The Horrors of Chick Lit by Nick Bryans
Louise Bagshawe; not only is she a rubbish MP, but she's also a rubbish author. Multi-talentless, you might say.
‘Chick Lit’ is a huge genre. There are countless titles to choose from and everyone from Conservative MPs to glamour models are releasing their own. Every chick lit book tends to be the same; woman has good job, good boyfriend, then something happens, then there’s 100 pages of cringing and slapstick humour, then a little denouement about finding love. Or something. And they always have twee little titles like ‘Love and Fun’ or ‘The Crazy World of a London Girl’, or similar vomit-inducing stuff. It’s basically like a women’s version of Nuts magazine; mainstream appeal to a gender’s stereotypical base instincts; find man, buy shoes. Lots of shoes.
So, purely by chance, the chance being that I share a house with a female who enjoys this tat, I had the chance to examine a leading title. Lindsey Kelk’s ‘I Heart Hollywood’.
.
One simply has to have a look at the front cover to be outraged; ‘I HEART HOLLYWOOD: SCANDAL, CELEBRITY AND SECRETS ON THE SUNSET STRIP’. Now I’ve been to Hollywood, twice. It’s shit. Identikit concrete shopping blocks, deserted sidewalks with every man, woman and child incarcerated in their garish 4×4 (little fact for you, there are more cars in Hollywood than there are people). The few human beings that you actually see on the sidewalks are most frequently the homeless. It really is a vacuous hell-hole of a place. I mean, people slag off Vegas, but at least Vegas knows what it is. Hollywood seems to think its some sort of 8th wonder of the world. Like Petra, but with a minibar and hot-tub.
Now, an old fable says you should never judge a book by its cover. Which is fair enough. So onto the back…
…Surprise surprise, it gets far worse. The top of the page introduces us to our protagonist for the next 326 pages, Angela Clark:
Angela Clark can’t believe her luck…she’s living in New York with a dream job and a sexy boyfriend!
Any hopes I may have had that this book would be Jane Austen-lite are quickly extinguished. I say extinguished, what I mean is beaten senseless by every member of the Met’s riot squad.
Anyway, all I have so far is Angela’s profile and the title. How can I possibly judge this book already? So I rapidly look at the blurb, wondering when this is going to turn into Anna Karenina for the Facebook generation.
Sent to Hollywood to interview hot actor and fellow Brit James Jacobs, she’s in at the deep end amid the thin and beautiful of Rodeo Drive. The only person who seems genuine is James, despite his ladykiller reputation. But then the paparazzi catch them together at Chateau Marmont, and Angela finds herself in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons…Can she convince her boss, her best friend and – most importantly – her boyfriend not to believe all they read in the papers? And will Hollywood ever win Angela’s heart?
Fuck. Me. I have never been this angry reading something so stingily happy. Shit, what the fuck is she gonna do? Sent to Hollywood on an all expenses trip to interview some toss-pot, which I’m sure will be the greatest meeting of minds since two pieces of scrap wood bashed into each other at a refuse site. What a poor thing! Have Amnesty International heard about this brave girl’s strife? I’m sure she’s certainly in the deep end. I’m not sure what deep end it is, but hopefully a metric tonne of vomit.
So basically the issue Angela has got is that she’s in some gutter press rag who assumed she’s getting poled by this dipshit because you know, famous actors NEVER get interviewed, the press would DEFINITELY assume that she was getting porked every which way from Sunday. Wow Lindsey, what an amazing fucking plot device!
It appears that the crux of this book is her convincing her boss that she was merely interviewing this ”sexy” waste of organs rather than getting rutted senseless by him. This, however, is odd for me to accept, because after reading about the lovely Angela Clark, I’m surprised this person can spell, let alone engage in basic conversation with other similarly reprehensible toss-pots. I can only assume that she got her position of, well, I dunno, lets just say, ‘journo-cunt’, by either winning it in a raffle or through some sort of ‘care in the community’ scheme.
So who’s responsible for this tripe? Well, luckily enough, the author herself has stuck a little bio in the book. It reads more like a lonely hearts column, but hey, judge for yourself:
.
Lindsey Kelk is a writer [sic] and children’s book editor. When she isn’t writing, reading, listening to music or watching more TV than is healthy, Lindsey likes to wear shoes, shop for shoes and judge the shoes of others. She loves living in New York but misses Sherbert Fountains, London, and drinking Gin & Elderflower cocktails with her friends. Not necessarily in that order.
…I mean …sigh …I give up. This is where the jokes stop. It’s all fun and games until this bit. I mean, I actually feel insulted by this. This is someone’s body of work, their legacy, their life pursuit. And inside they’ve chosen to comment ad nauseam about their interest in shoes. I suppose it fits in with the theme of the book; Hollywood, shoes, trash fame, gutter press; it all reflects the lowest, most consumerist, braindead areas of society. Who gives a fuck about what you think? Who gives a fuck about what you know? The only things that matter in the modern-day society are money, clothes and who you’re sleeping with. I mean, all intelligence ever gives you is crippling self-doubt, stress, drug and alcohol problems and a lifetime of being under-valued and not appreciated. But shoes!?!? SHOES ARE ALWAYS GOOD!
I’m really struggling to see how anyone with a modicum of self-respect could pull off a paragraph like that. Here’s the equivalent of a respected author trying it:
Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky is a writer, philosopher and essayist. When he isn’t writing, having epileptic fits or giving into his crippling gambling addiction, Fydor likes to partake in Liberal intellectual group the Petrashevsky Circle, get arrested for taking part in the Petrashevsky Circle, and being sentenced to death for taking part in the Petrashevsky Circle. Fyodor loves living at Katorga prison camp in Siberia, but misses freedom of thought, Moscow and not having to do hard labour for 12 hours a day in the unendurable cold. NOT NECESSARILY IN THAT F-ING ORDER!
My issue with this book is not the readers themselves. I can accept that not everyone wants to sit down when they’ve got a spare few minutes and leaf through a couple of pages of Ulysses. But my issue is someone unashamedly writing this parp with the sole intention of making quick, hard cash. Lindsey Kelk isn’t on Wikipedia so I can’t find out about her education background, but I can only imagine if she had dragged herself through school she’d be clinging onto her grades like some sort of safety blanket, legitimising her utterances. But the fundamental issue is that this shit sells. ‘I Heart Paris’ and ‘I Heart New York’ are both in existence. This book has twenty one five-star reviews on Amazon. That’s nine more than Franz Kafka’s ‘The Metamorphosis’ and thirteen more than Solzhenitsyn’s ‘The Gulag Archipelago’, two of the greatest writers of the 20th century. This woman has made a successful career out of shite like ‘I Heart (insert clichéd, over-dissected, under-researched city here)’ while genius authors have died penniless.
Perhaps I’m being too hard on her. Perhaps if I read the book it might indeed become Hemmingway halfway through. Or perhaps not. I think this review from Amazon speaks volumes about Miss Kelk’s work:
It reads like the worst kind of lazy, repetitive “You go, girl!” article in a cheap magazine. It’s full of cliches; “as far as humanly possible”, the friend who eats constantly but never puts on weight, the ‘Pretty Woman’ style makeover etc etc. It reads as if it were written by a 16 year old. There’s no wit, no humour and little plot; like most poor efforts in this genre it concentrates on listing the designers of the clothes the heroine buys and the shops she visits. Presumably it’s meant to be empowering and appeal to readers who feel wronged and under-appreciated. You too can run away, become instant bosom buddies with somebody you meet the same day, have a makeover and become gorgeous, shop at Marc Jacobs and have handsome rock stars and bankers accosting you for dates!
The stupidest bit of the story is the heroine’s shock when the two men she’s been “dating” (under the most ludicrous and unconvincing circumstances) tell her they know that she’s been seeing both of them at once. The reader can see this coming a mile off. The culmination is a tearful scene in an art gallery which is so mawkish and badly-executed that I couldn’t finish the book.
I hear the author has written two more in the same series. God help us all.
Indeed.
.
Related Posts
Recent Posts
Watching
Comments
Leave a Reply
© 2012
Have you ever read Mills and Boon? They’re the true masterpieces of Chick Lit. Hearfelt epics to the love of men in uniforms. “She gazed into the soldier/doctor/postman’s eyes…”
Let me start off my comment by asking you one question: If you don’t like Chick Lit, if you know for an ABSOLUTE FACT you don’t like Chick Lit, why the hell did you read I Heart Hollywood? Merely to rip it to shreds? For your own amusement? I don’t entirely know the point you’re trying to make here, except for the fact – shock horror! – you don’t like Chick Lit.
You’re not even offering anything constructive, you’re merely ripping a book (and an author) to shreds for absolutely no reason. You probably think you’re being amusing, and perhaps you do have followers who will laugh along with you, but personally I just think you’re an idiot. If you don’t like it, don’t read it. It’s as simple as that.
Maybe I Heart Hollywood won’t win the Booker, but that doesn’t mean it’s trash. Lindsey Kelk will have spent months and months working on it and slaving over it and for you to just shoot it down like this is unnecessarily horrible. If this is all you have to do all day, then I suggest you get yourself a job. There are millions of women around the world who enjoy Chick Lit, myself included, there’s nothing wrong with a bit of Chick Lit as long as you like it. You clearly don’t, so why don’t you go back to your award-winning novels and leave us Chick Lit readers and authors alone.
I think your crazy I heart these books (see what I did there) :) I thought that a sign of a great writer is to engage with the reader and these books certainly did I got so drawn into these books I couldn’t put them down. But hopefully you feel better after pulling apart someone’s hard work
What a bitter jealous rant. Not even really worse the response. Bullys in the school yard…
This is one of the funniest reviews I’ve read I’m years. I’d like to thank you for your insight and the no-holds barred approach. It’s extremely disappointing to read the defences in the comments below. Just cos someone has worked hard on something (which she probably hasn’t cos it could mostly be written with the find and replace buttons) doesn’t mean they she shouldn’t recieve any criticism. I know of some people who have worked very hard doing terrible things!
You thought Lindsey’s book was trash? Hmm, have you ever read your own diatribe? THAT is trash. Who are you to diss someone’s hard work, just to be rude, scathing and nasty? Pathetic.
You come across as dreadfully unintelligent. The author of this book is extremely popular and has many loyal fans. Perhaps you’d be best sticking to books that you like instead of attempting to be funny and witty (you are clearly neither), by ripping apart someone’s hard work.
OK people, calm down.
Firstly, in response to some of the lovely tweets we received; no-one at Shouting at Cows is married (I’m 22, ffs), all of us have jobs, and I’ve never seen The Editor’s penis, but if it’s anything like his writing then I’m sure it’s a glorious specimen.
The article was written about the broader genre of ‘chick lit’. As stated in the article, we have nothing against the readers. Everyone needs to stop being so precious; person writes book we think is terrible, we say why, we get accused of a ‘vicious, personal assault’, whilst the author accuses us on Twitter of a spineless attack. Firstly, SOMEONE PLEASE POINT ME OUT THE PERSONAL ATTACK! Every criticism of ours can be found within the book’s content. Secondly, please don’t be an author if you haven’t got the backbone to deal with criticism.
Chick lit, is rubbish. It’s arguably sexist as well. It’s writing by numbers, literature written by people who work in advertising;
‘Hey, erm, what does the stereotypical woman like?
‘erm…I dunno. Boys? Shopping? Shoes?’
‘Sweet. Let’s pay Lindsey Kelk and Louise Bagshawe money to write on it’
I mean, it’s pretty dam woeful. Hence the comparison with Nuts magazine. Nuts magazine is aimed at the lowest ebb of the male demographic; tits, beer, gratuitous photos of injuries. It gets stick, and rightly so. Why should ‘chick lit’ escape any?
Yes, some of us at Shouting at Cows aren’t the target demographic, but that isn’t the point. Why I accept that some people may like it, it doesn’t mean it isn’t rubbish. Please don’t mix up critical and commercial success. Selling lots of books and having lots of fans doesn’t make you by default ‘good’.
Anyway, don’t take my word for it, take the words of my good freind (can be found for lols @lalalaaauren), a 22 year old female English student and someone slap bang in the middle of Chick Lit’s target audience:
“Oh, you’re being abused by a chick lit writer who is upset that she writes drivel and someone’s pointed it out? Gutted for her. She should stop writing shit if she doesn’t want to be called out on it. Urgh, her latest book is called ‘The Single Girl’s To Do List’. I want to vom all over her. WE DON’T ALL LIKE PINK AND RICH MEN, LINDSEY! Some of us like books with an actual purpose.
On her website it says she ‘loves books’. How can you love books but then write such utter crap? Surely they cancel each other out? You must really hate books to so abuse the form. Gaaah!
I expect more depth and sophistication from a book than how many high heel shoes I should have and how many men I could “date”. She has entrenched misogynism in her stereotypical representation of women.
AAFAFA%%%%ASFGS!!! <— This is how angry chick lit makes me! I used to hide it when i worked at Waterstones. mwuahaha!"
So, you know, it's not just me.
All I have today is this person is a dick!! (sorry!) These books give us a sense of escapism and is light hearted. Lindsey has spent a lot of time on these books and it is rude to say these things about her when you haven’t even read the book properly. If you don’t have anything nice to say don’t say anything- simple!
Lindsey, don’t take any notice of these nasty people it’s what your true fans think that matters!
I will stand up and admit that I am a huge chick-lit fan. I read this genre all the time and as Karla says I love the escapism, light hearted fiction that it offers.
However I now hate to admit that I own a Lindsey Kelk book … I read a bit but gave up when I realised how bad it really was.
The thing that really gets me though is that she is so insecure in her work that she has to take to Twitter to defend herself and call on her so-called ‘fans’ to help her. Get over it. Not everyone wants to read the “I heart…” view of the world.
Really?? What you probably don’t know is that Lindsey was a book editor for many many years before becoming a writer, so I think she knows a fair about about the genre. Her books are written for a certain audience and she aims her writing at that audience. Not everybody wants to writer the next booker prize winner, or costa, or orange award et al. Lindsey offers woman a chance to escape their own life and her books if you had cared to read even one properly are very well written and full of depth. Just because she mentions shoes and men on the blurb (which she won’t be responsible for herself) doesn’t mean the book doesn’t have any depth.
Your review was personal because it didn’t point out any of the story written in the actual book or analyse her choice of language, writing style etc.
I have a degree in english, trained as a writer and work casually at waterstones for the love of books and both miss kelk and miss bagshawe write books that are very successful and have both gained a reputation for being excellent writers.
Yeh they might not write the next pride and prejudice, but not everyone wants to read that. They do what they do very well and with great success so don’t attack them because of it.
Hmm, going to try to keep this short:
I cannot stand chick lit. It’s degrading and completely devoid of imagination. I also don’t like it when books (and films) about women are wrongly lumped into the ‘we’re girls, we like shoes and babies’ category as that is just as lazy.
Thank you for the article. Always funny, always tongue in cheek and as someone has already pointed out – if you’re going to be a writer you must be prepared for some criticism. It might make you a better, more creative writer who doesn’t need to conform to the stereotype.
However, there is a genre worse than chick lit. So much worse. So called ‘reality fiction’, not so affectionately referred to as ‘torture novels’. These were started by Dave Pelzer and continued on so now we have shelves and shelves of simplistic book covers, usually with a crying child on the front and snappy names like ‘Ugly’. If any genre could be erased, it’d be that one.
I’ve read a few chick-lit novels that were…okay. Not my first choice, nor my second, third or fourth but I suppose I enjoyed being occupied without having to concentrate or think.
As a woman in my EARLY thirties I find it incredibly tedious that stereotypes are used so regularly in this genre. Not just tedious but embarrassing. I fully agree with the article author that it’s the equivalent of reading Nuts magazine. What amuses me greatly about all the comments and response to the article is that people are trying to justify chick-lit and argue to support the author.
Of course everybody has different tastes in reading and different styles of writing. Nobody is disputing that, nor doubting the hard work involved in writing such a book but to the negative responders on here, please don’t pretend chick-lit is much more than reading the latest edition of Grazia.
‘You probably think you’re being amusing… but personally I just think you’re an idiot’
‘You come across as dreadfully unintelligent’
‘All I have to say is this person is a dick’
Some of these comments are absolutely fantastic, chic-lit readers really are a beastly bunch! Brilliant, just brilliant!
Attention Chic-lit white-knighters!
If you genuinely enjoy Chic-lit, you would be able to easily brush off articles like this. You’d be able to chalk it down to difference of opinion, ignore it, and carry on.
But it seems that there is just that much doubt in your mind that you are enjoying your cookie-cutter, stereotype enforcing trash for you to resort to hostility and personal attacks in order to validate in your mind that you like them.
Basically, I’m not convinced any of you actually like Chic-lit as much as you think you do.
Also, if an author can’t take criticism, they have no business being an author. That’s science fact.
If there’s one thing that makes me interrogate the premises of my artistic views it’s accusations of being a dick and needless exclamation marks…
Look folks, you’re all missing the point: there’s a sale on at Jimmy Choo’s!
Joking aside, ‘Chick Lit’ is just as tedious a product (as that’s all it is) as that purchased, by the van-full, by the wannabes-&-Walter Mittys who read any of the myriad books shat-out by former members of the SAS and their ghost writers.
Both cater for, and play to, both demographics’ escapist longings. And to be fair – escapism as a genre is hardly a new concept.
Laura – “the author of this book is extremely popular and has many loyal fans.”
So is McDonalds, it´s still crap not fit for animal feed.
Loved the review, made me laugh alot. I have no sympathy for people who write or consume utterly cynical, hollow, banal, derivative, lazy and contemptuous shite such as this book. It isn’t ‘just harmless fun’, it’s the reason a large proportion of school leaving girls think becoming a WAG is a viable & respectable career option.
Dont really see how you can sit there and slate something you have never read before. The book is only a bit of fun and if you actually bothered to do your research on the author you would see that she was only writing this series for Fun. Anyone with half a brain cell can see that these type of stories dont reflect ‘real life’ (whatever that is anyways). You should try and lighten up… life is not meant to be taken so serious, afterall you only live once may aswell enjoy it why you can.
At the end of the day she has made f*** loads of money out of her books wheter people like them or not which is more then what you’ve proberly done. She’s definitely not phased by poorly structured ‘reviews’ like yours, shes laughing all the way to the bank and good on her.
This made me wheeze! I love this website I’ve read everything on it! Please keep up the hilarity, I enjoy fighting for breath. I cannot fully convey my love for this article!
I have only just recently discovered this website and think it’s brilliant – your articles in particular crack me up!
I read chic lit, it’s great for escapism, but I’ve read so much of it now I’m starting to find it tedious and predictable. However some books marked under the genre chick lit are actually really good, although still easy reading. Lisa Jewell is a brilliant writer. Her books aren’t pink and fluffy and I really like her stories and characters. It’s a shame if all authors were to be tarred with the same brush.
I got bored of chick lit years ago. That’s when I decided to write something in the genre that was more off the wall, ‘A Gay in the Life of Melinda Finch.’
Good post.
why did you read it in the first place? Who asked you to read it, and who asked for your critism. I mean…why on earth would you pick it up of a shelf?
You picked up a book with ‘I heart’ in the title; then rave on about your dissapointment that it doesn’t compare to the likes of Hemmingway?
Hmm…
“who asked for your critism”
I dunno. Who asked Lindsey Kelk to write that book?