Relying on emotions, of course, is weak, so readers who relate to and admire heroines that rely on their emotions and intuition must be weak as well.

I sometimes wonder how certain feminist will abstain from anything remotely femine like emotions and such. As if striving for the masculine traits make them better. It is a vibe I do sometimes encounter.

The actor responded with something like, “You know, I’ve never heard of sci fi fans leaving a convention and then going out and burning cars in the streets.” What I got from that, of course, was that sci fi fans (even the ones who dress up at conventions) are really no more pathetic than, say, sports fans or music fans *snip* The geeks just get more acknowledgment for being “obsessive” because for whatever reason, their fandom isn’t as cool (or “normal”) as others.

Yes, exactly! I remember that I once had friends who would go downtown during Baltimore’s big anime convention and get a table at an outdoor restaurant and make fun of the “nerds” in costume for the convention. (The funny thing being that I knew these people through a gaming group so they were, themselves, “nerds.”) You don’t see that kind of mockery being levied against, say, overweight football fans who sit painted and shirtless in the snow at Green Bay Packers’ games.

But, of course, sports fandom is much more mainstream. Blow-em-up action movies aren’t aimed at a male audience but at an audience, and it is assumed that they are appropriate for anyone to see. I don’t feel embarrassed buying a ticket for GI Joe like many guys would feel embarrassed buying a ticket for Mama Mia. They’re more mainstream, so it’s harder to pick up on their flaws, even though they are much the same as in more targeted genres.

And most people, it seems, like to hate something, even if that something is frivolous. And of course it’s much safer to hate something that is generally regarded as being stupid or worthless to start. (I.e., it is safer to pick on those nerds than that Packers’ fan! )

Lois:

Well, I remember when I was younger I used to really like the book The Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood. I’ve moved beyond it in my later years, but I’m not ashamed to say that I loved the book ten years ago.

So when the movie came out, I wanted to see it, and Bobby took me to see it. The show was sold out, and there were only four–four!!–men in the theater, most of whom loudly made fun of themselves for having their arms twisted into seeing the movie. Bobby doesn’t buy into the traditional gender-role crap, but even he was slightly embarrassed, I think, and I was mortified for him. I didn’t even enjoy the movie for the conviction that I’d somehow done something awful to him.

Now he asks me, at times, to go see action movies that are nostalgic for him, like GI Joe or Transformers. He knows that I likely won’t enjoy them–I even threatened to bring The Road to Middle-earth to read during GI Joe but he decided that the reviews were so poor on the movie that he’d wait for it on DVD–but I don’t think the same mortification at being a woman at a man’s movie ever applies. And I know Bobby doesn’t feel particularly bad about asking me to accompany him, either. So I definitely think that we are “allowed” to like–and admit liking–a wider range of genres than men are.

Rhapsy:

In this world I sometimes do wonder, like you why testerone filled movies and books are not frowned upon whereas the softer books (chicklit or just candlelight whatever novels) are being pictured as crappy books.

Yes! Ideologically, I am much more bothered by the action genre than the romance genre. The gender dynamics in many romances aren’t always ideal, but I feel more threatened by the casual way that deadly violence is treated in the action genre and the racist/sexist undertones that accompany most of it as well.

I think you’re on to something when you say that this genre–versus romance or chicklit–allows one to maintain an aura of toughness that romance/chicklit doesn’t. And, of course, this “masculine” type of power is still valued highly. Most people tend to respect those who are assertive and take control and appear to have the answers. Relying on emotions, of course, is weak, so readers who relate to and admire heroines that rely on their emotions and intuition must be weak as well.

Juno: I can’t agree with you enough, which you doubtlessly know since we’ve ranted to each other on this point before.

So it’s cookie-cutter fiction with cardboard characters. Fine. Look at detective thrillers and try to tell me they don’t have their own brand of clichés. For what it’s worth, look at genuine feminist literature.

Exactly! This was always my point when I was a writing student, and stories were neatly dichotomized as “literary” or “genre,” with the understanding that “literary” was fresh, original thinking about Life while “genre” was formulaic with little value beyond cheap entertainment for mouth-breathers. A couple of my co-students were smacked down for bringing so-called “genre” stories to workshop (as I was myself smacked down), and you know what? Those stories were, on a whole, more original than what the majority of the class was producing, the formula of which was to start in the moment in the life of a character (usually a thinly veiled self-insert), which was usually pretty interesting, and once we’d seen that moment in his or her life, then the chin tipped down and the navel-gazing began. Right before I went to Ireland, I was reading pretty much only Irish authors, and I checked out a book of (literary) short stories, and while some of the stories were brilliant, too many were marred by the author’s tendency to tip and gaze at the end and tell me what larger lesson I needed to take from the story. While not all of the stories were that way any more than all romances or thrillers or fantasy stories are formulaic, the majority were, and it was no less formulaic than the “genre” stories that get accused of the same.

The question arises, why, if there is a market, and there are writers, are there no books?

I wonder if it has anything to do with our culture’s lingering discomfort with the notion of women enjoying their sexuality. I know when talking even to forward-thinking, progressive people, they are sometimes surprised at the sort of content to be found in fandom. One of my smartest and most progressive (male) friends once laughed off the notion that women would ever enjoy m/m love scenes the way that men enjoy f/f; he was surprised when I told him that many–dare I say most–women are turned on by m/m. And I keep remembering the recent study on female sexuality that I wrote about here where reporters later expressed such surprise that women were turned on by “kinky” stuff: same-sex pairings, non-con, and so on.

Or even the reaction that women in fandom get and fear when their employers or sometimes their families find out that they write NC17–het or slash–and have been fired from jobs over this. Yet you never hear much about men being fired because it’s found out that, on their own time, they watch porn.

I think that the complexity of female sexuality still has a taboo feel to it, at least here in the US. So entertainment that involves sex and is meant to be consumed by women must necessarily be a little tawdry.

That’s just one feminist and author’s hare-brained theory. I’d be interested to hear how your experiences or impressions differ.

Pink Siamese:

Singling out any specific genre as an example of “inferior writing” is full-on logic fail.

Yes, exactly! And if you ever feel like writing that book inside of an eensy Wordpress comment block, please do come back.

Like I told Juno, some examples I’ve read of formulaic “literary” fiction rankle me worse than the supposed badfic within the genres.

Michelle:

Still, I can see the literary merit of the novel. I can see and understand why it is cherished by so many people, why it inspires academic texts and discourse. I don’t share the love for the book, but from an objective standpoint I can understand it. With chick lit? Not so much…

Ah, but this is exactly my point. While you can see the literary merit of LotR, even if you don’t like it much yourself, then there are plenty of people who absolutely cannot and are willing to brush it off in the same way that you brush off chicklit as utterly worthless. These people are, by and large, “experts” with advanced degrees in either creative writing or literature. Their voices carry much more weight in an argument than mine does, and they used those voices to silence creativity in their students because they felt that this creativity was subpar or even harmful to us as budding writers. And they were fully convinced that they could “prove” the substandard quality of the genres in which we wanted to write when, at the end of the day, we continued to simply like what we liked. It wasn’t subject to disproving.

I do not think that you have to see any worth in chicklit or anything else. Personally, I can find very little worth in the testosterone-saturated “action” genre where people brandish guns at each other more casually than I wield a butterknife. Besides the fact that I oppose, on principle, as a pacifist, the glorification of violence in these stories, they are just … tacky. And, to me, they all look and sound the same. I can’t find any merit. But plenty do, so I let them have their fun. Just please leave me out of it!

Years in which the books you and I want to read won’t be published.

I do lament this. Once upon a time, my dream or goal as a writer was to get a novel published with a major publisher. I’ve since revised that goal considerably and would sooner have my work available as I want it–not dumbed down to what is acceptable in “the industry”–even if it means that I must offer it on my website for a voluntary donation from readers. My hope is that the Internet will continue to open opportunities for a better variety of literature, and once people start consuming their literature more and more from independent sources, the publishing industry may follow suit. Or sink. In any case, I don’t think the tunnel is without a light at the end of it.

Okay, time to move to a new comment block …

I agree with the need to ask why “chick-lit” is bad while those testosterone-soaked stories of explosions and tough-talking guys are okay (or at least “better”), too, and was going to say something on that, but just forgot what, argh.

Somehow this reminds me of a video I saw the other day of some actor from a sci fi TV show answering questions on a panel at a sci fi convention, and I guess one of the questions/discussions had to do with how “obsessive” or pathetic sci fi fans and geeks are. The actor responded with something like, “You know, I’ve never heard of sci fi fans leaving a convention and then going out and burning cars in the streets.” What I got from that, of course, was that sci fi fans (even the ones who dress up at conventions) are really no more pathetic than, say, sports fans or music fans (and I’ll add: let’s face it, sports fans, whether your beloved team scores a point against a reviled opponent doesn’t really matter more than any of the fantasy that happens in someone else’s beloved comic book). The geeks just get more acknowledgment for being “obsessive” because for whatever reason, their fandom isn’t as cool (or “normal”) as others.

Okay, I’m jumping back in.

However, as to why people read it … I don’t know, but a lot of people do. To each her own, I say. To play devil’s advocate a bit, my classmates and teachers as a writing student, once upon a time, made a very similar statement to yours: “I CANNOT understand why anyone would read that crap.” Only the “crap” in question was The Lord of the RIngs.

I see the point you want to make, but for me the comparison limps. I don’t like LOTR *pauses and waits for the flying tomatoes*. The summer I spent reading it was the most miserable of my life I was soooo bored. Still, I can see the literary merit of the novel. I can see and understand why it is cherished by so many people, why it inspires academic texts and discourse. I don’t share the love for the book, but from an objective standpoint I can understand it. With chick lit? Not so much… Truly, reading those books nearly gave me an ulcer. I went from fairly amused to enraged to angered to bored out of my mind.

I absolutely, totally RESENT the idea of anyone, in any way deciding what is “more appropriate” to be published and read “in times like these”.

Still, of course there are people who make exactly those decisions. And like with the movie industry, publishers nowaday aren’t brave. They’re too scared to try something new, something fresh. So, years ago they found chick lit sells (you can substitute chick lit with fantasy and crime novels – it seems that’s 90% of what’s on the market today). And now they’re publishing more of the same. Again and again and again. It will run dry eventually, but that may take years. Years in which the books you and I want to read won’t be published.

How do those people think that genres work? Similarity makes a genre.

Yes, though the books I read were not only similar, they were totally alike. It looked like the author had written one outline and had then made ten books out of it. While, on the other hand, there are similiarities in crime novels – but they aren’t all alike. Which is evidenced by the fact that there is (still) no working definition of crime novel/detective novel, because while everyone reading it will be able to say “Yes, that is one”, but it’s hard to pin down actual rules for it.

As for Warhammer, from what I’ve heard, most people don’t like them or consider them serious scifi. And yet, I tend not to read the hard scifi stuff because I either can’t find characters that sound interesting or the science is so blatant and the author expects his readers to understand higher-level physics or whatnot (I do much better and enjoy the biology based stuff) to understand the plot! Tom Clancy– I’ve read some of his books and liked them. But once I start them, I can’t put them down or begin another book because I’ll never pick it up again. Seriously– I started one two years ago, left it for a couple of weeks over Christmas, and still haven’t picked it back up. (And from what you said, I think the movie you saw was based on that book.) So is *that* poor writing? But you won’t hear him called on it.

As for chicklit itself, if it sells, then it’s a good thing. I don’t understand the hatred toward it– people obviously like them! (And as you said, it’s much the same with scifi/fantasy.) There’s nothing wrong with different tastes.

Like Juno, publishers aren’t publishing the types of books I want to read. I want three-dimensional, non-cliched characters. I want a non-cliched plot. If there’s a villain, I want good characterization. Or better yet, no villain at all and have shades of gray. (No more Tolkien rip-offs!) And like her (and others), I find more of what I want to read in fanfic that original fiction these days. Part of it may be that the fantasy/scifi section in my library is terrible, but I also don’t have the time and money to browse my bookstore. And yet every time I go into those sections, it feels weird because I’m female and females aren’t supposed to like that kind of fiction.

So, in the end, I think it comes down to women choosing what they like to read, people not understanding it, and bashing the readers for it. And that isn’t right.

As for the sexist implications in the derision of girlie-lit, I could write a book. But not tonight. I’m too tired.

So, the majority of cool readers and reviewers have declared that chick lit is shit. (And that Harlequin & Shilouette novels, Nora Roberts and Rosamunde Pilcher are shit, too, I guess.)

Well.

That may be true or that may be wrong.

…So what?

If there are writers who want to write that kind of thing, more power to them. If there are readers (and look at the sales figures, there are still more than enough of them!), who enjoy those books, I hope they have fun.

(I may not be a fan of romance novels in general, but I have no problem with admitting that the gentle romance of a few Nora Roberts novels has saved my sanity in times of stress. Or that, while I’m generally not into thrillers, I do enjoy reading Dan Brown. The books are entertaining. They are meant to be entertaining. I doubt the author has ever claimed they are big important literature. (At least not as far as I know.) I normally don’t like chick lit, but I got a number of laughs out of Bridget Jones.)

So it’s cookie-cutter fiction with cardboard characters. Fine. Look at detective thrillers and try to tell me they don’t have their own brand of clichés. For what it’s worth, look at genuine feminist literature.

How do those people think that genres work? Similarity makes a genre. And the outstanding books in any genre cut enough across the grain to be more than “just” a genre. (They stand out.)

Re: Chick lit/romance novels being about women. Or not.

Yes and no. Some are about women, actually. Some are about alpha males so hairy you wonder if they’re the missing link. Ahem. Others are…well, I personally don’t *get* them, but probably pure escapism.

The POINT however is, that even though figures MAY be shifting, there’s still a HUGE market of readers out there who LOVE that kind of stuff for whatever reason. Writers want to write that stuff? For heaven’s sake, LET them. Readers want to read that stuff? …then it will be published and sold.

I absolutely, totally RESENT the idea of anyone, in any way deciding what is “more appropriate” to be published and read “in times like these”.

What I definitely would like an answer to is the confounding question of why the kinds of stories my friends and I like to read DO NOT exist in the pro-market. The books I would love to read are not being published. I want an intelligent, entertaining plot, strong characters, an explicit romantic subplot with real adult scenes (i.e. both more graphical than what’s available in romance novels and better written). In other words, I want to buy the literary quality I have become used to in fanfiction. (And I am not alone in this. See hit counts and visitor stats of M or NC-17 rated fanfic novels in various fandoms.)

The question arises, why, if there is a market, and there are writers, are there no books? I definitely see a trend in publishers’ decisions to dumb down genres, and ESPECIALLY where romance aimed at a female audience is concerned. Now, I don’t know how it’s done in the US, but at the publisher I’m working with, which does only romance, everyone I’ve worked with so far, is female. So what’s up with that? Is it the old story that we’re too goody-two-shoes to admit what we really like? Too embarrassed to stand up for our frivolous pursuits that grant us moments of respite when times are tough?

…seriously, to the best of my knowledge trashy literature hasn’t killed anyone yet. What’s the big deal? People bashing bad lit are really pathetic. THAT is really frivolous IMO. Not reading a cheap romance novel to relax, but to spend time to be destructive, ridiculing others and what others enjoy, especially when that enjoyment is so harmless.