Sorry to cut across, in a couple of weeks I'll have more time to enjoy. Just wanted to say to Dee, are you listening,.. 'Thrutch', what a fabulous word. I will be speaking with all seriousness about whether I think Chit-lit, no, chsi, not that either, chicklit, - that's a chewing gum, - Chick-lit, - that's the one, is banollicks or not. Do you like 'banollicks' as a word?
Becca.

Hey, Becca, glad you like it!

Let me see… banollicks? It conjures up ‘banal’ and Horlicks. Is that what you had in mind? Maybe it should be banorlicks? Unless you meant bollocks, in which case, how about banollocks?

Dee

I though Michael Banollocks was a Scottish golfer.

On the 'lit crit' issue and in the spirit of 'I'm sorry I Have'nt a Clue' why not:

Hit Lit - gangster novels
Spit Lit - history of Punk
Lit lit - Terry Eagleton's biography
Fit lit - Pilates
Tit lit - most of the press and magazines
Skit lit - Humour
Squit lit - Tales from Suffolk.

And now will you welcome....from.....

Z




<Added>

Shit lit - my unfinished novel

Zettel, nice thinking!
Dee, the word is a mixture of banal and bollocks, but I spelt it banolicks, because if you use it enough it slides into banolicks because it's easier to say. Spelling-wise an 'o' is better though.
Becca.

What about Nitlit - Autobiography of a school nurse.

And Pitlit - 'My__________Hell' (fill in the blank)


;0) Mike

Arthur Scargill???

Adele

Jane Austen doesn't have a Napoleonic Wars issue. It's what some of her (mainly male) critics object to most.

She's more Anita Brookner than Bridget Jones - the 'I'd like the rewards but I really don't want to play silly games' type. Also, as a friend of mine used to say 'She thinks what she's sitting on is daimond-studded'.

Sheila

<Added>

diamond-studded

Jane Austen revised her work over and over, and even then she only got published through her father's connections.

Sorry, I am a bit late into this discussion.

Sheila

I'd been commenting on another thread but just realised I should have been mouthing off here!
Damn right 'Chick-lit' is derogatory. I hate it! But then if it is characterised by ditzy, cutesy, slightly chubby, middle class 30-somethings, looking for love, devouring shoes and handbags and guzzling wine and chocolate, it deserves to be insulted. It's easy, formulaic, nonsense, written by women, for women, and it insults us and alienates men from what could be, the pleasures of well written literature by women.
Why do we feel the need to write about ourselves instead of exploring the world around us?