Relevance in Writing

I started 4 books last night. One I skimmed/read, two I tossed after the first page and a half or so, and one I tossed after checking out the year of publication and book jacket. Why? Well, it didn’t feel “relevant” to me, which is just another way of saying it didn’t interest me.

A Dirty Word
Relevance has become a controversial word in religious circles, but putting the religious issue on hold, I bring it up for two reasons.

#1 – Within the relevance discussion, someone (I can’t remember whom) said that excellence is always relevant.

#2 - In its strictest sense, the word simply refers to the ability to connect with or relate to something/someone.

From that, let’s make this jump….
How does literature arrive in the canon?
Typically the craftsmanship is excellent, and it involves an important/timeless subject/theme. (I’m referencing an English textbook by Sylvan Barnet and Hugo Bedau.)

Could we then argue that great literature is always relevant because it has both excellence and subject matter that is timeless, i.e. something readers will always relate to?

Apostolic Relevance

Kent’s post made me once again consider how we should present our faith as we continue in our ongoing experiment to write the great Apostolic novel. I’m convinced two fundamentals will be:
1) writing with excellence, and
2) presenting important enough subject matter that will stand the test of time.

I don’t know about you, but I think Apostolics can fit the bill. What do you think?