I just read a very convincing argument from Dorothy Koomson over the term 'chick lit'. She thinks it should be renamed pronto (and makes an excellent suggestion for the new name). Check it out here.
Meanwhile, Jennifer Weiner gives her usual balanced, intelligent answer to the chick lit question in an interview on her blog and Meg Cabot weighs in with her own take on the term; hop over the cut to read it.
Whatever. People who have a problem with it are usually other authors who don’t write it, and no one is reading their books because they’re so gloomy and boring and don’t have fun scenes with girls spying on their boyfriends and doing pretend kung fu moves in the dark like in Megan Crane’s English as a Second Language.
Meg goes on to make some intelligent, well-balanced points of her own, but I love her first reaction!
Related posts: Did Janet Evanovich invent Chick Lit? | If it's good it can't be chick lit
