The Best CLASSIC novel of ALL TIME!

[doreenjoy]

Lady Chatterly's Lover by D.H. Lawrence.

[James_Wilde]

I think it was J G Ballard who shocked an audience of SciFi enthusiasts by stating that "90% of Science Fiction is crud." When the murmur of shock had died down, he continued. "90% of everything is crud." and everybody relaxed and laughed. I think he grossly underestimated the amount of crud, but I think of this when I read a book or listen to music. Will this still be read/listened to in 200 years?

By that criterion, very little modern music can be adjudged classical. The Beatles, Arvo Pärt, Phillip Glass, Vangelis, ... Add your name to the list.

It's even worse with literature. Of modern authors, I think I'd put the Swedish author, Marianne Fredriksson, on the list. Probably Diane Setterfield. I'll have to think long and hard to find more names.

But one name is already up there, as the definition of a classical author, and in particular for one work. It has been filmed innumerable times, it has been made into several quality TV miniseries and at least one crappy one, it is read in its own right and is one of the most popular books in any bookstore, it has been spoofed with a zombie version, and sequels have been written, and there is even a film about its fans.

Of course I'm referring to Jane Austen's "Pride and Prejudice", and however you may say that it was its time's equivalent of Mills & Boon chicklit, there's no getting away from its being a classic by any definition.

And I say that with the full strength of Robert A Heinlein's support: "If you can't measure it, it's not science, it's opinion."

[gollu]

I've read a few of the already mentioned in the topic books, but IMO nothing comes close to Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky. It's definitely not a page turner like LOTR or Dune but the complexity and the descriptions are one of a kind.

[Scott Nielsen]

I take Classic Novel to mean the Western canon though I appreciate there are slight differences as to how that is interpreted. In that light most of the offerings on this thread fail to qualify.

However, given the OP suggested Dune himself, I take it as a given that he has a different definition of the subject at hand so perhaps that could be clarified.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by James_Wilde

I think it was J G Ballard who shocked an audience of SciFi enthusiasts by stating that "90% of Science Fiction is crud." When the murmur of shock had died down, he continued. "90% of everything is crud." and everybody relaxed and laughed. I think he grossly underestimated the amount of crud

That's Sturgeon's Law (or Sturgeon's Relevation). Theodore Sturgeon (1918-1985), probably most famous for "More than Human", based on his earlier novella, "Baby is Three".

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

That's Sturgeon's Law (or Sturgeon's Relevation). Theodore Sturgeon (1918-1985), probably most famous for "More than Human", based on his earlier novella, "Baby is Three".

I'm not certain you can give the "best" Classical book. Too many great books, and each very different...

I know I can't.

[CazMar]

Hard to decide:
Dickens' "Our Mutual Friend", full of human passions, mystery, social comment.
Chaucer's "The Canterbury Tales" The first "English" stories
Homer's "Odyssey" - inspiring a whole raft of adventure/quest books and movies, the classic epic.

[mjhudston]

I think we need to define classic. I'm all for putting endersgame on the list.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by crich70

The Hound of the Baskerville's is a good one. I think it was one of the 1st I read as a kid. I got it through one of those book order forms they handed out in grade school.

I've been a Holmes fan for years. I avidly devoured all of them, perhaps it time for a re-read.

[Kiwimick]

Although its probably not read as widely nowdays I would say Catcher in the Rye
by J D Salinger is a classic

[wodin]

Originally Posted by sabredog

It is a shame you find other members choice of what they consider a "classic" amusing. Surely a purely subjective choice to be made by those respondents? I may not necessarily agree but I never find such choices amusing as that would be disrespectful to those respondents choices.

It is interesting to see what respondents consider a "classic".

I consider "Mr Midshipman easy" by Captain Marryat (1836) as an important book too, but it is less of a classic to me than, say, Fellowship of the Ring".

To me "classic" means out of copyright before my lifetime, In my case that means nineteenth century.

[GA Russell]

I would include in the definition of "classic" the concept that the work continues to be relevant. Thus, timeless.

I would agree that a requirement is passing the test of time. I think that forty years is a sufficient period of time.

[K-Thom]

I consider a "classic" a novel which stands the test of time. Okay, which would also include modern classics who are likely to be read this and next century.

And what about Shakespeare's scripts of his plays? Are they considered to be novels?

[Williamlk]

I would say the term classic as it applies to literature is going have too many variables to put a definition to it that we are all going to agree upon on.

Let's just say a novel that has/or will (in your opinion) stand the test of time. In other words, a novel that will appeal to more than one generation of readers.

Does that seem like a fair guideline?

[elsussman]

I once read somewhere that everyone should read Don Quixote 3 times in his life. once as a young man... once in middle age and once when old. I have read it twice but in the interest of holding on am deferring the third go thru for a while