1,000 must read Crime Thrillers listed at Observer [UK]

Hi guys

The UK's Sunday Observer has a suppliment listing 1,000 best crime and thriller novels in their MUST READ series


It is a fascinating list bound to promote debate



Views: 305

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Not sure I would call all of the books mentioned thrillers. But then the definition is pretty elastic.
Thanks, Naomi. Your comment has saved me the trouble of actually looking at the list. With those omissions, I can skip it.
Your information is incorrect. The list is 1000 must-read novels and it is divided into several different genre categories. I went through the list and counted and there are 123 crime novels listed. And some of those, such as The Andromeda Strain and Jurassic Park, aren't really crime novels. The list is not intended to be just thrillers. It is intended to include all kinds of crime novels.

Here are direct, non-blogspam links to the articles:




Still, the list does have Friedrich Dürrenmatt and Emile Zola so it's not all bad.
Dana - I take exception to the term 'Blog-spam'

My original post split all the lisitings on all the listings in the Observer peice - Part I, II, II, Spynovels, Hard Boiled, Agatha Christie, Conan-Doyle, Dibdin, unusual detectives et. al.

I was trying to help - especially as the hardcopy suppliment had them nicely collected.

None of my blog posts generate revenue, I do it as I love the crime genre.

I have never spammed - and I've been blogging for several years.

Just to clarify, the "Blog-spam" comment was from John D, not Dana.

And I read your blog post Ali, and appreciated your comments and organization in addition to the original Guardian article.
OOOPPPPPS Sorry Dana and thanks from pointing out John

The intent isn't the point of the term, it's the fact that it wastes time for someone to get to the actual article. Your blog post was confusing; I just wanted the list and it took a few minutes to find it. If you talk about a Guardian article in the post, link directly to it. Linking to a blog instead is, in the colloquial usage of the term, blogspam, regardless of the intent. Don't get mad at me about it, I didn't create the term.
Without getting 'precious' - The primary link to The Guardian / Observer was in the first paragraph of my post.

Sorry if you felt [and I quote] "Your blog post was confusing; I just wanted the list and it took a few minutes to find it" - but the link was there, right there in the first paragraph. Would you have found it without me posting it?

The rest of my post spilt and identifed all the other links, as there were several - but I guess "No Good Deed Goes Unpunished"


No matter which way you paint the term 'blog-spam' - it is still a term of derision.

lease don't hide behind [I quote] "Don't get mad at me about it, I didn't create the term." - It's like someone calling me by the 'N-Word', and then saying, "Hey don't blame me for using the 'N' Word, I didn't create the term."

John D - Next time you see a post of mine, why not ignore it, rather than deride the messenger.
I'll never live so long. (Sigh!) Remember the phrase "So little time, so many books!"

Going to my 50th reunion from college in June (Pacific University, Forest Grove, OR). The years do pile up.


CrimeSpace Google Search

© 2024   Created by Daniel Hatadi.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service