I've been thinking about how much something's/someone's reputation affects people's perception...

Like, are the songs in the "Real Book" great, timeless pieces of music and therefore were chosen to be in the book for that reason, or have the songs become standards BECAUSE they were put into the Real Book?
there are different types of songs in there. a large percentage of them were already standards for a long time before they were in the book. These are things like 1930s songs with lyrics, many of which were featured in theatrical musicals, and were very popular. There's also a totally different, fairly small category of music in that book, which are songs that were trendy amongst the players who compiled the book at that time. many of those ones are probably not-so-classic, and certainly are not standards. but, regardless, there are plenty of tunes in the book that just, for one reason or another, just usually aren't good, or they aren't good when played from the book. so these are the ones people don't like to play. they turn to the page and say "hmm, let's try this one" and then it's like "eich, no that one sucks" and they don't do it. but then there are some that just shine like the sun, even through the paper. so naturally those ones are the good ones. And very often, the ones that were big hits long before the book, are damn great in the book also, even without the lyrics. what tends to make something a 'standard' is if it endures popularity for many many years. Generally if you look at the songs played at weddings, or in the pubs, you will get a more updated idea of what today's "standards" are