Chicks On Lit discussion

I've pilfered this idea from another group I'm involved with but I thought it was so interesting it needs to be shared wider.

Which modern books do you think have the potential to become the classics of the future???

I have my own thoughs but I don't want to sway the argument so I'll chip in my thoughts once others have had a chance to ponder on this!

Ally

Harry Potter?

Or those written by Cathy Kelly. There are actually so many books we could cinsider as a future classic.

Great question.... I like this! I'll think about this and come back to it later today.

"Gilead" by Marilynne Robinson

"The Book Thief" by Markus Zusak
I know I plan to read it a few more times before I die and I can see it joining the classics!

I'd definitely agree with The Book Thief.

I would also think that Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close by Jonathan Safran Foer could be a future classic, not only because it's a great book but also because it specifically deals with the topic of September 11th.

That's a very good question. I agree with everyone else that The Book Thief may stand the test of time (I guess we'll see in the next few years?). Otherwise, I'm not sure what other books may become classics later on; I agree with Brenda that there may be less in the future. Maybe Yann Martel's Life of Pi, Paulo Coelho's The Alchemist? Can't think of any other books at the moment, may have to come back to the question later =D

Okay, so here is my question to add to this discussion. What makes a book a classic? What is required of a book to be considered a classic?

This is similar to timelessness but I think universality is important as well. A classic needs to appeal to a wide set of people, usually with a theme that most everyone can understand and relate to- like loss of innocence or life/death questions.

I could see The Pillars of the Earth being one.

I think this is a great and really interesting question. I think Sheila raises good questions on what defines a 'classic'. Are there some books that are instant classics?
To me it has to be what Valerie says but it also has to be fresh. It can't be the same story with a twist.
I wonder with the amount of books printed each year if it makes the birth of a classic harder. If we think of books prior to the 20th century that are considered classics is it because there weren't as many books being published? Would they be classics today?

I think The Book Thief could certainly be one. I would also hope that The Gargoyle would be up there. It tells a classic story in some ways but it also tells a story I have never heard before in a beautiful yet fresh way. I will forever love The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society and think in another time it would be an instant classic. I worry that in today's day a lovely well told story might not be enough for critics and world wide appeal although I just loved everything about that book.

This is such a hard question! When I think of classics, I think of the books that are usually on a summer-reading list, or books that were banned (or almost banned) before. Those seem to be the highest concentrations of classics. But I can't really say what they all have in common. There are some romantics, like Pride and Prejudice, and then there are quite a few distopian ones as well, such as 1984 and Anthem.
I guess that for now I agree with Brenda - they need to be able to stand the test of time. But there's something else as well...a lot of the books that I love have certainly passed that time test with me, but not everyone else thinks that they're so fantastic. For instance, I absolutely love The Other Boleyn Girl by Philippa Gregory and re-read it every year or two and it still grows on me - but I know that not many people would consider it a classic.
So if it's something that stands the test of time - what exactly are the criteria for that? Sales, ratings, critics, amount of time passed since it's release, etc?
Man, this is going to be on my mind all day...

True, but that doesn't seem to be a good qualifier either - there are a TON of books in all genres, but some stand out to us. And there are quite a few classic books that kind of all have the same "dystopian" plot, just done a little different - Anthem, 1984, A Brave New World, Fahrenheit 451, etc.

I don't think TOBG would be a classic because I know it's not that popular among a lot of people, it was just an example of something that stands the test of time with me personally, but not necessarily others. Am I making an sense?

1984, Anthem, A Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451 all critique society's values or makes a makes a warning about certain ideas or beliefs. For a book to have some appeal down the line after years and years, it needs to say something of value that people will be able to get some insight from.

I think that's a common theme in a lot of the classics although I don't think it's required for every classic. And I don't think TOBG quite lives up to that standard, although I did enjoy it when I read it.

I agree Sarah there are books that are 'classics' to me but I know others dont think that way.
In that sense I apply the term classic to me something that is well loved and will continue to be loved and enjoyed by me for years to come. I know that is too simple of a definition for society at large to accept for the term classic.
Generally speaking I think it has to stand up to the test of time. It can be great in every other way but if it isn't loved and highly regarded generation after generation then it will fall to the wayside.
I also don't think that critics and literary scholars get to pick out what will and what qualifies as a classic. I think it is up to public opinion. I have heard Jane Austen slammed by many literary critics and book snobs because at its a pretty predictable love story... but it doesnt matter what 'they' say because the public finds joy in it year after year decade after decade so despite the critics it stands because of public love.

The Secret Life of Bees

I think, for me, a Classic does not necessarily have to be a 'good' book but from an aesthetic point of view it needs to be well written and I also feel that the plot should have some resonance.

I'd say that John Boyne's 'The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas' would do it for me. - Also - perhaps – ‘Sophie's World’ by Jostein Gaarder and ‘Mister Pip’ by Lloyd Jones.

There are also a couple more on my list of potentials that have recently been made into films and it was pointed out to me that this could dent their 'classic' credentials! – For example Captain Corelli's Mandolin or Memoir's of a Geisha.

Do you think being made into a film dents or promotes potential classic-ness???

Ally

Allhug wrote: "I think, for me, a Classic does not necessarily have to be a 'good' book but from an aesthetic point of view it needs to be well written and I also feel that the plot should have some resonance.

..."


I think that it would dent it's potential classicness. There are many classics that have movies as well, but the movies were made after it had already been deemed a classic. For example, plenty of Jane Austen's novels.

When I think of classics, I picture them being taught in schools and universities long after the author is gone. I raised a similar question in one of my other groups as to will Harry Potter and Twilight be classics someday, and I don't know that they will based on my academic criteria. I think Life of Pi should be, while I love the others listed so far (except I haven't read TOBG yet), I don't know if they will be. Maybe The Kite Runner? I'll have to ponder some others.

I think it depends on the movie. I think most movies today cheapen the books they're based on, because it's tough to get the essence of a book in 2ish hours of film. However, I would point out To Kill a Mockingbird which was made into a film shortly after the book came out, and I think it enhanced it.

I think of a classic as a book you can read over and over. It will stick in a readers mind for years and grab at your motions. Of course also required reading from schools is an obvious.

I think we really just have to look at books popularity and how long they keep their ratings up. I think Harry Potter is already considered a classic. Catch 22 is becoming one. Anything by Stephen King will become one. How about Bridges of Madison County. Such a good book. I haven't read The Kite Runner, The Life of Pi, Atonement or The Alchemist yet but I could see them getting there. And, as much as I hated The Da Vinci Code, I could see it becoming one as well. We don't have to love all the classics.

I'd think Harry Potter would have to be one. I also think The Life of Pi and Kite Runner have a good chance too. I could see myself still loving those years from now!

I looked at my 5-star reads list. In addition to The Kite Runner mentioned by others, I think, perhaps, The Red Tent has the potential to become a classic.

You need to differentite between popular and classic. A classic is one that says something about the time and will still appeal in years to come. Harry Potter are already classics along the Narnia and Oz catagory.

Will the Boleyn Girl be one? I tend to doubt it. Its a story that has been written before and will be written again.Stories from history are always popular fodder. Think Shakespeare the boleyn girl does not contain clever enough writting to not be displaced by the next person writting of Henry the eight in years to come.

Secret Life of Bees is a more likeley choice.

Once again everyone, I DON'T think The Other Boleyn Girl would be a classic. It's just an example of something that I will always love, but obviously will not stand the test of time with everyone else. It was to point out that "the test of time" is a relative term - there's no quantifiable way to define it.

I really have no idea what would make a good classic. Possibly Kite Runner, possibly even The Poisonwood Bible (as it already seems quite popular among book clubs and reading lists).

I don't think many books from this age will become classics. It's kind of like movies - it's really hard to picture any of the stuff the movie industry has been coming out with lately as a classic. As time goes on, it gets harder and harder to come up with fresh, original ideas while also having the talent to get that idea to come to life.

This is a tough question. I was discussing "Cutting for Stone"( which I think may have a chance) and it was decided the author was able to expose the universal weaknesses in the characters, similar to other great novels. It was brought to my attention the "human truths" are what many of the classics touch upon. I think "Mr. Pip" was able to expose his charcters and could stand the test of time. Great question Allhug!

Great question! Very though provoking. I could see The Secret Life of Bees becoming a must in schools across the nation, much like To Kill A Mockingbird is today. Only time will truly tell.

I love this question. When I think of classics I think of To Kill a Mockingbird and works by Jane Austen. It's really tough to choose books that can measure up to them! I guess it helps to think of the books that have stood out in my mind in the last 5 years. I guess they're classics in my mind!

I, too, loved The Other Boleyn Girl, Sarah! I adore Ahab's Wife, I would love to see it listed as a classic!

I must be really strict. A classic to me has to be actually life-changing in some way and also beautifully written. I've never felt that popularity and school ratings and best seller lists could be criteria. But I haven't read enough of the newer stuff to be able to suggest anything. Maybe a McEwan? Or Jones's The Known World? This question is extraordinary - very thought-provoking and fascinating!

Maria, The Known World is a very good suggestion. I had a terrible time getting through it, but persevered because I knew it was an extraordinary story. I can only hope it is close to being historically accurate.

Maria wrote: "A classic to me has to be actually life-changing in some way and also beautifully written."

Exactly - well written and resonant. I completely agree.

I so loved the Secret Life of Bees! Such a wonderful story. I definitely think that The Giver can stand the test of time! Great suggestion, Brenda!

Brenda, finally someone else who just doesn't get why Austen is so admired. Thank you!

Brenda ~ I don't know. His books all seem like classics to me now. Even if I am too scared to read them. ;)

Water for Elephants bySara Gruen would be my pick.

Publication date was May 2006. The paperback hit #1 on the New York Times Best Seller list on July 8, 2007 and is still on the paperback trade fiction bestseller list

Elizabeth wrote: "Brenda, finally someone else who just doesn't get why Austen is so admired. Thank you!"

I can only believe that she was the author of women's lit of the times. But I can't get into Austen, either.

Brenda ~ Stephen King

I don't think having a movie made has anything to do with a book becoming a classic. I don't like Jane Austen because her characters are only one-dimensional. I say that having read only one book, Pride and Prejudice, which I read because I kept thinking it would become worthwhile. I was wrong. I have read only one Stephen King - Cujo. I can't see any reason why he should endure. Yes, I'm making these conclusions based on one book each, but, hey, if an author doesn't make me want to read another . . .

To me, a classic needs to explore the human condition in such a way that it resonates with people, and will continue to resonate regardless of technology or politics. If the technology or the politics is the vehicle by which that human condition is conveyed, so be it. I think of Brave New World or The Red Badge of Courage when I make this remark.

There might also be a difference between a classic and a great book. To me, a classic is a book that continues to be published for centuries (or maybe I should just say for a long time). On the other hand, a book could be great by a number of standards and for whatever reason not become a classic. Once in a while a book in that second category get "discovered" and published after being forgotten for some time. But I bet there have been quite a few great books over the centuries that we will never know about because they've disappeared from print.

I put The Poisonwood Bible in the category of a great book. It is an entertaining book at the surface level and can also be read on a number of other levels. The themes are universal rather than specific to the surface plot.

I also agree with Sophie's Choice and To Kill a Mockingbird. Some of the others I'm just not familiar with.