Chick Lit. Definition anyone? I would call it Romantic Comedy. How about you?
There is an interesting article in Publishers Weekly about the rise of “Women’s Lit “.
This appears to be focused on women’s lives after the big romance and even bigger wedding with babies in tow.
Life. In other words. With one big caveat.
The women in the first three books discussed ALL Live in New York.
“Welcome to the new narrative of the New York woman—just don’t call it chick lit. If these three recent books are any indication, the genre is about to get an update. “The Prince Charming narrative is just not accurate to people’s lives,” Sohn says. “There’s so much anxiety around finding a mate that no one really thinks about the actual marriage when they’re trying to find someone.” Froelich concurs, with a twist,“None of my friends are about, ‘I must get married,’ ” she says over lunch. “They’re about, ‘I want to stand on my own two feet.’ ”
At the RNA Conference in Penrith last month I recall discussing the apparent demise of the Transita approach to romantic fiction created for the older female reader. And the derogatory, dismissive and insulting terms which has been used to describe it.
Who wants to read a book with the hidden category – to booksellers at least – of Menopause Porn, Old Hen lit or Broiler Misery romance?
Is there a market for Women’s Lit?
Who is going to publish it? [ these 3 books were published by Simon and Shuster and Atria- which is part of Simon and Shuster.]
Promote it? Then sell it to readers worldwide?
Why should a reader pick up one of these books as opposed to a fun, entertaining, refreshing and warm Romantic Comedy?
Who is the readership? Of course we do not live on a diet of chocolate cake and Dry Muscat ALL of the time.
Women’s fiction should be about hope and optimism and renewal, and perhaps in these hard and cruel economic time, there is a market for this type of book.
It will be interesting to see if this approach translates to the UK Literary Agents and Publishers.