Why has what is considered to be good literature not changed over the past several hundred years?
If it has - is literature from hundreds of years ago that is considered by current standards to be good actually good, or just timelessly good?
>>7683372
Go read middlemarch or bleak house and then read sabbaths theatre or crying of lot 49 and see if you can ask yourself that question again without sounding stupid.
>>7683378
I've read Bleak House & Sabbath's Theatre.
I was referring actually to a translation of the Gospels which states that out of all of the Gospels - the Four were chosen to be canonised by the Church because they were the best in terms of literary content.
Basically what I'm asking is have standards of literature changed since then?
