[blockwriter]

These estimates seem weighted toward the reality that books are simply not read, and it is a meta-rationale, like the book's relevance to some theme that is perpetually bandied about in our political discourse, that is a more reliable vehicle for relevance. If books do end up being read again, and if therefore the individual merits predominate our perception, appreciation, and institution of these works, then the list would not be appropriately calibrated. As of now, it might be more right than wrong. It's not sad. It's not not sad. It's just the way it is.

[LanceH]

> relevance to some theme that is perpetually bandied about in our political discourse, that is a more reliable vehicle for relevance.

This is why Sir Mix-a-Lot's opus magnum will be played forever.