Well, I think chick lit often involves romance, but it's not genre romance. I think Bridget Jones is the defining 'chick lit' book - finally, one of these I've actually read! It's not a genre romance b/c even though there's a definite romance plot, it's not the central focus of the book.
What makes it chick lit? Focus on female character? Themes or subject matter females are supposed to find more interesting?
I don't mind if people disagree with me. I find it more interesting when there is contention and passion. My point, ultimately, is intention. Entertainment is fine, but it can only entertain. I'd rather have literature that tried to do more. Literature has the capability to do great things, or say great things. It's the difference for me between a Michael Bay film and an Alfred Hitchcock film. I like watching Michael Bay films, but I care about Alfred Hitchcock's films.
I think so, yeah. I mean, it was essentially a marketing label, I think, so I guess it was whatever publishers thought they could best sell under that sort of category. Generally fairly light and frothy (heavier fare might be the relatively exalted (but still ghettoized) "Women's Fiction".
As is horror, as is romance and bildungsromans like The Hobbit and Harry Potter. The theme is different to the content I'd say.
I'm not looking for agreement, either. I like opposing viewpoints so long as they're presented with some rationale underpinning them.
Yeah, I think I've fell into my underpinning attitude and rationale. I love watching Michael Bay films, but I forget most of them as soon as the credits roll. I care about Alfred Hitchcock films, and I watch them again and again and really work to know them. Alfred Hitchcock was a serious film maker, and his films reflect his talent for details and planning, Michael Bay makes explosions with characters sometimes appearing to make sure they have context.
I don't know about the concept of "guilty" pleasures. I like books I like. Recent reads run the gamut from Joyce and Conrad to gaming fiction (Bioshock and Warhammer). I'm not embarrassed to read them. Although I am glad I have The Nigger of the Narcissus in ebook form, as people might do a double-take due to the title
Yes, with Hitchcock and others you can view the films time and again. Summer blockbusters only need to be seen once.
Exactly this, I've read Warhammer books, read them on the bus. I'm not the sort of person to worry if someone thinks I'm a 40k geek just because I'm reading the Horus Heresy series. Frankly, I don't care what other people think of what I'm reading, especially if I don't know them. I wouldn't usually like the Horus Heresy series, but I do - I've read 5 or 6 of them I think.
The Horus Heresy books are on my list, mostly because Abnett wrote the first one and I've not failed to like anything I've read by Abnett, WH40k or otherwise.
The Abnett one was the one I liked the least I must admit. It might be down to the fact I read it 5 years ago when I wasn't as good a reader, but I thought the best written book in the series was the third one. I don't remember who wrote it - Richard something, I think.
Abnett is a good writer. A notch or two above other gaming-related writers I've read. He also has a non-WH40K scifi book called Embedded, and a fantasy/comedy called Triumff.
Awesome stuff. I do remember loving his Ghost's series, to be fair. I used to play Imperial Guard too, so I felt a connection to them.
What always gets me about discussions of this kind is when people go from "I don't think this is a good book" to "People who read this book are stupid". And no, no one has used those exact words, but it's a clear implication. It's at that point that I start disregarding anything else they have to say. It's one thing to have a personal opinion - a totally different thing to believe others have to agree or they're somehow deficient.
I personally don't think anyone is stupid for not seeing flaws in books. Maybe they are not as careful readers, or just didn't think of it, but stupid is not even something I think about.
But you do think that some people's opinions aren't worth as much as other people's opinions. And I'm betting that you're one of the people whose opinion you think should be valued more highly?
It's never an issue of intelligence, just how much time and experience has went into forming an opinion. I'm a teacher, I see thoughtless opinions made up on the fly all the time. I also see opinions that have been carefully worked out in class debates. Guess which opinions score the highest as exam essays?
Ohhhhhh! So close! *Please note, I'm talking of the common student. Sometimes you get the talented student who can make up excellent arguments on the flu*
Getting back to the title of the post... I think Meyer, Rowling, and King have all succeeded for one reason: they were able to engage readers to an extent that most authors will never be able to do. It is interesting to look at how they did it, and that's something that can be argued over, but there is no question but that they did it. If your goal as an author is to engage readers and tell a story that a lot of people want to read, there's no question but that these three hit the ball out of the park, so to speak.
The ones you feel are valid. All opinions are worth the same unless they are based on erroneous facts. One may say that a book is written poorly from a technical POV, but that doesn't mean that someone who greatly enjoys the book anyway is somehow wrong.
Or maybe they are careful readers or did think of it, but believe the story overall is worth disregarding them. As I said, no one specifically said stupid, but "not as careful" is just another way of saying they are deficient because they liked something you did not. Because clearly, if they were as careful as you, they would not like it either.
Well, not quite. To get a mark we have standards that a student has to meet, and any grade I give has to be seen and agreed to by another teacher before it affects that students grade. The criteria is something like: does the student make use of supporting literature, check for bias and quality of argument, has the student argued their own case or are they just quoting someone else. I don't have the time to go into things here, but no, it's never just my decision when it's a grade affecting someone's A-level. If it's not an opinion based on experience, no one would need to train to be a teacher, would they? If there isn't a system against teacher bias, it wouldn't make for a good education system would it? In all my life as a reader of books and Criticism I've never came across a good critic who accepted everything with 'Well, it was just a neet little story'. They always have something to pick up on. I dare say they wouldn't even have a job if they didn't.
Yep. I have two modes of reading (at least), and when I'm reading popular fiction that I know is going to be light and just for entertainment, I turn off the inner critic and just go along for the ride. I'm not saying all popular fiction is that way, but some of it is and I buy those works knowing what I'm getting. If I buy a book like that and then analyze it to death while I'm reading it, it defeats the purpose.
