100 greatest non-fiction books

I regret to say that I've only read or part-read or have on my shelves as to-be-read less than ten of these titles: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/jun/14/100-greatest-non-fiction-books and have heard of only about half of those listed. How is it for the other 277 members of this group?

I've only read six of them. I very rarely read nonfiction, though, so I'm not altogether surprised at that. However, of the six I have read, one is among my favourite books of all time - Let Us Now Praise Famous Men.

I've read or part-read 10 and have 6 others in the TBR pile/wishlist. About half are completely unfamiliar: I've either never heard of them at all, or I've come across them and forgotten about them.

I'm not a huge non-fiction reader, though.

I went through a phase of only reading non-fiction at one time, and on the list I've only read through two in full:
The Uses of Enchantment by Bruno Bettelheim (1976) and
The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins (1976)

I've got the following on my shelves, though none catalogued as yet, and have dipped into them all either as reference or to skim read:
Ways of Seeing by John Berger (1972)
Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects by Giorgio Vasari (1550)
Mythologies by Roland Barthes (1972)
The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon (1776)
The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli (1532)
The Golden Bough by James George Frazer (1890)
On the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin (1859)
It's an odd mix of culture, history and science, I suppose. I find myself embarrassed at how little of the listed titles in the Guardian's choice I've bothered to follow up in all the years.

One out of a hundred. Ha. (About another two or three that I've often almost bought...)

Oh dear - my tallies show the triumph of 'intend to read' over have read. We have about 14 of these on our shelves, but I am afraid I have only read one of them (Homage to Catalonia). I've also owned but got rid of two (Periodic Table and Bad Blood) as I couldn't get anywhere with reading them.

This is a very interesting one for me, as I am just about to start a Masters and PhD (got a funding package, so the latter is a sure thing) concerning sociology, specifically gender oriented. So I should have read far more of these than I have. I have read a good few non-fiction books, and the number is steadily increasing as I gear myself for a career in academia, but I often read more recent books to keep me up to date, and thus learn vicariously about the canon.

What I have read:
Mythologies by Roland Barthes - This is the one I would recommend anyone reads. It's fantastic, entertaining and insightful (I love this particular field of sociology, which doesn't hurt!)

The Diary of a Young Girl by Anne Frank (1947) - Wonderful wonderful, poignant book.

The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels (1848) - Well, it didn't work, but it's still important and extremely powerful.

What I have part-read:
The Interpretation of Dreams by Sigmund Freud (1899) - Freud's insistence that if you dreamed something it meant you wanted it and that if you dreamed you didn't want it, it also meant you wanted it (especially if you disagree with him) irritated me so much that I stopped reading it about half way through. I am going to have to buff up on my psychoanalysis knowledge though due to some of my academic pursuits.

Meditations on First Philosophy by René Descartes (1641) - Well, the cogito (I think therefore I am) was great, but it went downhill from there. Descartes moved on to really scrape the metaphorical philosophical barrel in search of proof of the existence of God. It just goes downhill from there, and I couldn't bear to finish it. Again...I should at some point.

Suicide by Émile Durkheim (1897) - As part of my sociology degree.

Discipline and Punish by Michel Foucault (1975) - I have read The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: The Will to Knowledge in its entirety, and I very much want/need to read all of Discipline and Punish.

What I would like to read:
Speak, Memory by Vladimir Nabokov (1951) - I have only read two Nabokov books, Lolita (of course) and The Eye. Both were absolute masterpieces and I would love to read about him, especially in his own words.

The Gulag Archipelago by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1973) - I've just read A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, and would like to read Gulag (it's on my bookshelf waiting).

Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant (1781) - This book terrifies me, and I can see it turning into something of a nemesis, but I do need to read it. Kant's philosophies, alongside those of Hegel, underpin many of the arguments used by key sociologists.

Phenomenology of Mind by GWF Hegel (1807) - Speaking of the devil...see above.

On Liberty by John Stuart Mill (1859) - As much as Mill is a utilitarian and I am not, he is one of the first feminists and I would very much like to read some of his works if only to be better equipped to critique utilitarianism. Luckily, I picked up his three major essays in Oxfam recently.

Thus Spake Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche (1883) - Ahhhh Nietsche, yes he was a misogynist bastard, but at the same time, his words on the Uber Man were unfairly twisted by the Nazis and it is that which he gets most regularly lampooned for. I love him for his influence on Foucault, and his ideas on the limit experience. In spite of this, I have yet to read him.

The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli (1532) - Why I haven't read this yet, I have no idea. It's short, too!

A Vindication of the Rights of Woman by Mary Wollstonecraft (1792) - I have read Maria or The Wrongs of Woman, which I would not wish on anyone. Hopefully her non-fiction is better.

The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir (1949) - Anyone studying feminism should probably read this.

Economy and Society by Max Weber (1922) - I do like Weber, his essay on the Protestant work ethic is fantastic.

The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan (1963) - I have heard great things about this book. I must read it!

Oh gosh...I have written rather a lot. I should maybe trim it back, but it took me ever so long to write it and I would feel sad to. I'll try to write less in future in this group!

I've read a few more than I had expected to.

But I find their choices an odd mix. Very few science and maths books - and I would have dropped A Brief History Of Time. Yeah everyone knows about it, but there are much better books out there.

No Pictorial Guide To The Lakeland Fells is a major oversight.

Ah, but then I'd have had none out of a hundred! :^P

(In the blog comments following the article, I did like http://www.guardian.co.uk/discussion/comment-permalink/11166639)

#9 - That's a very good comment!

I think you'd have to be a real enthusiast for the particular subject to wade through some of the philosophy and some other of the books.

In my opinion - for what it's worth - only the most unusual person would not be setting themself up for a big fail in attempting the full hundred.

#9, #10 - Agreed! I know that I need to read Kant at some point, but even dedicated philosophers describe it as pure torture to get through. I think that any book which needs a book to explain how to read it should probably be excluded by default from a Guardian list of non-fiction books to read!

Think I've read or speed-read about thirty of them, but only because they were on reading lists when I was at uni and I had to produce an essay. Some of them I've never heard of at all, including some published quite recently.
I do read a hell of a lot of nonfiction but only in subjects I'm fascinated by e,g, mythology and comparative religion. I certainly wouldn't try to read all of this list - but then I'm always a bit mystified when people try to read complete lists like this. I only read stuff that takes my fancy and there's more than enough of that without my having to plod through stuff on a list! Some people seem to be gluttons for punishment :)

I only have one, Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee. It's not exactly a cheerful read, but certainly worth remembering that a whole people and way of life was just wiped out. I think most of the books on the list are quite old. I also think they avoided controversial choices like The God Delusion.

I think I've 23 on my shelves, mostly glanced at. I think Time of Gifts is a great book - read how the gauche young Leigh Fermor chucks back a glass of aged and precious Tokay as if it was aquavit. I'd recommend Rings of Saturn - a strange but compelling book. I liked Ways of Seeing. The Gulag Archipelago and Silent Spring were required reading in the 60s/70s, but now?

What a daft list!

I've read 19 of them but I still feel a little ashamed - especially since whenever somebody releases a list of the 100 'best' fiction works, I'm generally somewhere in the 70s, 80s or 90s. Life is just too short, I guess.

You know all those snobby list books like 2,001 Things to Do Before You Die and 1,000 Recordings to Hear Before You Die and 1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die and 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die? Well, I want someone to write one called "1001 List Books To Completely Ignore Before You Die".

#16 Just interested to know why you think lists of recommendations are 'snobby'?

Not all are, but a lot of them are based around the particular class/lifestyle of the author (I guess the "things to do" and "places to go" ones are the biggest culprits), especially where many recommendations are things that may financially be out of a lot of people's reach. But I did haver between typing "snobby" and "aspirational", so it's not an adjective I was 100% forcefully behind :^)

I am deeply, deeply ashamed to say I have read only 5 books off this list, I think I have some serious reading to do in the new year.

Two and two halves.

But when you consider that there are only six on science and maths, that takes me up to 50%!