i;ve a non-funny tale to tell, and it reveals much about my depth of character!
well i realised that i'm somewhat hooked on chick lit. everything i read is chick lit. my fav movies chick flicks (based on chick lit, etc books)! so i decided to broaden my horizons. i wanted to read one of jeffrey archer's works - non-chick lit. go me. and you know how the books are arranged right? alphabetical order, according to the last name of the author!
i started at around 't', hopped to 'j' in no time, and somehow got stuck at 'c'. guess which author? you got it right! meg cabot. wow. so much for my non-chick lit reading list. i'm currently on 'babbling madness', i think. well SOMETHING like that.
oh i read as you like it yesterday. shakespeare was one confusing dude. seriously. i am 101% against his sentence structures. =P.
oh, then i dug into pride and prejudice. you know what i realised? jane austen wrote novels that are, in my opinion, ancient chick lit. seriously. consider this - mansfield park, persuasion, p&p, s&s, all have a few things in common... a) a good-looking hero who is much-wanted by the opposite sex [chick lit must-have]; b) another bloke obviously put there as competition to the aforementioned hottie in a) - there's always some superficial quality of his revealed sooner or later; c) nasty Hot females who despise/look down on/basically clash with the heroine - points of similliarity usually end with the fact that both protagonist and antagonist fall for the same eligible bachelor, and they appear to have the upper hand in most things [think modern day popular cheerleader character?]; d) somehow, in some cases, a fairy-godperson whose purpose in the novel is to enhance or point out the amazing qualities of the heroine. oh. and did i forget? the heroines are 1) pretty. 2) opiniated, to a certain extent. 3) lesser-liked by their dominant parent. 4) mostly around the poverty line.
did that send anyone out there to sleep? if it did, sorry! heh.