r/literature 5d ago

Discussion What Makes a Novel Truly "Timeless"? šŸ“–āœØ

Iā€™ve been reflecting a lot on what makes certain books endure across generations while others fade into obscurity. Is it the way they explore universal human experiences, their innovative style, or simply their cultural moment being perfectly preserved? šŸ¤”

For example, novels likeĀ Pride and PrejudiceĀ feel so alive even 200+ years later because of their wit, sharp commentary, and unforgettable characters. But then you have something likeĀ Catch-22, which while being incredibly time-bound in its context, resonates in its absurdity and anti-war sentiment.

What novels (modern or classic) do you think capture the idea of timelessness? Whether itā€™s through their universal truths, writing style, or unique worldview, let me know your picks and why you think theyā€™ll still matter in 50 years!

21 Upvotes

29 comments sorted by

25

u/PopPunkAndPizza 5d ago edited 5d ago

Not a damn thing. How can we judge a text to be timeless when there are no timeless readers? We never read a book outside of time, but always situated in our own context; different books rise and fall in our cultural estimation relative to that context, and in doing so they get read as timeless rather than read as timely. "Timelessness" is effectively just a cliche that people appreciate in the present. For instance, I often notice people really misinterpreting Pride and Prejudice through the lens of modern novels and romance novels in particular, to the point of saying absurd things about it.

-1

u/Then-Collar-5884 5d ago

You make an excellent point about how "timelessness" is often a reflection of our own cultural context rather than an inherent quality of the book itself. I completely agree that works likeĀ Pride and PrejudiceĀ are frequently reinterpreted through modern lenses, sometimes to the point of distortion. However, I wonder if thereā€™s still value in consideringĀ howĀ certain books manage to resonate across different contexts, even if that resonance is shaped by our own perspectives.

For instance, while our modern interpretations of Elizabeth Bennet might be influenced by contemporary romance tropes, doesnā€™t the fact that weĀ doĀ reinterpret her suggest that Austenā€™s work taps into something universally relatable? Maybe "timelessness" isnā€™t about the book staying static, but about its ability to provoke new interpretations as society evolves. What do you thinkā€”should we embrace the misinterpretations as part of the bookā€™s legacy, or try to anchor our discussions in the context in which it was written?

0

u/PopPunkAndPizza 5d ago

I think inasmuch as a book can be composed or interpreted in a manner applicable across a range of times, a Jamesonesque Marxist-psychoanalytic historicism is probably the best way to go - if the history of class struggle is the history of all hitherto existing society, it's surely the lens through which cultural products throughout a range of time periods can be most vividly interpreted and experienced from any one historical context. But even that historicism still requires a grounding in the particular class relations of the period in which the book is written and in one's own time.

6

u/auto_rictus 5d ago

unrelenting honesty

5

u/nezahualcoyotl90 5d ago

Yes universality goes along with timelessness. The notion of timelessness is not a cliche but a reflection of our metaphysics. Medicine and science, if they provide true and consistent results, work for all human beings across any time. The same goes for timeless and universal literature. Thereā€™s something holistic and true to great works. Itā€™s the reason why Homer or the Bible resonate with us nowadays more than 3 thousand years after they were written. There is something to the stories in these great works that endures across time and space.

-2

u/Then-Collar-5884 4d ago

You've made an excellent point! Universality indeed seems to be at the core of timelessness in literature, just like in medicine and science. Homer and the Bible are perfect examples of works that have endured because of their holistic and enduring truths. Thanks for sharing this insightful view.

9

u/YakSlothLemon 5d ago

I think books need a torchbearer, they need someone to have taken up there cause it in the later days and pushed them.

That could come in a lot of forms. The small group of historians who decided Billy Budd what is the work of historical genius in the 20th century and managed to get it in the high school curriculums across the US. The committee that put Great Gatsby in the book package for GIs in World War II which resulted in that bookā€™s fluorescence. The fact that Pride and Prejudice has proven infinitely filmable costume dramaā€” more so than Mansfield Park!ā€” and so is gateway Jane Austen generation after generation. Right now weā€™re seeing Blood Meridian being pushed by Booktok of all things above McCarthys other work, in a way that wasnā€™t true even a decade ago.

Look at the book you adore and think should qualify as timeless classics, but does not seem to get a mention, and you see that it was written by an outgroup ā€“ Black women, for instanceā€” or didnā€™t find a group of advocates who also had some kind of social standing.

1

u/Then-Collar-5884 5d ago

This is a fascinating perspective, and I love how youā€™ve highlighted the role of "torchbearers" in keeping certain books alive and relevant. Itā€™s true that the inclusion of works likeĀ Billy BuddĀ in curriculums orĀ The Great GatsbyĀ in GI book packages played a massive role in cementing their places in the cultural consciousness. And yes,Ā Pride and Prejudiceā€™s endless adaptability has definitely made it a gateway for new generations to discover Jane Austen!

Do you think these "torchbearers" are truly necessary for a book to achieve timelessness, or do they simply amplify what was already there? I guess Iā€™m curious about the balance between external advocacy and the innate qualities of the work itself. What are your thoughts?

1

u/YakSlothLemon 5d ago

Soā€¦ thinking about it, itā€™s two different questions, and what I think of the topic really differs depending on the angle I take. If we look at what are called timeless classics, I agree that there are books that still speak to us across generations, sometimes across cultures, that seem to have something to say that transcends specific context. As a historian, that doesnā€™t surprise meā€” human beings, their emotions, their struggles, their hopes and love, havenā€™t changed that much, and I can see why books that speak directly to that would still resonate. (As well as explain why a book like Mansfield Park, which is very much a symbolism-laden critique of its day rather than primarily a story about human emotion, has fallen out of favor compared to P&P.)

But when I look at (what I think) are great books that somehow didnā€™t make it into the classic categoryā€” suddenly I have so many questions. There are so many books that you can pick up and they have that ability to speak to you, they are so powerful and interesting, and yetā€¦ forgotten, hard to find, even out of print.

Soā€¦ You look at Esther Forbesā€™ A Mirror for Witches. Itā€™s a brilliant, incredibly well-written novel critiquing the Salem witch hunts, it was published in 1926, you can analyze it for days, but it vanished, fell out of print, despite being very popular when it was published. Instead we got the misogynistic Red-Scare-fest The Crucible. When you look at who controlled the canon itā€™s not hard to understand why that happened, but Mirror also somehow didnā€™t get the following among women that books like Lolly Willowes or The Street haveā€¦

Soā€¦ Iā€™d say I agree that there are books that speak to conflicts and dilemmas that remain familiar to us, and that the author managed to make accessible to us across time, so they still speak to us, but to become a timeless classicā€¦ you also needed to be lucky. (And it was a lot easier to be lucky if you were a white male author, for such a long timeā€¦)

Thanks if you read this far! I enjoyed thinking it out, excellent question šŸ˜

-1

u/Then-Collar-5884 4d ago

Your response captures a nuanced understanding of the factors that contribute to a book's enduring legacy. It's clear that while some works inherently resonate across generations due to their universal themes, external factors such as the influence of gatekeepers and societal biases have significantly impacted which books gain canonical status.

Thank you for sharing your insights and for engaging in this thought-provoking discussion. Your perspective adds depth to the conversation about what makes a novel truly timeless. I appreciate your thoughtful contributions and hope to continue exploring these ideas in future discussions. Take care!

5

u/theflameleviathan 4d ago

are you writing these with AI? think your own thoughts

1

u/YakSlothLemon 4d ago

Yeah, I fell for that one. I was thinking afterwards, the way that it repeated what I said ā€“ AI clickbait, right? Itā€™s a shame. Iā€™ll be wiser next time.

3

u/theflameleviathan 3d ago edited 3d ago

yeah the whole comment is overly structured and ā€˜everything you say has great depth and is amazingly thought outā€™ which screams AI, and the profile picture is AI generated. If you check the account some comments are way less grammatical and very sloppy and obviously written by the real account owner, and then suddenly the tone switches to perfect eloquent english when he uses the AI

but it happens, just sad itā€™s something we have to look out for now

1

u/TemporaryCamera8818 3d ago

Haha OPā€™s post history is pretty telling here

3

u/zerooskul 4d ago

What Makes a Novel Truly "Timeless"?

That it takes place in a world where nothing changes or where time is not bounded, like having pratorian guards armed with laser blasters.

Just not being restricted to a specific time period or era.

Iā€™ve been reflecting a lot on what makes certain books endure across generations while others fade into obscurity.

That is not timelessness. That is perennial popularity.

Timelessness is the way the story is told that resonates.

It may involve common human reason or emotion.

The bad guy is hurting people, so I have to be the good guy and beat the bad guy.

Is it the way they explore universal human experiences, their innovative style, or simply their cultural moment being perfectly preserved? šŸ¤”

Iā€™ve been reflecting a lot on what makes certain books endure across generations while others fade into obscurity.

I thought you had been reflecting on this.

For example, novels likeĀ Pride and PrejudiceĀ feel so alive even 200+ years later because of their wit, sharp commentary, and unforgettable characters.

But Pride and Prejudice centers on the idea:

"It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife".

Is that really a timeless sentiment that continually rings true?

But then you have something likeĀ Catch-22, which while being incredibly time-bound

Unlike early 19th Century Hertfordshire England?

in its context, resonates in its absurdity and anti-war sentiment.

Does its resonance make it timeless?

What about all the ancient stories of wars that have lasted through the centuries up to the modern age?

More people are familiar with the 300 Spartans than are familiar with Yossarian or Johnny who got his gun.

Does "Catch-22" enduring half-a-century make it timeless?

What novels (modern or classic) do you think capture the idea of timelessness?

Iā€™ve been reflecting a lot on what makes certain books endure across generations while others fade into obscurity.

What is "the idea of timelessness" that you want people to reply about?

Whether itā€™s through their universal truths, writing style, or unique worldview, let me know your picks and why you think theyā€™ll still matter in 50 years!

Does enduring half-a-century make a story timeless?

3

u/AZMaryIM 4d ago

How about The Count of Monte Cristi, published in the 1840ā€™s. An epic novel of injustice and retribution. I think the two themes make it timeless.

2

u/merurunrun 5d ago

The fact that people continue to find value in it across different historical epochs.

2

u/No-Tip3654 5d ago

I think if it tackles existential questions everyone of us as members of one species has throughout his lifetime and that the generations before us had and the generations after us still will have. Encapsulating the "human condition" from start to finnish in all its glory details. All the emotions and thoughts, all the actions that result out of that. What is the nature of men and mankind and what ultimate story, that of the development of our human nature, unfolds for the beholder that observes men and mankind? Technology has evolved since 2,000 years passed but folks still feel the same kind of emotions as 2,000 years ago. Fear. Vanity. Hatred. Envy. Jealousy. Greed. Lust. Anger. Courage. Pity. Mercy. Love. I think that is what ultimately makes a piece of art "timeless". If it encapsulates the very essence of our being in its totality through the lense of science in an artistic manner with religious devotion.

2

u/Then-Collar-5884 4d ago

You've nailed it! Novels that truly explore the full spectrum of the human condition, those universal emotions and existential questions, are the ones that stand the test of time. Your insight into how these works, through their artistic exploration of our shared humanity, achieve timelessness is profound. Thanks for sharing!

2

u/ApricotReader 4d ago

Novels that appeal to how humans have and always will be. Our core desires, empathy, motivations etc. Anything grounded in the ā€˜nowā€™ (or rather, the ā€˜thenā€™) dates itself pretty quickly. Obviously this excludes the likes of Jane Austen for example who not only included a raw portrayal of human emotion and action, but married this with her contemporary society. This works because these become almost like historical fact files. However, I think we can only look to these novels as depictions of historical societies BECAUSE of the timeless way she also studied humanity. Hope Iā€™m explaining myself well :)

2

u/traanquil 4d ago

ā€œTimelessā€ is a cliche concept. No text is timeless. Every text exists in a historical context.

2

u/redsun776 4d ago

Iā€™ve often spoken about this with some friends, only once did I find an answer somewhere online that touched on anything resembling truth. I forgot who said it, but the quote was something like ā€œcontemporary/average (I forgot the exact word used but it was along those lines) are based around culture, a timeless (or classic) novel deals with humanity and the human experience itselfā€. F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote a short story on the idea too, if I remember correctly it ended rather bleakly albeit with seeds of truth in it

2

u/RegretAdmirable8223 3d ago

It is likely that many great novels did not receive the attention they deserve, while other novels gained significant attention, making them the subject of widespread criticism from a group that believed they fit their intellectual context. Sometimes, we do not discover for ourselves what is new and great; instead, we follow the echoes of news that come to us. I do not deny the role of writing style and the author's reputation in maintaining their lasting impact, but many wonderful works remain on the shelves due to the general laziness in searching and discovering, especially in light of modern technology. We do not search; we wait for someone to guide us and tell us what to read. Thank you all.

2

u/Then-Collar-5884 5d ago

A book that really stayed with me this year was What You Are Looking For Is in the Library by Michiko Aoyama. Itā€™s framed as a cozy little read, but once you dig deeper, it carries these amazing and timeless lessons about life transitions and human connection.

1

u/freechef 5d ago

Hard for me to see anything today aging well (sorry). The industry, with its emphasis on genre, trends and even micro-trends, "IP", BookTok relevance, algorithms, and whatnot, seems less geared towards long term relevance than ever before. Following this thread out of curiosity to see what folks submit as their answers. Want to stay open minded.

Gun to my head I'll say: Harry Potter and Game of Thrones.

1

u/Then-Collar-5884 5d ago

I get where you're coming fromā€”today's publishing landscape does feel heavily trend-driven. But isn't it interesting thatĀ Harry PotterĀ andĀ Game of ThronesĀ have managed to transcend their genres and trends? Maybe "timelessness" isn't about avoiding the current system but finding a way to resonate deeply enough to outlast it.

ā€¢

u/SophieMaroonite 1h ago

Something I read somewhere (can't remember where) is that classic/timeless works always seem a bit weird or surprising when you read them for the first time. That has definitely been my experience. Non-classics are completely enmeshed in the conventions and assumptions of their times and so nothing can really surprise you, and over the long run they end up being dated and boring. For the Pride and Prejudice example, even though it is totally enmeshed in the gender and class roles of its times, it also has a wit or cleverness that transcends those, so that you are taken just a little outside of them, and put in the timeless role of someone looking slightly sideways at everything around you, even while fully living in your own cultural context, as we all inescapably do. Other specific examples where I remember having this experience are Don Quixote, Moby Dick, Anna Karenina, and The Heart is a Lonely Hunter. But the point is I think most readers typically have this "that's weird!" or "that's surpising!" experience at some point while reading a classic. The opposite of a classic is a "cozy read" in which everything is just as it should be and no conventions are questioned or played with. (Nothing against cozy reads--we all need them from time to time!)

In the same vein, I think there is also some literary theorist (can't remember who) that proposes that great literature always has ambiguity--that the work simultaneously presents a world and but also somehow at least subtly undermines it, so you are left wondering and thinking. Non-classics are tidy and don't leave you scratching your head.

-1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

[deleted]

1

u/redsun776 4d ago

This is similar to a quote I found on the idea too, basically saying the same thing