Perhaps this won’t always be the case, but when I tell someone I’m writing chick-lit, I feel like I have to explain myself.

Yes, I did go to university. Nine years, three credentials.

Yes, I do have a job. It’s a great job.

No, not everything I write is something that I want to have happen. Sometimes a story is just a story.

Yes, most characters are composites of people who exist.

All of the above are questions that I likely wouldn’t get if I was writing a genre that wasn’t chick-lit, but truthfully most people have just been interested that I’m writing a book.

I chose to write chick-lit because my reason for reading books or watching movies and TV shows is escapism. Real life is real life. Sometimes it’s good and sometimes it’s bad, but I don’t often want media that completely replicates it. This distinction explains why normal people love The Greatest Showman and critics hated it. Normal people want to be happy, and critics want everyone to predict the morality of society years after they die and adhere to that while they’re still living.

Remember when being a movie critic meant you were interested in movies? I miss Roger Ebert.

This isn’t to say that I don’t have ideas that might show up in my books. I believe that [REDACTED] as it exists now should not be taken into account [REDACTED], and this appears in my books. However, this appears as a result of compelling characters and a good story. We need look no further than The Last Jedi or Captain Marvel to see why prioritising a political message over well-developed characters is a mistake.

I think this is a good message to send, because the worst thing that could happen would be for people to stop writing stories for the sake of writing stories, especially since stories told for political gain almost never have a foundation of wanting to understand the other side. We only have to look at John McCain’s funeral to see why bipartisanship is a good thing.

Leave a Response