Watermelon discussion thread

[Caryl]

Here is our discussion thread for Watermelon by Marian Keyes.

You can share your thoughts about the book here on this thread at any time during your reading. It would be helpful if you could post in the subject line the chapter you are on in the book. That way, we can open this thread during our reading without being surprised by any spoilers.

You may also enjoy checking out Marian Keyes' website after reading this book.

Here are some questions to spark discussion, but feel free to ignore them and just post your thoughts on the book!

~ What were your first impressions of this book?

~ Talk about the characters in the novel. Which of them touched you the most? What did the characters learn about themselves, each other and life?

~ What did you think of the ending?

~ Most people would put Watermelon into the genre of "chick lit." What do you think of this new label for novels that focus on a female protagonist? Do you think this is a helpful label, or an overly dismissive one? How would you define "chick lit"?

~ Have you read any other "chick lit" novels? If so, how does this one compare?

~ Would you recommend this book to others? To a particular person?

[SusanH]

I probably only have time for two questions right now, so I'll answer these two:

~ Most people would put Watermelon into the genre of "chick lit." What do you think of this new label for novels that focus on a female protagonist? Do you think this is a helpful label, or an overly dismissive one? How would you define "chick lit"?

During grad school, a Serbian writer came to talk to one of my lit classes. She went on at great length about the evils of referring to her as a "woman writer", as she felt that automatically dismissed her as less important than a man, who was simply a writer. I feel rather the same way about "chick lit" - Nick Hornby writes books that are very similar in tone, but about men, and he isn't marginalized in this manner. Yes, there is a formula, as with most genres. And yes, some writers do not manage to rise above that formula. But some do and they shouldn't be trivialized as writing about unimportant subjects like chicks and chocolate. Jennifer Weiner comes to mind as someone who writes in this genre but with depth and sensitivity for complex issues.

~ Have you read any other "chick lit" novels? If so, how does this one compare?

I've read a few that varied quite a lot in quality. I'd say this is one of the good ones.

[dane]

I really enjoyed the book. It was a very quick read for me. At first I was surprised by the way the book was told. I've seldom read any first person accounts like that. I ended up thinking it was a really fun way to get into the story. It was like she was one of my RL girlfriends, telling everything how it was. I think she did a great job of getting into the way a woman thinks...how your mind can blow things totally out of proportion and jump around to random thoughts. It was nice to see that I'm not the only one who does that. I have to admit though, that there were times that I wanted her to speed up, so I could see what happened next. I guess that's a sign of a good book though, she had me on the edge of my seat, wanting to find out what happened next. And there were times when I was saying, "NO Claire!!! Don't do that!!!"

I really liked Helen's character. She was such a nut. I was so glad that Claire toughened up and got more self-esteem. I couldn't believe what a slimebag James turned out to be. It seemed a little hard to believe that they were together so long and she didn't have a clue what a jerk he was. I (of course) really liked Adam, I mean, what isn't there to like?

As I neared the end, I didn't think she'd be able to close it well enough for me and wrap everything up, but I was happily surprised. I like the idea of them being together, but not together. I think it's set up perfectly for a sequel. I would definitely read one if she did it.

Dana.

[carissanboys]

I'm about a quarter of the way through and while I find it fairly easy to get through, I think I'm somewhat bored with it. And her writing style kind of annoys me. I find my mind wandering a lot, but that may have a lot to do with the fact that I have so much going on in my life right now It seems like everyone is liking it so far. I'll post more once I'm finished.

[LoveMyAlexa]

I don't have time to write much. But I loved the book! I loved the characters, but of course hated James. He made me so mad I think I took it out a little on DH till the book was done! I loved the way she wrote it. I also loved the ending. I would deffinatly recomend it to all of my girlfriends. I already passed it on to my Mom!

[Maribeth]

I finished this over a week ago and already my memory is fading. It took me awhile to get into this book. I'm not sure why other than, perhaps, my mood which may have been too close to Claire's "Great Terror" phase . I've had the same problem with 2 other books I was reading at the same time (switching off hoping to be hooked on something). I had moments though when I couldn't put the book down (especially the last 1/2 - 1/3), and moments when I couldn't make myself pick it up. Part of my problem was with the characters. I didn't really love any of them which seems to be a big thing for me in truly loving a novel. I felt sorry for poor little Kate, and I got a big kick out of Helen. I wanted to smack Claire quite often.

There was something very likeable to me about the writing style though. I can't put my finger on it but I know that I will try other Marian Keyes books. It may be that this particular book wasn't my cup of tea or if I'd read it at some time when I was in a better mood, I may have loved it. I found the ending terribly unrealistic - how coincidental that Adam would have a daughter, the daughter's mother would want to take a vacation from parenting for a year so Adam could raise her, and Adam would be moving to London to raise her and live, oh so close, to Claire and Kate. As much as I found the rest of the story believable, this ending just didn't work for me. I didn't want to think of this book as just another romance novel but the ending just made it feel that way.

As for the label "chick lit," it bothers me as much as "chick flick" does. It is a dismissive label, IMHO. I've read some really good books labeled as "chick lit" -- Jennifer Weiner's books come to mind. They're meatier than the typical romance novel.

I'll guess I'll put this book in my love/hate category. I'm glad I read it as I've found another author to pursue. I would recommend it to a few friends but I think they've already read it.

[carissanboys]

I had a hard time getting into this book at first. I kind of found it boring. And the writing style annoyed me. But after I was about a third of the way through I really started enjoying it. I think the depression part of the book was boring to me because I really couldn't relate. I've never reacted to something in that way.

I think the reason her writing annoyed me was that she would just go on and on about things. It seemed like each happening would go on forever and I would be saying, "Enough already! Move on!" I also found it odd when she would talk to the reader...it just didn't seem to work for me in this story.

As for the ending...didn't really like it. I felt it was just too neat and perfect. I was hoping it would end with Claire and Adam talking things through and leaving things as friends, but not getting together.

Overall I enjoyed the book and would recommend it. I'm not sure if I'll read anything else by Keyes. I might if I see a book in the library.

[Scout]

~ Most people would put Watermelon into the genre of "chick lit." What do you think of this new label for novels that focus on a female protagonist? Do you think this is a helpful label, or an overly dismissive one? How would you define "chick lit"?

I'll jump in on this one, beacuse this happens to be a pet peeve of mine. I really don't like the term chick lit, although I've started using it more and more just because it's now so commonplace in the industry.

Jenny Coolgan, a Scottish writer, said it best:

"Everyone, no matter what they're writing about -- be it dysfunctional families, anorexia, death, or other serious issues -- is being thrown into one big hole marked 'chick lit' and written off. Chick lit is a deliberately condescending term they use to rubbish us all. If they called it **** lit it couldn't be more insulting."

[Lisa Jo]

I thought this was fun, but not especially memorable. I read it earlier this year and couldn't even remember what it was about until I read this thread. I thought the ending was totally improbable, but since I don't ask for too much from this type of book I just moved on.

I did like her writing style and would read something else by Marian Keyes.

[amykw33]

I have to agree with Carissa and LisaJo on this one. It was a light read, and I wasn't really expecting Tolstoy or anything, but I couldn't get past the improbability of the premise, and even though it was a horrible situation for the protagonist to be in, I kind of felt like James -- there was so much interior monologue and so little interaction with her kid that I felt like she was pretty self-absorbed and narcissistic, which were James' complaints. I also didn't think he seemed savvy enough to pull a psychological snow job like that.

I'd give Keyes another chance, but I wasn't blown away by this book.