Hey, thanks, Lola Dane, what a lovely thing to say. Anyway, the feeling's mutual - I don't think I could bear to leave our wonderfulngroup (even though I only write for young adults) so it's true that starting a YA Chick Lit group might not be any kind of solution!

Luisa

<Added>

That should say 'wonderful group'. But it's kind of wonderfulngroupen, too.

Yeah can't see anyone quitting the existing bunch at all, would be too hard.

alexandra



<Added>

p.s. it's more about having extra --i.e. not leaving the existing but seeing if another could kick off?

I'd definitely be up for joining a YA chick-lit/contemp fic group, but totally see why existing chick lit members wouldn't want to leave the current group - that would be as sad as the final episode of Friends or something.

Just to say, I second the view that the Young Adult group is probably not the right place for chick lit. At least, I wouldn't be inclined to critique it, whereas I try to critique everyone's work who joins the group. This is because I don't understand chick lit. Well, I do understand it; I just don't understand it.

Terry

Call me dumb, but what's a Young Adult anyway? Is that like teenagers, or people in their twenties?

It's a marketing term, mostly. Publishers believe the main target group for it is the age range around 9-13.

Precisely, Terry (re: your first point). No one wants to join a group in which the Site Expert has openly scorned the genre they're writing in - we tried to convert you and failed miserably, as I recall.

Then let's do it, let's have a YA Chick lit and contemp fiction group! Please........!

Alexandra

Yes, you advised 'The Other Side of the Story' by Marian Keyes. I actually paid for a copy too. What I couldn't fathom was the difference between the fascinating woman I'd heard on the radio, talking about her alcoholic period, and doing so with all the skill of a natural story-teller, and the superficial book I tried to read. I believe a writer should use every bit of passion they have in their writing, and every true experience--not necessarily directly but through their created characters and story. So, I don't understand when instead they produce characters who are supposed to be funny but actually make your teeth itch because they're so shallow, skipping through a story that's obviously made up as it goes along. And I better go dust off my bike helmet now . . . I don't use if for cycling any more but I suspect it might come in handy any minute now.

That was the adult Chick Lit book you read, Terry (not Marian Keyes's best, but I'm not going to suggest you try Rachel's Holiday...)

The YA Chick Lit book you read was Jaclyn Moriarty's Feeling Sorry for Celia.

Am I bringing back bad memories for you?

If you're that strongly against, then it would make good sense to have a separated group. You should be able to give your opinion, so don't worry about the bike helmet just yet.

It is a genre that sells and I think most of the writers on here are successful in incorporating other elements into their work and exploring...

Traditional chick lit for me is pretty much done, and if anyone told me I was writing it, I'd go insane. Regardless on what people love or hate about the genre the way it's allowing for cross overs to other genres / new avenues, - which if it's successful or not - it's something different.

Yes, I must have been nuts because I paid for 'Celia' too. That one made my teeth, head and credit card itch.

But, seriously, I do appreciate that chick lit has a place. It's just that, personally, I prefer writing that makes me think/react above and beyond the normal. I understand, however, that a lot of people like to read fiction that reflects their own lives, pretty much as they are. At least, I can't see any other reason for the success of Bridget Jones. A lot of light YA fiction does the same. Most TV likewise, especially the soaps.

Surely chick lit isn't bad or wrong, but just a form of escapism, like watching reality TV or reading vacuous magazines? I don't think people always want to read books that teach them things or have them reaching for the dictionary every second sentence.

I bet it's pretty difficult to write chick lit well too!

Oh, and how can a nine-year-old be classed as an adult (albeit a 'young' one)??! I don't get it!

Well, as often happens, you're interpreting above-normal writing as difficult and intellectual. That's not what I mean. For what it's worth, I think intellectual - e.g. much of literary - fiction is just another form of 'normal' fiction. It suits people who like to reach for dictionaries and discuss French cinema or whatever. But it's still genre writing, i.e. only means a lot to those who have a taste for that particular kind of writing.

What I mean by above-normal is writing that is genuinely original, where, for example, the humour comes from the characters, not the author just slapping on gags or weak asides. It also has uplift and transcendence to it - again, not in an intellectual way but by making you feel that this is the way life could be, if only we tried a bit harder to say things that are interesting and different and unusual. For example, I think a lot of Joss Whedon's dialogue has this quality to it, and he's not someone you'd find on Melvyn Bragg's top ten list (thank God).

<Added>

As for 9 year olds being classed as young adults, well, this is just another example of how kids are targetted much younger these days, or, I suppose you could argue, they grow up quicker.

Look, I'm now writing science fiction and fantasy, but have to admit that a lot of what gets published - especially fantasy - is predictable, badly written, pap. But it sells. There is also science fiction and fantasy that is ground-breaking, exciting and full of memorable themes (particularly science fiction). Unfortunately, the ratio of crap to good stuff is rising on the crap side, mainly because publishing houses are now obsessed with instant returns on every book they put out, and don't trust readers enough to give new, interesting, writers time to develop.