No, seriously though, it's a bit like any art form. Prolific authors will turn out good & not so good books. I prefer to read a selection - the best of the best - rather than sticking with one author.
And some will produce only one great, iconic book that gets a place in history - Catch 22, The Catcher in the Rye, Schindler's Ark, To Kill a Mocking Bird, etc. etc.
one’s favourite is not necessarily the most historic or even accomplished though davebro… i doubt there is a writer in the English language better than shakespeare or edgar allen poe…. but your favourite will be the one that means the most to you. I’m sure many people would name JK Rowling as their favourite but i don’t think anyone would say she’s a better writer than Shakespeare!
i’m sure you understand what i mean… a favourite is not necessarily the author you think is the “best of the best” it is the one whose work means the most to you… for want of a better word, one whose work you love
My mum absolutely loves the work of Martina Cole… she reads far more of that than she reads of the greats and i suspect she gets more enjoyment out of it… she smiles with excitement if you buy her one in a way that she wouldn’t if you handed her a tome of jane austen… but i don’t think my mum would ever say that she thought martina cole was a better writer than jane austen!
Untitled, I think it depends which way you look at it. I've long abandoned the notion of the 'literary intellectual' when I deemed traditionally great writers 'the best' and now recognise that as 'great' as he was, Shakespeare's appeal is limited.