findingtimetowrite

Thinking, writing, thinking about writing…

Why I Hate the Term Chick Noir

I haven’t been the only one to notice the spate of recently published books with the word ‘wife’ or ‘husband’ in the title. Some have even hastened to call it a new (sub)genre. Rosamund Urwin calls it ‘chick noir’ and claims that readers are attracted to the horror at home, the ultimate unknowability of one’s life partner. Lucie Whitehouse in The Guardian calls it ‘the marriage thriller‘ and argues that it is about the life stage most female readers are in, rather than just trying to copycat the success of Gone Girl.

I really liked Gone Girl, although I wouldn’t necessarily want to read five more books similar to it. However, the reason why I object to the idea of a new genre (let alone the terrible term of ‘chick noir’) is because marriage is not just for women. It is cynical to market such psychological thrillers to female readers, especially when the subject itself is as old as the hills. Jane Eyre, Wuthering Heights, The Woman in White, Rebecca, even Bleak House could all be called ‘marriage thrillers’, if we like such labels. And that’s just the English language novels.

beforewemetTwo of the books I recently read are usually lumped together under the ‘like Gone Girl’ category, just like any Scandinavian crime writer has been hailed as the next Stieg Larsson. They are quite different from Gillian Flynn’s novel and from each other, and I’d like to consider them on their own terms.

Lucie Whitehouse’s novel Before We Met tells of the perfect marriage which may be hiding some unsavoury secrets. It owes some allegiance to the twisty dark tales of Nicci French and Sophie Hannah (both of whose novels are more about single women than married ones, incidentally!), or films like ‘The Stranger Beside Me’ or ‘Sleeping with the Enemy’.

Hannah is a successful and happily single advertising executive working in New York. She meets charming and even more successful fellow Brit Mark Reilly through mutual friends and very quickly falls in love. Although she is scared of commitment since her parents’ marriage broke down, she decides not just to marry Mark, but also to give up her career to follow him to London. With her job hunt stagnating and her husband not showing up at the airport when she expected him, she becomes increasingly suspicious and forgets about her determination to not turn into her mother, whose jealousy and bitterness (she believes) drove her father away.

This book has a very easy, highly readable style. It slides down your reading gullet like a smooth chocolate mousse… and has perhaps just as much consistency. It is frothy, the gradual reveal works well, and it will while away a rainy afternoon, but I found it a little too predictable for my liking. There is insufficient motivation for the actions of either Hannah or Mark and I found myself not caring very much about them in their rather privileged little world (even if they have had to work quite hard to attain the privilege). In fact, the people I ended up caring most about were their mothers.  Short verdict: Good enough, but not memorable.

seasontotasteNatalie Young’s novel Season to Taste or How to Eat Your Husband is certainly not easy reading. This will not be a crowd pleaser of a book. Open-minded and eclectic in my reading tastes as I am, I found the initial chapters with the descriptions of cutting up and preparing human flesh for dinner rather nauseating. Perhaps there are a bit too many such descriptions and recipes. Yet, as I read on, I realised that this is a very sly novel, almost surrealistic in its approach. Boris Vian or Roland Topor transposed to the calmer English country-side.

Lizzie Prain is a fifty-something housewife who has never excelled at anything, never been loved, never seemed to have a mind of her own. One day she snaps and hits her husband on the head with a spade while he is out gardening. She feels she has wasted nearly all of her life so far and has no intention of wasting even more of it in prison. So she decides to do away with the evidence by gradually eating every little piece of her husband, which she has preserved in the freezer.

There is something inherently comical about the contrast between the extreme events described in the book and the quiet, middle-aged main character, as well as the matter-of-fact, almost flat way in which the story is told. The author is too subtle to make the husband a monster, but it is nevertheless a study of repressed feelings and almost off-hand bullying in a marriage that has never had any spark. I do feel the author could have gone further, been more ferocious in the blackness of her humour, more satirical or surrealist in her treatment of the couple. An interesting attempt, and the bullet points Lizzie writes to herself are very poignant, but ultimately just a little too timid. Short verdict: memorable, but good enough?

For more reviews of the two books, see here (and can I just point out that neither of the reviewers of Season to Taste are women? So much for that chick tag!)

Simon Savidge  – Season to Taste

Reader Dad – Season to Taste

Daneet Steffens in The Boston Globe – Before We Met

Alice Jones in The Independent – Before We Met

 

About these ads

Single Post Navigation

17 thoughts on “Why I Hate the Term Chick Noir

  1. I’d never heard the term ‘chick noir’ until now! I must get out more ;) You’re right – there have been books about this kind of stuff around for years and years, it’s not that new. I read one recently called Blink Murder (can’t remember who it was by or, indeed, much of the plot, which may be down to my poor memory rather than a reflection on the book’s qualities). I love new genre names, if only to laugh at :) I quite like ‘chick-myst’, which is a chick-lit-stroke-mystery, and one I think I might have made up to describe Flora Lively x

    • Ha, ha, love that! I usually avoid even reading the blurb on the back of a book, so that it doesn’t spoil the surprise, so you can imagine how much this labelling affects me…

  2. Reblogged this on Joanne Phillips and commented:
    Great post here about a new chick-lit sub genre that I’d never heard of. Chick Noir, anyone?

  3. Marina Sofia – I’m not sure I like the term chick noir either. I agree with you that it doesn’t adequately or fairly capture the real marriage issues that are in such books. You’re spot on about that. What’s more, I am always concerned about new labels, which can be limiting. After all, a lot of excellent books defy categorisation.

    • I don’t quite understand the need for narrower and narrower subcategories. I suppose it’s the niche audience imperative. But I am sure we are not the only ones who prefer reading more widely!

  4. Your post comes just in time for Valentine’s, perhaps I should buy How to eat your husband for the occasion? I wasn’t quite enthusiastic about Gone Girl (although of course, the cliffhangers kept me reading through the night), so I may skip this whole marriage thriller genre. Perhaps I’m too much of a romantic at heart. And Jane Eyre reclassified as Chick noir? The Brontes are spinning in their graves.

    • Well, Mr. Rochester’s first marriage was not exactly a success and he does keep a lot of secrets from Jane, doesn’t he?
      And maybe I am too much of a cynic about marital happiness…

  5. I hadn’t heard the term ‘chick noir’ but like you I hate it! I am usually not adverse to grisly goings on in my books but I did gag when I read your review of Season to Taste. ;-)

  6. Sisyphus47 on said:

    I don’t think “Gone Girl” is in that category, however it is defined. “Gone Girl” is very much about the trap individuals can set for themselves by sheer malevolence… ;)

  7. Pingback: Lucie Whitehouse: Before We Met (2014) | Beauty is a Sleeping Cat

  8. Two books I’d never heard of: many thanks for the reviews! Like others here, I’d never heard of the term “chick noir” before; unlike (it seems) everyone else here, I didn’t like Gone Girl very much.

    As for the movie examples, the one I always think of as the template for this sub-subgenre (not sure how many subs!) is Deceived (1991), with John Heard and Goldie Hawn.

    Incidentally, Sleeping with the Enemy was a pretty good novel (by Nancy French) before it was a movie.

    • Yes, I think I may have watched that one at some point, thanks for referencing it. Another (much later) one that comes to mind (and the title says it all really) is ‘What Lies Beneath’ with Michelle Pfeiffer and Harrison Ford.

      • Yes, there’s a bunch of them; Enough (2002) and Gothika (2003) are two more recent ones — both hated by the critics, if I remember rightly, though I quite liked them.

        I suppose really these are homme fatale movies, although there are other homme fatale movies that aren’t “marriage thrillers”. Hm.

  9. Pingback: February Reading: A Season of Grimness | findingtimetowrite

  10. Pingback: SHAREWORTHY: The Paper Bag Princess by Rebecca Jones-Howe » Screaming With Brevity

Do share your thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: