So, in what may be my last ditch effort, I have been trying
to research small presses that publish what was once called chick-lit. Now, the
covers have been taken back, burned in a fiery pit of bubblegum pink ash, and
repackaged with new titles, new colors, and a new genre label. New Adult?
Maybe. Lighthearted Women’s Fiction? Possibly. Commercial Fiction? Book Club
Fiction? Contemporary Romance?
At this point, I'm not even sure how to market this thing.
What I do know, is it is hard to find someone, whether it be agent or press, to
actually take my book or me seriously as a writer. And I have a million and one
problems with this that I have no qualms about sharing. It doesn't help that
recently there have been a slew of articles admonishing chick lit for making
women feel fat. (see Telegraph article here) Uhhh, news flash, it is not chick lit that makes women feel fat. If you really
want to know what actually does make women feel fat, first look at magazines
and Hollywood and the fact that people always focus on how women look. (My co-worker just came in and told me the new trend is teenage girls measuring the empty space between their thighs as a measure of attractiveness. They have not read chick lit by the way) Not to
mention, how women judge other women. But this is not a post about that. Maybe another
time. This is a post on chick lit.
For me, these next few things are what I am going to call “common
myths of chick lit as a genre”.
Myth 1: All chick
lit contains vapid main characters.
No. No they don’t. What they show are real women. Real women
who are insecure, who compare themselves to others, who are stuck in a
misogynistic society where characters like Christian Grey and Edward Cullen can
be shallow and into their looks and money and it’s considered sexy but when
women give a concern about how we look, we're called vapid.
What about the fact that most of the character arc of these
women are going from a woman who is insecure with themselves or their situation
to being confident and finally taking initiative? What about the main characters who
are muddling through major life decisions? Wives, mothers, daughters? It’s only because these books are
typically narrated through first person so that the reader sees the obvious
flaws in thinking that allow us to view these women for who they are. People who judge
these characters need to get off their sanctimonious high horses and for a
moment consider what they may sound like if a constant recording of
their most intimate and personal thoughts and doubts replayed for everyone to hear as they order their triple-organic -venti-nonfat-soy latte in a carbon neutral cup. My guess is they
would either end up looking just as insecure and flighty as any chick lit
heroine OR a pompous assmunch. Either way, they wouldn’t be faring too well in
the chick lit version of themselves.
Myth 2: All chick
lit is about friendships, fashion, food, drinking, shoes, and boys.
Fantasy has dragons and shapeshifters.
Science fiction has space and nanotechnology.
Historical fiction has…history.
You don’t hear anyone say, well science fiction is just lame
because those darn writers can’t write about anything other than science. These mystery writers should stop putting dead ends, dark nights, and train rides in their novels. That’s
because whoever says that would sound stupid. Wrap your head around that, chick
lit naysayers.
Because these “dumb materialistic things” that are in chick
lit, build the world of our characters. And it's as important as any wrecked future and totalitarian government entity in a
dystopia.
Myth 3: Chick lit
is always around girl loving the wrong guy, but ending up with the nice guy.
First, not always true.
Second: HOW IS THIS DIFFERENT FROM LIFE?
Enough said.
Myth 4: Chick lit
is unintelligent writing and is the plague of good literature everywhere.
Can this sometimes be true? Sure. Is all chick lit
comparable to the work of Leo Tolstoy or Harper Lee? No. But you know what? I
have read some pretty bad science fiction, or mainstream fiction. I am not a
fan of all the classics. And some best sellers, I just don’t get. Some have
every bit of cliché plotline in them as well. But you don’t castrate a whole
genre because some books may be considered “fluff”.
Chick lit can be viewed as it is or perhaps it is in more
complex terms a commentary on society and women in general. Or perhaps it is a
reflection of who we are and how far we have come. Gone are the wild rebellious
women of the 60’s and 70’s who are searching so hard for their role in the
workplace. Gone is the winner take all mentality where women fight and claw to
the top, sometimes risking their family all for the sake of equality. (I would
argue at that time, we were not necessarily looking for equality, we were
looking for superiority)I believe chick lit focuses on the women of today,
balancing work and love and family and friends. And that is not unintelligent.
Is it life.
So…as we sail into the OPI colored sunset, I’d like to end
by saying:
I am tired of people (most who are so called authors or
reviewers) ripping apart a book, genre or author because they are successful.
Mark my words, if chick lit hadn’t exploded in the market a decade ago, no one
would be even discussing it. And as the sequel to Bridget Jones grows closer
and closer, I predict the negativity and backlash against chick lit will
worsen. Because heaven forbid, we women look to Bridget Jones’ as a role model.
We wouldn’t want women to go thinking that bigger, beautiful women with some
insecurities and a bangin’ sense of humor is the norm. Heavens no.
Let’s stop hating on a genre. If you don’t like it, don’t
read it. Yes, you have a right to your opinion, but don’t forget others do as
well. And just like opinions, chick lit is not going anywhere.
.jpg)