How many authors bat 1.000?

[xiphias]

(Note to non-baseball fans: "batting a thousand" means hitting the ball 100% of the time. It doesn't happen. Well, if you hit the very first pitch you are thrown, then you're batting a thousand for a brief period of time, anyway. . . )

Lis was just playing me an NPR story on David Macaulay and his new book on the human body. In the introduction, the reporter referred to him as a "one-man genre". He is an architect who writes books about how things are built. From Roman cities to castles, to sewer systems, to cathedrals, to mosques, to machines, and now, the human body.

And I made the comment to Lis that, yeah, "one-man genre is a good term for him, and, what's more, every one of those books is worth reading." And looking at the pictures. The pictures are great.

It got me thinking -- how many authors ARE there for whom every single book they've written is worth reading?

Harper Lee, of course. But that's kind of cheating. Jane Austen. I'd argue for Shakespeare, even if plenty of other folks think that at least a COUPLE of his plays suck. Who else?

Comments

[quietann.livejournal.com]

I would argue for Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan series, though I am not sure if "genre fiction" really can qualify.

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Of course genre fiction can qualify! But to count Bujold, you'd have to also agree that all her Chalion books were also good, and maybe argue in favor of all her novellas and short stories, as well. Depends how we're defining "batting a thousand" -- if it includes shorter works as well.

I think she's written fanfic, as well, but a) I'm not sure, and b) I'm willing to not count fanfic in the average. Unless an author WANTED it counted -- some of it is quite good. . .

I'd agree on the Vorkosigan books, but I'm not as certain as the Chalion stuff. Your mileage may vary, of course.

[ecban.livejournal.com]

Stanislaw Lem. M. John Harrison. Kelly Link. William Gibson.

[goljerp]

J.D. Salinger? Although I have to admit that I've only read _Catcher_

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

I've read "Catcher" and "Nine Tales".

And they're both good.

He's also written a half-dozen other books, which I know nothing about.

[redbird]

Homer

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Not according to Horace:

et idem indignor quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus

... and yet I also become annoyed whenever the great Homer nods off.

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Oh -- I'm not just sucking up or giving shout-outs to friends when I state that both matociquala and papersky qualify.

So far.

They both have plenty of time to write clinkers in the future, however.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

So far I've never read anything by either that hasn't been anything but good.

I'll try to think of other people --- has Diane Duane written any clunkers? Can't think of any -- but am currently online with one eye on a small wigglesome redhead, so not exactly concentrating.

[gilmoure.livejournal.com]

Neil Gaimen?

Kurt Vonneget?

[jehanna.livejournal.com]

Seconded on Neil Gaiman. I've never met a book of his I didn't like. Terry Pratchett, too, I think.

[bluepapercup]

John McPhee.

[chaiya.livejournal.com]

Lloyd Alexander, on the children's lit section. I'd also argue strongly for Margaret Atwood's fiction and Timothy Zahn (his non-Star Wars novels are also fab, so far as I've gotten).

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Ooh, yeah on Alexander. I've never picked up a novel of his I haven't loved -- including some of the more obscure ones, like The First Two Lives of Lucas-Kasha.

[noveldevice.livejournal.com]

Lois McMaster Bujold, for sure. I'm pretty sure I've read it all, and it's all good. Even The Spirit Ring, which I hated at 18, I now love.

Euripides. (I know, I have to say that, I wrote my thesis on one of his lesser-known plays.)

Diana Wynne Jones.

[goljerp]

I'd say that Isaac Asimov ended his career batting 0.996. I'll leave it open as to which two books he wrote aren't worth reading :-)

[wordweaverlynn.livejournal.com]

Katherine Anne Porter.

The Bronte sisters.

Truman Capote.

E. B. White.

James Thurber.

[rosefox]

Seconding Lloyd Alexander, and adding Junot Diaz. Oh, and Ted Chiang.

[ckd]

Steven Brust. (I didn't like Cowboy Feng's when I first read it; when I went back 10 years later, it was amazing. I'm pretty sure he didn't sneak in and replace my copy with a revised edition, either.)

[navrins]

I've made two attempts to read, um, the one that takes place in the east, I can't even remember the title, or any proper names. Or get more than about halfway through the book before giving up from sheer boredom. It counts as an out to me.

[dianavilliers.livejournal.com]

I'm busily making notes here for future reading.
I'd have to add Christopher Brookmyer to the list, and Patrick O'Brian. Iain Banks almost makes it - I wasn't too taken by A Song of Stone or Dead Air.

[hobbitblue.livejournal.com]

John Scalzi

[florafloraflora.livejournal.com]

I'd argue for William Styron. One of his early novels didn't do well with US critics but was a big hit in Europe, says Wikipedia.

[cbpotts.livejournal.com]

What an awesome question!

It's a very strange question in a way too, for there aren't many books that aren't worth reading at least on some level(I may have learned more about writing from negative examples than positive ones)

But for positive examples:

E.M. Forester

Seth Godin (although you may need to be a marketing geek to appreciate him)

I'm partial to Nabakov, too, although it'd be hard to argue the 1.000 rating

[greenlily.livejournal.com]

Minister Faust. Pamela Dean. Possibly Connie Willis.

[mattblum.livejournal.com]

Jasper Fforde.
J.K. Rowling.