Notes from underground

يارب يسوع المسيح ابن اللّه الحيّ إرحمني أنا الخاطئ

Yahoo! to close mailing lists?

I just saw this announcement today which, if true, will mean that thousands of mailing lists will be cut off with very little notice.There are lists that deal with various academic subjects and have been used for research. Some universities run listservers of their own and may be able to take some over, but that is almost impossible at such short notice.

There are others, like genealogy groups, which have a lot of family history information that was searchable on the Web, but that too will be gone.

Yahoo is shutting down its Groups website and deleting all content:

Yahoo (owned by Engadget’s parent company Verizon) is phasing out one its longest-standing features. The internet pioneer is closing the Yahoo Groups website in a two-phase process that will effectively see it disappear. You’ll lose the ability to post new content on October 21st, and Yahoo will delete all “previously posted” material on December 14th. Users can still connect to their groups through email, but the site will effectively be vacant. All groups will be made private and require an administrator’s approval.

If you’re at all interested in preserving your history on the site, you’ll want to download your data either directly from posts or through Yahoo’s Privacy Dashboard.

It should be borne in mind that Yahoo! got into the mailing list business when it took over something called E-Groups, which ran public mail servers.

If they were concerned about their customers they would give them enough notice and time to possibly arrange for alternative mail servers. As Yahoo! took over E-groups, so other servers could possibly take over some of the lists hosted by Yahoo!. But if they leave an impossibly short time, that will not work.

If they close it down with such short notice I will certainly be removing my Yahoo! Id, and will have nothing more to do with any of their services in future.Actually Yahoo! has hardly any services left. The mailing lists were one of the last.

Yahoo! developed a reputation for taking over flourishing web services, and wrecking and killing them off. The list is a long one — Geocities, Webring, MyBlogLog, and E-groups.. And now it seems that Yahoo! itself has been taken over by another company, which is shutting them down.

A few years ago there was a group that tried to  set up an alternative when some bright spark arrived and tried to change the way YahooGroups worked and almost wrecked it. I think it was called groups.io — you can find more about it here. If you know of any others, please tell about them in the comments.

I suggest that while you still have the opportunity you will not the e-mail addresses and other contact information of people on mailing lists that you would like to stay in touch with while you still have the chance.

I’ve been involved with about 50 mailing lists that deal with a great variety of topics, including:

  • Missiology
  • New Religious Movements
  • Books and Literature
  • Genealogy and family history groups (including several dealing with Single family name)

I suppose we can put it down to entropy on the Internet — if there is anything useful there, it will die.

 

Singularity

Singularity (The Jevin Banks Experience, #2)Singularity by Steven James
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Three years ago I heard Izak Potgieter speak at TGIF about The Singularity. According to him,  The Singularity is a milestone in the foreseeable future where technology, or non-biological intelligenc-
e, will reach the ability of its human creators, themselves largely non-biological by that point, and then transcend it at a rate that “will be so rapid, its impact so deep, that human life will be irreversibly transformed”.

I had previously heard of singularities as some kind of mathematical thing relating to the topological characteristics of Mobius strips, but Izak assured us that this was not just any old singularity, but The Singularity. And he described himself as a Singularitarian,.

So when we went to TGIF last week, and I saw a book with the title Singularity, I was moved by curiosity to buy it.

What is it about?

A mysterious death, mysterious semi-government research institutes where some dodgy research is going on, hints of connections with organised crime and bent cops — mix those ingredients and you can be sure that the protagonist and those he loves will be getting deeper into danger as the story progresses.

The protagonist is Jevin Banks, a stage musician who performs in Las Vegas, and his associates Charlene Antioch and Xavier Wray. Xavier Wray, like Izak Potgieter, is a Singularitarian.

The “singularity” of the title concerns the development of Artificial Intelligence and the point at which it overtakes human intelligence, and the book raises several questions about that. But these questions are not new, and I recall reading books published more than 50 years ago on the same topic. And some of the elements were also found in speculative fiction, in novels like The Müller-Fokker Effect, which spoke of capturing someone’s consciousness and storing it as digital data.

And over the years I’ve often used that as an analogy for the Christian doctrine of the resurrection of the body — that when we die God has us all backed up on tape somewhere, and when the last day comes he’ll restore it in new and improved hardware and reboot us.

View all my reviews

Friendship and kinship in the age of social media

Last Sunday was our 45th wedding anniversary.

It’s not a major anniversary like the 25th or 50th. but it seemed worth remembering, and remembering some of the people we have known, both before we were married and in our 45 years together. We didn’t have a big celebration — a cheap cake from the supermarket at teatime sufficed. And we did a few things on social media.

The response to the photo album on Facebook was:

Likes etc from Jethro Hayes, Jenny Aitchison and 46 others
36 comments
2 shares

The response on Facebook to the link to the blog post was:

Likes from Jethro Hayes, Jenny Aitchison and 72 others
27 comments
4 shares

And the response to the blog post itself was:

I also posted “then and now” photos in a photo album on Facebook, but one cannot tell much from responses to those because most people responded to the album itself rather than those particular pictures.

But it was interesting to see who responded and who didn’t, and to think of what it might have been like without social media.

Responses on the blog link on Facebook:

  • 9 from people we have seen face to face within the last 3 years
  • 18 from people we have never met, but have only interacted with on line
  • 5 from close family (2nd cousin or closer)
  • 9 from extended family (more distant than 2nd cousin)

What conclusions can one draw from this?

  • absence makes the heart grow fonder
  • familiarity breeds contempt

The more you see people and the closer you get to them, the less they like you.

Of course this has to be balanced against how many people the social media platforms’ algorithms actually showed them to. I have 926 followers on Twitter, of whom 2 responded. I have 591 “friends” on Facebook, with responses as indicated above, and I suppose 315 views of the blog post isn’t a bad response.

What it seems to show is what most of us already knew — social media, and the Internet generally enable us to keep in touch with friends, family and acquaintances whom we haven’t seen for a long time and who live far away. Quite a lot of the people who responded were actually at our wedding, though we haven’t seen several of them for 40 years or more. Social media have enabled us to reestablish and maintain contact with them.

Facebook seems to do it a lot better than Twitter. In fact Twitter seems to be pretty useless as a social medium. In spite of having nearly twice as many Twitter followers as Facebook friends, the response from Twitter was minimal.

But it also leaves a niggling thought — what about the closer family and the people we’ve seen recently who didn’t respond? Is their lack of response due to social media algorithms or because they are offended with us in some way? So social media can bring people can bring people closer together, but can also sow suspicion and mistrust.

Steve & Val Hayes, 29 September 1974, Durban North

Here, for what it’s worth, are the “then” and “now” photos.

The first was on our wedding day 45 years ago, wearing the wedding garments that Val made (they no longer fit).

Other observations … Val’s hair was wavy then, perhaps because we were living at the coast, and humidity makes for wavy hair. We’ve been living inland for more than 35 years, and that seems to make for straighter hair. .

Steve & Val Hayes, 29 September 2019, Kilner Park, Tshwane

Now, of course, our hair is also grey.

And the cap is in honour of our Subaru station wagon, the best car I ever owned.

And so we carry on, much along the lines of the theme song of the BBC’s New Tricks TV programme:

It’s all right, it’s OK
Doesn’t really matter if you’re old and grey.
It’s all right, it’s OK
Listen to what I say.
It’s all right, doing fine.
Doesn’t really matter if the sun don’t shine.
It’s all right, it’s OK.
Getting to the end of the day.

Baffled by Brexit

For the last three years a lot of my Brit friends have have been debating the issue of the UK leaving the EU. It’s something that keeps cropping up on social media and in blogs but the more the issue is debated, the more opaque it seems to become to outsiders like me.

As far as I’m aware it’s been going on for nearly 60 years. I first became aware of it when the Brits applied to join and General de Gaulle gave a resounding Non! Flanders and Swann made it memorable by writing a song about it: “Eyetie, Benelux, Germany and me, that’s my market recipe.” Eventually the Brits did manage to get in (over de Gaulle’s dead body) and now they want out. But it seems that having decided that they want to go, they want the assurance that they can have their cake and eat it.

I don’t have a dog in this particular fight. It’s no skin off my nose whether they stay or leave. But sixty years!

One blogging friend whose blog I’ve been following for years has just written an article about it in the Church Times, Are the Bishops really listening to Leavers?:

The bishops write: “The levels of fear, uncertainty and marginalisation in society, much of which lies behind the vote for Brexit, but will not be addressed by Brexit . . .” One way in which power is experienced as abusive is when those with power (such as a bishop) say to those without power (a normal voter) that the voter does not know what he or she really wants. To say that there is something that “lies behind the vote for Brexit” is to disparage the desire for Brexit in and of itself, and thus is an exercise in disempowerment.

Leavers have become accustomed to being slighted in this way, to having their understanding and integrity impugned, to being told that we voted for Brexit only because of X, and, if those in power solved X, well, we don’t need Brexit any more, do we? This is not the product of genuine listening: it is the imputation of false consciousness and a rather un-Anglican attempt to “make windows into men’s souls”. It is essential that, if there is to be a reconciliation between the different sides on Brexit, such language is abandoned.

But I suspect you have to have been following the issue closely for the last 60 years to know what he’s on about.

It seems to me, looking from a distance, that the result of the 2016 referendum was pretty close, and they really should have looked for a 2/3 majority before deciding to change. They should also have specified that there should be at least a 55/45% majority in favour of “leave” in each of the four countries of the UK. As it is, England and Wales wanted to leave, Scotland and Northern Ireland wanted to remain in the EU. But the fact is that the UK government did decide to leave and set the whole leaving process going.

One of the difficulties this creates is a land border between the EU and the UK in Northern Ireland. Why this creates a special difficulty is rather puzzling, since there are other land borders between the EU and non-EU countries, 23 of them actually. Why not do whatever they do there, since it is simply a matter of adding a 24th land border?

So my question is, why doesn’t the UK opt for one of the following:

  1. England and Wales leave the EU and the UK simultaneously, while the rump UK (Scotland and Northern Ireland) remains in the EU.
  2. The UK leaves the EU and Scotland and Northern Ireland leave the UK and go their separate ways, applying to rejoin the EU if they wish.
  3. Have another referendum stipulating a clear majority (at least 55%-45%) in each country.

Can any of my UK friends explain why the present indecision is better than any of those, or which of those might be better than the present shilly-shalying?

 

 

 

Stranger in a strange land

Stranger in a Strange LandStranger in a Strange Land by Robert A. Heinlein
My rating: 2 of 5 stars

I bought this book and had read about two-thirds of this original uncut version when I left it on a bus. I thought of buying another copy to see what happened in the end, but I didn’t think it was all that good, so I left it. Then when I saw a copy in the library I thought it was my chance to find out what happened, so I took it out and re-read it from the beginning because after 27 years I’d forgotten too much to just pick it up where I left off. And having reached the end, my verdict is unchanged. It’s not really worth paying good money for.The first half is OK, and I’d give it 3 stars on the GoodReads Scale. The second half is excruciatingly boring and preachy, and would get 1 star from me, so 2 stars for the whole thing.

The story concerns the first manned expedition to Mars, which disappears without trace. The second expedition finds there was a survivor — a child of two of the crew members who was born on Mars and named Michael Alexander Smith, and was brought up by Martians after his parents died. The second expedition brought him, now a young adult, back to earth, where he suffers from culture shock, and is perceived as a threat by vested interests on earth, and so is kept incommunicado by the government.

The book was at least partly responsible for starting a New Religious Movement (NRM), the Church of All Worlds, and perhaps the best comment on that comes from Drawing Down the Moon by Diane Adler:

The Church of All Worlds has been called everything from ‘a sub-culture science-fiction Grok-flock’ to ‘a bunch of crazy hippie freaks.’ But the real origins of CAW lead back to a small group of friends who, along with untold numbers of middle-class high school and college students in the late 1950s and early 1960s, became infatuated with the romantic, heroic, compelling right-wing ideas of Ayn Rand. It is a sign of the peculiarity of North American consciousness that thousands of young students, at one time or another, have become possessed by her novels – Atlas shrugged, The Fountainhead, and Anthem. Jerome Tucille, in his witty, tongue-in-cheek tour of the libertarian right, It usually begins with Ayn Rand, could not have been more precise in his choice of title. He noted that Rand’s works were particularly appealing ‘to those in the process of escaping a regimented religious background.’ Despite the author’s rigid philosophy of Objectivism, she stirred a libertarian impulse, and Atlas shrugged became a ‘New Marxism of the Right’.

And the second half of Stranger in a Strange Land is like nothing so much as John Galt’s speech from Atlas Shrugged, only about three times as long.

It was written in the late 1950s, and is stamped with American culture of that period, including their vision of the future. This included future technology — flying cars, yes, but no personal computers, no cell phones, no digital photography. It is also full of the male chauvinist piggery of the period, though some of the language seems strange for a novel set in the USA — lots of “chaps” and “blokes” around. I didn’t know there were so many of those in the US, either back in the 1950s or now.

View all my reviews

Novel writing and genealogy

What do novel writing and genealogy have in common?

One could think of several links, but now I’m thinking of using genealogy software to keep track of the characters in the novel you are writing.

For about 40 years now genealogists have been using computer software to keep track of their family history. Genealogy is quite a popular pastime, and computers are a good way of keeping track of your relatives, and there are lots of programs available for doing so.

But the same software can also be used for keeping track of the characters in a novel.

The software allows you to enter basic details of a person — dates of birth, marriage and death. Names of parents, and also siblings children and cousins.

It also allows you to enter information about a character: height, weight, colour and texture of skin, hair, eye colour and so on.

This is particularly useful if you write several novels involving the same character. Crime novels, for example, often feature detectives whose careers span 30 years or more. It’s embarrassing if you have them talking to a spouse when they were divorced three years earlier, or if their child who was a pop idol three years ago is still at school in the current novel.

You mention that your character learnt a certain skill in the British army during the Falklands War, but after a publication a reader points out that the character was only 10 years old at the time.

Your characters may be fictional, but the chronology needs to be consistent, even if your plot involves time travel.

And it’s not only writing. I’ve even used family history software to keep track of the characters in books I’ve been reading. One such book was The Book and the Brotherhood by Iris Murdoch, where the characters’ relationships were difficult to keep[ track of.

So what is this genealogy software and where do you get it?

There are at least two genealogy programs for Windows that offer free versions. They are RootsMagic and Legacy Family Tree. Yes, just click on the links and download and install the program. It’s that simple.

For keeping track of characters in a novel I prefer RootsMagic, as it loads in about half the time of Legacy Family Tree. Once you’ve tried them, you might also want to use these programs to keep track of your own family tree, but that’s beyond the scope of this article. If you want to know what other programs are available, see here.

Once you’ve downloaded and installed your chosen program, open the program and begin by entering details of your protagonist. Name, nicknames, date of birth, place of birth, spouses and children if any. Parents too. Even if the parents don’t feature in your novel now, they might crop up in another volume. Aunts and uncles too — your character might inherit something from them. Enter events in the life of your protagonist. In RootsMagic this is “Add a fact”. Schools they attended, jobs they held — how much detail is up to you.

Most fields allow you to enter notes. In the main person name field, you can include in a note a physical description and a potted biography in as much or as little detail as you like. In notes for the Facts/Events fields you can include, for schools attended, for example, best friend, favourite teacher, worst enemy (who may appear as the principal villain in volume 3 of your trilogy), sporting achievements and so on.

Then, when you are writing, you can print an “Individual Summary” for each character in your current chapter, so you’ve got the facts about them at your fingertips. When you are revising your first draft, you can use the same “Individual Summary” sheets for checking consistency.

Do be careful what you do and don’t tell the reader. In the first volume of the Harry Potter stories, the reader doesn’t need to know that Ron Weasley will become Harry Potter’s brother-in-law, but the author needs to keep track of such things. On the other hand, do remember that if you’ve recorded such a relationship in a genealogy program, the reader doesn’t know that until you explicitly tell them.

 

Your 25 friends on Facebook

Many Facebook users are concerned that Facebook only shows them posts from about 25 of their friends. And Facebook will probably only show their posts to about 25 (or fewer) of their freinds unless a lot of those friends “like” them, or react to them in some other way.

One thing that is a bit concerning about this is that Facebook is always nagging me to add new friends by showing “People you may know” prominently — but if I add them, which of my friends will drop off the radar?

Some people have thought the solution is to post things like this:

Fixed my blocked posts …….. I wondered where everybody had been!

This is good to know: It’s ridiculous to have so many friends and only 25 are allowed to see my post.
I ignored this post earlier, because I didn’t think it worked. But…. it WORKS!! I have a whole new news feed. I’m seeing posts from people I haven’t seen in years.

Here’s how to bypass the system FB now has in place that limits posts on your news feed:

Their new algorithm chooses the same few people – about 25 – who will read your posts. Therefore, Hold your finger down anywhere in this post and “copy” will pop up. Click “copy”. Then go your page, start a new post and put your finger anywhere in the blank field. “Paste” will pop up and click paste.

This will bypass the system… I thought I’ll try it and hey presto!

The problem it describes is real, but the proposed solution is not. Copying and pasting text like that will do nothing to change Facebook’s algorithms.

Some have claimed that the “25 Facebook friends” meme is a hoax, but it isn’t. The exact number of 25 may not be accurate, but there is certainly some such limit, and it doesn’t even seem to be affected by “likes” or other reactions.

How do I know this?

Well a couple of years ago Facebook forced me to have two accounts[1]. When I opened the second account I linked to some of my friends so I could still keep in touch with them while my main account was blocked. One of those friends is Koos van der Riet, who is a friend on both accounts. But Facebook never ever shows me his posts on my main account, no matter how many times I “like” them. It always shows me his posts on my secondary account, even though I deliberately refrain from “liking” them or reacting to them in any way. But to see his posts on my main account I have to type his name in the search bar and search for his account, otherwise Facebook never shows me his posts.

This problem will not be solved by copying and pasting a bit of text. It can only be solved by Facebook improving their algorithm. One way of doing that would be to rate every person you link to as a friend, say on a scale of 1 to 10, to show how much you wanted to see their posts.  The algorithm could then add their value for you to your value to them to show how much value to give to posts. It could also introduce a classification of kids of posts, family news, general news, news commentary, to let one indicate which kinds of posts one was most interested in from which people. Such a scheme would take a bit of work and research to develop, but would make it more useful to its users.


Notes

[1] Why I was forced to have two accounts. Facebook blocked my main account on my main computer, and semanded that I download and run some software before it would allow me to see it. I could still, however, see it on my laptop. So I opened a new account. Later I discovered I could still access my main account on my main computer using a different browser. So I use two browsers, one for each account.

Sorry, Twitter. You did something wrong

Update 25 August 2019

This now seems to be fixed, and Twitter is accessible again.

Thanks to the people at Twitter who made it accessible again.


For the last couple of days, almost every time I’ve tried to read Twitter, I get the message:

Sorry! We did something wrong.

It seems that the “new” Twitter has been introduced, and it no longer works on my old computer.

For the moment I can still post links to things on other web sites on Twitter, though perhaps that will soon stop working too. But I can no longer read my Twitter feed on my computer, so I won’t be “liking” or retweeting stuff posted by other people, or seeing the links they post. I won’t be able to search for hashtags dealing with news items that interest me, and get different points of view on the same event.

At least I’ll still be able to look at my daily digest on paper.li, but that is selected for me, and isn’t quite the same thing. And for my literary friends, like the Inklings fans out there, I’ll still ber able to follow in the #Inklings daily digest, provided they use the #Inklings hashtag, which they don’t always remember to do.

It seems that we pensioners who can’t afford to buy the latest and greatest hardware every year are now excluded.

It reminds me of my youth, and the planned obsolescence in the motor industry. Back then South Africa;s roads were filled with small British cars and big American ones, and most of my posh school friends boasted that their parents traded their cars in for a new model every year. Then along came the Japanese, who didn’t believe that it was obligatory for cars to break down, and people started keeping their cars for longer.

My wife’s Toyota Yaris, which is 13 years old and has done nearly 300 000 km, still has its original front brake pads. My mother’s Wolseley 4/44 needed decoking and its valves ground when it was only 2 years old.

Those American cars that were traded in every year, the Dodges and Desotos with their huge tail fins, were snapped up second-hand to become second-class taxis. But the Japanese put a stop to that in 1969 with the Toyota Hi-Ace, which lasted longer, used less fuel, carried more people, and came with two nuns as standard equipment (those who are old enough to remember will understand).

But it seems that social media, like TV sport, are being placed beyond the reach of pensioners like us, and being reserved for the rich who can afford to upgrade their computers every year.

An obsessive search for erasure

The ZahirThe Zahir by Paulo Coelho
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I can’t decide whether this is a profound book or a superficial one.

The protagonist is a novelist living in Paris, rather like the author himself, whose wife disappears without a trace, and he becomes obsessed, not so much with finding her as with discovering why she left him. This leads him to some deep (or shallow) philosophical reflection, from which he concludes that in order to discover himself as a person he needs to forget and erase his personal history.

Since the protagonist is a writer and in many ways resembles the author, I found parts of it gave me an incentive to work on things that I myself am writing. Those bits made me want to give it four stars. But part of his personal history, which he wants to erase, is that his wife was the one who inspired him to write in the first place, and when he goes on about that, in a rather banal and boring way, I want to give it one or two stars. In the end I compromised and gave it three stars.

One thing that gave the book a bit more interest is that part of the search took him to Kazakhstan in Central Asia, which has cropped up in other books I’ve been reading recently.

Another puzzling aspect of the story is that the protagonist (also like author Paulo Coelho himself) had been on a pilgrimage to St James’s Cathedral at Compostela, which had been a life-changing experience, and had written a book about it. Yet this, too, was apparently part of his personal history to be erased and forgotten. And if that is the case, why should anyone buy and read his book about it?

I suppose that one reason for my inability to sympathise with this particular aspect of the story is that I rather enjoy rereading my journals of 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 and 60 years ago each morning. I think of people I knew then, some I am still in touch with, others not, and I wonder what has happened to them. Even if I don’t know what has happened to them, I don’t think they can simply be erased. Their fate may not be known to me, but it is known to God, who values them, and perhaps if nothing else, I can offer a short prayer for them, wherever they may be. And if they have died, pray that their memory may be eternal. That is the opposite of forgetting.

 

 

View all my reviews

Best fantasy books

I saw this list of best fantasy books from Reddit.

Top 100 Best Fantasy books:

This is a list of the best fantasy books. If you want to find good fantasy books to read, this list is a safe bet.

The list was created by parsing comments on the r/books subreddit, and takes into account both number of mentions and the comment scores.

The fantasy genre is the most popular genre in the data we have.

Since the list is created by parsing user comments, it represents the most popular fantasy books, or at least which fantasy books most reddit users have been reading.

The data used in this list is from 2018 and 2019. As we get more data the list may change and will hopefully become a list of the best fantasy books of all time.

I don’t frequent Reddit, and don’t agree with the list. I suspect that the list is a bit misleading. It might be more accurate to say that it is a list of the most-discussed books on Reddit, or perhaps the most popular among Reddit readers. I’ll certainly use the list to look for books I haven’t read — I’ve read 20 of the books on the list — and I would also order them differently.

Here’s my list of favourites among the ones I’ve read:

  1. That hideous strength Lewis, C.S.
  2. The place of the lion Williams, Charles.
  3. The weirdstone of Brisingamen Garner, Alan.
  4. The greater trumps Williams, Charles.
  5. The moon of Gomrath Garner, Alan.
  6. War in heaven Williams, Charles.
  7. Elidor Garner, Alan.
  8. The Annotated Alice: Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass Carroll, Lewis.
  9. Lord of the Rings Tolkien, J.R.R.
  10. The lion, the witch and the wardrobe Lewis, C.S.
  11. Many dimensions Williams, Charles.
  12. Gulliver’s travels Swift, Jonathan.
  13. The hobbit Tolkien, J.R.R.
  14. The voyage of the Dawn Treader Lewis, C.S.
  15. Prince Caspian Lewis, C.S.
  16. Harry Potter and the chamber of secrets Rowling, J.K.
  17. Dracula Stoker, Bram.
  18. The trial Kafka, Franz.
  19. The silver chair Lewis, C.S.
  20. The wine of angels Rickman, Phil.
  21. The shadow of the wind Zaf¢n, Carlos Ruiz.
  22. Pet sematary King, Stephen.
  23. Harry Potter and the philosopher’s stone Rowling, J.K.
  24. Descent into Hell Williams, Charles.
  25. Animal Farm Orwell, George.
  26. Watership Down Adams, Richard.
  27. The Book of Lost Things Connolly, John.
  28. The last battle Lewis, C.S.
  29. Candlenight Rickman, Phil.
  30. Harry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban Rowling, J.K.
  31. Harry Potter and the half-blood prince Rowling, J.K.
  32. All Hallows’ Eve Williams, Charles.
  33. The man who was Thursday: a nightmare Chesterton, G.K.
  34. The Eyre affair fforde, Jasper.
  35. The historian Kostova, Elizabeth.
  36. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Rowling, J.K.
  37. The chalice Rickman, Phil.
  38. The secrets of pain Rickman, Phil.
  39. Lost in a good book fforde, Jasper.
  40. Needful things King, Stephen.
  41. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix Rowling, J.K.
  42. Midwinter of the Spirit Rickman, Phil.
  43. The owl service Garner, Alan.
  44. The princess and the goblin MacDonald, George.
  45. The subtle knife Pullman, Philip.
  46. All of a winter’s night Rickman, Phil.
  47. Crybbe Rickman, Phil.
  48. A Game of Thrones Martin, George R.R.
  49. The man in the moss Crybbe Rickman, Phil.
  50. The cure of souls Rickman, Phil.
  51. My life in the bush of ghosts Tutuola, Amos.
  52. The vision of Stephen Burford, Lola.
  53. Heartsease Dickinson, Peter.
  54. The well of lost plots Fforde, Jasper.
  55. Sophie’s world Gaarder, Jostein.
  56. A wrinkle in time l’Engle, Madeleine.
  57. Harry Potter and the goblet of fire Rowling, J.K.
  58. Shadows of ecstasy Williams, Charles.
  59. The talisman King, Stephen Straub, Peter.
  60. A wind in the door l’Engle, Madeleine.
  61. Duncton Wood Horwood, William.
  62. Black House King, Stephen Straub, Peter.
  63. The Phoenix and the Carpet Nesbit, E.
  64. Northern Lights Pullman, Philip.
  65. The devil rides out Wheatley, Dennis.
  66. Faerie tale Feist, Raymond E.
  67. Finn family Moomintroll Jansson, Tove.
  68. Desperation King, Stephen.
  69. The horse and his boy Lewis, C.S.
  70. Timecatcher Fitzpatrick, Marie-Louise.
  71. Neverwhere Gaiman, Neil.
  72. Mythago wood Holdstock, Robert.
  73. House on Falling Star Hill Molloy, Michael.
  74. The Long Price: Book One — Shadow and Betrayal Abraham, Daniel.
  75. The hunger games Collins, Suzanne.
  76. Lord Foul’s bane Donaldson, Stephen.
  77. The giant under the snow Gordon, John.
  78. The fetch Holdstock, Robert.
  79. Firestarter King, Stephen.
  80. The wood beyond the world Morris, William.
  81. Good Omens Pratchett, Terry and Gaiman, Neil.
  82. Mr X Straub, Peter.
  83. The shadow guests Aiken, Joan.
  84. The Earthsea Trilogy le Guin, Ursula.
  85. American gods Gaiman, Neil.
  86. Salem’s Lot King, Stephen.
  87. Her fearful symmetry Niffenegger, Audrey.
  88. Mockingjay Collins, Suzanne.
  89. First among sequels fforde, Jasper.
  90. Duncton quest Horwood, William.
  91. The wounded land Donaldson, Stephen.
  92. The astonishing stereoscope Langton, Jane.
  93. The Earthsea quartet le Guin, Ursula.
  94. The End of the World Murakami, Haruki.
  95. The family tree Tepper, Sheri S.
  96. The King of Elfland’s daughter Dunsany, Lord.
  97. The Wrath of Angels Connolly, John.
  98. The One Tree Donaldson, Stephen.
  99. The dark half King, Stephen.
  100. Macabre Laws, Stephen.

I’m sure most of those reading this will disagree with my ordering, but I’d be interested in recommendations of books not on either or both lists.

There’s also the problem of which books belong to which genre. C.S. Lewis’s Cosmic Trilogy, for example, straddles the border between science fiction and fantasy. There are some published as combined volumes that could be listed separately, for example Ursula le Guin’s Earthsea Trilogy. I also found it difficult to rate them. On the first reading I liked the second book, The Tombs of Atuan the best, but on the third reading it was the one I liked least of the three, and my rating of each had probably dropped about 10 points (out of 100). By then the trilogy had become a quartet, and the fourth book, Tehanu was the worst of the lot.

I’m prejudiced, of course. My favourite fantasy authors are the Inklings, Charles Williams, C.S. Lewis, J.R.R. Tolkien, Roger Lancelyn Green, et al, who generally had the presuppositions of a Christian worldview, and I think they write better fantasy than most. But so did Alan Garner, whose work does not have such presuppositions, and some Christian fantasy authors, like Frank Peretti and Stephen Lawhead, wrote rather bad fantasy, at least in my view.

Post Navigation