补充一下外国网友的评价：
I guess this attempt to numerically rank what the author considers the 100 best novels is as good as it possibly could be. It's just such a futile endevour I'm not even sure it's worth taking. However, the goal of this book is probably to try to get people to explore the classics, so I can't quibble with the rankings too much. Plus, a list like this is sure to generate debate and controversy, which is always entertaining.
1) The list includes too many English language novels, considering that it's supposed to span the entire history of world literature (plus a lot of English/American novels are ranked too high).
You could easily take o u t s t u f f like Uncle Tom's Cabin and Gone with the Wind and include more non-English language authors,
like Svevo, Calvino, Cortazar, Vargas Llosa, etc. Plus, does the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn really need to be in the top 20?
2) This is a touchy subject, but I think the author is a little too politically correct with some of the rankings, especially African American authors. Does anybody really think Invisible Man belongs in the top 25 greatest novels of ALL TIME? It's a good novel, but remember, this list is trying to take into account the entire history of the world literature. Ditto for Beloved. This also ties into the author's American-centric view point.
3) The author seems to have given up on the last 12 or so rankings, and just put in a bunch of popular but not exactly GREAT novels. There are plenty of great novels that have been excluded to make way for stuff like Gone with the Wind and the Three Musketeers. Like, say, Doctor Faustus.
4) The author unnecessarily excludes more "fantastic" literature because they don't have, to quote, a "synthesis between romance and realism, between a poetic, imaginative alternative to actuality and a more authentic representation." So that means no Gulliver's Travels, no Gargantua and Pantagruel, no Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. Yet somehow Gravity's Rainbow and that giant pile of gobbledygook Finnegans Wake make it on here. Because they're so grounded in realism.
But whatever, it's still a good effort, despite it's flaws. The author just easily exposes himself as an American.
获得诺贝尔文学奖也不见得都是经典，时间检验有滞后性，诺奖这百年历史，被证明留得住的作家可能都不到2分之1。就像奥斯卡最佳影片一样，最后留在电影史上的，被证明不过时的也就三分之一，反倒当年没有选中的很多被认为是经典。
看看榜单上，排名靠前的20世纪作家也未必很多是诺贝尔奖获得者。
还有没有一个榜单是绝对权威，让所有人都信服的，那根本不可能做到，只有相对合理就不错了，这个榜单站在西方人尤其是美国人的立场上去看世界文学，还算是相对靠谱的。排在前面的都是西方文学史上最牛的经典。
要是什么时候你看到某个榜单飘排在福克纳之前，罗曼罗兰在普鲁斯特之前，高尔基在陀思妥耶夫斯基之前，简爱在简奥斯丁之前，金庸在曹雪芹之前，那这个榜单的水准就没有一点价值了。