OnlineBookClub.org

What exactly defines a book as a classic? Is the criteria set or is it subjective? If it is subjective what criteria do you think a book should meet before it is considered a Classic?

Personally, I think a book has to be at least 10-15 years old, and really, most books that we can agree are classics are older than that so that their status is widely agreed on. Then I think a classic has real literary quality. So Stephen King's books are great, but they're plot-driven in a way that isn't really literary, in a way that will endure the way that, y'know, Shakespeare's plays or the Austen novels (or the Twain novels) have.

Irene C wrote: ↑23 Sep 2018, 14:10 Personally, I think a book has to be at least 10-15 years old, and really, most books that we can agree are classics are older than that so that their status is widely agreed on. Then I think a classic has real literary quality. So Stephen King's books are great, but they're plot-driven in a way that isn't really literary, in a way that will endure the way that, y'know, Shakespeare's plays or the Austen novels (or the Twain novels) have.

Agree and also i think the context of society has a part in choosing a classic, for example most books that are considered classics today are story that show us a reality completely different to what we have now.

A classic is a work which encompasses themes which are both universal and timeless, thus applicable to people regardless of their geographical location or the era in which they live.

In my opinion the standard is already set since classic books are considered to have artistic quality and must have endured the test of times

I have often wondered about that myself. For me it's a matter of feeling, do I feel like looking up this author and re-reading all their books. Has the feeling lasted for many years? but then again there are few of my favorite classical authors whose other books I simply refuse to read as I'm convinced that there is absolutely no way they could be remotely as good as the first one I read (for example the Master and Margarita by Bulgakov, it's just not possible that he wrote anything even remotely worthy of it, right?

A Classic book is on every book readers wish list , I think a classic story has a very good literary quality you almost get into the world of the author , there language is easy to understand for example Jane Austen her work is outstanding be it Emma , Pride and prejudice or sense and sensibility . These are the works that every other person wishes to read ,though they were written in the 19th century but still they engage us this is the beauty of a Classic book or a Classic story.

In my opinion the plot not only has to be unique, well laid out with good grammar as well as punctuation but also feelings,emotions, actions,reactions, thoughts or even reasons as to why have to be taken into consideration.

Personally, I think it is about the book having themes that withstand the test of time. If a book has a theme that has been relevant through the ages, that makes it a classic for me.

A classic is a book accepted as being exemplary or noteworthy, for example through an imprimatur such as being listed in a list of great books, or through a reader's personal opinion

In my opinion, a classic is a book that has been around for a while - at least 50 years - and is still talked about and read. A classic stands the test of time. Also, it should be a celebrated book. By that I mean a book that literary critics and scholars from various times and places recognise as an important one.

True, a Classic is something that has relevance beyond geography and time. I remember Cinderella, Pride and Prejudice, The Little Prince, The Interior Castle, etc.

A classic must be applicable to many generations but also give insight of the time it was written in.

I think classics typically define or summarises the era in which they were written. Yet, they also challenge how people at the time thought and behaved. They challenge the way the reader thinks and they leave you with more unanswered questions than you had begun with.
I guess there is no criteria that a classic book has to fit, it just often challenges society’s common thesis. If that makes sense.

Irene C wrote: ↑23 Sep 2018, 14:10 Personally, I think a book has to be at least 10-15 years old, and really, most books that we can agree are classics are older than that so that their status is widely agreed on. Then I think a classic has real literary quality. So Stephen King's books are great, but they're plot-driven in a way that isn't really literary, in a way that will endure the way that, y'know, Shakespeare's plays or the Austen novels (or the Twain novels) have.

If 10-15 years is the criteria then I guess Harry Potter books are classic now?? Makes me feel old since I grew up reading them, waiting for each new book to be released