Spelling As a Competitive Sport

People who know me well will know that I am a bit of a sports junkie. As in, I am the kind of person who will be happy to put ESPN on in the background, and I am someone who follows a wide variety of sports - football, tennis, basketball, golf, and even more random ones like table tennis and badminton. ESPN has been extending their coverage to such non-traditional sports as pool, snooker, bowling and darts (all of which I must admit I do rather enjoy watching as a kind of guilty pleasure), but even I was taken aback when I turned on the TV the other evening to be confronted with the ultimate clash of the titans, 48 individuals battling it out for the ultimate grand prize: the US National Spelling Bee trophy.

Traditionalists ("It ain't a sport unless you sweat while doing it") will laugh, but there was something rather captivating about seeing 13 and 14 year olds (some as young as 9) puzzling out words which were, quite honestly baffling, even to those who believe they have a considerable grasp of the English language. That spelling is a competitive sport, as unlikely as that might sound, was soon evident from the contestants.

Many of them were familiar with Latin and Greek root and derivatives, better to ensure not being caught out by tricky words; a number of them were making their second, third or even fourth appearance at the National Spelling Bee, with previous experience seen as a bonus (is experience a key factor, well just ask any golfer or tennis player yet to win a major). Nerves were evident, unsurprising given the one mistake and you're out see you next year format of the competition. It was often tension filled and pressure packed - there was even a psychologist on hand to counsel the distressed, some visibly distraught after they were literally "rung out" by the dreaded bell, signifying they had made a misstep puzzling out some fiendish word or another.

Just how difficult was it? I am not a great speller, laziness and Microsoft Word spellcheck has seen to that, but I do think I have a fair vocabulary. By the third and fourth elimination rounds (when the difficulty was increased) I would have probably gotten between a third to a half of the words wrong. This put me just about par for the competition as a whole. No doubt, these were 13 and 14 year olds, so I should feel ashamed at my ignorance, but in my defense, some of the contestants admitted to more or less sleeping with a Miriam-Webster by their bedsides, and spending arduous amounts of preparation in advance of the competition.

That said, I have kept a little notebook which I have filled with puzzling and interesting words that I had not previously come across. I have always meant to check out their meanings and etymologies, if only to expand my vocabulary. I have also meant to get to the roots of language, literally and metaphorically, to actually learn the building blocks (what is an adverb, what on earth is a past participle?) of grammar. Perhaps watching the US National Spelling Bee will inspire me to renew my efforts in this.

15 Books

I've succumbed to yet another Facebook meme that has gone rabid. This one can be basically called 15 Books. You are supposed to choose 15 books that you love, or that had a major influence on your life. It was a very difficult task for me, given how much I enjoy reading, but here is the list I've come up with:

1. The Lord of the Rings | J.R.R Tolkien
2. Dune | Frank Herbert
3. The Sandman Graphic Novels | Neil Gaiman
4. The Passion | Jeanette Winterson
5. Housekeeping | Marilynne Robinson
6. Atonement | Ian McEwan
7. Disgrace | J.M Coetzee
   
8. The Remains of the Day | Kazuo Ishiguro
   
9. The Great Gatsby | F. Scott Fitzgerald
   
10. The Things They Carried | Tim O'Brien
11. In Cold Blood | Truman Capote
    
12. King Lear | William Shakespeare
13. Ex Libris | Anne Fadiman
    
14. A Wrinkle in Time | Madeleine L'Engle
    
15. True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle | Avi

Two books that probably influenced me greatly but which are too embarrassing to list: The Firm by John Grisham (it was the very first "adult" novel I ever read after I picked it up off my mother's shelf) and Kane and Abel by Jeffrey Archer (I read through the night trying to finish it, fell asleep, woke up around lunch and carried on where I had left off).

Near Misses: A History of the World in 10 1/2 Chapters by Julian Barnes, Practical Ethics by Peter Singer, Julie of the Wolves by Jean Craighead George, Bartholomew and the 500 Hats by Dr Seuss, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisevitch by Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Love Condensed?

On certain occasions, fiction mirrors reality to a rather uncanny extent. We quote music lyrics because sometimes they express what we feel in a more direct and pithy way that we otherwise manage. So I found this passage in Julian Barnes's England England, which I am now reading:

Martha knew exactly what she wanted: truth, simplicity, love, kindness, companionship, fun, and good sex was how the list might start. She also knew that such list making was daft; normally human but still daft. So while her heart opened, her mind had remained anxious. Paul behaved as if their relationship were already a given: its parameters decided, its purpose certain, all problems strictly for the future. She recognized this trait all too well, the blithe urgency to get on with being a couple before the constituent parts and workings of coupledom had been established. She had been here before. Part of her wished she hadn't; she felt burdened by her own history

Couldn't have put my current feelings more accurately and concisely that what Barnes has written. Fiction mirroring reality.

Soft Landing

My mother told me about the death of Elisha Chng the other day, and I was quite shocked. It was a surreal sensation reading about him in the afternoon papers - about how he played rugby and was a male model, though I was annoyed at the tone of idle speculation, the he seemed to have it all, so why? I used to play with Elisha when we were young children - our families were close. I remember giving him a bucket of G.I. Joes when he left for Africa with his family - his father was a missionary sent there to proselytize. I've written this poem as a form of remembrance and tribute. Note it is still a work in progress. Comments and suggestions on the poem (and how to improve it!) are welcome.

Soft Landing

for Elisha Chng

I knew you but briefly
more a presence, a memory,
than something solid,
until the thump of your landing
in the afternoon papers -
dry words of baffled condolence
leavened with concrete.

It was surreal to discover
the grown up you, secondhand -
rugger, model, all action hero,
rather like the G.I Joes
we played with as kids –
a bucketful my parting gift
as you left for Africa.

You weren’t a close friend or confidant –
nothing to warrant
this extravagance of verse;
still, I offer this wreath -
wraith like memories
thinly plucked
an antidote to idle speculation:
of why, what, waste
seeking some absolution
better found
in quiet remembrance.

Mexican Banditry

The sister, CL, and myself met at Holland Village for lunch, and given the usual ding dong backwards and forwards discussion of where to eat, I plumped for Mexican. Holland Village itself has two Mexican restaurants sitting plumb right beside one another. Family tradition has dictated that we always dine at El Patio, which has a slightly more homely feel compared to Cha Cha Cha which was reputed to serve food that was less than authentic.

That age old tradition was to be broken today. We arrived at El Patio and stood outside briefly perusing the menu. The restaurant was completely empty, rather dire for a Sunday afternoon. We could blatantly see the one staff member on duty inside the restaurant, sitting at one of the tables, doing her damnedest to blithely ignore us. Even when we stood there for five minutes and began staring straight are her. I finally made irritated waving motions and she slowly and very reluctantly began to rise from her slouch, by which time me and the sister were so irritated, we walked away.

It was thus that we came to dine at Cha Cha Cha. The service was admittedly much more prompt. We were soon shown to a table. That, if anything, could explain why they had 6 or 7 tables occupied to El Patio's none. All was going rather well. Until the food came. I had ordered the mixed combo - one hard taco with beef, one chicken burrito. By the time I was half way through the hard taco, I was confronted with stringy bits of meat at the bottom, which was so tasteless, I couldn't remember whether I had ordered the beef or the chicken with the taco, and quite honestly, on taste alone I couldn't tell. I guessed it was beef based on the coloration, and nothing else. My sister was similar unenthused about her meal - her rice wasn't quite to her liking, and the refried beans tasted like they had probably been refried one too many times. The result was poor CL being subjected to a litany of complaints about the food from the two of us.

So, the puzzling question for us remained: how did these two establishments survive for longer than a decade at Holland Village, given the poor food in one, and the poor service in the latter (though the poor service at El Patio was probably due to a change in management). More importantly, where can Caleb and the sister go if they want some good mexican food? There is of course the Cafe Iguana, near Clarke Quay and with a newly opened outlet on Greenwood, which is decent. But we're looking for really authentic Mexican, stuff which can vaguely measure up to what we had when we spent a few months in Texas. Can anyone help us with our conondum, please do send recommendations. We need to eat proper Mexican after the debacle that was Cha Cha Cha.

My Simple Pleasures

It all started when CL sent an SMS commenting about the simple joys of gelato, and watching happy dogs and exuberant children frolic about, with a subsequent query about what my simple pleasures were. Conventional wisdom tells us to count our blessings, a simple old as apple pie piece of advice that has been echoed by countless self-help and positive psychology books centering on how we can achieve happiness. Admittedly though, having the question posed so starkly gave me pause, though it hardly took me all that long to reply. What I can up with was:

reading a good book, watching an enjoyable movie in the cinema, browsing in a bookstore or a library, watching a play or a concert, holding someone you care about deeply, my dog wagging her tail and bringing me her toy ball whenever I step through the door, a beer in the pub with some friends, dinner at a nice restaurant with good company, meeting new and interesting people, catching up with old friends, randomly bumping into someone on a street corner, the thrill of pulling out a random piece of trivia or information, sleeping in, sharing a bottle of wine with company, staying up late doing absolutely nothing, spur of the moment decisions, suppers, lazy Sundays, reading the news, heartfelt kisses, the fresh smell of a brand new book and the musty smell of an old one, pretty notebooks, dry humour, long rambling discussions, sitting and watching the stars, hiking and walking, visiting new places, lovely little cafes and eateries

Of course the list doesn't end there. But the rather long list shows that as cynical as you care to be, there are lots of little things in life that inherently make it worth living.

When Harry Dumped Sally

I was having a random chat with M. when we both mentioned that we really enjoyed When Harry Met Sally. Which is unsurprising given that it is a cult romantic comedy classic but surprising given that we are both a little bit cynical and jaded, and don't ordinarily watch rom coms.

The cynical side of us did come through of course. Like in any romantic comedy, the two protagonists end up together at the end. That wasn't a spoiler. If you are watching a rom com you know it is going to happen. Anyhow, I mentioned that I always thought that Harry and Sally would divorce after say 5 years of marriage because they would start to drive each other nuts. M said that she always thought that it would happen that way too. Of course given that the American divorce rate is hovering at about 50%, we have a odds on chance of being right.

So we started imagining what would happen after the credits rolled. So they divorce after 5 years but what do they do then? Perhaps Sally buys a dog to help her get over the break-up and she meets a lovely guy while walking the dog in the park one day. M was like no no maybe Sally turns lesbian (being so put out by men after Harry) and meets this really hot chick and ends up with her! Maybe they meet while Sally is walking her dog.

As for Harry. Well, he probably leaves New York and goes out of state in order to try to find himself. M wanted him to turn fat, and lose his job and be miserable. But, he needs some kind of redeeming quality too. What if he turns gay as well? I tell M. that we can't have both of them turn gay as that will go beyond the bounds of all credibility. Maybe he joins a hippie commune or loses himself in Zen Buddhism.

Where we can agree is that Harry and Sally don't end up back together. We are too realistic and cynical for us to believe or even want that to happen. Life doesn't always imitate the movies. I proposed the title When Harry Dumped Sally as suitably nice. M did say that even she found the idea and the title depressing. It would make her lose all hope in love. Which probably means that it won't sell.

I've always harboured secret dreams of writing a screenplay. Why not write a cheap sequel to a cult classic. Goodness knows it has been done often enough before! I'll just go check on the availability of Rob Reiner to direct, and of course Meg Ryan and Billy Crystal to star......

Eating: Some Commense Rules

Eating, previously one of life's simplest and most pleasurable activities, has become increasingly complicated. I have always adopted a simple philosophy towards eating which has served me well thus far: "eat first, worry about it later". When pressed, I would joke that the stress of worrying about what you eat will probably kill you faster than anything present in the food.

Joking aside, we have been given an incredible amount of dissenting advice regarding our diets. Previously, we were told about the dangers of fat and cholesterol only to find that the 'trans-fats' that replaced them in our diet (in products such as margarine), were even more deadly. Now we are told that carbohydrates are the bogeymen, the overconsumption of which is cause for much of the obesity that plagues Western society (Atkins diet anyone?). We should eat more fish because they contain Omega-3s which is the new holy grail for everything from reduced cancer risk to better brain cells. But fish may also contain harmful substances like mercury.

Michael Pollan, in his book In Defence of Food, nicely deflates the prevailing trend towards 'nutritionism' where food is not seen as food but as an item made up of calories and nutrients. He brutally de-bunks nutritionism, showing how it is unreliable at best, and bad science with links to the food and medical industries at its worst. Nutritionism, to a degree, has become a blanket excuse to create processed foods, with studies commissioned by the food industry showing nutritional benefits of whatever food they are asked to assess. Pollan states rather cynically that a qualified FDA health claim for any product amounts to a euphemism for "all but meaningless". By the end of the book, you are rather inclined to agree, especially when you read about a chair in "Chocolate Science" being endowed by the Mars Corporation at the University of California Davis.

One of the worst failings that Pollan documents involves the so-called 'lipid hypothesis' linking the rise in heart disease (and other illnesses) to consumption of fats and cholesterol. That led to a drastic change in diets - not necessarily for the better as it turns out. Pollan rightly points out the manichean nature of dietary advice - previously protein was bad and carbs were good, now carbs are bad and protiens are good. The only thing that is universally acclaimed to be generally pretty harmless and actually quite beneficial is leaves and fruit and that goes to the heart of Pollan's advice for what we should eat.

Pollan also rightly points out that the reductionist nature of nutritionism just doesn't work. Scientists enjoy isolating an individual vitamin, mineral or nutrient within a particular foodstuff and praising or blaming it for having beneficial or deleterious effects on your health, but ultimately foods themselves are highly complex agglomerations that defy analysis. So is it really the Omega 3 fatty acids alone that makes fish such a nutritional food? Or is it the Omega 3s working in conjunction with other individual proteins in fish that has some effect during the digestion process? The most basic but crucial thing that Pollan does is to emphasize that we have to once again think about food, as well food.

Ultimately, I have distilled from Pollan's book a small number of simple maxims with the aim of eating more healthily but also being able to enjoy food a lot more. He presents about two dozen or so simple and sensible general rules which you will be well advised to check out. After finishing the book I have resolved to:

• Set aside specific time for eating as a sole activity and spend more time eating - no eating in front of the TV, or computer, or at a desk while finishing work.
• Have more meals with other people - good company and excellent conversation makes a meal that much more enjoyable, and actually reduces the amount you eat.
• No snacking - eat three square meals and avoid having little snacks in between. So no nuts, crisps, chicken wings etc.
  
• Stop eating junk food or fast food - there are far far better ways to spend $7 than on a upsized Big Mac Meal; there are also much better ways to spend $4 than on a pack of Lays potato chips.
• Eat more green, leafy vegetables - try having 2 servings of vegetables and 1 serving of meat for dinner instead of the other way round.
• Eat fruit more regularly - try to have freshly squeezed fruit juice at hawker centers/foodcourts. One serving of fruit after dinner.
• Cut down on the amount of meat you eat - fish and seafood might be better options. Perhaps choose a day where you can forgo meat entirely (a la Catholics on friday).
• Avoid any kind of food that looks like it is processed. If it didn't once look alive, don't buy it.
• Cut down on alcohol consumption - you don't have to go teetotal but binge drinking is generally a very bad idea. Also if you are going to drink, try a glass of red wine every evening rather than beer or spirits.
• Learn to cook - what better way of really understanding what on earth you are eating? Plus it will make you appreciate and enjoy food all the more.

Other things that I should explore:

• Taking supplements - the jury is still out whether supplements are really all that effective. However, it is also true that modern factory farming has resulted in foods that give much higher yields but lower nutrient values. It may be worth taking a multivitamin.
  
• Portions - Is it better to have five small meals a day rather than the traditional three solid meals? It is worth finding out the evidence on either side. Will it be too much of a hassle to change?
  

All Roads Lead to Rome

It was the final that every neutral football fan wished for. Arguably the two top teams in the world going head to head for the right to be crowned European Champions. More than that, two teams who play open attacking football, with two of the best and most exciting players in the world in Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi competing to settle the issue of who is better once and for all in a personal duel on the pitch. The names of those on show dripped off the tongue: Henry, Eto'o, Messi, Iniesta, Ronaldo, Giggs, Rooney.

On paper, a truly Olympian struggle was promised at the Olympic stadium in Rome. What ensued was a compelling match, but unfortunately not one for the ages. It is not often that Sir Alex Ferguson can be accused of being tactically outmaneuvered, especially in a major final, but after Pep Guardiola's side took the lead, very much against the run of play, they played masterful possession football and strangled the life out of an erratic and disappointing Man United side that were almost thoroughly outplayed.

The pundits had given the advantage to United, particularly given the frailties of a Barcelona defence deprived of its two starting full backs and defensive rock Marquez. Sir Alex's side has shown they could contain Barcelona in the previous year's semi-finals, when a nil-nil stalemate was followed by a Paul Scholes stunner that put United through. It was expected that Barcelona would have more possession, but United's defensive solidity and ability to counter attack at pace would enable them to pierce the makeshift Barca defence.

United started the match with the confidence that comes from being the current champions of Europe, dominating possession in the opening exchanges, and wasting a few half chances, especially from Cristiano Ronaldo. As amazing as it sounds, the Barcelona front three barely had a touch on the ball between them for the first 10 minutes. United were then hit with the proverbial sucker punch. Iniesta was allowed to run through a gap in midfield far too easily, and played a weighted ball through to Eto'o who turned Vidic and squeezed a shot past Van Der Sar's near post. It was Barcelona's first meaningful attack of the match. It was disappointing defending by United and by Vidic in particular.

The goal clearly lifted Barcelona, who began to dominate possession, settling into their usual mercurial passing game that left the United players chasing shadows for a large part of the remainder of the half. The confidence only grew during the second half, as United was forced to throw caution to the wind. Tevez was brought on for an ineffectual Anderson in the hope that his attacking qualities might manufacture a breakthrough, but more importantly that his terrier like hounding and running might actually unsettle a Barcelona midfield that was stroking the ball about with supreme confidence.

Iniesta was particularly peerless in this regard, playing lovely little passes and neat one-twos that left his markers flummoxed. He was involved once again in the build up to an excellent Barca chance at the start of the second half, Man Utd's old tormentor Thierry Henry bursting through only for Van Der Sar to save smartly with his feet. At one point, his pinpoint passing, and general awareness led the commentator to ask rhetorically if he was even capable of misplaying a pass. The answer was yes, but not often.

Lionel Messi was also living up to his billing as a world class player, terrorizing the United with his direct slalom like running. Often the only way United could stop him was resorting to cutting him down. One such challenge led to a free kick at the edge of the area, and Xavi curled a lovely shot round the wall, only to see it carom off the upright. It was no surprise that it was Messi that supplied the coup de grace, from a pinpoint Xavi cross after United had given away possession cheaply and Evra only half cleared the ball. It was a superb ball into the box, but Messi still had to lean backwards while hanging in the air to guide the ball past a flailing Van Der Sar into the bottom corner of the net.

Credit must be given to Barcelona for their superb passing, and for the incessant pressure they put on United. Their makeshift backline was never much of a factor given their ability to close United down from up the field, and to starve them of space and possession. Gerard Pique, who only re-signed for Barca after failing to secure a first team place at United, had an excellent night, blocking a Park attempt on 2 minutes, and denying Ronaldo a clear shot that would have given United hope moments after Barca had taken a two goal lead. Beyond that, Vidic and Berbatov had headers off target, but United never really threatened the Barcelona goal in the closing stages.

Ultimately though, it was a surprisingly toothless performance from a United side that was lacking leadership, self-belief, and real quality on the day. What they would have given for a midfield enforcer in the Roy Keane mold, who could stamp his authority in the middle of the park, and harry Iniesta and Xavi. For all their other talents, Carrick can't tackle and man-marking are not the best attributes that Giggs or Anderson possess. The closest United have to that kind of a player in their current side is Darren Fletcher, who was suspended for the final and was sorely missed.

The entire United midfield was disappointing on the day, Carrick spraying passes all over the place, Anderson running aimlessly. Rooney was deployed first on the left, briefly led the line and ended the game on the right flank and cut a frustrated figure throughout. Ryan Giggs looked his age for probably the first time this season, looking tired and ragged by the early stages of the second half, as the Barcelona team continued to run circles around him. Paul Scholes should certainly have been brought on earlier - his intelligent runs and long range passing were sorely needed on a day when the United midfield was largely misfiring.

Tactically, United chopped and changed frequently, to little effect. Players often looking strangely clueless on the field. They started ostensibly with a 4-3-2-1 formation similar to Barca's that occasionally evolved into a 4-4-2 with Giggs tucking just behind Ronaldo up front. The 4-4-2 was singularly ineffectual, with the Barca midfield dominating United, so Ferguson brought Tevez on in a straight 4-4-2 with Giggs taking the place of Anderson in central midfield, Ronaldo moving to the flank and Rooney and Tevez pressing the Barca backline. That proved even worse, as Barca threatened to tear United to ribbons with their intelligent link up play, exploiting the gaps that United left as they pushed forward. Barca never tinkered with their tried and tested formation, looking comfortable playing their usual attacking and pressing game.

By the end of the game, Ferguson had his entire fab four of Rooney, Tevez, Berbatov, and Ronaldo on the field in what was effectively a 4-2-4 formation. It didn't make one jot of difference. United were a team lacking real leadership (Paul Scholes as the captain for the last twenty minutes?), any self-belief or even any fluency. There was to be no repeat of 1999 when United stole the trophy from under Bayern's nose due to a dogged refusal to give in. In 2009, it wasn't an exaggeration to say that they capitulated.

It was certainly not third time lucky for Ferguson, who despite his vast experience and supreme talent, has arguably been outplayed in all three Champions League finals he has been involved in. He was undoubtedly lucky in Barcelona in 1999 (brilliant substitutions aside) when Bayern bossed the game only to be hit by a double whammy in the last 3 minutes. Last year, Chelsea probably edged the game overall, despite United's domination of the first half - Drogba will be cursing the crossbar, and Terry will probably never be able to forget the nightmare of seeing what would be the winning penalty smack off the upright. Fergie ran out of luck this time round, flummoxed and well beaten by a truly marvelous Barcelona side.

Telegraph 100 Essential Novels

It is in the vogue for newspapers to come up with lists of novels that everyone should read now, and the latest list I have found is on the Telegraph website. I probably only discovered it so late because I don't read the Telegraph as a general rule but was directed there when a friend sent me a link about a new Jane Austen biography, claiming, you guessed it, to have found that mysterious man that broke her heart and eventually led her becoming the ultimate literary chick lit novelist.

The Telegraph's selections are:

100 The Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkein
99 To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
98 The Home and the World by Rabindranath Tagore
97 The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams
96 One Thousand and One Nights by Anonymous
95 The Sorrows of Young Werther by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
94 Midnight’s Children by Salman Rushdie
93 Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy by John le Carré
92 Cold Comfort Farm by Stella Gibbons
91 The Tale of Genji by Lady Murasaki
90 Under the Net by Iris Murdoch
89 The Golden Notebook by Doris Lessing
88 Eugene Onegin by Alexander Pushkin
87 On the Road by Jack Kerouac
86 Old Goriot by Honoré de Balzac
85 The Red and the Black by Stendhal
84 The Three Musketeers by Alexandre Dumas
83 Germinal by Emile Zola
82 The Stranger by Albert Camus
81The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco
80 Oscar and Lucinda by Peter Carey
79 Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys
78 Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll
77 Catch-22 by Joseph Heller
76 The Trial by Franz Kafka
75 Cider with Rosie by Laurie Lee
74 Waiting for the Mahatma by RK Narayan
73 All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Remarque
72 Dinner at the Homesick Restaurant by Anne Tyler
71 The Dream of the Red Chamber by Cao Xueqin
70 The Leopard by Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa
69 If On a Winter’s Night a Traveller by Italo Calvino
68 Crash by JG Ballard
67 A Bend in the River by VS Naipaul
66 Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky
65 Dr Zhivago by Boris Pasternak
64 The Cairo Trilogy by Naguib Mahfouz
63 The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson
62 Gulliver’s Travels by Jonathan Swift
61 My Name Is Red by Orhan Pamuk
60 One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel García Márquez
59 London Fields by Martin Amis
58 The Savage Detectives by Roberto Bolaño
57 The Glass Bead Game by Herman Hesse
56 The Tin Drum by Günter Grass
55 Austerlitz by WG Sebald
54 Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov
53 The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood
52 The Catcher in the Rye by JD Salinger
51 Underworld by Don DeLillo
50 Beloved by Toni Morrison
49 The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck
48 Go Tell It On the Mountain by James Baldwin
47The Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundera
46 The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie by Muriel Spark
45 The Voyeur by Alain Robbe-Grillet
44 Nausea by Jean-Paul Sartre
43 The Rabbit books by John Updike
42 The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain
41 The Hound of the Baskervilles by Arthur Conan Doyle
40 The House of Mirth by Edith Wharton
39 Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe
38 The Great Gatsby by F Scott Fitzgerald
37 The Warden by Anthony Trollope
36 Les Misérables by Victor Hugo
35 Lucky Jim by Kingsley Amis
34 The Big Sleep by Raymond Chandler
33 Clarissa by Samuel Richardson
32 A Dance to the Music of Time by Anthony Powell
31 Suite Francaise by Irène Némirovsky
30 Atonement by Ian McEwan
29 Life: a User’s Manual by Georges Perec
28 Tom Jones by Henry Fielding
27 Frankenstein by Mary Shelley
26 Cranford by Elizabeth Gaskell
25 The Moonstone by Wilkie Collins
24 Ulysses by James Joyce
23 Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert
22 A Passage to India by EM Forster
21 1984 by George Orwell
20 Tristram Shandy by Laurence Sterne
19 The War of the Worlds by HG Wells
18 Scoop by Evelyn Waugh
17 Tess of the D’Urbervilles by Thomas Hardy
16 Brighton Rock by Graham Greene
15 The Code of the Woosters by PG Wodehouse
14 Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë
13 David Copperfield by Charles Dickens
12 Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe
11 Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen
10 Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes
9 Mrs Dalloway by Virginia Woolf
8 Disgrace by JM Coetzee
7 Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë
6 In Search of Lost Time by Marcel Proust
5 Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad
4 The Portrait of a Lady by Henry James
3 Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy
2 Moby-Dick by Herman Melville
1 Middlemarch by George Eliot

I've personally managed almost a quarter of them. 24 out of 100. Mostly classic choices on the list but some odd ones - Waiting for the Mahatma by R.K Narayan? The Savage Detective by Robert Bolano? Strangely, it is those odd ones that I want to seek out first, if only to slake my curiousity as to why they were included!