[j. d. worthington]

I'd largely agree with Teresa's comments here, and add one or two things to them: What makes a great book (or any work of art) is when it actually reaches down in there and strikes a genuine (rather than apparent) chord with the human heart; something that is emotionally honest; something that increases the reader's experience of the substance of reality. All of these things mean that it's something that will stick with you (you being a general rather than specific term) and something that will continue to appeal to people over generations/centuries/millennia... because it goes to the heartmeat of the human condition. That's a very difficult thing to define, but broader experience with the arts allows you to sense it more clearly; those who are more widely read are much more likely to be able to pick that which will last from those who aren't; the latter are influenced by "what's hot", not by quality, and their judgment on such things really doesn't count for much, any more than a plumber's opinion on astrophysics as opposed to those of someone trained in that field (and vice versa).

Awards can sometimes be a bit more helpful... but it's a shaky criterion. Depends on the award, and the milieu in which they are chosen. And yes, obscure books can often linger on long after those which were considered "deathless classics" in their day... in fact, to be honest, it's a good rule of thumb that, the more popular a particular work is, the less likely it is to last. That isn't always the case, but it's accurate to about 90% of the time (or better). How many bestsellers -- even tremendous bestsellers of forty years ago can you name? How many have remained in print? Yet hundreds of other works from the same time period are still in print, or have been brought back into print, and find considerable numers of readers. The best-sellers, on the other hand, when brought back into print, are often complete flops. They date too easily, for one thing. (And I'm not talking about specific references; I'm talking about general attitudes, underlying assumptions about people, and emotion. That's because they are often hitting on the current view of things, not on the genuine deep emotional makeup of human beings, which doesn't tend to alter that much over time.)

As for what do modern day readers want from books? As always, the majority want quick entertainment, something to get them away from themselves for a while, and something that, in a few years (or often a few days, sometimes hours) they can forget. But the discerning readers, the ones who read much at all... they often expect something more, because less simply isn't satisfying; it may be fun (like a carnival or amusement park ride), but it doesn't last; it doesn't lodge itself in your emotions; it doesn't "hit the spot". So the discerning readers will still expect what they've always expected; the mass of people will go for the ephemeral. That's no different than in times past, and I doubt very seriously it will change in times to come....