When I first read the question asking for the required criteria to make a book a classic, I had to think long and hard about the common factors I saw in the “classics” that I had read. Most people would probably callTreasure Island a classic, and as different as it is in style and writing, The Lord of the Rings would also be a classic. I eventually came to realize that it is the books’ representation of a culture or genre, how they stood out from similar writings and their understanding on human nature that gave them lasting appeal and made them classics.
“Uncle Tom’s Cabin” stands out as possibly the greatest piece of abolitionist writing ever. It certainly proved to be the most influential. It’s been said that when President Lincoln met Harriet Beecher Stowe, he called her the little woman who started the big war. There were certainly other abolitionist writings written in the same era, some more well-written than others. However, it stands as a good representation of the genre and what those writings were trying to accomplish through being an influential read.
But while audience response is a very important factor in determining which books become classics, the quality of the book itself is also important. It cannot at all be a generic or common story; there must be something new and very memorable about it. I think that it would be fair to say that every classic out there should be a book the reader never forgets about. Even if the reader dislikes it, it should stick out in the mind when the reader is looking back on significant books that he or she has read. I can recall books that I have read like The Old Man and the Sea which I honestly did not think were truly great books, but they stand out in my mind. It might be the story, the characters, or the style.
Finally, the great classics have stood the test of time, and a factor that the great classics have that enables them to do this is an analysis of human nature. This past semester, I read Frankenstein and A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. Both are drastically different stories to be certain, but contain critiques on the study of human nature. Frankenstein upholds the idea that man is a Tabula Rosa, while Connecticut Yankeeholds to the idea that man is prone to foolishness and needs a guide to being better. While I am not saying that both present the clear truth, they both address an issue that man has wrestled over for millennia. Thus, they have a lasting appeal to the people of today.
People may find classics that they actually dislike, like I did with The Old Man and the Sea. They may find it boring, heretical or simply not their style. But if one considers the quality of the book, cultural impact and lasting appeal due to relevant exploration, it becomes easier.
