The NYT’s list of the best books of this century (the 21st): not much science

April 28, 2026 • 8:45 am

I’m a sucker for lists like the NYT’s 100 Best Books of the 21st Century (also archived here), though the list may be a bit premature given that the century is barely one-quarter over. The article notes that the list was compiled by “votes from 503 novelists, nonfiction writers, poets, critics, and other book lovers—with a little help from the staff of the New York Times book review.”

From the intro:

Many of us find joy in looking back and taking stock of our reading lives, which is why we here at The New York Times Book Review decided to mark the first 25 years of this century with an ambitious project: to take a first swing at determining the most important, influential books of the era. In collaboration with the Upshot, we sent a survey to hundreds of literary luminaries, asking them to name the 10 best books published since Jan. 1, 2000.

Stephen King took part. So did Bonnie Garmus, Claudia Rankine, James Patterson, Sarah Jessica Parker, Karl Ove Knausgaard, Elin Hilderbrand, Thomas Chatterton Williams, Roxane Gay, Marlon James, Sarah MacLean, Min Jin Lee, Jonathan Lethem and Jenna Bush Hager, to name just a few. And you can also take part! Vote here and let us know what your top 10 books of the century are.

Sarah Jessica Parker? Jenna Bush Hager? Are those literary luminaries? I don’t think so. Well, there were many real luminiaries and real critics, so we’ll let it pass.

Is it a good list? Well, I’ve heard of many of the books, and the 18 I’ve read (see below) have been good ones. But seriously, there’s no mention of All the Light We Cannot See? (2014; it won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction and is perhaps the best book I’ve read written in this century). Or A Little Life (2015)Where is Hamnet (2020)? And for medically related nonfiction, I’d add Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies in a Silicon Valley Startup (2018), about Elizabeth Holmes and the Theranos scam, and Empire of Pain: The Secret History of the Sackler Dynasty,(2021), about the Sackler family’s relentless pushing of opioids. And where, oh where is Rebecca Skloot’s The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks (2010), a book I enthusiastically reviewed? 

I’d also kvetch because there’s only one nonfiction book about science (The Emperor of All Maladies; 2010), though two others are tangentially related to science.  This likely reflects the NYT’s general neglect of the wonders of science.

But I’m sure everyone will find lacunae, and if I thought hard I’d find others. But it doesn’t matter: use the list for suggestions of books to investigate. At least you can tick off the books you’ve read and the paper conveniently compiles a list—and a photo—of the ones you’ve read. Here’s my own list:

I’ve read 18 books on the list. . . .

The Warmth of Other Suns  The Known World  Austerlitz  Never Let Me Go  The Year of Magical Thinking  The Road  The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay  The Overstory  Atonement  H Is for Hawk  A Brief History of Seven Killings  The Vegetarian  The Looming Tower  Demon Copperhead  The New Jim Crow  The Passage of Power  The Emperor of All Maladies  The Sympathizer

Again, it biggest gap on their list is “All the Light We Cannot See,” a masterpiece of a book.

And it makes a photo you can use for bragging rights, though I don’t have many:

Some of the best books I’ve read have hyst missed this century, including A Gesture Life (1999) and Troubles (1970). As always, recommend books you like written recently, particularly ones not on this list.

4 thoughts on “The NYT’s list of the best books of this century (the 21st): not much science

  1. My fast-thinking process (D. Kahneman) suggested this quote :

    “Be careful, however, lest this reading of many authors and books of every sort may tend to make you discursive and unsteady. You must linger among a limited number of master-thinkers, and digest their works, if you would derive ideas which shall win firm hold in your mind.”

    -Seneca (4 BC – 65 AD)

    Moral letters to Lucilius (Epistulae morales ad Lucilium), letter no. 2

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Moral_letters_to_Lucilius/Letter_2

    … corollary I add is that yes, more reading like this is an unalloyed good – but I think what I’m looking for are through that process are those that get dog-eared and worn by continual reference – the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly 🤠

    E.g, in order :

    George Orwell
    Paulo Friere
    Gayle Rubin

  2. Hmm, it does seem very US-centric and race-centric, even by US standards.

    I’ve read three, Wolf Hall, Bring up the Bodies and Cloud Atlas.

    There’s been a load of excellent non-fiction over the last 25 years, off the top of my head:

    War in Civilisation – Azar Gat
    Why Nations Fail – Acemoglu and Robinson

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *