LISTS ARE PERSONAL things, not just grocery lists but favorites, top tens, even top 100s.  So when I see a list of the supposedly best this-or-that, I expect to have different ideas.
But when I saw the July 5/12 Entertainment Weekly (EW), with their "100 All-Time Greatest" lists, I got really aggravated.  Movies and TV shows, okay, it's EW, that's their bailiwick.  But novels?  Now they're out of their realm.
Someone once said that a camel was a horse designed by a committee.  The EW committee has produced a true dromedary.  Tolstoy's Anna Karenina as the greatest novel ever?  Pul-eese.  Add to that that the novel many more knowledgeable observers would list as #1 -- James Joyce's Ulysses -- didn't even make EW's list of 100!  I'm not alone in believing the #1 spot belongs to Joyce's masterpiece.  In 1998, the Modern Library (ML) ranked Ulysses first on its list of the 100 best English-language novels. Yet it gets not even a nod from EW.
Aldous Huxley's great novel Brave New World was 5th on the ML list.  The EW list omitted it too!  Another masterwork left off the EW list:  Mikhail Bulgakov's The Master & Margarita which many believe is one of the greatest novels of the 20th Century. 
There are other idiocies.  Number 10 on the EW list of greatest novels is Charlotte's Web.  Now, I have respect for E.B. White (esp. his "The Elements of Style" with Wm Strunk), but give me a break! The best they could give Twain's masterpiece The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was 62nd place.  Heller's Catch-22 listed at 85th (it was 7th on the ML list).
Cervantes' great novel Don Quixote, called by World Library the "best literary work ever written," appears nowhere on the EW list.  Omitted.  Ignored.  Not even honorable mention.
I would say that EW needs to stick with what they know, movies & TV.  They rank "Freaks & Geeks" (at #59) higher than "Beavis & Butt-head" (at #71) and I am unable to argue with that.
Extremely unable...