Leaving Lasting Marks in Literature

Choosing books is a complex process that can be shaped by both personal and social influences. Whether we are aware of it or not, we often make choices based on different criteria. One of these may be a preference for experienced, well-known and successful authors. This is actually quite understandable, as one might think that “if the work has been widely read, if no one has ever stopped talking about it, if it has been mentioned in the media, it cannot be that bad”. Depending on the genre, these may be works that have been accepted or works that have become stereotypes, i.e. classics.

Classics are works that have had a major impact on the conditions of their time, have been accepted by a wide readership and have proved their validity over time. Of course, anyone can come up with a number of different titles in this context, but it does not take long to find a common denominator. There are also works that have become classics after the author's death. There are many works that were not understood at the time, or that somehow attracted attention later on.

I thought about the books I read every month and the books I recommend in the clubs. I asked myself why I make these choices. Actually, I gave my answer above. My desire to offer my friends books that are as enjoyable to read as possible leads me to focus on the classics (at least of the genre I choose). This may not always be the case, but I think it is the ideal choice. After all, if they have such a reputation, they must be good enough, right? It may not always be the case, but that is another discussion.

Photo by Elena Kloppenburg on Unsplash

“What are the reasons why we consider them classics?” I thought about this for a while. I started by thinking about the books and themes that I could quickly put into that category in my mind. We can see that one of the things they have in common is that they are timeless, and what makes this possible is that they deal with universal themes. Emotions and concerns such as love, death, justice, social pressures, freedom, local problems can be common to us wherever we are in the world, in whatever period of history we live. It is not important that they are not experienced in exactly the same way, for what is important here is that they exist for everyone. This can bring us closer to the work, no matter how many centuries have passed. The author can touch our hearts or our brains from that time.

No doubt this is not the only thing that works here. If it were, everyone would apply it as if it were a formula. Of course, the author's hard work and success play a big part. It is not easy to devote years of one's life to this. How many people do we know who have been writing for decades? It is quite understandable that the writer who uses the power of language and expression as it should be, and who has the knowledge and experience to go beyond it, is superior to others. After all, we are talking about writers who create their own style of writing and who can make others think of themselves even when they read different books.

Apart from the fact that they can be read continuously, there is a more striking point. They may not appeal to all ages (all the time), but they can appeal to all eras, which I think is the part that makes the difference. Imagine you and many generations before you reading them, but you can all have the same feelings and thoughts. These masters are the ones who can influence you, your elders of different ages or periods, and other writers who read them, and make them talked about. Because, thanks to the depth of their work, they skilfully deal with philosophical, sociological or psychological issues in subtexts. These are well understood in our book clubs and friendship circles, where we get together and listen to different perspectives. In other words, the author writes in such a way that you end up collecting something from everyone. That is marvellous.

Of course, there are also those who deal with innovative and original subjects. I think we can see this more clearly if we look at the genres. Contrary to the universal themes mentioned at the beginning, the branching out of different genres can disperse the common perception in the narrative and offer unique perspectives. Therefore, in genres that are more current and modern branches of literature (genres that do not come to mind at first glance, such as fantasy, science fiction, humour), new and detailed themes, unexpected titles or unusual narratives can also bring new perspectives. Even if they are a little more daring and risky, each genre has its own classics. So the meaning of the word “classic” can be expanded on a genre basis.

Photo by Susan Wilkinson on Unsplash

Looking at the situation in this way actually helps me with another question I have in mind. "Is it necessary for a certain period of time to pass before we can call a work a classic?" If we make a rough estimate, the youngest of the works that we can call classics should probably be about 50 years old. In other words, a difference of at least 1-2 generations is necessary. Because, as we have said, the classics must have penetrated the minds of different periods and left a similar degree of permanence. Personally, I think that a period of time has to pass, that they have to be seen in a social and global context, and this can only happen over time. Otherwise, for example, if this process is accelerated by popularising the work, it will not be ahead of its time.

On the other hand, the most objective characteristic of the classics is that they do not belong to or come from a particular nation. Yes, every country will have classical works within its own literature, and this will give us an indication of the richness, satisfaction and quality of that literature. But beyond that, the works we are looking at in the global context continue to live in a way that belongs to the world rather than to nations. They are read all over the world, whether in the original language of the work or not.

Of course, the popularity of the author or the country at the time may play a role. But such a tabloid distinction would not be accepted in the literary community. We can see that these are also formed over time. But we should not forget that such novels are not remembered as much as they are loved. This will not go any further than giving them the qualification of "popular" rather than the title of "classic". Because talking about it a lot does not necessarily make it better. I know you can think of such books right now.

Photo by Shiromani Kant on Unsplash

Let's try a final thought experiment. You have read above many of the criteria that give the classics their significance. Now think about the points that you think I have not mentioned and answer. What do you think the new classics might be?

You may have noticed that in recent years almost every new book has been labelled a “bestseller”. However, this label does not always reflect the quality of the work. For we know that these are examples of periodic success. The age we live in, with its rapid digital interaction, makes this possible. But it also makes them ephemeral. None of them, for example, will ever be a Kafka. His works began to become classics after his death, with the growth of academic interest (which we can use as another criterion). I don't know what kind of bestseller arouses such feverish and infatuated interest, but I think it would be more useful to conduct a sociological study on why there are so many “bestsellers” in general.

In my opinion, it is more likely that works that are differentiated by genre (as mentioned above) will become classics in the future. Because it is very difficult to rise above the existing ones. Even if there are those who can do it (maybe you think there are some), it is an ambitious claim. So I think we will see those who sit on that throne in sub-categories. That is why authors and their works that are more farsighted, that can deal with what will happen years later, that can create concepts, that do not completely break away from universal themes, that can be pioneers, will have this right.