But this post is a little rant on the subject of a 'real' author, the kind with a book in bookstores. Presumably this author would like people to actually buy and read her book. She even went on a national radio program for an interview, which I happened to catch yesterday.
Now, I have to honestly say that this woman grated on my nerves from the get-go. She was awfully full of herself, with the over-dramatic, self-aggrandizing tone which I correlate with high school, and which I thought she should have grown out of by now. But still, I'm listening, I'm giving her a shot to tell us what she wrote and why she wrote it, and intrigue me enough to maybe even buy it.
I'm feeling pretty wishy washy about it, thinking this might be something to maybe check out of the library as opposed to buying it, until the interviewer makes a comment that the author's books have been described as "chick lit".
At which point the author has a complete hissy fit.
She says she feels demeaned by that term. She has the audacity to bring John Updike into the conversation in terms of explaining how she realizes she needs to deal with labels placed on her books.
She proceeds to say that even though she considers herself a 'chick' and her heroine, a single young woman carving out her own path, is a 'chick', neither of them would ever be caught dead reading "chick lit".
And that, my friends, is how you lose at least one reader, in just a few seconds. Nothing like insulting your audience, nothing like ignoring the fact that the biggest readers are cross-genre readers - meaning they read widely and copiously from a large variety of genres. Nothing like forgetting the fact that the majority of book buyers are women, and that the women who might have bought your book most likely have at some point enjoyed some chick lit.
It was especially grating perhaps because the person who preceded her on the show was a gracious, funny, charming man, who was genuinely excited about his book, admitted he was in a state of nervous anticipation about how his next release would do, and spent the majority of his allotted time telling amusing stories about other authors who mentored him along his way. Now on my to buy list is Linwood Barclay's No Time for Goodbye
.
3 comments:
I heard that this afternoon too and was shocked. Not because I'm such a great fan of chick lit (thought "Bridget Jones's Diary" is one of the funniest books I've read in the past 10 years), but because, as you noted, of the tenor of the conversation.
I also think that Canadian authors seem to have a tough enough time anyway, so you'd think you'd want to ingratiate yourself with as many potential readers as possible.
And nowadays I'm not sure if you can write or talk about Literature, Fashion, Single Living and the Aging of Generation X and avoid the chick lit label. Then of course all you have to do is write so well that readers notice and defend you from the label. But maybe it's easier just to throw a fit...
I'm not quite ready to buy the Barclay book but I did request it from the library!
neat blog :) i just finished listening to a book on tape that i suppose would be considered "chick lit" though i don't like any term with the word chick in it. the book was "baby proof" by emily giffin and i really enjoyed it! i don't get as much time to sit down with a book now that i'm a parent so i thought a book on tape might be a good solution. but back to the whole "chick lit" - "chick flick" thing, i find those terms demeaning, as though only women would like the thing and that somehow makes it less important, less meaningful and something not to be taken very seriously. thanks for your post!
Ack, I feel like this whenever I see Rebecca Eckler's name in the newspaper. She grates on my teeth, much less my nerves. How she got 2 books published I'll never know.
Post a Comment
Go on! Say something!