What makes a classic a "classic"

[Anonymous No.16643398]

And what can we aspiring writers do to get a result near that

[Anonymous No.16643511]

>>16643398
It hides what is affected about it, has a sense of inevitability that is at the same time not predictable. It has layers of meaning such that it can simultaneously appeal to general and non-general audiences. In the end, I don't think style is that important. If you have something worthwhile to say, you will most often express yourself appropriately. If you have nothing to say, you will agonize over style and create an affected piece of shit

[Anonymous No.16643515]

>>16643398
If your work is remembered after the 15 minutes of fame it recieved, it's a classic. This is why the phrase "it's an instant classic!" is retarded. Things only reach classic status if future generations continue to reference them, and future students of the craft continue to study them.

[Anonymous No.16643527]

"Classic" is just a word to describe works whose true qualities go beyond the contingent elements of whatever time they were written, and touch upon the eternal principles life and highest yearnings of man, which is why they are also considered timeless.

[Anonymous No.16643533]

>>16643515
Pretty much the end of thread here.
A classic is a good book that people still like/buy/talk about after decades. A story becomes a classic with age; there is no such thing as an instant classic.

[Anonymous No.16643536]

>>16643398
Time, and the work's persistence through time.

[Anonymous No.16645052]

>>16643398
Something about being recognised as good across generations.

[Anonymous No.16645089]

>>16643527
Based

[Anonymous No.16646078]

>>16643533
but what elements make a book classic? I personally read a lot of good books that aren't considered classics

[Anonymous No.16646097]

>>16643398
>does something special/unique among its peers
>notable quality
>receives critical recognition
>is passed down at least one generation

[Anonymous No.16646105]

>>16643398
Works that capture the imaginations of future generations.

[Anonymous No.16646109]

>>16646078
Not him but I think the work being some sort of universal quality plays into quite a lot. Works that are contingent on the milieu they were created in don't tend to last long. That's why people don't remember "What is to be done?" but remember Tolstoy and Dostoevsky.

[Anonymous No.16646114]

>>16646109
*the work having some sort of universal quality

[Anonymous No.16646200]

>>16643515
Yeah, but governments and institutions can shill shit just because one guy at the top likes it and probably identifies with the protagonist as “omg literally me!!!!” Religions keep even the driest theological books alive after centuries, whereas losing one war means your language goes extinct and therefore untranslated works fall into obscurity. Plus normies have shit taste (look at what they eat) and still remember things like “who framed roger rabbit” and Paris Hilton’s sex tape while an incredible book can only survive by word of mouth amidst a small coterie of enthusiasts who might all die off before they can transmit it to the younger generation. I’m not disagreeing, the good stuff tends to survive, but the shit gets blared so loud through the megaphones of the world.

[Anonymous No.16646276]

>>16643398
my opinion about it