
And now I find this post on Galley that refutes the dismissal of commercialized women's literature. Just yesterday, I was very self-satisfied with my choices in books - if I may say so myself.
As I stepped into my Dr's office elevator, I noticed a woman reading a hard cover book with the paper cover missing. I tried really hard to see what she is reading but alas could not see the title. I let her get out of the elevator before me and I trailed behind her trying to read the name of the book from over her shoulder to no avail.
Then I thought what if she is reading a romance and doesn't want anyone to know that's what she is reading. After all there is a stigma attached to that kind of a genre. Some still call it bodice ripper... yes, they do. Don't deny it! Any many women, thanks to the kind of thought perpetuated by Ms. Dowd deny reading women's Lit.
So what was I saying... oh yes... being personally self-satisfied. A pleasure rippled through me (yes, the pleasure actually rippled through me) as I thought hey just as I don't hide my copy of "The Inheritance of Loss" - a book I'm currently reading which won the National Book Critics Circle Fiction Award in 2007 - If I were reading one my romances I wouldn't be hiding that book either. Hence the self satisfaction and the happiness I have in my life by being free to chose the books I want to read without fear of censure. By not paying heed to what the critics say.
If people knew what they were missing there wouldn't be any criticism. I've read enough to know that many of the romances I have read are by far better than some of the "acceptable" fiction out there. The prose and plot of many of the romances I've read are so satisfactory that it really makes me sad/upset/angry that people can so easily dismiss these books as simply fluffy. Some of them may be but many are really really good books.
Anyhow, I'm rambling on for the full post dismissing Ms. Dowd's assertions go to: Why Does Maureen Dowd Hate Popular Women? on the Galley Cat.
No comments:
Post a Comment