Top 100 Books

With the craze that surrounded Harry Potter and all things magical, the BBC decided to publish a 'Top 100' list as part of their 'Big Read'. The book was supposed to indicate books that everyone should read, however I found the list quite erroneous (how can all 7 Harry Potter books make the fold). Judge for yourself:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/bigread/top100.shtml

Anyway, I found this list on the Guardian and deem it far more comprehensive and, in my personal taste, correct:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/may/08/books.booksnews

Here's a few notes, please disagree:

Firstly, the list is less suffocating as it hasn't numbered the entries, this allows the reader slightly more freedom in discerning for themselves where each entry should lie.

It dates well, whereas the BBC version was slightly compact and overly modern, the Guardian is far more ubiquitous and rounded.

A problem with the Guardians version, is that it has 'complete works', which feels obvious and contrived. After all, Kafka's best book is not his 'complete works'. Quite stupid really.

That's about all, as a side-note, Crime and Punishment shouldn't be in either. It's overrated. (Sorry)