Comments on: The All-Time Best-Selling Books http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886 Feel Smart Again Mon, 13 Feb 2012 06:19:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5 By: LaraP http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886/comment-page-1#comment-468811 LaraP Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:23:15 +0000 http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886#comment-468811 Completely agree with the above poster re: traditional, old works being difficult to track in terms of actual 'sales.' I found <a href="http://www.ranker.com/list/best-selling-books-of-all-time/jeff419" rel="nofollow">this list of best selling books</a>, both fiction books and non-fiction, and found it interesting (they left out The Bible and other religious books, and again, all of these lists are totally subjective). All hail The Hobbit! Completely agree with the above poster re: traditional, old works being difficult to track in terms of actual ‘sales.’ I found this list of best selling books, both fiction books and non-fiction, and found it interesting (they left out The Bible and other religious books, and again, all of these lists are totally subjective). All hail The Hobbit!

]]> By: Terrence Lockyer http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886/comment-page-1#comment-438659 Terrence Lockyer Mon, 30 May 2011 12:08:34 +0000 http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886#comment-438659 Personally, I think we can take these lists with a grain of salt: for very old traditional works (Bible, Quran, Mahabharata, Iliad and Odyssey), we have simply no way of remotely estimating how many copies have ever existed or how many people have possessed copies; for translations of these and for more recent works now in the public domain (Austen, Dickens), there may be so many editions (not to mention electronic texts, which present a whole new counting problem between downloads and page views) as to make counting impracticable; and even for recent publications we are at the mercy of publishers for reports of numbers of copies in print, and it may be very hard to ascertain exactly how many of those are finally sold, while figures of copies in print and sold may at times be inflated for commercial or ideological reasons. Personally, I think we can take these lists with a grain of salt: for very old traditional works (Bible, Quran, Mahabharata, Iliad and Odyssey), we have simply no way of remotely estimating how many copies have ever existed or how many people have possessed copies; for translations of these and for more recent works now in the public domain (Austen, Dickens), there may be so many editions (not to mention electronic texts, which present a whole new counting problem between downloads and page views) as to make counting impracticable; and even for recent publications we are at the mercy of publishers for reports of numbers of copies in print, and it may be very hard to ascertain exactly how many of those are finally sold, while figures of copies in print and sold may at times be inflated for commercial or ideological reasons.

]]> By: Terrence Lockyer http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886/comment-page-1#comment-438658 Terrence Lockyer Mon, 30 May 2011 11:47:41 +0000 http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886#comment-438658 @Allan: The Wikipedia page has undergone major revision in the almost exactly four years since this post appeared: I suspect you, like me, followed a link from somebody who mistakenly suggested it was recent. The list above seems to have been based on the list as at the 16th May 2007: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_best-selling_books&oldid=131294107 @Allan: The Wikipedia page has undergone major revision in the almost exactly four years since this post appeared: I suspect you, like me, followed a link from somebody who mistakenly suggested it was recent. The list above seems to have been based on the list as at the 16th May 2007: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_best-selling_books&oldid=131294107

]]> By: Allan http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886/comment-page-1#comment-438633 Allan Sun, 29 May 2011 21:14:49 +0000 http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886#comment-438633 that wiki page linked lists 'a tale of two cities' at 200m, and many more left off here. what's with the discrepancies? that wiki page linked lists ‘a tale of two cities’ at 200m, and many more left off here. what’s with the discrepancies?

]]> By: Terrence Lockyer http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886/comment-page-1#comment-438631 Terrence Lockyer Sun, 29 May 2011 20:47:12 +0000 http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886#comment-438631 I see that I was misled by http://twitter.com/qikipedia into thinking this a recent post. My fault, of course, as I ought to have paid more attention to the date at the top of this page, and not relied on the notoriously fallible QI account. My other correction stands: "Sorcerer's Stone" was only a US title. I see that I was misled by http://twitter.com/qikipedia into thinking this a recent post. My fault, of course, as I ought to have paid more attention to the date at the top of this page, and not relied on the notoriously fallible QI account. My other correction stands: “Sorcerer’s Stone” was only a US title.

]]> By: Jason English http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886/comment-page-1#comment-438627 Jason English Sun, 29 May 2011 20:31:10 +0000 http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886#comment-438627 Terrence -- This post is more than four years old (before Deathly Hallows). It's probably up there by now. Terrence — This post is more than four years old (before Deathly Hallows). It’s probably up there by now.

]]> By: Terrence Lockyer http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886/comment-page-1#comment-438626 Terrence Lockyer Sun, 29 May 2011 20:13:49 +0000 http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886#comment-438626 Two corrections: 1) Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone was the English-language title everywhere other than the US; not just the UK. 2) There are SEVEN Harry Potter titles overall (so it should be "three other Harry Potter titles"; not "The other three"), excluding the three additional volumes proceeds from which went to charities. Two corrections:

1) Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone was the English-language title everywhere other than the US; not just the UK.

2) There are SEVEN Harry Potter titles overall (so it should be “three other Harry Potter titles”; not “The other three”), excluding the three additional volumes proceeds from which went to charities.

]]> By: vijay http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886/comment-page-1#comment-438625 vijay Sun, 29 May 2011 19:55:42 +0000 http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886#comment-438625 there would be a billion copy sold each for ramayana and mahabharata. there would be a billion copy sold each for ramayana and mahabharata.

]]> By: Shaun Schon http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886/comment-page-1#comment-331495 Shaun Schon Tue, 02 Mar 2010 04:12:54 +0000 http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886#comment-331495 Totally agree with Jason. While Catcher in the Rye can actually be considered a work of literature, the other books are not even worthy of mention in the same sentence. They are cheap bubblegum. Now, the fact is that some people have inferior tastes and if you want to be politically correct and tiptoe around them be my guest. I don't see any reason to. People with inferior tastes shape the sales figures and damage writing as an art form, reducing it to a mere commerce. The same holds true for music today. And anyone who is truly literate and knowledgeable in the context of language, literature and writing, would appreciate the fact that Catcher of the Rye is a brilliant book. You may not like the book or it's message, but you would be able to appreciate the fact that it is an exceptional work as compared to many of the other books you may like a lot more. Totally agree with Jason. While Catcher in the Rye can actually be considered a work of literature, the other books are not even worthy of mention in the same sentence. They are cheap bubblegum. Now, the fact is that some people have inferior tastes and if you want to be politically correct and tiptoe around them be my guest. I don’t see any reason to. People with inferior tastes shape the sales figures and damage writing as an art form, reducing it to a mere commerce. The same holds true for music today. And anyone who is truly literate and knowledgeable in the context of language, literature and writing, would appreciate the fact that Catcher of the Rye is a brilliant book. You may not like the book or it’s message, but you would be able to appreciate the fact that it is an exceptional work as compared to many of the other books you may like a lot more.

]]> By: johnny http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886/comment-page-1#comment-143893 johnny Sun, 31 May 2009 03:14:00 +0000 http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/5886#comment-143893 I love DaVinci Code,the Bible,and all religious books and novels.A lot better than Catcher in the Rye and Harry Potter [which I never read]. I love DaVinci Code,the Bible,and all religious books and novels.A lot better than Catcher in the Rye and Harry Potter [which I never read].

]]>