What makes a classic?

[jack]

On wednesday, I watched "True Lies", perhaps the best film in which Schwartzneger plays a human :) It's got a good mix of action, sex, and pretty funny too.

I've also just re-read Niven/Pournelle's "Moat around Murchurson's Eye". In many ways it's got everything a good science fiction book should. Some of the best aliens I've ever read. Lots of action. Science pretty realistic + two necessary innovations (shields and wormholes) which are consistent. Fun characters, including a Muslim ex-potential-terrorist (which is suddenly a much hotter topic now...).

I enjoyed both, and would recommend them without hesitation, but somehow I wouldn't describe either as a classic, in the way I would LOTR, Dune, Star Wars. And I'm not sure why. It's like they did everything right, but were just a perfection of themes found in other things, and not genuinely new. But then you could say the same for starwars. Do you have to create a genre to be a classic? That seems a bit stringent. What other works fit this pattern?

Comments

[rochvelleth.livejournal.com]

I think classics are made classics by the attention they get - work X gets notorious/famous for dealing with topic Y in a novel/interesting/profound/exciting/suave way. Plus added soundbite and good character factors.