This may be an "unusual question", but I notice that some novels, such
as "The Three Musketeers", "Treasure Island", "The Phantom of the
Opera" and others written by novelists long ago, are called
"Classics". Similarly, some very old movies are called "Classics", and
I was wondering, what are the "qualifications" for a piece of
literature, a movie or a song to be called "a classic"? I know it has
to withstand the test of time, but does it have to be written at or
before a certain date?

Would books written by authors such as JRR Tolkien, JK Rowling and
Stephen King be called "classics", or are they "too new"? What about
movies such as "Star Wars"?

They become 'Classics' when I say so.

Books written by authors such as JRR Tolkien, JK Rowling and
Stephen King are certainly NOT "classics": they are too rubbishy.

Movies such as "Star Wars" are also, too rubbishy.

LORD OF THE RINGS is a classic, and dotn you dare say otherwise Bryan

IF I have read the book or seen the movie, then it is a "classic"   -


since I don't read rubbish, and go to movies ("the cinema" for PB) so
seldom, that any movie I have seen has become a classic.

By some strange chance, however, I agree with PB on his selections of rubbish.

Myoarin

the book or the movie have to stand the test of time, certainly. 
There appears to be a need for a general consensus as well about the
quality of the book or movie.

What is most interesting to me about the decision over what makes a
"classic" is that many of the novels that are considered classics of
today were considered trashy and "popular" or plebian in the day they
came out. Dickens serialized his works in the newspaper (and was
looked down on for it)!  But now people think "oh, a Dickens novel"
and think that it's a really high-class thing. That's what I find most
interesting. A novel like "Robinson Crusoe" was really popular during
the time it came out. In 200 years, the Harry Potter novels or Stephen
King novels might be considered classics of our time.

A classic can also be forgotten and then brought back to life. Kate
Chopin's Awakening would never have been seen in a college discussion
before the 1970s, but it was written in 1900 and was certainly there
all that time for people to read! Now there's not a decent college out
there that doesn't teach this book.

Some things become classics when they don't merit it. This is another
interesting point. One of my professors was a Herman Melville scholar,
and was of the mind that Melville was greatly underappreciated. Most
people know Moby Dick (whether they like it or not is another issue)
but his greatest work, Billy Budd, has gone unnoticed by the general
public and is only appreciated by scholars (and their students). Why
is Moby Dick so famous and Billy Budd not? Because it's about a whale?
Who decides?

It's all a very interesting concept.

On a much more mondane level, I expect that a film or book will be
called a "classic" if the film is still being shown after 20 years, or
the book is then still on a publisher's list  - a crude test of time,
not necessarily one of cinematographic or literary quality in critics'
eyes.

How do I pay "keystroke-ga"?

To pay Keystroke, you invite him to post an Answer.