I'd never heard of the term “Chick Lit” before last term and I must say, I find it a tiny bit irritating. Lori Jakiela told us during her reading last night that her book, “Miss New York has Everything,” is marketed as such. Maybe I don’t get it. I’m a chick, though, given I’m a lesbian it's possible that I have less then usual chick-i-ness, but I enjoyed her book, and her readings. I like how she takes us on a ride through her life throwing in punch lines here and there.
She also told us that her editors have pegged her as a humor writer. I can understand why. She’s good at it; I’d say she was a natural if I hadn’t heard from her own lips that she wasn’t, that she grew up quite serious and had to teach herself humor. Even her self-described “dark” reading, one about realizing her birth mother was a paranoid schizophrenic, even that was humorous. She described that her birth mother would pepper LJ’s in-box with provocative comments, then scream, “DO NOT RESPOND” and change her profile.
I guess when she says dark she means deep - the tough side of life, the real side. I think the more she delves into that side, the richer her work will be. Sure, Dave Barry is funny, but rich? Rarely. Do we have a nickname for his type of writing?