We clung to each other as a way of validating our rejection of all those social people.

Radcliffe was a great place to live. There were more women up there, and most of the guys were science-math types. That combination offered me the best odds, if you know what I mean. This is where I learned the sad lesson that improving your odds doesn’t guarantee success.

One of my biggest memories of Harvard came in January 1975, when I made a call from Currier House to a company in Albuquerque that had begun making the world’s first personal computers. I offered to sell them software.

I worried that they would realize I was just a student in a dorm and hang up on me. Instead they said: “We’re not quite ready, come see us in a month,” which was a good thing, because we hadn’t written the software yet. From that moment, I worked day and night on this little extra credit project that marked the end of my college education and the beginning of a remarkable journey with Microsoft.

What I remember above all about Harvard was being in the midst of so much energy and intelligence. It could be exhilarating, intimidating, sometimes even discouraging, but always challenging. It was an amazing privilege – and though I left early, I was transformed by my years at Harvard, the friendships I made, and the ideas I worked on.

But taking a serious look back … I do have one big regret.

I left Harvard with no real awareness of the awful inequities in the world – the appalling disparities of health, and wealth, and opportunity that condemn millions of people to lives of despair.

I learned a lot here at Harvard about new ideas in economics and politics. I got great exposure to the advances being made in the sciences.

But humanity’s greatest advances are not in its discoveries – but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity. Whether through democracy, strong public education, quality health care, or broad economic opportunity – reducing inequity is the highest human achievement.

I left campus knowing little about the millions of young people cheated out of educational opportunities here in this country. And I knew nothing about the millions of people living in unspeakable poverty and disease in developing countries.

It took me decades to find out.

You graduates came to Harvard at a different time. You know more about the world’s inequities than the classes that came before. In your years here, I hope you’ve had a chance to think about how – in this age of accelerating technology – we can finally take on these inequities, and we can solve them.

Imagine, just for the sake of discussion, that you had a few hours a week and a few dollars a month to donate to a cause – and you wanted to spend that time and money where it would have the greatest impact in saving and improving lives. Where would you spend it?

For Melinda and for me, the challenge is the same: how can we do the most good for the greatest number with the resources we have.

During our discussions on this question, Melinda and I read an article about the millions of children who were dying every year in poor countries from diseases that we had long ago made harmless in this country. Measles, malaria, pneumonia, hepatitis B, yellow fever. One disease I had never even heard of, rotavirus, was killing half a million kids each year – none of them in the United States.

We were shocked. We had just assumed that if millions of children were dying and they could be saved, the world would make it a priority to discover and deliver the medicines to save them. But it did not. For under a dollar, there were interventions that could save lives that just weren’t being delivered.

If you believe that every life has equal value, it’s revolting to learn that some lives are seen as worth saving and others are not. We said to ourselves: “This can’t be true. But if it is true, it deserves to be the priority of our giving.”

So we began our work in the same way anyone here would begin it. We asked: “How could the world let these children die?”

The answer is simple, and harsh. The market did not reward saving the lives of these children, and governments did not subsidize it. So the children died because their mothers and their fathers had no power in the market and no voice in the system.

But you and I have both.

We can make market forces work better for the poor if we can develop a more creative capitalism – if we can stretch the reach of market forces so that more people can make a profit, or at least make a living, serving people who are suffering from the worst inequities. We also can press governments around the world to spend taxpayer money in ways that better reflect the values of the people who pay the taxes.

If we can find approaches that meet the needs of the poor in ways that generate profits for business and votes for politicians, we will have found a sustainable way to reduce inequity in the world. This task is open-ended. It can never be finished. But a conscious effort to answer this challenge will change the world.

I am optimistic that we can do this, but I talk to skeptics who claim there is no hope. They say: “Inequity has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us till the end – because people just … don’t … care.” I completely disagree.

I believe we have more caring than we know what to do with.

All of us here in this Yard, at one time or another, have seen human tragedies that broke our hearts, and yet we did nothing – not because we didn’t care, but because we didn’t know what to do. If we had known how to help, we would have acted.

The barrier to change is not too little caring; it is too much complexity.

To turn caring into action, we need to see a problem, see a solution, and see the impact. But complexity blocks all three steps.

Even with the advent of the Internet and 24-hour news, it is still a complex enterprise to get people to truly see the problems. When an airplane crashes, officials immediately call a press conference. They promise to investigate, determine the cause, and prevent similar crashes in the future.

But if the officials were brutally honest, they would say: “Of all the people in the world who died today from preventable causes, one half of one percent of them were on this plane. We’re determined to do everything possible to solve the problem that took the lives of the one half of one percent.”

The bigger problem is not the plane crash, but the millions of preventable deaths.

We don’t read much about these deaths. The media covers what’s new – and millions of people dying is nothing new. So it stays in the background, where it’s easier to ignore. But even when we do see it or read about it, it’s difficult to keep our eyes on the problem. It’s hard to look at suffering if the situation is so complex that we don’t know how to help. And so we look away.

If we can really see a problem, which is the first step, we come to the second step: cutting through the complexity to find a solution.

Finding solutions is essential if we want to make the most of our caring. If we have clear and proven answers anytime an organization or individual asks “How can I help?,” then we can get action – and we can make sure that none of the caring in the world is wasted. But complexity makes it hard to mark a path of action for everyone who cares — and that makes it hard for their caring to matter.

Cutting through complexity to find a solution runs through four predictable stages: determine a goal, find the highest-leverage approach, discover the ideal technology for that approach, and in the meantime, make the smartest application of the technology that you already have — whether it’s something sophisticated, like a drug, or something simpler, like a bednet.

The AIDS epidemic offers an example. The broad goal, of course, is to end the disease. The highest-leverage approach is prevention. The ideal technology would be a vaccine that gives lifetime immunity with a single dose. So governments, drug companies, and foundations fund vaccine research. But their work is likely to take more than a decade, so in the meantime, we have to work with what we have in hand – and the best prevention approach we have now is getting people to avoid risky behavior.

Pursuing that goal starts the four-step cycle again. This is the pattern. The crucial thing is to never stop thinking and working – and never do what we did with malaria and tuberculosis in the 20th century – which is to surrender to complexity and quit.

The final step – after seeing the problem and finding an approach – is to measure the impact of your work and share your successes and failures so that others learn from your efforts.

You have to have the statistics, of course. You have to be able to show that a program is vaccinating millions more children. You have to be able to show a decline in the number of children dying from these diseases. This is essential not just to improve the program, but also to help draw more investment from business and government.

But if you want to inspire people to participate, you have to show more than numbers; you have to convey the human impact of the work – so people can feel what saving a life means to the families affected.

I remember going to Davos some years back and sitting on a global health panel that was discussing ways to save millions of lives. Millions! Think of the thrill of saving just one person’s life – then multiply that by millions. … Yet this was the most boring panel I’ve ever been on – ever. So boring even I couldn’t bear it.

What made that experience especially striking was that I had just come from an event where we were introducing version 13 of some piece of software, and we had people jumping and shouting with excitement. I love getting people excited about software – but why can’t we generate even more excitement for saving lives?

You can’t get people excited unless you can help them see and feel the impact. And how you do that – is a complex question.

Still, I’m optimistic. Yes, inequity has been with us forever, but the new tools we have to cut through complexity have not been with us forever. They are new – they can help us make the most of our caring – and that’s why the future can be different from the past.

The defining and ongoing innovations of this age – biotechnology, the computer, the Internet – give us a chance we’ve never had before to end extreme poverty and end death from preventable disease.

Sixty years ago, George Marshall came to this commencement and announced a plan to assist the nations of post-war Europe. He said: “I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the situation. It is virtually impossible at this distance to grasp at all the real significance of the situation.”

Thirty years after Marshall made his address, as my class graduated without me, technology was emerging that would make the world smaller, more open, more visible, less distant.

The emergence of low-cost personal computers gave rise to a powerful network that has transformed opportunities for learning and communicating.

The magical thing about this network is not just that it collapses distance and makes everyone your neighbor. It also dramatically increases the number of brilliant minds we can have working together on the same problem – and that scales up the rate of innovation to a staggering degree.

At the same time, for every person in the world who has access to this technology, five people don’t. That means many creative minds are left out of this discussion — smart people with practical intelligence and relevant experience who don’t have the technology to hone their talents or contribute their ideas to the world.

We need as many people as possible to have access to this technology, because these advances are triggering a revolution in what human beings can do for one another. They are making it possible not just for national governments, but for universities, corporations, smaller organizations, and even individuals to see problems, see approaches, and measure the impact of their efforts to address the hunger, poverty, and desperation George Marshall spoke of 60 years ago.

Members of the Harvard Family: Here in the Yard is one of the great collections of intellectual talent in the world.

What for?

There is no question that the faculty, the alumni, the students, and the benefactors of Harvard have used their power to improve the lives of people here and around the world. But can we do more? Can Harvard dedicate its intellect to improving the lives of people who will never even hear its name?

Let me make a request of the deans and the professors – the intellectual leaders here at Harvard: As you hire new faculty, award tenure, review curriculum, and determine degree requirements, please ask yourselves:

Should our best minds be dedicated to solving our biggest problems?

Should Harvard encourage its faculty to take on the world’s worst inequities? Should Harvard students learn about the depth of global poverty … the prevalence of world hunger … the scarcity of clean water …the girls kept out of school … the children who die from diseases we can cure?

Should the world’s most privileged people learn about the lives of the world’s least privileged?

These are not rhetorical questions – you will answer with your policies.

My mother, who was filled with pride the day I was admitted here – never stopped pressing me to do more for others. A few days before my wedding, she hosted a bridal event, at which she read aloud a letter about marriage that she had written to Melinda. My mother was very ill with cancer at the time, but she saw one more opportunity to deliver her message, and at the close of the letter she said: “From those to whom much is given, much is expected.”

When you consider what those of us here in this Yard have been given – in talent, privilege, and opportunity – there is almost no limit to what the world has a right to expect from us.

In line with the promise of this age, I want to exhort each of the graduates here to take on an issue – a complex problem, a deep inequity, and become a specialist on it. If you make it the focus of your career, that would be phenomenal. But you don’t have to do that to make an impact. For a few hours every week, you can use the growing power of the Internet to get informed, find others with the same interests, see the barriers, and find ways to cut through them.

Don’t let complexity stop you. Be activists. Take on the big inequities. It will be one of the great experiences of your lives.

You graduates are coming of age in an amazing time. As you leave Harvard, you have technology that members of my class never had. You have awareness of global inequity, which we did not have. And with that awareness, you likely also have an informed conscience that will torment you if you abandon these people whose lives you could change with very little effort. You have more than we had; you must start sooner, and carry on longer.

Knowing what you know, how could you not?

And I hope you will come back here to Harvard 30 years from now and reflect on what you have done with your talent and your energy. I hope you will judge yourselves not on your professional accomplishments alone, but also on how well you have addressed the world’s deepest inequities … on how well you treated people a world away who have nothing in common with you but their humanity.

Good luck.

September 11, 2007


Filed under: world — lesturla @ 2:53 am

The reactions on that fateful day were hugely varied. When the tons of dust began settling in the aftermath, a collective rattling was felt across the world. I remember fixing a cup of coffee at the pantry and seeing some officemates gather around the tv glued to CNN. A friend muttered, “Holy shit, this is like a Die Hard movie except it’s for real!”

I first thought, who on earth would be stupid enough to ram a plane at the WTC? But when the second tower was hit, it dawned to me that this was not a Darwin Award material. At that point it could have very well been the beginnings of war. I called my sister in NJ but she was not even aware at that time on what was happening since she was perhaps performing a lobotomy. But to our relief she was nowhere near NY during that time.

I called home to let people know, “In case war breaks out, well, I called home ayt?” My sister thought I was sick in the head. But what can I say, I was 21 at that time and was going through that “phase”.

Around me people were either annoyed that their momentum at work was disrupted. There were quotas to be met and hours to log for many. For a lot, this was another excuse to head to either City Jam, Ponana, Blue Onion and all those usual haunts for alcohol and hopefully good music. Heck, if war breaks loose among those nuke wielding countries and some stray missile hits near home might as well enjoy that last drop of beer!

It does suck however to realize that in the event that 911 rose to a dreary level than it already were, all we’d have been were hopeless spectators with a high probability of being used as pawns or getting caught in the crossfire. Fuck, now that’s depressing!

A lot of people resent the USA for what Bush and some of his predecessors has turned it to be. Oh, I’m not even gonna start getting all political here but when you do some Occam’s Razor-ing it’s really as simple as this: Have some tolerance to diversity and mind your own shit. A lot of people have died because you cannot get your shit together. A lot are still dying. George and Ossama, for crying out loud kiss and make up already!

Six freakin years and nothing much has changed. Darn it, makes me want to drink beer!

September 6, 2007


Filed under: apple, ipod, ipod classic, ipod touch, steve jobs, tech, techie — lesturla @ 3:34 pm

Apple recently launched its new line of iPods in a sweeping upgrade that has become commonplace in the tech world.

The shuffle still is key-chainey with availability in new colors as the only change so we’ll skip that. The nano however had a total makeover from the slim lines to the “fatty iPod” look: with a 2-inch, 204 pixel per inch, 320×240 resolution screen for video and photo viewing. The all-new design is made from anodized aluminum and polished stainless steel, and is available in five colors: silver, black, blue, green, and a (PRODUCT) RED special edition. Basically the nano got fat and now features Cover Flow.

Now the next two products are what made my jaw drop although moments later I can’t help but feel a tad cheated. Here’s why: for the on-the-go anal retentive types who pack bazillion of data, the 80 GB version of the iPod was a welcome change when it arrived. But then, the whole iPod experience changed along with the bump in its capacity. Having a number of your favorite artists’ albums did not seem enough. With 80 gigs of storage, let’s throw in U2’s entire discography, as well as REM’s, Radiohead’s and so on. Soon enough, the 80 GB iPod’s then massive capacity seemed limited. There are still those videos to load after all and for the business users who lug along with them years of business email, the iPod’s “flashdrive” function makes for a good excuse to have your iPod lie around conference room tables.

As if to taunt us, Steve Jobs gives us the iPod classic. Apple’s new iPod classic features a new, thinner, all-metal anodized aluminum and polished stainless steel enclosure, the same enhanced iPod interface as the new iPod nano, including Cover Flow, and increased capacity and battery life. Best of all, it is now available in 160 GB storage capacity. How cool is that?

Now the edges are gone, too. And with the Cover Flow function and enhanced viewing and browsing experience, you’d feel that you definitely have to have this beauty. 160 GB baby! That’s months of GGW clips right there!

Oh, but Steve’s not done yet. As if saying, “So you loved the 160 GB storage capacity eh? How about we make it look like the iPhone minus the phone functions?” Are you freakin kidding me?! Meet the iPod touch!

Building on the momentum of the iPhone’s iPod interface, the iPod touch features the same touch screen multi-touch interface found on the iPhone, as well as integrated Wi-Fi, the Safari web browser, a 3.5-inch widescreen display, and a 8mm thin enclosure. The iPod touch offers up to 22 hours of audio playback, up to five hours of video playback. Yeah baby, touch me!

Now here’s the catch, unlike the iPod classic, it’s available only in measly 8GB and 16GB capacities. Now that’s a real downer, ain’t it? Of course Steve could have made an iPod touch with 160 GB capacity right? Heck he could have made it 200GB for crying out loud! But then he’s also a businessman who makes big bucks from chronic technopaths like us.

Want more? Here’s a demo: Parts 1 & 2

With excerpts from ilounge

September 4, 2007

Goodbye Blackbird

Filed under: Uncategorized — lesturla @ 4:33 pm

Shall I now fall into words
like how we fall into a pit
of pain

realizing that
pain is the only place for you and me

For this is what you do
You make me want to compare you
to things, places or scents

You ask, am I the face in your dreams?

And this is how you are — you are my breath
and yet you are the one that takes it away

Oh, shall I now compare you
to the air that sustains me?
And kills me?

For you are more than that
You are where my life began, too

And there is no comparing this pain
Of feeling those fingers run through your hair
And realizing that it’s your own

And this is what you are
The hands that are no longer there

September 3, 2007

Green, Yellow and Red

Filed under: Uncategorized — lesturla @ 10:29 am

In case you’ve seen Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, well, good for you. What does that have to do with this post? Nothing. Abso-fuckin-lutely nothing.

So I’m bored out of my wits and I finally had the chance to finish this post that has been sitting in my drafts for weeks. I of course, being a goal oriented slash world class procrastinator (yup this mutative personality conflict happens), went to the NY Times list of “great” books to see how much of it I’m done with. Turns out not much! Like holy shit, right?

What an inconvenient truth! There, finally squeezed that in — forcible insertion. Classic! So here’s how it goes, not that you’d care — wait scratch that, after all this might come in handy when you’re bored or feeling the need for punishment via Nabokov.

Green: Read, Yellow: Bought but sits in the shelf, Red: Bleep

This list of 100 novels was drawn up by the editorial board of Modern Library. Where possible, book titles have been linked to either the original New York Times review or a later article about the book.

1. Ulysses,” James Joyce

2. The Great Gatsby,” F. Scott Fitzgerald

3. “A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man,” James Joyce

4. Lolita,” Vladimir Nabokov

5. Brave New World,” Aldous Huxley

6. “The Sound and the Fury,” William Faulkner

7. Catch-22,” Joseph Heller

8. Darkness at Noon,” Arthur Koestler

9. Sons and Lovers,” D. H. Lawrence

10. The Grapes of Wrath,” John Steinbeck

11. “Under the Volcano,” Malcolm Lowry

12. “The Way of All Flesh,” Samuel Butler

13. 1984,” George Orwell

14. “I, Claudius,” Robert Graves

15. To the Lighthouse,” Virginia Woolf

16. An American Tragedy,” Theodore Dreiser

17. “The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter,” Carson McCullers

18. Slaughterhouse Five,” Kurt Vonnegut

19. Invisible Man,” Ralph Ellison

20. Native Son,” Richard Wright

21. Henderson the Rain King,” Saul Bellow

22. Appointment in Samarra,” John O’ Hara

23. U.S.A.” (trilogy), John Dos Passos

24. “Winesburg, Ohio,” Sherwood Anderson

25. A Passage to India,” E. M. Forster

26. “The Wings of the Dove,” Henry James

27. The Ambassadors,” Henry James

28. “Tender Is the Night,” F. Scott Fitzgerald

29. The Studs Lonigan Trilogy,” James T. Farrell

30. “The Good Soldier,” Ford Madox Ford

31. Animal Farm,” George Orwell

32. The Golden Bowl,” Henry James

33. Sister Carrie,” Theodore Dreiser

34. A Handful of Dust,” Evelyn Waugh

35. “As I Lay Dying,” William Faulkner

36. All the King’s Men,” Robert Penn Warren

37. “The Bridge of San Luis Rey,” Thornton Wilder

38. “Howards End,” E. M. Forster

39. Go Tell It on the Mountain,” James Baldwin

40. “The Heart of the Matter,” Graham Greene

41. Lord of the Flies,” William Golding

42. Deliverance,” James Dickey

43. “A Dance to the Music of Time” (series), Anthony Powell

44. “Point Counter Point,” Aldous Huxley

45. “The Sun Also Rises,” Ernest Hemingway

46. “The Secret Agent,” Joseph Conrad

47. “Nostromo,” Joseph Conrad

48. “The Rainbow,” D. H. Lawrence

49. “Women in Love,” D. H. Lawrence

50. “Tropic of Cancer,” Henry Miller

51. The Naked and the Dead,” Norman Mailer

52. Portnoy’s Complaint,” Philip Roth

53. Pale Fire,” Vladimir Nabokov

54. Light in August,” William Faulkner

55. On the Road,” Jack Kerouac

56. “The Maltese Falcon,” Dashiell Hammett

57. “Parade’s End,” Ford Madox Ford

58. The Age of Innocence,” Edith Wharton

59. Zuleika Dobson,” Max Beerbohm

60. The Moviegoer,” Walker Percy

61. “Death Comes to the Archbishop,” Willa Cather

62. From Here to Eternity,” James Jones

63. “The Wapshot Chronicles,” John Cheever

64. “The Catcher in the Rye,” J. D. Salinger

65. A Clockwork Orange,” Anthony Burgess

66. “Of Human Bondage,” W. Somerset Maugham

67. “Heart of Darkness,” Joseph Conrad

68. “Main Street,” Sinclair Lewis

69. “The House of Mirth,” Edith Wharton

70. The Alexandria Quartet,” Lawrence Durrell

71. “A High Wind in Jamaica,” Richard Hughes

72. “A House for Ms. Biswas,” V. S. Naipaul

73. “The Day of the Locust,” Nathaniel West

74. “A Farewell to Arms,” Ernest Hemingway

75. “Scoop,” Evelyn Waugh

76. The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie,” Muriel Spark

77. “Finnegans Wake,” James Joyce

78. “Kim,” Rudyard Kipling

79. “A Room With a View,” E. M. Forster

80. Brideshead Revisited,” Evelyn Waugh

81. The Adventures of Augie March,” Saul Bellow

82. “Angle of Repose,” Wallace Stegner

83. A Bend in the River,” V. S. Naipaul

84. “The Death of the Heart,” Elizabeth Bowen

85. Lord Jim,” Joseph Conrad

86. Ragtime,” E. L. Doctorow

87. “The Old Wives’ Tale,” Arnold Bennett

88. “The Call of the Wild,” Jack London

89. “Loving,” Henry Green

90. Midnight’s Children,” Salman Rushdie

91. Tobacco Road,” Erskine Caldwell

92. Ironweed,” William Kennedy

93. The Magus,” John Fowles

94. “Wide Sargasso Sea,” Jean Rhys

95. “Under the Net,” Iris Murdoch

96. “Sophie’s Choice,” William Styron

97. The Sheltering Sky,” Paul Bowles

98. “The Postman Always Rings Twice,” James M. Cain

99. “The Ginger Man,” J. P. Donleavy

100. “The Magnificent Ambersons,” Booth Tarkington


From NYTimes


Blog at WordPress.com.