Today, we shall be talking about Stephanie Lehmann’s latest release: You Could Do Better. Those of you who want to discuss the genre known as chick lit, keep reading after the GCC info. Those of you who recently indicated that they are uninterested in commentary and just want heads-up on blogs, keep reading anyway.
This is what it’s about:
The author of The Art of Undressing makes her highly anticipated return with an irresistible new novel about a woman trying to choose between the man of her dreams — and her fiance.Daphne Wells is way too busy watching television to start planning her wedding. She tells herself that being glued to the boob tube counts as research for her job at the Museum of Television and Radio. But the truth is, as much as she’s looking forward to a future with her fiancé, Charlie, their sex life just isn’t ready for prime time.
Then Daphne meets sexy, successful writer/producer Jonathan Hill when he comes to the museum for inspiration. Daphne spends a weekend in the Hamptons at Jonathan’s beach house—on business, of course—but the picture comes in loud and clear: This man can turn her on as if he’s a remote control. She’s more confused than ever about marrying Charlie. What if she can do better?
This is Stephanie’s website: http://stephanielehmann.com
This is Stephanie’s blog: http://historyoftelevision.blogspot.com
So, as a girl who can’t imagine being uninterested in planning my own wedding and who doesn’t even own a television set that gets network reception, let alone cable (look, if there is anything really good on, I’ll get it on DVD, as evinced by the recent arrival of Veronica Mars, season two in my Netflix shipment), I can’t say that I’m going to have a lot in common with Daphne. But that’s all right. I don’t smoke and am not overweight, a’la Bridget, I’ve never, thank goodness, been in the type of horrific debt so often enjoyed by Becky Bloomwood, and not once in my whole 27 years on earth have I ever been attacked by a rove of rampaging vampires and woken up in a coffin in a tacky Chanel suit and ill-fitting shoes, as Betsy Taylor has been wont to do.
Doesn’t matter. I doubt the people who ‘ve been feeling Cinderella’s pain for the last millenium ever got a chance to wear blown-glass shoes, either. These chicks speak to me. They have problems to overcome, lives to get on track, friends to keep or lose, sex to enjoy or regret (or, you know, both), and they want to laugh while they do it.
Lehmann writes books about women who are dealing with sexual dysfunction. You can’t tell me this isn’t an issue that speaks to a whole host of women who have been conditioned by Meg Ryan and romance novels and Herbal Essences. And maybe, just maybe, that instead of reading some dry as dust tome telling women to just relax or better yet, lie back and think of England, they want a girlfriend to sit beside them and tell them a funny story that says, “Sister, I’ve been there.” And you can go ahead and laugh, and relax, and think about it because it’s safe. It’s not real. It’s just something funny. It’s just fluff, right?
There’s a well-known theory in the science fiction community about how science fiction is free to break all these boundaries because people don’t think of it as “real” enough to get upset over. Star Trek has the first interracial kiss on American television, stuff like that. I hear that Battlestar Gallactica is having a full out exploration of the abortion debate (it hasn’t made it all the way up my Netflix queue) that is shocking everyone, becuase, heck, it’s science fiction, and they can do it, because it’s not real.
And meanwhile, chick lit, they say, is setting back feminism. It’s reaffirming all the worst stereotypes about women: that they are shallow fashion hounds who just want to find a rich Mr. Right before the cat fight starts. After all, the covers are pink. And they employ the term chick. Seriously, most of the arguments I’ve seen against chick lit use those as their main, if not only, complaints. “The covers are pastel and the word “chick” is demeaning.”
Let’s start making a list of words that were once considered demeaning until the people to whom those terms referred decided to claim it as their own. I’ll go first: Yankee.
I’m not saying that all chick lit is good. Some of it is bad. Some science fiction, in the midst of all that breaking of boundaries and interracial kissing, was little more than an excuse for oversexed, adolescent ship captains to go chasing after mylar miniskirt-clad spacebabes. But some chick lit is making statements. Real statements, that in years to come, will be remembered as turning points in modern feminism. We now have a huge body of fiction, popular fiction, genre fiction, about the range of choices women have now, and how complicated our lives are because of it.
Take for example Emily Giffin’s recent release, Baby Proof, which is about a woman whose husband wants a baby, and she doesn’t. Giffin herself says that she chose that premise becuase the alternative, that the woman’s clock is ticking and the husband is all hands off, seemed like the traditional, expected situation. Isn’t that the joke? It’s the woman whose clock ticks? Apparently, Giffin received nasty notes and Amazon reviews (the actual review is gone from the site now, though the responses remain) saying that a woman should have children, and that it’s selfish of her not to want them. Other Amazon reviewers title their reviews “real issues — not so much chick lit,” which is in keeping with my position that people call chick lit that transcends their prejudices something else, rather than calling it chick lit that transcends their prejudices. As I once heard an agent say, “if it’s got aliens and ray guns, don’t tell me it’s not science fiction.”
Meanwhile, Booklist says of Baby Proof: “By avoiding easy answers, Giffin once again proves she’s one of the best chick-lit writers in this thoughtful, layered, and wholly original story of a woman facing a major choice in her life.”
Chick lit does not, as some have claimed, present “one very narrow representation of women’s lives.” It allows for the full spectrum of options available to the modern women. Education, career, Mr. Wrong, Mr. Right, marriage, baby… or not any of those things at all. There are chick lit novels about young widows, about grieving mothers, about sisters whose paths in life are so wildly divergent that you wonder how they splashed out of the same genetic pool. There are some that you’ll read and never think about again, some that bash you over the head with their issues, and some that have you falling out of your seat laughing until you begin to cry because you realize that’s you the author is talking about. She nailed you. What scares you, what worries you, what angers you, what frustrates you, and most of all, what entertains you.
Chick lit: it’s funny because it’s true.
Have you read a chick lit book that touched you? Tell me about it. Post a comment.
August 25th, 2006 at 7:39 am
I can’t speak to a particular chick lit book, but I just had to say I love this:
“You can’t tell me this isn’t an issue that speaks to a whole host of women who have been conditioned by Meg Ryan and romance novels and Herbal Essences.”
Niiiice. =)
August 25th, 2006 at 8:14 am
I know, Kristin b…Diana should be a writer.
I think the first chick lit novel that “spoke” to me was SPANISH DISCO by Erica Orloff. It was real to me because of the take on the publishing business, which was very, very accurate, so much so that I called my editor to read her passages with tears of laughter. I feel the same about a lot of chick-lit books. I’m very particular now about my purchasing choices and therefore, haven’t been disappointed by one in a long time.
I can’t say that the Lehmann book would appeal to me. It seems very old hat. Very romance novel. Very been there, done that. I’ll have to go to the bookstore and read a little before I decide.
Other chick-lit books I thought were amazing–HIT REPLY by Rocki St. Claire, DO ME, DO MY ROOTS by Eileen Rendahl and anything by Alisa Valdes Rodriguez. Diana has a point. I’m so tempted to say “they transcend the genre” but that’s not fair. They are the genre. They just happen to be the “best of” in my limited perspective.
August 25th, 2006 at 8:35 am
Unfortunately, I feel the Lehmann book is a bad example for this post. The heroine is extremely shallow (even Harriet Klausner commented on this) and the book fails to take any chances. I.e., when the heroine’s relationship with her fiance falls apart it is due to the fact that he is no longer interested in TV as she is. So the heroine goes and finds a rich TV producer and falls in love with him. Too easy.
I have a love affair with Erica Orloff. Her book, The Roofer, was a dark and compelling story of a woman just starting to climb out of the hole of her past which was filled with emotional and physical abuse. I thought that the technique that Orloff used in making the character’s narrator voice very flat was brilliant because the character herself had a very flat aspect in order to deal with the emotional trauma. As the character began to heal, the voice began to change.
Another chick lit book I really liked was Caren Lissner’s Carrie Pilby whose female protagonist was a social misfit. Again, the narrator’s voice matched the character that the author was developing. Carrie Pilby was always saying and doing socially awkward things and not really understanding why people’s feelings were hurt.
My favorite chick lit author, however, is not a chick lit author. She’s a Young Adult author and that is Sarah Dessen. Dessen has written touching emotional stories about young womanhood dealing with every problem: boyfriend abuse, death of a parent, eating disorders, promiscuity, etc. with beauty and grace. I find her to be an amazing writer.
August 25th, 2006 at 8:41 am
Two points:
1) The Lehmann book is not “an example” for this post. It’s the book tour I’m on. Never read Lehmann’s book. Never read Lehmann’s other books. Read a lot about them, though.
2) If someone convinced me that Harriet Klausner actually READ a book she reviewed, rather than pirating, cutting, and misinterpreting other book reviews she read, I’d probably fall over from shock.
August 25th, 2006 at 9:12 am
THE FUNERAL PLANNER by Lynn Isenberg is really a good read. I liked Maddy Banks and found myself rooting for her to succeed. I adored Maddy’s Uncle Sam and her unexpected intern Eve. But, more than anything else, this book made me think. About my death, of course. But also about my life and how I want to live it and how I want it remembered.
The absolutely coolest thing, is that the author has actually created in real life the business she created in fiction, Lights Out Enterprises. The purpose of the book and the business is to help the living celebrate, not mourn, those who have passed.
Check out http://www.thefuneralplannerinc.com
August 25th, 2006 at 9:27 am
I am sorry I wasn’t more clear. I have read two of Ms. Lehmann’s book: The Art of Undressing which I liked and You Could Do Better which featured a heroine who had less depth than Klausner’s reviews. YCDB is an example, imo, of what is wrong with the Chick Lit genre and I thought that the post was about what is RIGHT with the chick lit genre. But I apologize if I misinterpreted the post. You are free to delete my comments if they are inappropriate.
August 25th, 2006 at 9:35 am
Not at all inappropriate, Jane!
I often use the subject of the GCC post, especially if they are an author with whom I am unfamilar, as a jumping off point to discuss an industry issue.
For instance, here I blogged about deborah Le Blanc’s new book and how I missed writing paranormal stories, here I discuss the choices a writer can make in a series that she can’t make in a standalone, and in other places I have discussed the draw of the “hook” in the cozy mystery, what it’s like to work from home, whatever.
This post is on two topics: 1) GCC tour of Stephanie Lehmann, and 2) The Art of Chick Lit.
August 25th, 2006 at 9:43 am
To add to your list of words:
Redneck.
Two chick lit books that I really enjoyed, and touched me in a way:
Good in Bed by Jenn Weiner
and The True and Oustanding Adventures of the Hunt Sisters by Elizabeth Robinson (I believe).
Excellent post, Diana!
August 25th, 2006 at 11:50 am
I love In Her Shoes. I love Jennifer Weiner in general, but In Her Shoes was my far my favorite…probably because half the time I feel like the responsible older sister with the boring job
Loved that book and if people dont’ think it’s chick lit, I dont’ care. It has chicks and it was lit to me.
Thanks for starting this discussion Diana! I want to get these books people are bringing up and see how they touch me.
I posted today on my blog about character driven novels and I am slowly starting to understand that to touch the reader, the main character has to be developed as well as the plot, or even more so.
August 25th, 2006 at 12:20 pm
Oh! I forgot to add my word.
Bitch.
Babe. In. Total. Control. of Herself.
Reclaimed.
Call me a bitch and I won’t be offended. I might slap you, but I won’t be offended.
August 25th, 2006 at 3:29 pm
To describe someone in total control of herself, I would call her a “Lady,” jmo.
August 25th, 2006 at 3:52 pm
My favorite chick lits are Sophie Kinsella’s THE UNDOMESTIC GODDESS, Rocki St. Clair’s HIT REPLY, Alesia Holliday’s AMERICAN IDOL, Jennifer Weiner’s IN HER SHOES, and Julie Kenner’s MANOLO MATRIX and GIVENCHY CODE. I also really like the whole SHOPAHOLIC series because it’s just so darn funny and so well-written.
I would have included Diana’s SSG, but I don’t think of it as chick lit — and that’s neither an insult nor a compliment. For me, it just isn’t that genre, but I can’t define why, since it’s a takes-no-shit female protagonist with a strong voice who spends at least part of the book sorting out what really matters to her, careerwise and romantically. Then again, Julie Leto’s DIRTY LITTLE series absolutely has the stong voice female protagonist and some emotional/sexual conflict, and I don’t classify it as chick lit either. Ditto Julie Kenner’s demon-slaying soccer mom books — love ‘em but to me they aren’t really chick lit. Maybe it’s a question of balance between the self-discovery part and the external conflicts in the plot? I don’t know. But now I’m really veering off course from the topic . . .
August 25th, 2006 at 8:12 pm
Since I read much more than “chick lit,” it took a while to remember my first and favorite one: Animal Husbandry by Laura Zigman. Yes, this was made into the movie, Someone Like You.
Ironically, having just been at Amazon.com, I was stunned to see Laura Zigman’s plog on my page, counting down T-31 until her next release, Piece of Work!
August 25th, 2006 at 8:18 pm
Larramie, I don’t disagree with you about Lady/Bitch. However, I determined long ago that no one is going to call you a Lady in order to insult you. They will, however, call you that if you are strong, opinionated and female. Diana’s point (which I agree with) is that negative words can be reclaimed by taking them back under our control. And that’s a word I feel I have under my control now. If anyone calls me that, I simply take it as a compliment because those people are generally intimidated by women in power.
August 25th, 2006 at 8:19 pm
Oh, by “that” in “call you that” I mean “bitch.”
August 25th, 2006 at 8:55 pm
Well, Phyllis mentioned mine, but California Demon is a chick lit title that had an impact on me. In fact, I’m very angry with Julie Kenner because there’s no sign of a sequel.
But I disagree that it’s not chick lit. If we go back to what the publishers said they wanted to publish, books with a hip, contemporary, sharp-witted VOICE, then the demon-hunter books are totally chick lit. The reason I loved this one so much was because it was FUN, yet addressed some pretty painful stuff at the same time.
I love books like that.
August 25th, 2006 at 9:42 pm
I copy your explanation, Julie, but still bemoan why it must come down to “that.”
August 25th, 2006 at 10:30 pm
I happen to know that the next Demon book by Julie Kenner, DEMONS ARE FOREVER, will be turned in to the publisher within the next month. I have no idea about the release date.
I’m a huge Kenner fan, as well as a friend. But I honestly inhale all of her books. She’s finished up the Prada Paradigm as we speak and I CANNOT wait!
Larramie, I agree, I wish it didn’t come down to “that” but it has. When I worked in the “workplace” (as opposed to alone in my own little house) I saw it happen over and over to women in positions of authority. If they acted like their male counterparts, they were bitches, even when they were simply doing their jobs. I got called that more than once when I was teaching high school, simply because I didn’t put up with any crap. The students (male) would invariably use the word thinking I was going to break down in tears. My normal response was, “Thank you for noticing” and a referral to the dean.
I rarely had problems with the same kid twice.
August 27th, 2006 at 6:35 am
Not so long ago, in a mindset far, far, away, I deemed myself far too “intellectual” to read chick lit. After all, I had lives to save, and futures to protect!
Then I bumped into a copy of Undead and Unwed in an airport. And you know what? Betsy spoke to me. Here was an (un)dead woman, in possession of a stellar shoe collection, going on and living the life she wasted while she was alive, and she’s getting a helluva lot of good sex in the process!
That truly reached me for some reason. Probably because I’ve stuck with Mr. You’re So Vain (Formerly known as my spouse) for a way longer than any other woman would have!
Imagine! Me, who writes books about autism, and articles about advocacy, and neurological dysfunctions, and medicaid corruption…lurking by loading docks at bookstores to be the first to lay hands on the next installment of Besty’s story.
And it gets worse. I just finished the first draft of my own attempt at WRITING chick lit….and good lord, there’s a synopsis for a YA series sitting here on my hard drive…
I’M INFECTED!
August 27th, 2006 at 10:12 pm
ur recommending a writer and a book u haven’t read? doesn’t make much sense.
August 27th, 2006 at 10:15 pm
I can always count on anonymous to write the snarky things.
GCC tours aren’t recommendations, unless they ARE. they are free advertising.
August 28th, 2006 at 12:41 am
I’ve read many chick lit books that have touched me… Eileen Rendahl’s, DO ME DO MY ROOTS, certainly… GOOD GRIEF by Loly Winston… Rocki St. Claire’s HIT REPLY… and Lani Diane Rich’s TIME OFF FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR… and all of Emily Giffin’s books have touched me in their way. And I just read Robyn Harding’s THE JOURNAL OF MORTIFYING MOMENTS and while maybe it didn’t have any super heavy issues… it did make me think about how many women (me included?) paint relationship failures as personal failures or evidence of character flaws… The Shopaholic series made me think about myself, too… Not that I’m financially irresponsible but I do have other aspects of my life where I ignore mounting problems like Becky does with her finances.
I’m just going off the top of my head in compiling this list… And it’s late… I’m sure I’ve missed some great ones I’ve loved…
All that said, I admit to being one of those writers who isn’t keen on the label chick lit. (not that I’d get upset if someone wanted to publish one of my books and call it that… I just don’t really like the label, much…)
I think it has been used to trivialize books by women.
But I would *never* assert that the genre has set back feminism. Au contraire. I think these books have revitalized women’s fiction and shown that there are stories to tell about strong, interesting young female protagonists beyond romances. Not that there’s anything wrong with romances… but I think the chick lit explosion showed there’s a market for books exploring non-romance aspects of young women’s lives. (and I don’t think that market has gone anywhere… it’s just flooded right now.)
If one buys into the media assertion that the genre depicts all twenty-something-women as shallow, shoe-shopping, cosmo-drinking, man-hunting twits… Well, I can see where that could lead one to say the genre had set back feminism.
But all one has to do is read a sampling of the bestselling books marketed under the chick lit label to realize that characterization of the genre just isn’t true.
All that said… I’d love to have a strongly-worded-chat with whoever came up with the label chick lit. Was it someone in the media? Someone in the publishing industry? Anyone know?
I often think that it was the label which created, or at least fueled, all the negative assumptions about the books themselves…
Love the books, but the label makes me squirm.
September 3rd, 2006 at 9:58 pm
“as Betsy Taylor has been want to do.”
You mean to use the word “wont,” not “want.”
You say that chick lit deals with a broad array of situations experienced by the modern woman. Sure. There is a strong tendency, however, toward severe superficiality in the characters and messages contained, despite the changing scenery.
September 3rd, 2006 at 10:05 pm
The tendencies you mention in science fiction are almost entirely localized within science fiction television shows and film from the mid-twentieth century.
Go read something by a real science fiction author if you want to see the vanguard of modern literature.
September 3rd, 2006 at 10:47 pm
YAY! More snarky anonymous comments!
I read Science fiction all the time. I just finished this year’s Hugo winner, SPIN. No ray guns, but plenty of aliens.
I disagree with everything you say. Oh, except, good catch on the typo. Thanks!