Reading in Public No. 57: Anatomy of a best-of-the-year list

What makes a list great and what makes them flop

It’s the most wonderful time of the year! The time when the bookish corner of the internet lights up to share our best books of the year. From standard bearer publications to your favorite bookstagrammer, there is a list for you—and probably from you. I think one of the best things about our “everyone is a critic” culture is seeing these end-of-year wrap ups. It introduces me to new books and new readers and—most interestingly to me—is very much an act of Reading in Public. Even readers who shy away from being critical about books offer real commentary with the curation of an end-of-year list. What is there and what is not speaks volumes and these public lists are an opportunity for readers to share and declare our tastes in a way that is concise, visible, and easy to interpret.

While most independent public readers (i.e. not employed by a legacy media organization) wait until the bitter end of the year or even January to share best books, the big lists are already circulating and the big feelings have begun. I’ve seen lots of takes on which list (so far) is the best, what’s missing from lists, and what the lists say about what types of books matter to the media. I agree with some of the discourse and strongly disagree with others, but mostly I believe that the best thing about lists is the conversations they begin. On the other hand, I’m careful about how I participate in these discussions because I think we can all tend to come at them from a place of defensiveness about our own taste. The whole conversation makes me wonder what we readers think best-of lists are for? Are they for validating our own opinions? Discovering new books? Cementing certain books as Truly Great? Capturing a literary moment in time?

I’m not sure I have a direct answer to that question, but I know what I’m looking for in a list itself. And I think our answers to what we are looking for might start to gesture towards what we want from these lists more broadly. So today I’m sharing my thoughts on what makes a great best-of-the-year list. Because this is the internet, I guess I need to preface this with the obvious: this is just my opinion. If you have other ideas about what makes an end-of-year list great, good for you! Just as there are enough books to please every reader, there are certainly enough lists for everyone.

Note: All the lists I refer to and more are gift linked at the bottom of this newsletter.

Anatomy of a best-of-the-year list

Here’s what, for m, makes a great, exciting, must-be-shared list:

1. A numerical limit. The most important aspect of a best-of-the-year list is a numerical limit. I’m sorry but as much as I love the NPR Books We Love (formerly called the Book Concierge) it is not a best-of list. Their collection includes 351 books which is not only far too many to be considered a best-of list, it is a completely random number as indicated by the three-hundred fifty-ONE and by the fact that the number varies every year. A best-of the year list should cause agony over what makes the final cut, as evidenced by this text from Liz Hein I received yesterday (we’re recording our best books episode this week).

   

   I am all in on the 100 book notable lists (both the NYT and Washington Post do this. Time does a list of 100 as well but calls theirs 100 “must-read” books, which is unconscionable word choice). 100 feels like an appropriate number for a big media company with lots of readers and reviewers on staff as long as they also offer (as the NYT and Post do) a smaller best-of list. I do believe the perfect number for individual lists or true BEST lists is ten. I believe this to be true because it is extremely difficult to make a list of ten. I often find that top 3-5 is pretty easy, as is a list of 12-15 really great books. But 10 books requires sacrifice, discernment, and creativity. One year (maybe even last year?) I did a list of twelve and you know what? It felt like cheating. Maybe I’ll eat my words another year, but I’m all in on the ten book list.

2. Short, personal blurbs. If you are recommending a book to me, I want to know why you loved it and why it deserves its spot on your list. I do not want to know how the publisher (or, worse yet, AI) describes it. I want to know why it resonated with you. This is your list. Why is it here? At the same time, I do not need full reviews or summaries for best-of lists. All I really need is to know why it’s a standout of the year. I was a little disappointed at the blurbs for the NYT 100 Notable Books, but they nailed it with their top 10 in terms of explaining why each book earned it’s place in this given moment. The Washington Post blurbs are also great and I do appreciate NPR allow all its staff to contribute a book and a blurb for a true personal touch. Of course not everyone has time to put together commentary for their lists, but if the commentary is there I want it to be personal.

3. A point-of-view. This is rather ephemeral but I want to look at a list and get a clear sense of what the list’s creator thinks makes a book particularly good. While I am very much against reviewers and public readers branding their reading, I do love when a list helps me understand what these readers are looking for in their books. One year it became clear to me as I was curating my best-of list that in that time of my reading life, structure was everything. I would overlook a lot of flaws if a book had an innovative structure that enhanced the themes. Another year, it was evident that books that emotionally resonated with me in a season of new motherhood featured prominently in my favorites. While I certainly don’t want all the books on a best-of list to feel the same or even have a common thread running through them, it’s always a delight to find a list that exudes a specific taste.

4. Outliers and surprises. One of the delights of a great best-of list is the outlier, the book(s) that doesn’t quite vibe with the others on the list but is so good that it earns its spot (hello, Good Material! Welcome to the NYT top ten!). While I know some readers felt that there should be more genre fiction on the NYT Notable Books, I disagree. For me, it’s the very fact that these few outliers exist on a list of literary fiction and serious nonfiction that makes the picks intriguing. Now, could the picks themselves be more exciting, weird, and unexpected? Absolutely. But having a small number of outliers elevates those choices whereas simply including more would dilute the impact. I’ll admit that this element is probably where I fail most in my own lists. It is very rare for me to have nonfiction or genre fiction in my best-of-the-year list because it’s very rare for me to have the same feelings of attachment to those books. This is one way I hope to expand my reading in the new year. Finding more books that surprise me and perhaps go onto surprise you with my endorsement.

5. An element of discovery. Of course, the very best best-of lists—whether they’re 100 books long or even just 10—put something on my to-be-read list. This could be an outliers or surprises, it could be a very under-the-radar book that fits firmly into the list’s point-of-view, or it could be a book I’ve heard about but am shocked to see in a top ten. More than anything, I want to see end-of-year lists that make me excited to keep reading 2024 books well into the future.

Alright, I know what you’re thinking: shouldn’t someone’s best of the year list just be their favorite books of the year?

Mostly, yes. I think the readers and publications whose lists I’m most interested in naturally work all of this into their reading and they naturally arise in their end-of-year lists. I enjoy following readers who have a clear point-of-view and individual taste, who can clearly articulate what they love about a book, who read widely enough to surprise me with outlier picks and under-the-radar gems. Ultimately, what makes a great best-of list and allows a list to meet all of the above criteria is taste.

But also…the numerical limit forces list makers to make difficult choices and this is where a little bit of creativity and big picture thinking might come into play. If I have 10 books that could easily go into my final top 10 slot, I might think overall about balance, genre, surprise, outliers, hype, popularity, etc. A limit forces me to really consider how I am defining best at this particular moment in time, and that degree of thoughtfulness can truly elevate a list.

Tell me your thoughts! What makes for a particularly great best-of-the year list? What’s your favorite list so far and which lists are you still looking forward to?

Lists mentioned

• 100 Notable Books (NYT, gift link)

• The 10 Best Books of 2024 (NYT, gift link)

• 50 notable works of nonfiction from 2024 (Washington Post, gift link)

• 50 notable works of fiction from 2024 (Washington Post, gift link)

• The 10 best books of 2024 (Washington Post, gift link)

• Books We Love (NPR)

• The 100 Must-Read Books of 2024 (Time)

And even more best-of-the-year lists

• Best books of 2024 (The Guardian, ongoing genre lists)

• Best Fiction Books of the Year (Kirkus)

• Best Nonfiction Books of the Year (Kirkus)

• Best Books of 2024 (Book Riot)

---

For questions, comments, or suggestions, please don’t hesitate to reach out by emailing fictionmattersbooks@gmail.com or responding directly to this newsletter. I love hearing from you!

This email may contain affiliate links. If you make a purchase through the links above, I may earn a small commission at no additional cost to you.

If you enjoyed today’s newsletter, please forward it to a book-loving friend. That’s a great way to spread bookish cheer and support the newsletter!

Happy reading!

Sara