The Great Debate

On the virtues, or lack thereof, of "chick lit."

If a book is good, it is good.  Period.  I am dismayed by the people who can only feel good if they are feeling superior and looking down on something.  I'm dismayed because I think of how long I did the same and I think of the many good things I deprived myself of because I was "above" them.  (Although, all that time I was spending spare moments reading H. P. Lovecraft and his ilk.)  It is one of the reasons I have little patience with most critics.  They seem to be actively seeking a reason not to like something that isn't "literary."  Or perhaps this commentary does too much what I despise--paints with too broad a brush.  I know there are people, a good many, who are in so much doubt of their own taste and ability to judge, that they feel the compulsion to put down anything that does rise to the standards of a Jonathan Franzen (little thinking how much below even and Anthony Trollope a Jonathan Franzen often is).  Oh well, enough about that--I don't despise "chick lit" on literary grounds, though I often find that there isn't enough to engage me and keep me reading--I'm obviously not the intended demographic--so if I enjoyed it , it would be a bonus for the writer.  And often, I must say, I DO enjoy some of the writing--I'm just not terribly engaged by the story.


Popular posts from this blog

Structures--Ulysses and Mrs. Dalloway

Another Queen of Night

Lewis Carroll and James Joyce