Rating: 
Summary: Any serious reader of short fiction needs this collection
Review: I am not sure what to make of the criticism that this book doesn't really include the "best" stories because Salinger and O'Connor aren't represented. Anyone familiar with the yearly series recognizes that the point is not to create a top ten or top one hundred list, but to allow the important writers of our time to select stories that are commendable.That this collection contains some hidden gems and more obscure titles is the charm. Do we need another anthology of stories from O'Connor, Salinger, and the like? No. We need collections like this that break from the canon and introduce new readers to the truly talented writers of the past 90 years. If you want a subjective top 100 list, find a website with the list you like. If you want to read a diverse collection of some of the most interesting, important stories in America, buy this book.
Rating: 
Summary: This isn't it
Review: I assume there is a reason for progressing through the century in a chronological fashion. On the other hand, there is a predictable flow from Jewish stories, to war stories, to Depression stories, all the way to AIDS stories. To that extent, the title of the book is a misnomer. Maybe some of the older stories were great at that time. By now the writing seems old fashioned and out of sync. I am missing many of the great authors of the post-war years. Maybe they fell victim to the chronology. But mostly it is a matter of taste. If you like the stories published in "The New Yorker", you will probably love this book. If you do not like sensitive, pastel-like, washed-out stories, then you should look elsewhere.
Rating:
Summary: This isn't it
Review: I assume there is a reason for progressing through the century in a chronological fashion. On the other hand, there is a predictable flow from Jewish stories, to war stories, to Depression stories, all the way to AIDS stories. To that extent, the title of the book is a misnomer. Maybe some of the older stories were great at that time. By now the writing seems old fashioned and out of sync. I am missing many of the great authors of the post-war years. Maybe they fell victim to the chronology. But mostly it is a matter of taste. If you like the stories published in "The New Yorker", you will probably love this book. If you do not like sensitive, pastel-like, washed-out stories, then you should look elsewhere.
Rating:
Summary: Great Stories
Review: I believe that most writers or short story readers will agree that these are not the "best" stories of the 20th century. Such a collection would include better known masterpieces like Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery," and Flannery O'Connor's "A Good Man is Hard to Find." Instead, this a collection of brilliant, but lesser known stories by accomplished writers. I think Updike makes it clear that his goal was to assemble great stories from all decades, but not necessarily the best stories. I believe there was a pointed effort made, in assembling these stories, not to include the well-known American standards that most college educated people have read. The New York Times sums up the result : "Finding wonderful stories that you don't already know is one of this collection's greatest pleasures . . Updike has made some surprising, even striking selections." Most of Updike's surprising selections are very enjoyable. My only disappointment was the 1999 story by Pam Houston. There are too many great writers these days to include this contemporary mediocrity. What about Rick Bass, Charles Baxter, Mark Richard? Just my opinion. Overall, I recommend this book without reservation.
Rating:
Summary: Great Stories
Review: I believe that most writers or short story readers will agree that these are not the "best" stories of the 20th century. Such a collection would include better known masterpieces like Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery," and Flannery O'Connor's "A Good Man is Hard to Find." Instead, this a collection of brilliant, but lesser known stories by accomplished writers. I think Updike makes it clear that his goal was to assemble great stories from all decades, but not necessarily the best stories. I believe there was a pointed effort made, in assembling these stories, not to include the well-known American standards that most college educated people have read. The New York Times sums up the result : "Finding wonderful stories that you don't already know is one of this collection's greatest pleasures . . Updike has made some surprising, even striking selections." Most of Updike's surprising selections are very enjoyable. My only disappointment was the 1999 story by Pam Houston. There are too many great writers these days to include this contemporary mediocrity. What about Rick Bass, Charles Baxter, Mark Richard? Just my opinion. Overall, I recommend this book without reservation.
Rating:
Summary: Stunning
Review: I bought this book a little dubious of its quality (mainly because the annual publication has so many glaring ommisions, such as John O'Hara and more contemporarily, Deborah Eisenberg), however I was pleasantly surprised. The selection amongst the famous authors are brilliant (I'm thinking specifically of Nabokov, Faulkner and Hemingway). There are also short stories I'd never heard of that are amongst the best I've ever read (Elizabeth Bishop's gem and E.B. White's hysterically brilliant story). Finally there is a list of stories that doesn't dismiss contemporary writers. It is nice to see writers like Raymond Carver, Ann Beattie, Alice Munro, Tim O'Brien and Anne Proulox be recognized. But I must once again bemoan the absence of perhaps the best living short story writer, Deborah Eisenberg.
Rating:
Summary: Where is "A Perfect Day for Bananafish?"
Review: I bought this book instantly, and couldn't wait to reread such classics as "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson, "Shiloh" by Bobbie Ann Mason, "A Perfect Day for Bananafish" by Salinger, and "Where I'm Calling From" by Raymond Carver. Only one of those stories made it to this book. Of course, any list of the best is going to be controversial, but the omissions from this book are glaring. Even so, most of the choices are great. Six stars.
Rating:
Summary: "In the Gloaming"--a well-deserved selection
Review: I found the collection as a whole enjoyable, but in places it has a musty, curatorial air about it that makes it read as less than what the title claims. Most of the stories seem to be included to satisfy Mr. Updike's objective to select stories from every decade and to represent big writers, even if that means including lesser stories. One exception, and truly one of the best stories of the century, is Alice Elliott Dark's "In the Gloaming"--without a doubt one of the best written and most moving American stories I have ever read. I hope we will see more stories by Dark in the near future. I, for one, would rather read those stories that are truly the best than those deemed so by compromise or default.
Rating:
Summary: Nothing new here
Review: I had hoped for a better selection of stories, there are SO MANY excellent ones to choose from. Skip this rehash of selections and invest your free time in reading some of the terrific new fiction out this summer. I loved A GOD IN RUINS, and also enjoyed THE TRIUMPH AND THE GLORY, and the touching new book from Stephen King, The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Book
Review: I have never really enjoyed short stories before, but this book gave me wonderful little tales that I very much enjoyed by authors I had never heard of before. It was fun, inspiring, and a good read.
| 
