Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
The greats of the past still loom large in academia, in part, because they were firsts. It's not as if they're still there solely because nothing has been written since that could possibly rival them. Judging the significance of present and future literature using past works' longevity as the only measuring stick is a mistake I think.
Books/authors are significant because large groups of people find them to be. Not because certain groups of people find them to be.
|
To me personally, the mark of a great novel is that I can get something new from it every time I re-read it. I've read both "Pride and Prejudice" and "The Lord of the Rings" half a dozen times, and I will continue to get something new and fresh from them even if I re-read each of them a dozen more times. That for me makes them great novels. Much as I enjoy reading Pratchett's "Discworld" books, in all honesty I don't think I could say the same about any of them.