Ariel, he of the bittersweet blog, asks readers to elaborate on what makes a classic book “timeless.” What does it mean to say a book stands the test of time?

Exactly what type of test is time dishing out, anyway? Is it a one-time event or an on-going phenomenon? Once a book has stood the test of time, can it later flunk out? What kind of book tends to survive? What qualities have that time-defying element? . . . How does a book stand the test of time? What bookish qualities tend to endure?

First of all, we’re really talking about popularity and influence here–two attributes in literature I tend to disdain. If it’s popular, if it’s sold a million copies, can it really be worth reading? So George W. Bush and Hugh Hewitt and the Pope are all reading the latest bestseller? Does that mean it’s worth my time? Such elitist skepticism may serve us well in the short run, but in the long run, when we talk about a book that “stands the test of time,” we’re lauding a book for its popularity and influence over the course of time; we’re saying that this enduring influence and popularity are proof of the book’s intrinsic worth.

So what keeps a book (or a poem) popular? Many bestselling authors of the Victorian age, Bulwer-Lytton, Harrison Ainsworth and Margaret Oliphant, for example, are forgotten and/or unappreciated nowadays. Others such as Dickens and Thackeray are still read and acclaimed. Many of the books that everybody is reading at the turn of the millennium will be forgotten by 2100 AD while others are still bestsellers that speak and have spoken to many readers. Is there any way to tell now which ones will last? Sadly, I don’t think so. Each age has its own blind spots. Books which are under-appreciated when first published may later turn out to be classics because over the course of the years a large number of people lose their blindness, so to speak, and see the value of a particular author’s writing. Then again, a book that is popular in its own time may be full of the same errors and fallacies that are peculiar to that time period, and people in later times may come to see what a poor specimen of literature it really is.

I think what endures is Truth, trite though it may sound. So insofar as we can recognize and appreciate Truth, we can evaluate literature and perhaps foresee what will stand the test of time. Insofar as we are blinded and have our own pet truths that do not line up with Real Truth, we will praise the poorly written potboiler and scorn the book that reveals our own inadequacies. Falsehood and evil don’t last, even in this sinful world; truth does. Unfortunately, in the meantime, lies are easier on the ears, and even Christians can be deceived.

A case in point: homeschoolers are quite fond of bringing back into publication forgotten “classics”, usually for children, that have been lost to modern readers, again usually because of their Christian content. Sometimes this re-publication is a good idea: G.A. Henty’s fiction is good adventure and history packaged together. Elsie Dinsmore, on the other hand, is an example of untruth packaged up in Christian-sounding ribbons and bows. Will Elsie stand the test of time, even though she’s been revived, poor girl, for a second bout of suffering sainthood? I doubt it, but then again maybe my cultural and chronological biases are showing.

There’s more to say here, but that’s all for now. First and most important in evaluating literature is the question: is it True?