"Chick-Lit" Positive or Negative Genre?

When Professor Ogden initially introduced the concept of “chick-lit” it made me immaturely laugh at the proposition of the idea, but also brought up dwelling skepticism that a genre such as this existed. Upon closer inspection I learned this was a recognized and emerging new genre of fiction depicting modern female protagonists accentuating and celebrating their flaws as opposed to viewing them as negatives. However this genre was introduced to us as a positive influence where imperfect females were depicted as the heroines of stories, finding who they really are through there own means. One thing that made me think was the term “chick” it contrasted in my mind all that was said previously. The word “chick”, to a certain extent is a degrading word used by men to draw attention to physically attractive women, or otherwise those that are disagreeable in their eyes (i.e. hey man! Check that chick out!). So why would it be used as a title describing many strong novels displaying the glory of feminism? Many other groups have attached the title “chick-lit” to a very different classification of other books labeling the genre as having negative effects on young women, portraying many of its heroines only obsessed with boys, shopping and cooking. With these two differing versions of chick-lit describing two totally different collections of novels which is the correct definition of chick-lit and how can you tell the difference between the two?

In The Innocent Traveller, the genre of “chick-lit” displays hip and refreshingly different female protagonists who are not anywhere near perfect. These flaws that exist within the characters are what help their readers relate with them and the book more closely. The protagonists do not have a perfect job or have the perfect man; they become a more real portrayal of today’s woman striving to find that balance between work and a social life. The second connotation of “chick-lit” has a different meaning entirely; groups refer to works as “graphic and sexually explicit”, containing negative messages about how girls only think about romance, shopping, social status and appearance. These “anti chick-lit” groups say it’s dangerous for young girls in many ways making them act a certain way to fit in, while giving them the feeling that they are choosing this lifestyle themselves. With this modern genre of “chick-lit” invading our shelves we now have to ask ourselves is it the brilliant works of positive feminism by authors such as Ethel Wilson, Helen Fielding (Bridget Jone’s Diary) or Candace Bushnell (Sex and the City)? Or do the other negative books flood our minds? On that note, which group of novels should be labeled “chick-lit”? Both obviously cannot claim the genre for themselves.