While I often agreed with the authors chosen, I did not always agree with the specific books of these chosen as their "best" works.
I also personally would have re-arranged the genre sections to have a proper non-fiction section.
..and how come we are doing SF and thrillers, but no horror or fantasy? ...for Pete's sake - an iconic author such as Tolkien is included under children's fiction...!! Could the "children's" section not rather have been named: "fantasy" which could have included children's fiction?
Non-fantasy children's novels could have been placed in a YA section.
Alternatively, could SF/Fantasy not have been placed together, since there is often a lot of crossover between these 2 genres?
I did not like the "thriller" section either, which seemed rather skewed in favor of early twentieth century detective novels. (...and in spite of that, Miss Marple doesn't even feature! LOL)
Surely, in any case, one must view the books as 'must-read' only if you are interested in the specific genre, so I feel more genres should have been represented here.
On the plus side, for those having nothing else to do, and nothing left to read, every novel gets an informative, succint description, with some brief information on it's author included, making this a useful and interesting, if lightweight reference/coffee table addition to one's library.
The book can be read on its own mainly for entertainment and to fill out any gaps in personal literary knowledge, or can be used as a quick reference book, but it is lacking regarding the satisfaction of anything more serious than idle curiosity, since it most often doesn't even give information on other equally good or famous books a prolific author might have written.