I'm reading it for my reading group and I just can't get over how appallingly bad a writer she is - or how her editors can have let her get away with it (oh I know, did someone say 'Orange Prize'? ). What's really sad is that underneath all that purple prose, overwriting and 'look at me I've done my research' passages, there's quite a decent, if unoriginal, story begging to get out. Honestly, if I'd taken my editor's pencil to it, I'd have reduced it by 2 thirds and improved the book beyond recognition.
Right, I'm glad I got that off my chest, so does anyone care to agree or come to her defence?