<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>mithridatism &#187; Top 10</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mithridatism.com/tag/top-10/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mithridatism.com</link>
	<description>the production of immunity against a poison by taking the poison in gradually increased doses</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2010 16:08:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Animal Farm (1945)</title>
		<link>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/05/12/animal-farm/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/05/12/animal-farm/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 May 2010 00:32:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kyle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[george orwell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[modern library]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top 10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top 100]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[top project]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mithridatism.com/?p=145</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Book #31 on Modern Library's Top 100 List.  Kid story or just Little Brother?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Though I loved <em>1984</em>, I always viewed <em>Animal Farm</em> with trepidation.  The notion of a slew of talking mammals simply did not appeal to me.  I had visions of <em>Milo and Otis</em> or <em>Charlotte&#8217;s Web</em>.  The actual story of George Orwell&#8217;s second most famous piece &#8211; the thinly-veiled communist dystopia &#8211; is nothing flowery or trite, but you never really hear about that factor.  Still, despite the serious overtones mixed with quadriped masks, <em>Animal Farm</em> never matches the effulgence of its Big Brother.</p>
<p>For all intents and purposes, <em>Animal Farm</em> and <em>1984</em> are the same story.  Orwell&#8217;s animals seem to be the stepping stone for his more polished, fleshed-out master stroke.  <em>Animal Farm</em> is the lean morality play, stripped of language and subtlety.  Both tales show the movement of supposed revolution toward supposed utopia.  In <em>Farm</em>, we see the communist swath from start to finish, from noble idea to washed-out greed-fest.  <em>1984</em> injects the human interest, the reaction to the story.  Where <em>1984</em> muses on what it might be like to discover the authoritarian ruse and push against it, <em>Animal Farm</em> is the blunt punch in the face about how that authoritarian ruse comes to be.  It is effective, but nothing more.</p>
<p>Orwell certainly held a creative touch for plotmaking and intricate detail.  The momentum of the story from incident to incident is genius, but Orwell stops himself at that point.  If you enjoy philosophical musings or wise ruminations, <em>Animal Farm</em> will leave you in a void.  When viewed as a stepping stone toward <em>1984</em>, however, the work&#8217;s existence is much more palatable.</p>
<p>When the final pages were turned, I found my experience with this book to be somewhere in the middle of my expectations.  It was not the kid story I often conjured internally, nor was it on a level with the transcendence of <em>1984</em>.  In future, potential canons, seemingly <em>Animal Farm</em> will always take a back seat to its more muscular, sophisticated cousin, even if it came first.</p>
<p><strong>mith rating: 7.6/10</strong></p>
<p><em>Animal Farm</em> was rated #31 on the Modern Library’s Top 100 Novels of the 20th Century. I read it as part of the <a href="http://www.mithridatism.com/the-top-project/">Top Project</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/05/12/animal-farm/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Slaughterhouse-Five (1969)</title>
		<link>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/04/29/slaughterhouse-five/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/04/29/slaughterhouse-five/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2010 05:19:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kyle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kurt vonnegut]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[modern library]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top 10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top 100]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[top project]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mithridatism.com/?p=130</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[#18 on Modern Library's Top 100, Vonnegut's most famous book rollicks the past, present, and future all at once.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Often viewed as Kurt Vonnegut&#8217;s masterpiece, <em>Slaughterhouse-Five</em> interestingly seems the least-Vonnegut Vonnegut novel.  The cynicism, black humor, science fiction, and imagination are all present, yet they approximate numbed cousins of the cynicism, black humor, science fiction, and imagination in his other works.  Considering the consternation the narrator (author?) describes to open the book and the ineffability inherent in traumatic experience, these numbed versions make perfect sense.  Still, rereading the novel, I almost felt as if I were reading a work by another author.  The significance of this observation really holds little weight.  As Kurt himself says 106 times in the book: so it goes.</p>
<p>At the core of <em>Slaughterhouse-Five</em> is the firebombing of Dresden during World War II.  Or so the narrator tells us.  Viewed from a distance, Dresden becomes a passer-by, a fleeting addition.  In fact, war itself is absent more than present.  On a conceptual level, this fact fits.  The narrator opens the book describing the aborted attempts at writing the great World War II novel.  He struggles with memory; he struggles with what parts of his experience <em>matter</em>; he struggles with making the pieces interlock.  The crux of his dilemma comes from describing the ultimately indescribable.  He wants to portray the damage he witnessed and experienced, but short of raw numbers, dates, or facts, he really cannot describe what he means at all.  Hence the only way he can write his book is to construct a plot for the character outside of the war.  He weaves a character withered by war, a character who talks about war, yet the story is not <em>about</em> war.  Dresden occupies strikingly little of the narrative.  In fact, most of the damage done to Billy Pilgrim&#8217;s psyche happens in war before the narrative.  When we meet him, he seems nearly broken.  The point to take here is the omnipresence of war, despite its absence.  The effects are there, but the war really is not.  This skirting of the issue paradoxically allows Vonnegut to address the issue.</p>
<p>Billy Pilgrim is abducted by aliens.  He travels through time.  He lives in a mental institution.  He survives a plane crash.  Along the way Vonnegut introduces the themes that pepper the book: fate, free will, meaning, time, human logic.  One easily imagines Vonnegut pondered these themes during World War II or because of World War II.  In the book, though, he can only overtly discuss them through these non-war constructs.  The notions are, of course, in action during the war sections, but they must be implied by the reader.  In terms of Vonnegut work, the plot constructs seem scattered and infrequent.  The first third of the novel I found less intriguing than I did reading the book the first time.  As the page numbers elevated, however, I started to sense the pattern and the reason for this scattered, infrequent characteristics.  <em>Slaughterhouse-Five</em> could not exist in the same way as other Vonnegut works.  It <em>has</em> to be the scattered book; it would work no other way.  In fact, by the end of the book, the fact that it is scattered and the normal Vonnegutisms are infrequent was no longer something that distracted me or made me like the book less.  Sure, I yearned for the biting humor, but that scenario would be alien here.</p>
<p>From a schematic view, Vonnegut subtly married the fractured elements of Billy Pilgrim&#8217;s life across time with the fractured elements of the narrator&#8217;s attempt and memory of World War II.  Interestingly, the muted language is highly appropriate for the ineffable experience Vonnegut wants to describe.  As always, the sporadic, tangential bits of life-insight that Vonnegut inserts heighten the reading experience.  <em>S-5</em> is not my favorite Vonnegut book, but I certainly understand its place in the canon.</p>
<p><strong>mith rating: 9.0/10</strong></p>
<p><em>Slaughterhouse-Five</em> was rated #18 on the Modern Library&#8217;s Top 100 Novels of the 20th Century.  I read it as part of the <a href=http://www.mithridatism.com/the-top-project/>Top Project</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/04/29/slaughterhouse-five/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Top 10 Rap Songs of All Time</title>
		<link>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/04/06/top-10-rap-songs-of-all-time/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/04/06/top-10-rap-songs-of-all-time/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Apr 2010 21:57:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kyle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hip hop]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rap]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top 10]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mithridatism.com/?p=50</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A list of the greatest songs ever recorded in that most polarizing of genres. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the remor.com days, no article claimed more page hits, comments, debate, and dissension than the one chronicling the Top 10 Hip Hop Songs of All Time.  You could go away from an hour and come back to a new page of comments from people with terrible spelling and grammar calling the remor list trash and touting their own ten tracks.  A lot of times, those user lists would contain five songs by Tupac or Notorious BIG.  It was a great confluence of the internet.  Sadly, the web&#8217;s black hole seems to have swallowed that article.  Onward and upward to a new list.</p>
<p>I could easily temper this article by calling it a list of my favorites.  But subjectivity is an easy way to shy away from criticism.  So I&#8217;ll just ahead and claim these are the greatest rap songs ever created.  The ten are a fairly nice mix of big hits and underground gems.  Disagree, critique, agree, or post your own list.</p>
<p>Let us start with some honorable mentions.  These tracks just missed the cut:<br />
<center><br />
<object width="250" height="300"><param name="movie" value="http://listen.grooveshark.com/widget.swf"></param><param name="wmode" value="window"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><param name="flashvars" value="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&#038;widgetID=20716534&#038;style=metal&#038;bbg=B4D5DA&#038;bt=813B45&#038;bfg=B1BABF&#038;p=0"></param> <embed src="http://listen.grooveshark.com/widget.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="250" height="300" flashvars="hostname=cowbell.grooveshark.com&#038;widgetID=20716534&#038;style=metal&#038;bbg=B4D5DA&#038;bt=813B45&#038;bfg=B1BABF&#038;p=0" allowScriptAccess="always" wmode="window"></embed></object><br />
</center></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/04/06/top-10-rap-songs-of-all-time/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Top Project</title>
		<link>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/03/27/the-top-project/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/03/27/the-top-project/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Mar 2010 04:09:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kyle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Film]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Site Update]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top 10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top 100]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mithridatism.com/?p=16</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A project most likely too immense for me to finish.  Let's try it anyway.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Being a fanatic of lists, especially rated lists, and a fanatic of books and films, I decided to devote some spare time to combining the fanaticisms.  <a href="http://www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/">The Modern Library&#8217;s</a> <a href="http://www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/100bestnovels.html">100 Best Novels</a> of the English language in the 20th century is an excellent list and I decided to task myself with reading or rereading them all.  <a href="http://www.theyshootpictures.com/index.htm">They Shoot Pictures, Don&#8217;t They?</a> published a truly astounding list of <a href="http://www.theyshootpictures.com/gf1000.htm">the 1,000 greatest films</a>, based on a staggering compilation of thousands of lists from critics, historians, and film experts.  I decided to saddle myself with watching all 1,000.  Obviously these projects will take a long damn time to complete, especially the films list.  I wanted to chronicle my experience here.  This page will feature updates as I crawl toward the finish lines of these lists.  Please check to see if I have died from exhaustion along the way.</p>
<p><em>Note: the lists will be maintained on <a href="http://www.mithridatism.com/the-top-project/">The Top Project page</a>.</p>
<p><big><strong>Modern Library&#8217;s 100 Best Novels of the 20th Century</strong></big></p>
<p>I will rank the books as I read them and leave links to reviews in this space.  A couple of the books I read slightly before deciding to tackle the list, so they are fresh enough to avoid the reread.  I decided to start with all the books I read in high school, since nearly all of them I loved even through the fog of memory.  See the Modern Library&#8217;s <a href="http://www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/100bestnovels.html">list</a> for reference.</p>
<p>PROGRESS: 7/100</p>
<p><strong>Mith Rankings</strong></p>
<p>1. Catch-22  &#8211;  Joseph Heller<br />
2. The Great Gatsby  &#8211; F. Scott Fitzgerald<br />
3. The Catcher in the Rye  &#8211;  J.D. Salinger<br />
4. Tender is the Night  &#8211;  F. Scott Fitzgerald<br />
5. A Clockwork Orange  &#8211;  Anthony Burgess<br />
6. As I Lay Dying &#8211;  William Faulkner<br />
7. The Sheltering Sky  &#8211;  Paul Bowles</p>
<p><big><strong>TSPDT&#8217;s The 1,000 Great Films</strong></big></p>
<p>Not sure how many years this project will entail or if I will ever get anywhere near completion, but it&#8217;s worth a shot, eh?  I&#8217;ll try to compile rankings here until the list becomes too unwieldy.  No rhyme or reason for the watching order.  Unless I truly do not remember a film because I watched it when I was 10, I won&#8217;t review what I&#8217;ve already seen.</p>
<p>PROGRESS: ??/100</p>
<p><strong>Mith Rankings</strong></p>
<p>Coming soon!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mithridatism.com/2010/03/27/the-top-project/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

