I experienced a myriad of emotions when reading this book (which I finished in two days.) I laughed, cried, I was depressed and paced aimlessly around the house.

Although the narrator, Shannon, (who shares the author's name) seems to be seeking love, she's really trying to accept herself and her life as she knows it. I bristle at the term "Chicklit" because this is not the stereotypical story of a single young woman in the big city with a job she hates and a series of bad dates. This is much more. This is about friendship and self-acceptance. This is about being happy with NOW. This is about the struggles, self-doubt and second-guessing anyone might go through.

Though the narrator's pickiness with others - her parents, her friends, her therapists, herself - may seem annoying to the impatient reader, she's really revealing the type of person she is. Bare with her and she'll make progress, I promise.

The writing style is smooth and injected with bursts of humor that had me almost spraying my beverage, much like Shannon herself. There are moments so touching and moving, I was glad nobody was in the room to witness me dabbing my eyes with Kleenex. And at one point, I was so immersed in the story that I had to stop reading and take a break just to shed the grief I was absorbing.

The title is unique, original and - rest assured - defined in the conclusion.

This story was told entirely through email, instant messages, voice mail, court transcripts, personal letters, cards and journal entries. Though there were some funny moments, an entire story executed in this manner leaves out one important device - characterization. We don't see the characters, we don't experience their thoughts, we don't have dialogue, we don't see their environment, their mannerisms. Because of this, I felt the story was lacking.

There are some funny moments and I think if PART of the story was told in electronic communications and the rest in narrative, it would have been very good.

Another flaw was that every character's 'voice' was similar and communicated similarly. Their email, voice mails and instant messages were so similar, they could have been one person.
She also did this thing where whoever was chatting/emailing would clarify in this manner:

"John Doe came in and punched Mr. Smith. Oh, he's so handsome. John Doe, I mean."

Every character would clarify WHO they were speaking of using the "...I mean" phrasing. It served only to bring me out of the story and realize a single person wrote this and a novel should never distract the reader from the story with flaws like this.

This is not your average "chicklit."
It has the typical chicklit brightly-colored, cutsey cartoon embellished cover. The heroine, Holly Phillips, fits the standard template for chicklit heroines: works in publishing, single, lives in the big city, dating, confides in best friend, has a quirky mother, etc...

But that's where the similarities end. In "Life A La Mode", author Linda Lenhoff takes the seemingly ordinary - painting wall trim, cubicle furnishings, a bug in the ladies room, origami - and looks at it in a new light, with wit and specialness.

It seems most chicklit books are about a lonely young woman trying to find that special someone. Life A La Mode is, too, only that special someone for Holly is herself. Much like Carrie Pilby in Caren Lissner's book of the same title, the story is about a person's unique and special interpretations of the quirkiness around her. And learning to accept herself, her situation and be happy.

If you are hoping to read yet another "Single-girl-meets-guy/gets-guy" story, you'll be disappointed in "Life A La Mode". If you want to read a book where the heroine helps you discover the specialness of ordinary life (and you like good writing and dry humor), then I highly recommend this book.

Because how else would this awful example of "writing" get published?

Many of my complaints have been mentioned in previous reviews - the awful editing, the author's-annoying-tendancy-to-create-hyphenated-phrases, the Canadaisms revealing her lack of authority on the American setting, etc.

My main concern is with the heroine, Jackie. She's so self-centered and annoying. When the primary character is so miserably flawed, the only hope for the story is if the character experiences a journey in which she grows, evolves and redeems herself in some way. Jackie doesn't grow, change, evolve or improve in any way. What is the point for the reader?

Most of the other characters were so poorly developed, I could barely tell them apart. Finally, towards the end, Andrew showed some spark when he stood his ground with Jackie. But it was much too little, far too late.

...for the publishers.

In the past, I typically never got past page 50 of a poorly written book. But more recently, I seem to seek some sort of self-punishment and continue reading, usually completing the book. If anything, these books are a lesson in how NOT to write.

Blushing Pink (I'm still unsure what the title signifies) is a story about an unmotivated PhD student, Reese Brock. She's not only unmotivated, she's uninspired and lacks backbone to stand up to the overbearing, droll Professor Kimble (for whom she's 'ghostwriting' a boring professional book as well as working out her fellowship with) or her cruel teeny-bopper boss at the book store where Reese works part-time.

One has hope for Reese. Hope that she'll stand up the those who oppress her; hope she'll find love; hope she'll stand up to her nagging mother; hope she'll finish her dissertation. Afterall, isn't that the point of a story - the heroine should achieve goals and evolve, preferrably in a positive manner?

Every time Reese has an 'epiphany', the reader is misled into thinking THIS is the beginning of change for the character -- she'll finally get her act together! But, no, it simply doesn't happen like that.

The characters are bland, not quirky and too alike. In fact, both hero and heroine have this habit of spacing out mentally while someone is talking to them, only to be snapped back to attention by the speaker.

Speaking of the hero - Brian Doren - I never really understood what exactly he did for a career. That was pretty vague. And exactly what did he see in Reese? There was no spark, no chemistry.

The author has a habit of writing filler paragraphs - annoying "skip the details" stuff, in order to mark passages of scenes. Dialogue of each character was too similar, except Reese's father, who merely spouted famous quotes in an annoying manner.

I also found editing errors, thus another reason the publishers/editors should be "blushing pink."

The romance book industry is a billion dollar a year industry. There are QUALITY romance novels out there, well-written, funny, good chemistry, characterization and engaging plot. I've read and appreciated them. I fail to understand why anything less is published AND purchased. Readers of romance novels need to be more discriminating. It's YOUR money they are taking in and it should be money well-earned.

This was not like the typical Red Dress Ink books I've read where the heroine is a single relationship/fashion obsessed young woman in the big city trying to find love and committment.

This was more about a unique young woman trying to find her place in her world, with the focus placed mostly on her emotional well-being and her acceptance of others.

Carrie Pilby is very much like the young Amelie from the movie "Amelie." She's young, single, quirky, shy and lonely. Both Carrie and Amelie are curious about the world around them and long to fit in, to find love, to make friends and to express themselves as individuals without fear of rejection.

But Carrie differs greatly from Amelie in personality. Where Amelie was gracefully generous and tentatively curious, Carrie is cynical, suspicious and overanalytical. Though both women embark on missions to help virtual strangers, Amelies's reasons are more unselfish - she just wants to see these people happy. Carrie's reasoning is more to prove a point - to teach someone a lesson in morality.

Carrie Pilby has been isolated from others nearly her whole life because she's a prodigy. She skipped three grades in school and graduated from Harvard before the age of 19. As the book begins, we find a shy, sarcastic person who struggles to understand morality and hypocrisy. Since she has had limited social experiences, she's on the verge of defining morality thanks to her therapist, who has provided her a with a list of goals to achieve before the year's end. Carrie approaches the goals in a somewhat unconventional manner with the intent of quickly just getting the list completed, but learns some unexpected lessons about human rationalization.

I highly recommend this book. It was such an unexpected pleasure and change from the typical "chick" stuff Red Dress has printed in the past. I hope they continue to publish quirky stories where it's more important for the heroine to evolve and become satisfied with aspects of her life than to 'get the guy'.

And if you've seen the movie "Amelie," read this book and compare the two stories about a single young woman trying to understand and fit in her world.

I imagine if Pat Brown were to give a speech on profiling and serial killers with a question/answer session, this book is pretty much how it would go.

Some questions/answers are repeated, but Ms. Brown is thorough, blunt and speaks in an easy to understand language. This book is for anyone interested understanding the motivations of murderers who commit sexual homicide. She uses layman's terms when possible and provides easy to understand definitions of professional terms. Each section is peppered with quotes from famous serial killers, adding a chilling seriousness to the dark humor of her writing.
If it lacked anything, it would be more accounts of real homicide cases. She does include brief descriptions of cases related to various topics she is covering, but the book could use a bit more.
It's disturbing to understand how close by serial killers are to us - in our neighborhoods and communities - and how much they get away with for so long.
This was a quick read - I finished it in one day - but interesting and informative. I especially liked how Ms. Brown debunks various Hollywood cliches about serial killers and profilers.

...but without proper editing and characterization, Hot Pink quickly deflates into an insubstantial tale of two oversexed people completely lacking distinctive personalities.

Pink-haired Chloe Chisolm flees from a blind date gone bad into an elevator just as Rocco Vinelli escapes the clutches of a possessive, clingy female friend. So far, so good (meeting in elevators is a good start - sort of a confined, forced acquaintance with someone.)

But, within the hour, Chloe and Rocco are tumbling into her bed where they spend the next 24 hours copulating, having fantastic mind-blowing sex. They part, both agreeing it was a fun one-time thing. Ho-hum.

However, neither can get the other out of his/her head, and so begins their obsessions with one another. The story quickly deteriorates from there and here are just a few reasons why:

There is no proper characterization of either Chloe or Rocco. They lack personality, quirkiness, uniqueness. I failed to understand why each was attracted to the other. For instance, WHY does Chloe choose to have pink hair? Other than his initial comment "Nice hair", Rocco never bothers to ask her. But had he asked, we might have gained a little insight to Chloe's personna. Why pink instead of green, blue, purple, etc.? How long has she had it pink? Has she experienced prejudice and disdain from others because of her hair color? What other quirks does she possess to go along with her unusual hair color? Unfortunately, I found nothing edgy or unique about Chloe beyond her hair color. And Rocco's merely a sculpted poster child for expensive clothing.

Secondary players get even less characterization. Chloe's friends are interchangeable, plastic, self-absorbed and are remiss in their assigned roles as confidantes. Rather than allowing Chloe a 'confidante friend' to pour her heart out to or seek advice from, the author chose to have Chloe hash out her problems with herself. Frankly, this doesn't work.

Rocco's self-proclaimed 'fiancee' is the overused stereotypical perfect blond pouty spoiled rich girl. Yawn.

Chloe has unprotected sex with Rocco with little concern, then later, has a sexual encounter with someone else and DEMANDS he wear a condom...but only one time, never during any later sex scenes. I call this the 'obligatory protected sex scene' that writers toss into stories to remain current and politically correct.

Poor word choice: moue, copacetic, outre, degage...etc. This isn't a literary novel, but perhaps the author needed to prove something?

Numerous editing errors. I get the impression the editor was out to lunch when this manuscript came in. When she came back, one of her underlings had already submitted it to the 'To Press' box.

And this was the most annoying flaw - the constant Point of View (POV) switching (or 'head-hopping') where the story is told from hero/heroine (and sometimes other characters, depending on who is in the scene), with no distinct section changes to indicate WHOSE head we are in. I'm grateful, at least, that the head-hopping was at least confined to separate paragraphs. Though, even this wasn't much help, since on any given page, the point of view switched back and forth half a dozen times. This is just lazy writing.

And finally, the ending... Well, considering Chloe and Rocco had known each other a FULL THREE WEEKS...let's just say the ending was just as insubstantial as their entire "relationship."

This book started off surprisingly funny and then spiraled out of control into a convoluted and unrealistic ending.

I give it two stars. One star for the first half of the book: Delilah Levine is a wife, mother and freelance soap opera writer. Delilah's relationship with her husband, Jason, has become increasingly strained and at first the cause appears to be Delilah's lack of housekeeping skills and her scatter-brained behavior on top of stress from her Jason's job. We see all the classic symptoms of marital distress and external pressures - husband irritable and disinterested in sex; frequent arguments; pressure on Delilah from other mommies and her daughter's principal to conform to NYC societies expectations; Delilah's frequent sexual fantasies about the handsome plumber.

The second star is for the sections of humor that had me laughing out loud. Ms. Kwitney has a knack for making humorous jabs at the ridiculousness of everyday life, of marriage, of outside pressures to 'fit in' with what's expected.

But, nearly every chapter begins with one of Delilah's plumber fantasies, all in italics, which have little to do with the plot, except to establish her distraction over the plumber.

Without giving away the plot, this story began as a humorous tale of a marriage on the brink of dissolution and quickly became a fantastical farce that left me wondering what in the world was the point?

Typically the story of a woman trapped in a loveless marriage is told from that woman's viewpoint. In this book, the story is told by the one holding the woman prisoner, caging her from freedom.

Professor Nicholas Van Tassel is a pompous, self-absorbed man. Not very likable. He falls for Etna Bliss in the aftermath of a hotel fire and is besotted. He courts her and though she obviously lacks reciprocity of passion and admiration for him, he manages to convince her to marry him.
What's fascinating about Van Tassel is that to his peers, he is merely an annoyance - a mediocre colleague with a distorted illusion of his own importance. But, beneath his professional facade, he's brilliantly manipulative. He seems to almost always get his way and truly believes he deserves that which he seeks - a marriage and family with a woman who does not love him; a prestigous position at the University.
Though the story is told by Van Tassel, it's truly Etna's story. I found myself yearning for poor Etna to gain her freedom. The reader has little sympathy for Van Tassel, doesn't root for him to achieve his goals. He's cheated before... and he does it again and again to get what he wants, at costs to others.
Upon getting acquainted with Van Tassel, the reader knows there can be no happy ending if the man attains all he wants.
I found the story to be unique in taking the viewpoint of the antagonist with no expectations on the reader to have sympathy for the man. Ms. Shreve showed the reader what goes on inside the mind of a person who loves selfishly, greedily. The writing style, with its prim flourish and pomp, is truly Van Tassel's voice and gives a feeling of the era.