50 Comments Add your own

• 1. K.L.  |  June 30th, 2007 at 11:24 am

  You captured the book perfectly, BCB. I agree wholeheartedly.

---

• 2. cc  |  June 30th, 2007 at 11:43 am

  okay- so since this is a group blog- and they’re giving away books to bloggers who post reviews- if they like the review and discussion do we ALL get books?

  I have the book, but haven’t had a chance to read it- but I am taking it with me to Denver, to the Centennial Garden, to meet Pam, the lurking CB- to have a fun filled CB kind of day- so as y’all are working in gardens, going to work, and dealing with reality, all I really have to say is, “Nanner, nanner, nanner.”

---

• 3. Mary  |  June 30th, 2007 at 11:53 am

  if people really could do magic, this is what it would be like. If people could be transformed by love, this is how it would feel.

  Yes. Exactly.

  Also, a much funnier book than I’d expected. I kept trying to determine who had the best lines, but I eventually had to give up. They all did. (Okay, perhaps not Maxine or Jude.)

---

• 4. Diane  |  June 30th, 2007 at 2:45 pm

  Yes, I finished the book and then read it all over again - but that’s not nearly such a big thing, BCB, as that YOU will! Quite the unusual compliment…

  SO much fun, and the magic so nicely integrated with the sisters’ other characteristics…

---

• 5. McB  |  June 30th, 2007 at 3:10 pm

  I too love Xan. Gotta love a villianess that you can almost sympathize with. “It’s so difficult to get good supernatural help these days.”

  As a SINGLE NOVEL written by 3 separate authors, it’s amazing how seamlessly the writing flows. It’s just a fun, fun read.

---

• 6. GatorPerson  |  June 30th, 2007 at 4:25 pm

  I found myself trying to find the seams. Gotta read it again, both for the fun of it and to look harder for the seams. Ciao hound. Love it.

---

• 7. jenb  |  June 30th, 2007 at 8:39 pm

  Perfect review, BCB. I’m still looking for the seams too.

---

• 8. me  |  June 30th, 2007 at 9:25 pm

  If I hadn’t known beforehand who had written which character, I would have been very hard to tell. But Jenny did have some of her signature snark in there. It was a great story, and funny. I like BCB’s line: defeat can be open to interpretation and resurrection.

  Per BCB’s request, I will go write about meeting Dee on the other psot.

---

• 9. me  |  June 30th, 2007 at 9:25 pm

  Or the other post.

---

• 10. Jen-t  |  June 30th, 2007 at 10:32 pm

  Excellent review. And might I add creative. Sheesh, someone might mistake you for a real writer or something.

---

• 11. orangehands  |  July 1st, 2007 at 1:30 am

  BCB’s reading a book again? talk about your excellent reviews…

  i need to read it again (hey, not weird when i do it), but i do remember smiling a lot. and not putting it down so i could finish my essay final. it was fun. loved Xan.

  i do remember thinking the ending was too rushed (though again, could have been me, racing through so i could work on my essay).

  and i’m back CBs (yeah, yeah, yeah BCB, i’m on topic- hanging with my CB family, and that book was all about family)

---

• 12. dee  |  July 1st, 2007 at 8:14 am

  Is this going to be a book discussion thread, or are we just talking generalities here?

  In general, I find it interesting that so many of the reviews that I’m reading now admit to anything from confusion, to curiosity, to downright skepticism, when the reviewer/blogger found out that all three would be writing the entire book. Here I thought I was the only one, and just being silent out of loyalty (or really, out f fear, because who the hell around here would dare doubt The Cherry?). Now though, at least 3 other people admit that they were as concerned as I’ve been.

  I’ve talked to someone else that is reading it, and she’s having a harder time than usual with a Crusie. Still though, I really enjoyed the book. Obviously.

  So yeah, are we talking specifics here, like why Xan had the same last name as the girls if she was their mom’s sister? Did I totally miss that explanation? Or the… oh wait. I better wait for an answer…

---

• 13. BCB  |  July 1st, 2007 at 9:49 am

  Dee: I can’t speak for anyone else, but I tried to be very vague in my review as I know not many people have had time to read the book yet. I think we certainly could have a true book discussion here, but maybe not just yet? I’m sure at some point the Cherries will be discussing it. Won’t they? Probably even Jenny would answer questions about it over there.

  But I’m confused. Are you saying people who have read it are still confused and skeptical? Or that before they read it they were skeptical about whether three people could/would collaborate on one book? When you say someone who is reading it is having a harder time than usual — what do you mean?

  And just FTR, I don’t think it’s “disloyal” to question why a writer is doing something a certain way, or even to be skeptical about whether they could do it, especially if it’s something very unusual. I think that’s human nature. And while I was skeptical about whether the three of them could pull it together (collaborating is HARD), I was absolutely certain all along that if they couldn’t, for whatever reason, none of them would have agreed to let that book hit the shelves. I have a great deal of faith in their professionalism.

---

• 14. GatorPerson  |  July 1st, 2007 at 11:32 am

  I thought the book was great. It’s just within me to look for the hows and whys of anything, including how 3 people could put a novel together so seamlessly. And then I look for the seams.

  Actually, I think the book’s biggest difference is not the 3 authors, but because it’s the intertwined stories of 3 women with none of them being absolutely positively the one and only protagonist. Three stories in 1 novel, but NOT 3 novellas. Four, if you count Xan. So the novel doesn’t really follow the format they’re teaching us over at HWSW. That may be what’s keeping some readers slightly off balance.

  This goes along with what I said about Orson Scott Card’s latest novel, Empire. He kills off the protagonist midway through the novel and has to create another one. Left me off balance.

---

• 15. orangehands  |  July 1st, 2007 at 10:06 pm

  I was actually skeptical because I didn’t think Crusie’s voice was similar to Stuart’s (haven’t read Dreyer’s yet, but i really thought Stuart was going to have a lot harsher of a (male) character than she did in the Fortune book).

  *maybe spoiler ahead*
  One thing that may rock readers is the time frame. I personally have a very hard time believing in love over a short period time (i do NOT believe in love at first sight. lust? hell yeah. but not love) so the fact it was three (four with Xan) stories in the length of one story, you didn’t get to see the same falling in love you see in other books. plus, it only took place over three, four days i believe.

---

• 16. downundergal  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 3:53 am

  Yes, its me coming out of all-too-infrequent lurk.
  Oh no, this is bad - still haven’t got the book yet. Next stop is to email Rosemary and badger her for a in-your-hands date.
  So I cant say anything yet. Except the cover would attract me from miles away so thats a plus. And speaking as someone who at 16 saw a guy and said - I’m gonna marry that man and then did - love in a short space of time doesn’t phase me onelittle bit.
  Right - on to Rosemary.

---

• 17. Jen-t  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 6:59 am

  I don’t believe in love at first sight - but I believe in it in fiction and I do believe that there are people in this world we are just supposed to know. Kind of that thing - everything happens for a reason.

  I ignore the time frame in books for the most part. It doesn’t matter othere than to ground me how things are happening. In todays world things happen so fast that long drawn out time frames in books is very annoying to the reader. Imagine reading along and then at the beginning of every chapter you get “the following week….” Time is very hard for the reader to keep track of and unless you are writing some epic thing, these days the market demands short time frames.

  Look at DLD - it happened in a week or two week time frame. I think Agnes is 4 days.

  the idea is for the writer to “suspend your disblief” just enough for you to think those two people have a wonderful chance of being together forever. For me this is a promise from page one. Time frame is irrelevent - relationship and character development the only thing that matters.

  I have not finished the Unfortunate Miss Fortunes. Half way through. I’m hoping to put my review up over at my blog by Thursday or Friday (maybe before).

---

• 18. GatorPerson  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 8:05 am

  The authors got away with the length-of-time-to-fall-in-love by using Fate. If we’re going to accept the magic the sisters do, then it’s not much of a stretch to accept Fate.

  OTOH, if a novel really covers the length of time it takes to fall in love, etc., it’s going to have to cover a lot of time or else jump over a lot of months and/or years.

  And then there’s the interesting part that so many of the romance novel heroines look just like me - long flowing blonde hair, inky eyelashes, creamy skin, legs that go forever.

---

• 19. McB  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 8:29 am

  OH at 15: I personally have a very hard time believing in love over a short period time

  But you had no problem with the purple bunnies, levitating bed, and dragon? *snort* As Jen said, if the story is good - and this one is - I’m quite willing to suspend disbelief. Plus which the guys were their one true loves.

  It was the different voices that had me skeptical. I don’t know why because Jenny and Bob pulled it off. Then I remembered that my first and long time favorite Stuart book involved a time travelling gangster. She can write anything. When I think about how well they balanced the timelines I keep thinking about the photo from one of their brainstorming sessions, the one of the cupboard covered with post-it notes. But I should have known better than to be skeptical because if Jenny is involved it WILL work.

---

• 20. McB  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 8:35 am

  Forgot to say welcome back DUG. Stop lurking and visit more often.

---

• 21. BCB  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 9:18 am

  I think there’s a big difference between being a skeptic and being a nay-sayer. I’m an optimist at heart, even though I’m very cynical, and my skepticism in this case was colored with a huge amount of hope. I was really hoping they could pull it off, at the same time realizing how hard it would be to do it. I think that’s a lot different from people who say they’re skeptical and what they really mean is that you shouldn’t even try or that you don’t have what it takes and they KNOW you will fail.

  I didn’t have a problem with the different voices. If you were to sit down with three people and listen to them tell the same story from each person’s perspective, it would sound like three distinct people telling it. I think it’s the weaving it all together into a coherent and cohesive piece that had the potential for disaster, but they did that very well.

  I was also skeptical when I heard Jenny and Bob had decided to collaborate — one the one hand, why shouldn’t a story have the authenticity of both a male and female point of view? On the other, well, how the heck did they think that was going to work? But I was very willing to be pleasantly surprised.

  I have a huge amount of respect for writers who are wiling to take chances like that. To try something different and challenging that, when it works, makes the rest of us sit up and say, “Wow, would you look at that. That is amazing.”

---

• 22. andi  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 9:30 am

  I’m not a fan of para-normal, is that the word? But I am a fan of the authors, so I dove in with an open mind, and while I was entertained, I didn’t LOVE this book. It was seemless as one novel, I wasn’t jerked from one story, voice, author to the next. And that was brilliant. The characters were engaging, but didn’t seem full to me, I guess it felt a too rushed, the pacing forced maybe?

  No problem with love at first sight, or falling in love in a weekend, but with so much else going on it did feel a little pinched.

  Although I’ve not re-read it, and on my second read everything may just flow. Who knows, I’m just a reader looking for a good time! and UMF was a good time!

  Hi DUG!
  Bryan - I have passport, will travel. Not sure what mince is, but I also have an adventurous pallette.

---

• 23. dee  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 9:35 am

  BCB- Got it on the discussion, and I agree. I also try to keep things very general and vague, for exactly the same reasons. A review should really pull someone in enough to buy the book, not be a mini- book report. But I’d very much LIKE to do a discussion here. I’m sure they will have one over at TCF, but I don’t get over there a whole lot, so I’m hoping we can do one here as well. We can put warnings up on the post and everything, saying “SPOILERS!”

  As for being skeptical - it just struck me as kinda funny that in almost every review I’ve read so far, the reviewer mentions being skeptical about them being able to pull it off. It seems that a lot of us felt that way, but I don’t remember any of us actually saying it before the reviews. Just thought it was funny, that we all had the same initial reaction, but didn’t share that, even here.

  Yes, of course there is a difference between being skeptical and being a nay-sayer. Totally agree with your post 21 above.

  The other thing I mentioned - I have a friend that LOVES Jenny’s stuff. She also loved DLD. However, she’s having a really hard time getting into this book. She’s not sure if it’s because there are so many POVs, or that each character ’sounds’ so different, or that this is more of a paranormal, or what, but she’s just having a harder time reading it. Normally, she devours Jenny books in about 12 hours. She’s been reading TUMF for three days. She said she’s enjoying it, but just has not been totally sucked into it like other Jenny books she’s read.

---

• 24. BCB  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 9:54 am

  Dee wrote: It seems that a lot of us felt that way, but I don’t remember any of us actually saying it before the reviews. Just thought it was funny, that we all had the same initial reaction, but didn’t share that, even here.

  Well, think about it. If everyone had expressed that opinion before they read the book, that would have just been mean spirited and discouraging to the writers. What’s the point of doing that? It’s one thing if you’re someone whose opinion that writer values and if that writer wants your opinion and you express it privately.

  It’s quite another to spread the word all over the place that you’re skeptical when the writers in question haven’t even finished the book yet. I don’t think that’s an issue of loyalty, that’s just common courtesy and professionalism. And honestly, if they hadn’t made it work, I’ll bet you would not have heard many people (not other writers, anyway) express their doubts after the fact. That would be mean.

  Saying it now, after they’ve proven they CAN do something extremely difficult, is more of an acknowledgment of the magnitude of their effort. A celebration, if you will, of the achievement.

---

• 25. BCB  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 10:12 am

  Ack! Need to clarify. Didn’t mean to imply there won’t be negative reviews of this book or that there won’t be people saying they didn’t like it. Of course that will happen, that is always the case. But it would surprise me if those people also said they knew all along it would never work. Of course, I’ve been wrong before.

---

• 26. McB  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 10:32 am

  Perhaps a better phrasing than skeptical would be uncertain hopefulness. For me, I’ve been disappointed in the past by writers who try to do something different. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. Sometimes it’s the difference in the writing, sometimes it’s my expectations.

  As to the lack of fullness in the characters or the too fast pacing, it has to be hard to do justice to three protagonists plus their love interests and keep to an average number of pages. From that perspective, I think they did an amazing job of it.

  I think the reviews will be a lot like they were with DLD. People will say they didn’t enjoy it as much as they usually do Jenny’s (or Eileen’s, or Anne’s) books. Well it’s not a Crusie … it’s a Crusie/Dreyer/Stuart.

---

• 27. K.L.  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 10:53 am

  I think it did feel a bit squeezed, but I think that came from putting 3 sisters into the same length book that usually holds one or two. It would have benefitted from being allowed to go a little longer.

  I think the person who posts Thursday or Friday should simply put up a post that says “TUMF SPOILER book discussion”. That way anyone who hasn’t read the book can simply avoid the post.

---

• 28. cary  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 11:06 am

  I loved TUMF. I did think that it was “squeezed” - enough material for at least three really good books, with each sister’s story (and Xan’s). And the “mystery” of the parents’ death was resolved a bit ? for me.

  But really, wouldn’t you really rather have one book with TONS of good story material than three books that could each have been 50 pages shorter? I’ll take too much inspiration over too little any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

---

• 29. Lori  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 11:28 am

  Re: Doubt.
  I don’t remember doubting. I did read several Stuart and Dreyer books out of curiosity. Then I thought, “this should be interesting” but I don’t think I doubted.

  Then again, one of the first things Sister Krissie said to me after I commented on how much I enjoyed her book Into the Fire on the former TUMF blog, is that she writes several kinds of books including dark romps and dark thrillers (or something like that). She wanted to be sure I knew TUMF was going to be a romp, so I wouldn’t be disappointed or something. I wasn’t disappointed.

  Re: Seams
  You all mention how seamless it was. I agree that all the different voices sang beautifully together. I didn’t think about which author wrote which part (much). I will admit that I felt jerked around by the story sometimes.

  Just as I was settling in to enjoy the next catastrophe for one sister, I would be pushed into another sister’s story. Of course, I always wanted to know what would happen to next so I’d keep going. Then again I found it easy to put the book down during those transitions (to go do laundry). Being able to put a book down (while great for my laundry) is not the best review I can give a book. Probably the “jerked around” feeling I got had a lot in common with the “squeezed” feeling other’s got.

  Bottom line. I enjoyed this book.

  Re: Love at First Sight

  Yeah, so the stories in TUMF did not have love at first sight. It was lust at first sight and love in a very short amount of time, under extenuating circumstances. Plus, Mare had history with her guy which got fleshed out pretty well.

  Question: Why is it that people believe me when within five minutes I can say, “he’s not for me,” but they think it’s insane that within the same amount of time I might be able to say “he is for me”?

  For instance, I went out with some friends on Friday for drinks. I sat across one of the most beautiful and nicest guys I have ever had the privilege to stare at from across a pitcher of beer. It took me exactly 2 minutes of conversation to know I didn’t want him for myself. I’m positive in that decision, and nobody I’ve talked to about that night doubted me.

  Still. What would have happened if there was an initial pull, followed by three days where I had time to really see his character and talk to him about life? Would I discount any strong feelings I had for him at that point because “it was just four days” into the relationship?

  The truth is I probably would discount those feelings because of the time frame, but the real point is: I still believe there is the possibility that I could feel them. That’s partly why this book works for me.

---

• 30. me  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 11:43 am

  i think the love at first sight is every girl’s dream, and every girl (woman) wants to believe it, so therefore we believe it in books because we want to believe it for ourselves.

  But that may be just me.

---

• 31. Lori  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 11:47 am

  Love at first sight would freak the hell out of me…but that might just be me

---

• 32. K.L.  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 12:00 pm

  I didn’t have love at first sight. I had knowing after the first date. It is hard to explain, but after my divorce from my high school sweetheart, I dated a lot of guys and knew right away they were NOT THE ONE. I finally got depressed, and prayed about maybe I was closing off relationships too quickly. God answered this one fairly quickly. “When it is right you will know it.” After the first date with my DH, I simply knew it was right. It isn’t always easy, but we have been together 20 years now and still doing well.

---

• 33. GatorPerson  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 12:41 pm

  The sofa? I knew it when I saw it because I’d been looking for a long time, somewhat as K.L. says.

  We develop a very long list of likes and dislikes for whatever we’re “shopping for.” Eliminating a sofa was easy. Going down the list, and the first no eliminated that one. Lori took 2 minutes of her list to hit a no. The yesses are harder, because often we need to check stuff that isn’t on the list yet.

  Now if the cushions soften or the air mattress isn’t very sleepable later on I’ll be ticked off. If the guy is a woman-beater, it might take a lot longer to find out, particularly if he’s experienced at hiding it.

  Love at first sight? Sigh! If only. Purple bunnies are easier to believe in.

---

• 34. orangehands  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 3:08 pm

  the really funny thing is my dad knew right away he was going to marry my mom. they actually moved in together fairly quickly too. i know a couple of people that knew right away they were with the one they wanted, and they’ve had good marriages for 40-60 yrs. i also know a lot of people on the negative side. i think what makes a difference is knowing it’s going to be a lot of work, rather than “s/he’s the one i want, we’re done with”.

  i’m actually curious to know- for those who said they saw their spouse and knew that was it, were you also “in love” with them right away?

  MCB, re 19: actually, yeah, like GP said, easier for me to believe in purple bunnies (or i guess, easier for me to suspend belief) than for love that quick.

  i think the reason it didn’t bother me as much as DLD was DLD had a faster pace that came more naturally (by that, it didn’t seem as forced), and i was able to see them together- a lot- so that it was easier to suspend belief. in TUMF, because Mare and Crash had a history together, i was able to see it more than with the other two, who met and then Fate came calling.

---

• 35. me  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 3:19 pm

  clarification: I believed in the instant true love in TUMF because I want to believe that happens. (And because, hey, it was magic!) I don’t, but I want to, and this plot line makes me try to believe it can happen, makes me just a tiny wee bit less cynical, for a few minutes anyway. But the fairytale is still just a fairytale. I mean, it is fiction.

  Just didn’t want you all to think I’d gone all mushy.

  And now that I think about it, it wasn’t love at first site with the sisters anyway. Or if it was, they were all in denial about it.

---

• 36. Lori  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 3:30 pm

  I know I’m talking about this love stuff a lot and I know I’m taking it a bit off topic, but I used to firmly agree with OH’s “love takes time” philosophy. Now I’m not so sure. Commitment takes time and energy and hard work, and it’s a HUGE part of lasting love. But “falling in love”…that’s a tricky bastard.

  GP: You know the “list” is part of the reason I found Friday night so strange and revealing. Now, mind you, I don’t really have a list. No really. There are a few things that might be deal breakers, but overall I tend to work on a guy to guy basis. Lists don’t work for me because what I find attractive in one guy I can find extremely repulsive in the next, so I’d have to amend my list to say stuff like: Friendly, but not TOO friendly. Confident, but not TOO confident. Nice but not TOO Nice. (And really, how do you measure too nice or too friendly?) See my problem here? (It’s okay, my friends find this strange too, but the list thing is just not my style.)

  Anyway, there was absolutely no reason for me not to want to at least try to pursue RGLG (ridiculously good-lookin’ guy). Great sense of humor. Incredibly attractive. Smiled with his eyes. He defended my honor against Zeke and Jeb (local yokels). Sincere. Not arrogant, but confident. Excellent listener. Genuinely nice. Seriously, if you ever have the chance to meet RGLG from Minneapolis go for it. Amazing guy.

  YET… He was not for me. I just knew it. I wasn’t for him either. Fate. Answered Prayer. Magic. Intuition. Pheromones. Chemistry. Whatever. If I can trust these to know when it’s wrong…why not trust them just a quickly if they tell me it’s right? Why is that such a big deal?

---

• 37. GatorPerson  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 3:49 pm

  Of course, people, it’s the Glittery Hoo Haa.

---

• 38. K.L.  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 4:18 pm

  We didn’t fall in love instantly. It was more that we both felt that there was something worth persuing. The relationship had value right from the start. But within the first month we weren’t seeing anyone else at all. Nor did we want to.

---

• 39. McB  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 8:54 pm

  Sometimes you click with people for no explicable reason. Sometimes you don’t. I think it’s true for any relationship, not just romantic. It’s not so much that they are so great, but rather that they balance you in some way.

---

• 40. downundergal  |  July 2nd, 2007 at 9:43 pm

  Yes, I think thats right McB. It can happen in any relationships. I’ve had 2 this-person’s-the-one moments. One was with my best friend in high school the other with Mark. The best friend thing didn’t last much past our teens but Mark and I have been together for 21 years. Not that its been all hearts and roses but bottom line is we love each other so we work it out.

  OH - I knew instantly (like an out-of-body experience instantly) that I was going to marry him. That he was the one for me. To this day it’s still one of the wierdest moments of my life. Do I think that if you dont have that then your relationships doomed? No. I just happened to get lucky. Did I fall in love with him in that instant. No - that probably took a few dates BUT I knew I was going to.

  Re the sceptical - I’m a sceptical person by nature but on things like this I just think - its a book that Jenny has a hand in. If she’s confident then who am I to doubt it? It never occured to me to doubt whether they could do it. I’d rather make that judgement after I’ve read it.
  If I ever get the damn thing.

---

• 41. Louisa  |  July 3rd, 2007 at 10:20 am

  Wow. So much thought. I do believe in love at first sight. I experienced it myself, many times, when I was younger. I knew that none of them mattered, though, because I was never going to get married. Just didn’t want to.

  In this book, though, it’s MAGIC. Xan worked her fingers to the bone locating these, ahem, guys. Love the bunnies & whatnot. Not my usual thing. Felt like reading an X-rated fairy tale with all the little-girl colors and lost childhood vibes.

  Doubt? It never crossed my mind that the book wouldn’t be good, that Jenny couldn’t pull it off. The other writers are unknown to me, but my faith in Jenny’s experience, talent, and professionalism–well, it just never crossed my mind the book wouldn’t rock.

  I did feel confused at first, so many heroines, colors, magical gifts to keep straight, and I kept reading “muffin butter” as “muffin batter” but that was only a microsecond’s jerk, and it was fully my own fault.

  And, I totally identified with Xan, even if I have no earthly idea how to pronounce her name.

  The only real problem I had with the book itself was that I thought the final battle wasn’t HARD ENOUGH for the girls to win. I would have twisted it at least one more time.

  If you’ve ever read TANSY WIFE, that is the kind of final battle of magic that’s really satisfying. TW wasn’t funny, though.

---

• 42. orangehands  |  July 3rd, 2007 at 12:03 pm

  DUG- this is just wrong. email me your address at orangehands @ gmail . com (that’s OH spelled out @ gmail dot com). it should only take, what? 2 weeks this way?

  louisa: who’s Tansy Wife by? and i agree that the last battle wasn’t hard enough.

  i’m so weird, because i see a difference between knowing someone is right for me (knowing they are “the one”) and falling in love. it’s one of those weird distinctions in my mind. yep, i’m crazy (it’s ok, my therapist says it works for me )

  and to keep this on topic- any problems i did have with the book, it had some great lines and some very funny scenes.

---

• 43. downundergal  |  July 3rd, 2007 at 5:55 pm

  OH, thank you, you are sweet but I have faith in Rosemary getting me the book soon. She got me DLD on the American release date so I’m sure it wont be much longer. She is a goddess among bookshop owners.
  But if I dont have it in a few weeks I may just take you up on that

---

• 44. Louis  |  July 3rd, 2007 at 6:51 pm

  TUMF…

  WOW!…that’s quite a weekend for the Ms Fortunes.

  Loved the book.

  Jenny Crusie and Anne Stuart are writers that I like…haven’t read anything by Eileen Dreyer..as yet…ordered a couple of her backlist to read.

  I think “Mother” was modeled after “Sister Krissie”.

---

• 45. WapakGram  |  July 3rd, 2007 at 9:36 pm

  I loved the book. And BCB, being the eldest of three sisters in my real life, I can tell you that Miss Jenny was perfect as the younger sister. My youngest sister is the biggest pain in the ass and I love her dearly. She is all snark and snap and gets everything she wants because no one wants to cross her. Jenny nailed Mare in that role.
  Of course, Dee had to worry about everyone else, and put herself aside for the others. She is the oldest and she has all the worries. It is a real trial.
  But that middle child…..you never know which way they will go.

  I needed a good laugh an TUMF certainly provided it. I didn’t delve into who wrote what, I just enjoyed having something Jenny (*and friends) in my hands to read. Well that, and the purple bunnies.

---

• 46. downundergal  |  July 3rd, 2007 at 10:37 pm

  Well Rosemary’s ears must have been burning - she just emailed me to say the book has arrived. I’ll have it tomorrow.
  Yippee - just in time for my three night duties!!!!!

---

• 47. CMS  |  July 3rd, 2007 at 10:42 pm

  I haven’t read the comments or the book yet. I gave my copy to Mom to read first and she’s having a rough few days with her eyes. But I wanted to tell you that thanks to the TUMF website and the PW review, I had a very loud and adamant discussion with the bookseller at Chapters. The staff insisted that it was an anthology. I explained that I knew for a fact it was a novel. This was on Thursday. The saleslady had to go into the back room in order to find a copy for me.(Thursday!) She backed down when I pointed out A novel printed on the cover. But head office insists it is an anthology and that it be placed accordingly. She did agree to head people in the right direction, as well as talk it up to people who were looking for a fun read. Once I’ve actually read the book, I’ll come back and see what you all had to say about it. See you soon

---

• 48. orangehands  |  July 4th, 2007 at 10:48 am

  DUG: i’m glad Goddess Rosemary came through but the offer always stands

---

• 49. McB  |  July 5th, 2007 at 5:42 am

  DUG, tell Rosemary she wins the CherryBomb seal of approval. Also tell her she’ll need to stock up on fish.

---

• 50. btuda  |  July 5th, 2007 at 2:12 pm

  McB RE # 49: I had to read it twice, but that last line gave me the laugh I’ve been needing all day.

---

Leave a Comment

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed