Two new groups added today:

Chick Lit and Long Poetry

Interesting.... I still can't help but see the term 'chick lit' as derogatory!

Cath

Cath,

Wonder if there's any chance of it being reclaimed, like chav (to an extent) or other such terms? hmmmmmm ... not sure.

David,

Just curious, will the Chick Lit group also include writing for women's mags, which I've occasionally seen people tout a desire for?

Andrea

chick lit sounds like something you put on the floor of a hen house, could somebody please explain what it is

I thought chicklit was past its sell-by date?

David, the original chicklit was Bridget Jones’s Diary, a funny and superbly written tale of one young woman’s attempts to find happiness, lose weight, and get laid. It spawned a whole thrutch of novels that came to be known as chicklit, instantly identifiable by their vivid pink or yellow covers featuring cocktails, handbags, and impossibly high-heeled shoes.

Some of them were good. A lot of them were awful. I didn’t realise there was a demand for a chicklit group on WW.

Dee

ps – are we still on for our date in Wales???

dee if brigit jones was the best then sorry the rubbish must have been really bad.
I think the term is derisory.

Yes subject to when should be fun

Here's a definiton of chicklit:

"Since Helen Fielding wrote the two Bridget Jones novels, chick lit has come to be defined as sitcom-style humor built around a female protagonist's fears of being indefinitely single, along with her anxieties about her professional competence, her weight, her wardrobe and her debt level. Typically, these troubles are somewhat offset by a cast of supportive friends and are resolved when the heroine hooks up with the until-then emotionally distant object of her affection, and also experiences a mild bout of epiphany, such as the realization she doesn't need the approval of everyone she meets in order to be happy. It's like Jane Austen, except with self-esteem issues instead of the Napoleonic War."

Interesting articles on chick lit on:

http://www.chicklit.us/News.htm

I don't get all this bad feeling surrounding "Chick Lit." Is it not just another genre that some people like and others don't? Is that not the same as horror or romance or sci-fi or crime fiction et al? As with any genre it's going to attract some and turn-off others. Why is Chick lit different?

Nik.

PS I say this without reading anything CL related, aside from B. Jones and a couple of Nick Hornby's books, so I may not be fully qualified to offer an opinion. It just seems a little unfair for a genre to be panned because it might not be certain people's cup of tea. A chick lit book would not be my book of choice, but neither would something sci-fi or crime fiction. And just because I wouldn't go out of my way to read those kinds of books, I wouldn't slag off the people who do, or the people who write them.

Anyone got any thoughts?

PPS I recognise that Nick Hornby isn't CL by the way. Think I just had his name in my head from visiting that website Aruna mentioned!

I think Nick Hornby is classified as Lad Lit!

CL is a genre like any other - it all depends on how well done it is. When I first read Bridget Jones I laughed my head off! And I read a couple books by Kaie Fforde I liked.

The trouble with chick lit - as with any genre! is that it tends to get formulaic. The writers knw the ingredients,and repeat them time and time again; and thus many of the books lack depth and insight. They sell nevertheless.

I recently read a chick lit book which was actually very well written, and I really enjoyed, and was different in its way: "For matrimonial Purposes" by Kavita Dawani - Indian Chick lit, which is a genre in itself!

And then I read a book that creted quite a furore when it first came out, and I was curious (borrowed it from the library!)
It was PS I Love You, bu Cecilia Ahern. This is the kind of book that makes you wonder - it is so badly written. Ah well, she was only 21 at the time of writing, she can be forgiven, but I understand why everyone thinks her dad got her the contract (she's the Irish PM's daughter, and beautiful to besides!)

But I think, whether or not one likes the genre or not, it is light reading; ie, it makes no claims to particularly beautiful prose, or particularly deep insight into the human situation; I think that lightness is exactly what makes it chick lit. However, it can be heart warming but somehow "heart-warming" has come in for a bashing in literary circles!

I myself love heart-warming stories and I think it's a pity that these days anything with a bit of emotion is treated as lackiong in intelligence. As if feeling were in some way inferior to thinking. It's not.

I don't see why the themes handled in typical chick lit can't be handled in a less obviously formulaic way, adding more depth to the whole genre. Unfortunatey, the publishing industry is geared towards formula. What we need is a new generation of writers who raise the standard to a new height - and write so compellingly they are irresistable!

I chicklit sometimes. It's easy to read and undemanding, great for relaxing before going to sleep or reading on holiday. It is the literary equivalent of soaps on TV. Yes, we should all be watching documentaries and drama as they educate and challenge your views but sometimes you just want to be a zombie and be entertained so you watch a soap.
One of the Bronte sisters (Charlotte I think) slagged off Jane Austen along similar lines - basically calling her work shallow and superficial, but they are both seen as classic authors now.
I agree with some of the other postings. Chicklit is a genre and it is personal opinion whether you enjoy it or not. I would never read sci-fi so am unqualified to criticise it, lets hope chicklit is given the same respect.

Gina.

thank you for the definition, I still consider the term derisory

I wouldn't slag off any genre. What I do critisize is blatantly bad writing - writing that gets accepted for publication although it is reads almost as a fist draft. If you want an example, read the book I just mentioned - PS I Love You.

Aruna,

I didn't mean to say I thought you were slagging off a genre, I agree with your comments. The point I was trying to make is a general one, unless you've read something you can't criticise it. I might just have to read 'PS I love you' to see how bad it is!

This debate also links into another thread, that is men read books by men. Romantic fiction as a whole is seen as 'womens' domain which is a shame.
Why do we have to pigeon-hole everything in life? Womens, mens, childrens, adults, gay, straight. All it does is create jobs for marketing execs, if it's pink then women will like it. Call it Turbo, or Mach and men will buy it (shaving foam called Mach three turbo, what a load of bollocks!). Sorry, got into a bit of a rant there.

Bad writing is bad writing and good writing is good writing no matter the colour or typeface of the cover. Maybe we should campaign to have standardised book covers, like they sort of do with Penguin Classics. It would be so interesting to go into a bookshop like that, not knowing anything about a book but the title and author, you could end up reading all sorts of stories. A bit like on this website, most of the time you have no idea what the piece is but you read it all the same.

Gina.

Is chick-lit a genre? What is a genre anyway? Nowadays, more and more, it's merely a cynical marketing construct. It's all a sad game, in which we are the pawns, of find the 'target' audience. Fuck 'em!!
I have no objection to chick-lit, content-wise; it's the name that's the problem. It's just so damn pejorative. I've read one Hornby and one Fielding and, strip away the gender waffle, and they're exactly the same kind of book.
Death to marketing, death to genres, death to generic book-covers and blurbs and all the homogenising, brain-rotting, choice-cheating ploys of the publishing world!!!



Mike