[issybird]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Harry Potter got kids and adults reading. The stories are good. Classc good vs evil.

Exactly! Just like a lot of moldy oldies. Timeless themes, which makes them relevant in addition to being good literature. But just because a book has a timeless theme doesn’t make it a classic.

It's because the term classic is subjective. I don't think some of the classics are classics and some of what I think are classics you may not. Is there a definition that fits in all cases?

It’s only subjective at the margins. What makes a classic a classic is that time and common assessment make it so. There’s a commonality to the canon. There can be disagreement about “minor classics” but mostly people know what the classics are. No matter how you dislike it, Jane Eyre is a classic. No one ever said you had to love them. I enjoy Victorian novels myself, but at that I bailed on Little Dorrit. I don’t, however, claim that Dickens isn’t one of the greats (although I personally prefer Trollope).

To parse your statement: “I don’t think some of the classics are classics” is illogical. First you acknowledge they are, then you contradict yourself. Really what you’re saying is that you do know what the definition of classics is, you just would like it to be different.

“Some of what I think are classics you may not.” One person does not make a classic. Again, if you’re going to define the word to cover the books you like and exclude the books you don’t like, why do you care about slapping the label classic on them? Just say, “this is what I like to read.” Because who cares? Sirtel has the right take on it.

ETA: I see you’ve edited your post, so I’ll respond to your new last para:

It’s because the term classic is subjective. When I say a book is rubbish, that's because I think it is. There are books I don't like but can see other liking it. And some of the rubbish doesn't hold up well at all. Not everything does hold up well and that includes some classics of old. Is there a definition that fits in all cases?

You’d be better served to drop the word rubbish to describe books you don’t like. Just say you don’t like them. “Rubbish” implies a qualitative assessment and an argumentative if not offensive stance and if you think Shakespeare is rubbish, you have no credibility. I think you’re an outlier. Nothing wrong with that, but you might as well use terms as they’re commonly employed. The lexicon of JSWolf confuses where it doesn’t irritate.