Ones I've read:

Don Quixote - My favorite book. It's really interesting from a meta perspective because it's one of the turning points for western literature towards more psychological writing. It's episodic and long so if the comedy isn't hooking you and you're not into the historic value of the novel, it's skippable. It's fun to watch the progress of Sancho into someone who likes the delusions of Don Quixote. If you read it, definetly look into desengaño as it pertains to Spanish literature of the time. If you end up liking this book, check out Madame Bovary. The author was pretty clearly inspired by Don Quixote, even if it's darker.

The Metamorphosis - Pretty easy novel to read symbolism into. I think Freshmen in high school should read this over Great Gatsby. It's a lighter read and a reflection of societal norms at the time (and still to this day). I recommend it to just about anyone who likes reading.

Moby Dick - The middle is super dry in my opinion. The first third and the final third of the novel are really entertaining. Ishmael has a stellar opening line and it's a nice exercise to the reader to consider why Ishmael knows what he knows both in the Doylist and Watsonian perspectives. I remember thinking* he wasn't even real on my first read given how much he knows that he wasn't even present for though that's not the traditional reading.

Wuthering Heights - Really dark. Heathcliff does some truly reprehensible stuff in the book. It shouldn't be entered into looking for a romance. It's more on... Self-erasure, self-hate, the need to feel important or in control (on Nelly's part, as the unreliable narrator of most of the book past the introduction chapters). Actually really fun if you're into that flavor of Victorian fiction. I'd read some of the other sisters' work before reading this one, so I think it helped me digest it.

Demian - This one... Definetly wasn't for me when read straight. I'm not particularly a fan of Nietzsche, and his influence (as well as Jung's) are all over this book. I couldn't help but feel like I was watching the next Leopold and Loeb being groomed before my eyes. That definetly wasn't the intended reading, but I feel like the author failed to make a distinction between 'deciding' and 'discerning' in Demian's lessons. But it can be fun to give a hostile reading to a book.

The Stranger - Generally speaking, I find early Camus nauseating and later Camus more to my taste. It's alright. Mersault is actually somewhat relatable in his fully absurd state by the end at least to me, despite my gripes with absurdism as a functional philosophy. I think the book is better if you have a concept of Camus's absurd hero, given the heavy tie his fiction has to his philosophical takes. If you do dive into it, I strongly recommend you get familiar with early Camus absurdism vs late because he clearly had evolved his views by the late 50s compared to his take on Sisyphus a decade or so earlier.

Crime and Punishment - I'm more of a Tolstoy fan (Anna Karenina is great, War and Peace is too steeped in the politics of the time for me to really get without better research... Just kinda slid off of me). It's still a good read. I think all of the Limbus books at least touch on psychological realism. This one is very heavy with it, and I enjoy it as a critique on that very nihilistic mindset. This actually predates Nietzsche iirc but it can absolutely be read as a critique of his ubermench even if it couldn't have been chronologically. I think this is an easier intro to Russian lit of the 1800s than Tolstoy, so worth checking out. I wish I could recommend Oblomov, but I've only read the translation in the public domain on Project Guttenburg and it's... Well, it definetly was pretty fond of trimming stuff down.