Sevde'nin Günlüğü

Yazmayı seviyorum…

I’m a woman


I have a beautiful soul
And worthy things to say
Lips without gloss
Eyes without shadows
I’m a woman,
and beautiful.

Sweatpants wrapping my legs
Standing in thick, black boots
I have pink-lipped dreams
And thoughts in high-heels
I’m a woman,
and beautiful.

Not a triangle
Nor a hexagon
I’m shapeless
and dimensionless
Ain’t got a 36
or a 24
I’m sizeless
and inch-less
I’m a woman,
and beautiful.

Weigh my thoughts,
Not my body;
Color my dreams,
Not my skin;
Judge my views,
Not my shape;
And always remember:
I’m a woman,
and beautiful.

Sevde Kaldiroglu

(Şiirin Türkçesi için buraya tıklayınız.// Click here for the Turkish version of the poem.)

The Awaited


One can appreciate many poems, short stories, novels, paintings, songs; yet certain works of art affect you in a peculiar yet deep way, so much that they haunt you. The following Turkish poem has had a similar effect on me. Although I put the English translation, I know that it will not give the same feeling as the original one. So you can listen to the original poem from the voice of its poet here.

Beklenen / The Awaited

Ne hasta bekler sabahı, / Neither the sick waits for the morning
Ne taze ölüyü mezar. / Nor the grave for the fresh dead
Ne de şeytan, bir günahı, / Nor Satan for a sin
Seni beklediğim kadar. / As long as I have waited for you.

Geçti istemem gelmeni, / Too late, I don’t want you to come
Yokluğunda buldum seni; / I have found you in your absence
Bırak vehmimde gölgeni / Leave your shadow in my delusion
Gelme, artık neye yarar? / Don’t come, what good is it now?

Necip Fazıl Kısakürek


I was only nine years old when my father read this poem to me but I remember being mesmerized by the beauty of the words as they came from his mouth in such elegance and with a naive yet fatherly passion to introduce her daughter the world of poetry. I remember getting my first poetry book, “Cile” by Necip Fazil Kisakurek, the poet of this poem. As I read this poem again and again over years, I began to realize that its meaning had grown deeper and greater for me. Every year had added a new layer to my interpretation; a layer I did not know existed before. Now, I will try to convey what this poem means to me at this stage of my life.

The Awaited by Necip Fazil Kisakurek is an exceptional example of poetry that tackles the theme of “waiting for the beloved” in the light of striking feelings such as longing, reproach, pride and exasperation. With its short form consisting of only eight lines, the poem stands out as a very concise yet meaningful form of literary expression.

The poem consists of two characters: “I” who is the narrator and “You” who is the addressed. In the first three lines of the poem, the narrator points out the extreme cases of the act of waiting in life, and in the fourth line, he concludes the first stanza by emphasizing the lengthiness of the time he has waited for his beloved one. The extreme examples in the first three lines serve to accentuate the extraordinariness of his commitment to his beloved. An entire night the sick spends in pain or the time the dead waits until burial or the patience and diligence Satan portrays to be able to catch a sin… None of these examples can be compared to the suffering, patience and commitment the narrator has demonstrated while waiting for his beloved: his love, longing and loyalty are all superior to the intense feelings illustrated in these extreme examples.

At this point, an exasperated and almost reproachful tone begins to take over the poem: the narrator does not want her to come back anymore because the exceedingly lengthy time that has passed since she left has gradually turned the feelings of love and longing into pride and exasperation.
The second line of the second stanza, “I have found you in your absence”, can be interpreted through a Sufi point of view. Sufism is a mystic system mainly within Islam, which has the goal of uniting with God through spiritual love and endurance. Looking through this lens, one can say that the “you” used in this line is not same as the “you” used in the rest of the poem; the romantic love the narrator had for his beloved and the endurance he has shown while waiting for her have come to such an extreme point that it helped him find divine love. Thus, he has “found (God) in (her) absence”. The subtle double meaning inherent in this line seemed really striking to me. It reminded me of “Layla and Majnun”, a very famous ancient Middle-eastern love story, where Majnun had experienced the same transition: his romantic love for Layla and the endurance he has shown had helped him find divine love, which was eternal in contrast to the mortal love he had for Layla.

Although the poem is in a form that I personally would not prefer to use while writing poetry (with its strict rhythm and rhyme scheme), I understand that it reflects a very popular view regarding poetry and form in the 1930’s Turkish literature, and overall, I still love this poem! I wonder how many different layers I will discover as I keep coming back to “The Awaited” at different stages in my life.

Click here for my Turkish essay on the same poem.

Questioning the “Other”


A close examination of one aspect of The Pickup by Nadine Gordimer

“If they really had desired one another so much it had not evidenced itself before—no hand-holding or kisses, or intimate touching over clothes in titillation; probably due to him, some tradition or inhibition in him, foreign to her—she had been accustomed to playing at love-making since she was twelve years old, had had the usual quota of lovers common to the friends around their table, and took her contraceptive pill daily with her vitamins.” (Gordimer 27)

One of the main aspects of the novel is, in my opinion, the sharp juxtaposition of Julie’s sexuality versus Ibrahim’s sexuality. As two people distinctly different in gender, cultural background and race, Julie and Ibrahim also represent two disparate cultural approaches to sexuality. What struck me about this quote is that the narrator tells the reader that Julie had become sexually active at the age of twelve. Personally, I can say that the culture I am coming from (the Turkish culture) is similar to (if not the same as) Ibrahim’s cultural background in the sense that sexuality is not something often talked about explicitly and publicly—at least in an average Turkish family. Likewise, having sex at a young age is looked down upon by the majority of the society, and even if it happens, it is definitely not something to talk about in public. Having read this quote, I was surprised (if not shocked—after spending almost two months in the States) to see how a girl can start having sex at such an early age, and moreover, how this can be perceived as “normal”, considering how early a stage the girl is at, both physically and psychologically, at that age. I can understand how my cultural background affects my perception of this quote, but what is so beautiful about this quote and the novel in general is that Gordimer boldly puts forth two different views regarding sexuality, and whether the reader comes from an Eastern culture or a Western culture, he or she can still be shocked by the other point of view. Gordimer’s narration puts the same distance to Ibrahim’s cultural approach as it does to Julie’s, which makes the text partly familiar and partly foreign to almost every reader, making them feel close to the story and to the characters while forcing them to face and question the foreignness. A reader from an Eastern society, for instance, might find it easier to relate to the “some tradition or inhibition in [Ibrahim]” regarding sexuality whereas a reader from a Western background might consider Julie’s early exposure to sex completely normal and natural. Yet, surely both readers would find themselves in a situation where they begin to ponder the “other”, more “foreign” perspective regarding the subject matter.

Yeri: English | Questioning the “Other” için yorumlar kapalı

The Wild Caress


“Quiet you!”

he shouts with undisguisable hatred, and as he does this, his belly swells up—with hatred and disgust, maybe, who knows?—so much that I can hardly breathe. As the woman continues babbling in an incomprehensible tone that still manages to be frustrating, I feel him inhale slowly—my body tenser than ever and my headache growing with each inhalation.

“All right”

I hear him say, and I know, as soon as I hear the words, that he will begin his show.

As the gloomy shadow of his gigantic hands falls on me, I know that there is no escape. He grabs me by my thigh and begins to unbutton me. No, I cry but his fingers are deaf. I won’t let you! His touch is so fervent, so inexplicably impatient that I almost feel that it is reflexive; there is no room for even a bit of hesitation or a moment of consideration; it is as if he was born to do this.

When he is done with unbuttoning, he pulls me fiercely and—without a look or a word or any sort of indication to prove him human and not a ferocious animal attacking on its prey—opens my legs wide apart. No, I cry again, desperately this time because I know that once he comes this far, there is no way to stop him. As I sense his aggressive touch going down my left thigh, my knee, and all the way through my ankle, I look for a trace of lust on the tips of his fingers. To my amazement, I find none. Realization hits me hard: This is not the usual routine that repeats every night; his fingers are not impatient to get rid of me to touch someone else but to use me to do so. To use me—“Oh, you don’t have to use the belt on her.”—as a puppet; to use me—“Do you have to use the belt?”—as a weapon.

It is only then that I see the girl’s face. Her young and almost naive features harbor feelings more intense and elderly than her frail body can bear. There is fear and shock widening in her pupils; embarrassment reddening her cheeks and something else, something inexplicable growing all over her face. Is it acceptance? Or obedience, maybe? Why? I scream at her, and I know that she will not fight back. She will remain obedient as he performs his show, her silent lips along with mine counting to infinity till the torture ends.

Holding me tightly by the ankle, he gets closer to the girl and heaves me right to her face. This is the first time we are eye-to-eye, face-to-face, and for the tenth of a second we are so close that I almost think we will kiss. And we do. I put a swift, chaste peck on her lips, and our lips fall apart as he fiercely pulls me back. He throws me again, and this time I kiss her on the cheek. Yet, coming back again, I am shocked to see her fragile lips and her soft cheeks bloating after my light kisses. I don’t want to do this anymore, I shout as I hear her scream, running away and begging him to stop, me to stop. Forgive me! Oh please, forgive me! He is deaf as are his stoic fingers, and he aims at her ears to deafen her too. And the torture of kissing continues; I kiss her on her right ear, her left ear, on her forehead, and once more on her cheeks; regretting every touch and every kiss, both of us crying at the top of our lungs at every wild caress.

Then he throws me away.

And as I hug the linoleum—my body sore, my voice hoarse and my lips bloated; her cries getting louder and louder—I let oblivion embrace me.


(This passage is an attempt to rewrite a scene in Alice Munro’s The Beggar Maid from a different point of view. The scene takes place on pages 17-19 where Rose’s father beats her with his belt.)

Sevde Kaldiroglu
October 7, 2013

Yeri: English, Fiction | The Wild Caress için yorumlar kapalı

The Theme of Self-Interest in ”The Merchant of Venice” and ”The Crucible”


IB English

‘’Do you think human relationships are based on self-interest? How do William Shakespeare and Arthur Miller respond to this question in their literary works: The Merchant of Venice and The Crucible?’’

Self-interest forms the basis of every relationship, whether it is related to friendship, marriage or trade. Although human beings ostensibly love and care for each other, in reality they expect some sort of benefit from every relationship. Both William Shakespeare and Arthur Miller depict the role of self-interest in human relationships in their literary works: The Merchant of Venice and The Crucible respectively. They emphasize this thesis through examples of love, friendship, power and Christianity.

Even though love and friendship are regarded as two forms of relationships where no one seeks any pragmatic purpose, in fact they covertly embody different sorts of self-interest. The triangular relationship among Antonio, Bassanio and Portia in The Merchant of Venice and the friendship between Abigail Williams and the girls in The Crucible are both based on selfish motives. Bassanio asks Antonio for money in order to marry Portia. However, his motive for this marriage consists of not solely his love for Portia but mostly his desire to have Portia’s wealth and be able to pay his debts. He reveals this motive in Act 1, Scene 1 when he tells Antonio that he will be able to pay his debts when he marries Portia. Also Bassanio’s asking his friend, Antonio, for money contributes to the claim that friendship can be used for self-seeking economic purposes. Similarly, the indirect relationship between Portia and Antonio serves to an analogous purpose. Since Portia knows that her husband, Bassanio, has an affection for Antonio, she endeavors to save Antonio from Shylock’s malice so that Bassanio does not leave her, grieving over his friend’s self-sacrifice. Through her powerful actions, most obvious in the trial scene in Act 5, Scene 1 when she is in disguise of a lawyer and saves Antonio’s life, Portia resembles an astute woman figure who transcends women’s standards of her time and fulfills her purpose of not losing her husband.

In The Crucible, although Abigail Williams and the girls seem to be loyal friends, why they are actually bound to each other so tightly is that they fear that one of them might reveal their pretense. In fact, the reason of their unity is their common interest of being seen as ‘’the victims’’ instead of ‘’the witches’’. In Act 1, particularly Abigail intimidates the girls, threatening them that she will not let go anyone who reveals ‘’the other things’’ they did in the forest, including Abigail’s drinking blood to kill Elizabeth Proctor. Therefore their friendship is vastly based on self-interest combined with an immense fear of exposure.

Power and Christianity are two concepts illustrated by both Shakespeare and Miller where self-interest can be observed more clearly than in love and friendship. Revenge, probably the most obvious form of self-interest, is prevalent in both works, portrayed through Shylock in The Merchant of Venice and Mr.Putnam in The Crucible. As a Jew who is constantly persecuted by Christians including Antonio, Shylock seeks revenge. Thus, when Antonio wants to make a bond in Act 1, he immediately seizes the opportunity to take revenge and asks for a pound of Antonio’s flesh if he forfeits the bond. In the following acts, it gets more clear that Shylock’s self motive of his bond with Antonio is not money but revenge; that’s why when he is offered three times the loan, he refuses it and insists on his ‘’pound of flesh’’. The conflict between Shylock and Antonio is simply a matter of power display, resembled by Shylock’s money and Antonio’s Christianity. Shylock attempts to take Antonio’s life to fulfill his self-interest; to quench his yen for revenge. However in the trial, his attempt turns out to be against his favor and Antonio becomes the one who is in charge of Shylock’s verdict. As a Christian who disparages Shylock because of his religion, Antonio uses this advantage to his self-interest and demands two things from Shylock, one of which is converting to Christianity. Antonio’s motive for asking Shylock to give up his religion is his desire to take revenge from the malicious Jew rather than his piety, resembling that of a missionary. Although Antonio seems to be the one who shows mercy on the Jew, he actually adds insult to injury by taking the last thing Shylock owns: his religion and this is Antonio’s ultimate revenge.

In The Crucible, Thomas Putnam’s landlust is a great example of revenge as a form of self-interest. Mr.Putnam along with his wife and his daughter accuses many innocent people of witchcraft in order to have their land. Among the victims of Thomas Putnam’s landlust are Rebecca Nurse, Francis Nurse and George Jacobs. The reason that Mr.Putnam targets exclusively the Nurse family is that he holds a grudge against their immense amount of land and reputable social status. Thus Mr.Putnam aims to possess economical and social power by taking their land and destroying their reputation.

Reverend Parris is a calculating character whom Arthur Miller created as a person who values his name and reputation more than anything else. He protects his niece Abigail and the other girls and helps them as they accuse innocent people so that his reputation as a pious Christian, a devoted reverend, is never associated with witchcraft. On the one hand he seems like the righteous leader of the church of Salem; however behind the scenes he is a scheming, selfish man who does not reveal the girls’ fraud in order to keep his good reputation and watches silently as many innocent people are executed. As a leader who is supposed to be an exemplary Christian role model, he prefers lies to honesty and uses Christianity as a tool to serve his self-interest.

The settings of The Merchant of Venice and The Crucible play a significant role in creating the theme of self-interest. The Merchant of Venice takes place in Venice in the sixteenth century. At those times Venice used to be a city of merchandise where capitalism began to thrive. This economic system allowed people to buy and sell goods and services with the incentive to gain interest and maximize their profits. It is no coincidence that Shakespeare had chosen such a setting where self-interest –mostly in the form of economic profit- was gradually becoming the sole purpose of the life of every individual in the society. Even the Court of Venice that is supposed to be a place of justice and equality, serves to the self-interest of the powerful class in the society: the Christians. The diction The Duke of Venice uses when he addresses Shylock; the way he overtly categorizes Shylock as a merciless, malicious Jew and Antonio as ‘’a poor merchant’’ reveal his bias in favor of Christians and his prejudice towards Jews. Just like the Court of Venice, the Court of Salem in The Crucible serves to the self-interest of certain groups of people, distorting its function as a court of ‘’justice’’ and causing many people’s unjust executions. Salem, the setting of The Crucible, is a town established only a few decades before the Salem witch trials. The church of Salem embodies Puritan beliefs and tries to maintain its authority in the recently founded town of Salem. The people of Salem are European immigrants who are trying to settle down and share the land of Salem. In such a disheveled society that is prone to any kind of chaos and where people are blinded by greed of land and power, it is very likely that a mass hysteria will take place where everyone will strive to maintain his or her own self-interest. Thus, though very different from Venice, Salem forms a perfect setting in order to portray the selfish motives of individuals.

Both Miller and Shakespeare convey different kinds of self-interest through various narrative points of view. Since both works are plays, they are not limited by one perspective but they show the reader many points of view. In The Merchant of Venice, the reader is given the self motives of disparate characters; a Jew’s revenge, a Christian’s religious domination, a woman’s fear of losing her husband and a man’s desire to gain wealth through marriage. Likewise in The Crucible, a greedy man’s landlust, a pretentious reverend’s fear of bad reputation and a scheming girl’s fear of exposure are reflected throughout the play. Therefore, both works enable the reader to see multifaceted relationships that are built upon the same basis: self-interest.

The Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare and The Crucible by Arthur Miller both accentuate the thesis that every relationship is motivated by self-interest. Both authors prove this thesis through multifaceted characters, intricate settings and various perspectives, using the themes of love, friendship, power and Christianity. Though having very different plots and structures; The Merchant of Venice as a tragic-comedy whereas The Crucible as a historical play, they both make the reader realize that no matter what kind of bond it possesses, every relationship harbors some sort of self-interest and it is inevitable for conflicts to arise when these interests contradict at some point.

Sevde Kaldıroğlu

May 13, 2012

Yeri: English | The Theme of Self-Interest in ”The Merchant of Venice” and ”The Crucible” için yorumlar kapalı

Comparative Textual Analysis of “Shooting An Elephant” by George Orwell and “The Damned Human Race” by Mark Twain


IB English

George Orwell in ‘’Shooting an Elephant’’ and Mark Twain in ‘’The Damned Human Race’’ both explore the cruelty of human nature. Twain conveys his opinions through a scientific tone, which he calls “scientific method”, while Orwell narrates a memoir of his own.

Twain begins his essay by mentioning the Darwinian theory of the Ascent of Man from the Lower Animals and with an unhesitant and unambigous tone he suggests that the Darwinian theory must be modified into a “new and truer one to be named the Descent of Man from the Higher Animals”. He presents his hypothesis, ‘Men descended from the Higher Animals, thus man is the lowest animal alive’, and supports it with the actions of human-beings through history, “Prince Napoleon… in the Zulu war”, and hypothetical experiments, “In another cage I confined an Irish Catholic from Tipperary and… I added a Scotch Presbyterian from Aberdeen”. Twain presumably acts as an objective scientist through use of “scientific method”. Nevertheless through his specific examples of the evil nature of human-beings, he makes lots of generalizations such as “Man is incurably foolish”, trying to impose his own tenets on the reader,this suggests that in fact Twain is strongly biased and considers only the evil side of human nature, dismissing the civilized and peaceable actions of humans.

Orwell conveys his memoir in a very candid way, revealing his confusion between his opposition to imperialism and his hate for Burmese people who hated him when he was a police officer in Lower Burma, “All I knew was that I was stuck between my hatred of the empire I served and my rage against the evil-spirited little beasts who tried to make my job impossible”. In fact, he’s stuck between his British identity and his allegiance to anti-imperialism. He then begins the story that gave him a better glimpse of “the real nature of imperialism”; the story of how he shot an innocent elephant ,”The elephant looked no more dangerous than a cow”, because of the pressure brought by the public. The elephant is a metaphor for people who live in colonized countries, who are the victims of imperialism. He, as the one who victimizes the elephant, is “ the puppet” of imperialist powers which are, in this case, the crowd that force him to do so, “Here was I, the white man with his gun, standing in front of the unarmed native crowd- seemingly the leading actor of the piece; but in reality I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind”. Orwell effectively uses imagery to make an impact on the reader, “At the second shot he did not collapse but climbed with desperate slowness to his feet and stood weakly upright, with legs sagging and head drooping”. The frankness of the way he narrates the story exposes the evil nature and the ugly truths of imperialism.
Imperialism, one of the evil actions of humans, portrayed in Orwell’s memoir supports Twain’s thesis of men being mean and evil. However, Orwell explores the motives that cause such actions which Twain never mentions. Orwell frankly tells that the motives for shooting the elephant were the pressure brought by the crowd, “the will of those yellow faces behind”, and his avoidance of humiliation, “The crowd would laugh at me”. Orwell connects those immoral actions with the subversion caused by public whereas Twain considers them as intrinsic characteristics of human kind, “He (man) is constitutionally afflicted with a Defect which must make such approach (to the level of Higher Animals) forever impossible, for it is manifest that this defect is permanent in him, indestructible, ineradicable”. Twain and Orwell both agree that whatever humans do, they do it consciously. Twain suggests that unlike ‘’Higher animals’’ man acts consciously, ‘’Man in his descent from the cat, has brought the cat’s looseness with him but has left the unconsciousness behind’’. Orwell, in his memoir, confirms Twain’s thesis by declaring that he ‘’knew with perfect certainty that he/I ought not to shoot the elephant’’.

Both Twain and Orwell illustrate different ways of violence caused by humans in their essays, expressing them through candid words. Orwell mentions the violence perpetrated by imperialist powers, “The wretched prisoners… the scarred buttocks of the men who had been flogged with bamboos”, and violence against children, “an old woman with a switch in her hand… violently shooing away a crowd of naked children”, but he mainly focuses on the unfair violence on the elephant which is again a symbol of imperialist actions. Twain depicts the same picture through harsh, yet realistic words, “force, bloodshed, wars”, and gives the example of an historical event, “a Buffalo hunt for the entertainment of an English earl”, to show the violence perpetrated on “Higher animals” by humans as “Lower animals”.

Twain juxtaposes human kind and other animals in a cynical and sarcastic tone, “The cat is innocent, man is not”. He uses irony while stating his arguments, “He (man) blandly sets himself up as the head animal of the lot; whereas by his own standarts he is the bottom one”, to accentuate the contrast between humans and animals. His cynical point of view when arguing that humans are the lowest animals reveals his misanthropic personality and his shame for being a part of this mass of evil creatures. Twain also uses syntax effectively, he uses capital letters to highlight the immoral characteristics of human kind, “Patriot, Slave”.

In “Shooting an Elephant” and “The Damned Human Race”, whilst George Orwell and Mark Twain both expose the barbarous and evil actions of human-beings, they differ in explaining the causes behind them. An intense and candid diction is prevalent in both essays, providing the reader a realistic view of the issues discussed.
Self-criticism 🙂 : This was my first textual analysis in the IB English class in my junior year; so it may not be a perfect IB English essay, considering the untidiness of the quotes and the vague introduction and conclusion paragraphs.

Sevde Kaldıroğlu

Nov 4, 2011

Chick Lit


Have you ever heard of chick lit? Or let me ask it this way; have you ever read a pink and fancy covered book? Or is there a book you’ve read that made you laugh out loud and caused surprised gazes from people around you? If you are a girl and said yes to at least one of these questions, then you’ve definitely read a chick lit book. If you’re surprised, then you’ve read a chick lit without even knowing its genre. Well, no problem, because here is the answer to what chick lit is. Chick lit or ‘’chicken literature’’ is a subgenre of women’s fiction that usually tells the stories of women experiencing daily life issues; such as love, friendships, shopping addictions, weight issues and much more, in a light, personal and humorous way. Today, the bestseller sections of bookstores are full of chick lit novels some of which are really great masterpieces while some are full of clichés which are mainly the reason of the bad stereotypes about the genre.

Although chick lit is a modern popular genre, it actually predates twentieth century. Since the plot of the genre is based on ‘women standing on their own feet’; Jane Eyre(1847) by Charlotte Bronte and many of Jane Austen’s novels, first heroine-centered novels, are also considered as the first samples of chick lit. However the first example of modern chick lit is known as Bridget Jones’s Diary(1996) by Helen Fielding.

One of the main things that make chick lit attract female readers is that it mirrors the women of today. Chick lit is not an extraordinary story of imaginary characters, it is simple and realistic and fun at the same time. Women read those novels and empathize with the protagonist immediately because the protagonist, itself represents the reader while the novel reflects the real life. Beyond being fun and easy-to-read, chick lit captures the issues women face in the society, including challenges of single or married life, office politics and economical difficulties. It is often written in an outspoken way which tells every thought that comes to the mind of the protagonist, making the novel even more realistic and usually giving the reader the feeling of déjà vu.

Some literary critics and readers dislike chick lit, blaming it for being frivolous, too light-hearted or even ridiculous. However there are a few reasons that cause these prejudices against chick lit. Since the genre has captured so many readers at a surprisingly short time and chick lit novels became international bestsellers all over the world, the number of chick lit authors has exploded, especially for the last few years. Just like in every literature genre, some bad samples of chick lit have been written as well as the good ones. Some original characterizations such as shopaholic protagonist created by one particular author had attracted so many readers that they were imitated by many so-called chick lit authors and this caused chick lit to be known as a genre telling the same story with same standard characters all over again. Thus the imitation of original plots and characters which actually belonged to great chick lit writers, led to stereotypes about the genre.

Despite all the critics and bad samples of chick lit, it is a fact that the genre continues to grow and attract more readers day after day, creating literarily well-regarded authors such as Sophie Kinsella and Marian Keyes and taking a permanent place in women’s literature. It seems that as chick lit develops and derives many sub-genres like mom&baby lit, it will be appreciated by the literary critics as well as the readers.



Yazının Türkçesi için tıklayınız.

Yeri: English | Chick Lit için yorumlar kapalı