One more fantastic review! Thanks, Melody, I won't consider this book for the very reasons you numbered. You should write a book of book reviews!

I've very sadly noticed that I tend to "like" (meaning the action of clicking the like button) reviews more often when the reviewer didn't like the book -- probably because my friends are such delightful writers.

So easy to criticize a writer who works hard. What have YOU published?

Sandy wrote: "So easy to criticize a writer who works hard. What have YOU published?"

That's not the point. As readers, we all have a right to express our feelings and thoughts about the books we read. That's the point of Goodreads. Positive and negative reviews are equally welcome here. They all give members information about books, and review readers can agree or disagree with the reviews.

So easy to comment on reviews without reading them. I did not criticize the writer at all- just the book. Have YOU never read a book you didn't like?

I'm glad that Sandy posted her comment so as to bump up your response on my front page - otherwise I would have missed your awesome review!

what's wrong with "chick lit?" I hate that newly coined word that seems made to denigrate books that merely entertaining as opposed to serious and worthy books. You know, the kind Oprah wants us to read that so PC and often boring they make you want to pull your hair out.

And I'm not a militant feminist, but I must wonder why books someone has decided are "chick lit" are, by some people, deemed unworthy of reading when you could be reading an "important" book.

And, might I ask, what is the male counterpart of the reading category "chick lit?" I would be willing to bet, that if certain books now conidered classics and by definition important, would be shoved into the chick lit category, if the dialog were updated to the current vernacular. One that comes to mind is Jane Austen's Emma. If a writer wrote a book now where the protagonist's goal in life was to marry off her friends, while making silly mistakes and misjudging the character of both her friends and the suitors she's chosen for them, it would be classified as chick lit.

I wouldn't have a problem since I enjoy many books that are derisively referred to as chick lit although I must admit the "chick lit" subsection of fiction annoys the hell out of me. To me the very name imples several things:
only women...and only a certain type of woman, will enjoy this book
2) women with brains stay away, its beneath you
3) men, don't even think about
it. This book is written for chicks so it's beneath you
4) and this is the one that really gets to me... WHERE is the male counterpart to "chick lit?"

Now that I've gotten all that off my chest and can stop ranting, I will say this. I liked this book and the other essay type books that Lisa Scottoline has written because sometimes I want a book that I can relate to meaning I've had some similar experiences. Also if I'm down for some reason this book and the other memoir types she's written make me laugh. Sometimes outloud. I don't enjoy the chapters written by her daughter quite as much, possibly because she's in her 20s and what she's writing about is not the same thing I can relate to, as I'm a lot older. Her writing style is also vastly different than her mother's, and I prefer her mother's.

I''ve been a huge fan of Lisa Scottoline's fiction, which reads totally different than her real life essay books. I don't know

I cut myself off accidentally. What I wanted to say is that I don't know whether L.S's fiction books are also considered chick lit. Perhaps someone can enlighten me.

Again I must ask though, What's wrong with books slapped with the "chick lit" stamp? Many are entertaining and well written.

I went off on my anti chick lit as a fiction category rant because the review that I'm commenting on listed, as one of her reasons for hating the book "Why my Third Husband Will be a Dog" that the author writes chick lit. It irked me that someone gave that made up category of fiction as a reason for hating the book. Hate it because you disliked the subjects in each chapter, or how the author writes-but to hate it because you believe Lisa Scottoline writes chick lit?? Give me a break. Also, if you've read her fiction which is filled with suspense, murders, car chases and stalking, I don't think you'd say she writes chick lit....unless Harlan Coben, John Sandford and countless other male authors are writing it too.

Again...I love many books that have the misnomer of chick lit thrust upon them. So in that way you could say I love chick lit, at least some of it.

But I HATE the term. I might find it less offensive when they come up with a cutesy denigrating term for lighthearted books written by men.

And this concludes my diatribe against the term chick lit and the few (I hope) readers who think that because a book has been branded by the term, it's not worth their while to read it.

I reserve the right to hate any category of literature without regard to other people's feelings about it.

For me, "chick-lit" does in fact encompass Jane Austen, whom I loathe. Chick-lit means (to me, and perhaps to me ONLY) stories which are primarily about finding or falling in love and generally end with marriage. They are also on balance wholesome, warm and wise. Madcap hijinks along the way are optional, as is white wine and shoe-shopping. FWIW, as a rule I also loathe Oprah's depressing book recommendations.

I agree it's a dismissive term. So's "dick-lit" which I think of as the analog, and under which rubric I include Grisham, Clancy, Ludlum & the various other formulaic blockbuster novels available in airport kiosks. And which I also don't bother to read.

My review, which ruffled your feathers, was written in a light-hearted manner and wasn't meant to upset anyone. I'm sorry my terminology offended you.

Melody, your use of the term "chick lit" didn't offend me. The term itself offends me. when I re-read my comment I do see where you might have taken it as a personal attack on your use of the term, since I admit I tend to rant when irritated...and that term irritates me to no end. I liked your male alternative but I don't see many bookstores having the guts to call a shelf dick-wit, although my local bookstore does have a chick lit shelf. I also dislike the authors you classified as writers of dick lit with one tiny exception. I did read a tom Clancy book that I liked but can't remember the title. Was one of his earlier ones and not filled with technogarbage. Just wondering, have you ever liked a book maybe against your will, that someone else classified as chick lit and if so, what was the title? I must say that I think your personal definition of chick lit is overbroad, but to each her own. You're enjoyable to read though we disagree on many books, so I have one question I'm really interested in...does maeve binchy's light a penny candle fall into the chick lit category?? If you haven't read it, never mind. And sorry if my comments on your review offended you, because that was not my intent.

I haven't read any Binchy. Hrm, let's see, I loved ...And Ladies of the Club, does that count? I picked up one of the Shopaholic books in a waiting room once, but left it there when I was done waiting, about 40 pages in. So I'm speaking from ignorance for the most part, aside from knowing that I don't like what little I have tried. There are too many books I do want to read for me to waste my time on something I'm not interested in.

Melody likes Love, Actually. Which, I know, is a movie and not a book, but still.

I like parts of Love, Actually. And yeah, Wendy has a point- maybe I should embark on a horizon-broadening attempt.

So weird when an old review gets pulled to the forefront. I'd start an argument with Wendy, but I've got nothing.