Sure. Both were very influential, both inside and outside genre fiction, to the degree that I think discerning which was more so is pointless, myself. I was just noting that I’d seen LHoD on the list, is all.
It was Always Coming Home for me.
It might be influenced by reviews or some other voting?
There are many other lists of best science fiction and fantasy books on the Internet, like Your Picks: Top 100 Science-Fiction, Fantasy Books : NPR for instance.
I’m wondering if maybe there wasn’t a lot of YA fantasy available when it was written. It was certainly one of the first novels of that length that I read. Not anything I’d pick up again, but certainly something I’d hand to a child today.
I thought it was a written-later prequel and was surprised when I learned she’d actually written it first. Like a decade earlier. It’s much lighter on the overt fantasy. So much so they may consider it off-genre for the list.
As others have remarked (and I agree with most of the criticisms) an odd list. It seems to be compiled by someone more familiar with recent books, because it slights an awful lot of older, arguably more classic novels.
What about L. Sprague de Camp’s Lest Darkness Fall, which inspired a lot of alternative histories (including everything by Harry Turtledove)? Or Mark Twain’s A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, which inspired de Camp? (and de Camp deserves mentions for other books, too).
How can I take seriously a list of 100 Science Fiction and Fantasy Books to Read in a Lifetime that doesn’t include a single book by Jules Verne or H.G. Wells? They practically invented the genre, and were spectacularly influential. They’re not as 'boring" as Frankenstein * and if you don’t think they’re still relevant, read The Time Machine again sometime. (What, they have The Time Traveler’s Wife, but not The Time Machine?)
I’m also annoyed at a Fantasy list that leaves off Robert E. Howard (if you’re looking for big influences in fantasy, how can you possibly leave him off?) or Edgar Rice Burroughs (What, not even Tarzan?) or Charles G. Finney’s The Circus of Dr. Lao
*I’ve lost track of how many times I’ve re-read Frankenstein. I found it boring at first, too, until I found the annotated edition by Leonard Wolf, and, later, Leslie Klinger’s re-annotation.
What - no Piers Anthony? (Kidding! Please stop hitting me.)
Pleased to see the Ted Chiang collection on there - it’s a great bunch of stories.
Of course, it doesn’t even pretend to be a list of the most influential works. But your guess is as good as mine what criteria (if any?) they actually did use in compiling the list.
You’d think there would be some Afrofuturism in there, too. No Octavia Butler?
Witch World, probably.
Not the worst list, although it seems a bit present-day biased to me. There are lots of good novels that aren’t quite so new on there.
Plus, it’s lacking Iain Banks’ Culture series entirely. That makes it a bit suspect in my view.
I’d also argue that Glen Cook’s “The Black Company” is a lot more seminal in a whole lot of ways than “Sword of Shannara”, as much as I enjoyed that series. Brooks’ Shannara books are basically Tolkien knockoffs at first, but “The Black Company” is kind of the granddaddy of the whole grim/gritty fantasy genre.
She’s on there with Kindred. Not that it’s easy to tell, with how badly that list was formatted. As you all have noted.
In addition to the omissions already noted, no Vernor Vinge? I don’t expect Reynolds, Stross, or a lot of the Brit New-New Wave—though I did expect Banks. SpaceX names their stuff after his books, for Chrissake!—but leaving off Vinge is pretty surprising.
It’s really more of a, “Here’s 100 authors you should read,” rather than 100 books.
Now I have to go and read that again! 
I thought maybe the formatting was just shit because I was browsing on my phone. No, it’s shit everywhere.
You’ve, piqued my interest, thanks.
I would separate “most influential”, “best”, “most widely read”, with “to read in a lifetime” maybe being an amalgamation of all three.*
“Most influential” is probably easier to argue about. Because re: “best”, people like what they like. And that changes over time. I’m very much not into YA fiction, but Brooks, Eddings, Cook, etc. were all a blast when I was a kid. How fun would it have been to read Harry Potter as a child? I can only imagine. And while I may acknowledge that A is a better writer than B, I may still enjoy B better because A writes about time travel, a topic that I find tired but that others really enjoy.
*I think putting together all of these lists would be a fun exercise.
The Time Machine and 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea were both on the list.
I must have been reading the list wrong, somehow. I went over it three times and didn’t see them. They get points for those, if that’s the case.
No Vox Day on the list either.
Each row of the list had to be scrolled to the right. Maybe where you lost some entries.
Thank you for the suggestion, but I scrolled each line all the way until I started over again. I didn’t see the Wells and Verne books.