Wednesday, June 01, 2005

Chicklit--What is up with the shoe thing?

Let me say, first off, I love chicklit. I was one of the first converts back in '99 when I read the original Bridget Jones. Loved her. Laughed out loud repeatedly. I love stories of young women (in their twenties or thirties) struggling with who they are and who they want to be, their relationships and their careers because I can relate to them in some way. I relate to their anxieties and their flaws--chicklit heroines are not perfect, not even close, which is what makes them so memorable and lovable (usually).

That being said, I'm getting a little worried about the direction of the sub-genre (at least, I think it's a sub-genre, maybe it's a genre already, not sub anything). Nearly every chicklit book I've read this year has focused on one aspect of the chicklit heroine almost obssessively--her fixation with shoes and high fashion. (Note: I'm not getting into this to tear on one particular book or even this kind of book specifically, just to ask the question--why does chicklit always mean shoes and clothes?)

Bridget Jones, while she worried about her appearance and possibly being fat, did not go on for pages and pages about the kind of shoes/clothes she had, longed to buy or borrowed from her roommmate without the knowledge of said roommate. I understand that this fashion fixation is used sometimes show to the superficiality of the main character. Shallowness that, hopefully, turns to real depth as the story progresses and she changes as a person. But more often than not, it turns out to be a list of brand names and stores, repeated over and over again, like that's supposed to mean something, like that builds a character. I agree that there's a difference between a person who buys Target shoes and a person who buys Prada. But I don't need to hear about it endlessly, or really at all, to know which type of person the main character is. I can get it from other clues about who she is.

Here's another thing that bugs me about this--I know young, single, urban-dwelling women struggling to find themselves and they don't spend all this time obssessing about shoes and clothes! I know there probably are some who do, but does that mean that every character who fits into this general category must behave this way? Is she not a chicklit heroine if she doesn't moan about having to wear last season's Dolce & Gabbana? I didn't think the definition for chicklit was that narrow.

It would be like if all the sci-fi writers got together and decided that if you were to have aliens in your book, the aliens MUST BE GREEN. Otherwise, your book could not be considered sci-fi. WTF?

I also hate it when the shoe/fashion crap pops up in books where it doesn't even make much sense. Right now, I'm reading what I would call a chicklit action/adventure novel with an excellent premise and good writing. Chicklit because the main character is clearly still trying to define herself. And action/adventure because there's running and danger and stuff. But I almost didn't make it past the first couple of chapters because the main character--who, judging by her interests, is not one that I would think would be obssessed with such things--couldn't stop going on about shoes/fashion. I understand why it's being done, to create a character that contrasts with typical stereotype. A warm-hearted attorney, a smart jock, etc. But ONE reference or maybe TWO would have been enough. Would have sparked my interest and made me think, huh, she's not your normal (fill in stereotype here). That would be enough!

Now, I must confess that I'm not the type of person who worries about labels. I want to look nice, and I love a good pair of cute shoes. But I would never save up and spend several hundred dollars on one pair of shoes--do you know how many books that would buy?!? So does that mean I'm cut out of the chicklit movement? They don't write books for people like me who identify with sharp and sassy young women struggling to find out who they really are but don't mind wearing flip flops purchased for ten dollars at Hilo Hattie's in Maui? They are really cool flip flops. : )

*sigh* Bridget Jones, I miss you.

End Rant

1 comment:

Pat Kirby said...

Let me say, first off, I love chicklit.

Me too. Actually, I've prefered it a good deal more than "romance." (Until recently, I thought they were the same creature, but the folks at Romancing the Blog have set me straight.) The snappy dialogue, the workplace crap--I can sooo relate--it all works for me.

But the shoe thing loses me. I'm a tomboy and a dreadful slob. I'm a horseowner; I need shoes for shoveling...poop. I fall over in Ferragamos.

It would be like if all the sci-fi writers got together and decided that if you were to have aliens in your book, the aliens MUST BE GREEN.

Actually, some of them are rather particular about what speculative fiction should, or more specifically, shouldn't be. Not that I care.

But I don't need to hear about it endlessly, or really at all, to know which type of person the main character is. I can get it from other clues about who she is.

Probably a lesson in their to writers of all genres. ? Give readers some credit; don't pound description/characteristics into their head. Show, don't tell and all that.

Love Hilo Hattie's; so fun.