How Much Does Relevancy Matter?

When we were discussing Ship It last week, we talked a little bit about how books stay relevant, and discussed our thoughts on Lundin’s novel staying readable in the future. We all seemed to agree that, while Ship It is currently relevant, it probably won’t age very well, even in the very near future. Parts of the novel, like the plot-dependence on Tumblr and some of the “shipping” terminology, is already less relevant than it once was.

The concept of books staying relevant is one I think about often. Eventually, I think I’d like to publish something, though I’m not yet sure what exactly it will be (a book for very young children, an elementary-aged book, a YA novel, etc.), and I’m not sure what path I would want to take with it. Would I take the Ship It route, where I pick a very fixed moment in time and ground my story there? Or would I attempt to make something not grounded in time, in the hope that it will stay relevant for just a little longer? It’s tricky to know which route to take, because there is no guaranteed way to make a book stay relevant.

Throughout history, there are very few books that have stayed relevant for several decades, religious texts aside. I did some research and found some of the most popular children’s books in the past century, and I’ve included the links here. The first link is a more general overview of the popular children’s books of the 19^th century, while the second link explores must-read children’s books organized by decade, rather than just a general overview.

While we may recognize some of the titles from the early 19^th century, many of them are no longer widely read. Every reader has different opinions and experiences, but I feel that most of these novels have already seen better days. I know the general story of Heidi, Treasure Island, and The Swiss Family Robinson, but I’ve never read any of the actual novels. Others, like Five Little Peppers and How They Grew and The Peterkin Papers are entirely new titles to me. All of these novels are well under 200 years old, with The Swiss Family Robinson, published in 1812, as the only exception. Meanwhile, according to The New York Times, the current YA bestsellers have all been published in the 2000s.

It’s clear that, over time, the popularity of older books wanes and new books take precedence, so what does it even mean for something to stay “timeless?” And is it fair to be critical of Lundin’s book just because it will not age well? Does any book really age well?

One of my favorite Ted Talks is of Anne Lamott, where she discusses 12 truths she has learned in her life. In her seventh truth, she says, “Publication and temporary creative successes are something you have to recover from…it’s also a miracle to get your work published, to get your stories read and heard.” She goes on to say that writing alone, unlike publishing, will be something that fulfills you. Publishing a novel is a great goal to have, but it is not the finish line. The best way to feel self-satisfaction, according to Lamott, is to write your own truth, regardless of its publish-ability.

Interests wane and books do not stay bestsellers forever. I don’t want to say that publication means nothing, because that is not true. But publication in a world that is fast-paced and finnicky and always changing is difficult, and no book will truly stand the test of time.

If I want to get very intrinsic and meta, I could say that, in the end, it doesn’t matter anyway. Everything is fleeting: every author’s cherished piece of writing will one day become irrelevant and every published book will one day cease to exist. But before that happens, even the most avid of readers will not be able to recite every author that ever published a mildly popular YA novel, so what does it matter that Ship It may have a lesser life span than other books? If Lundin’s words affected even one reader in a positive way, she accomplished a great thing, and while her work can’t stay relevant forever, she is relevant to somebody now.

-Jessica Hampton