The Dewey Decimal System of Love

If it is possible to recommend the "worst book ever" to anyone, this would be the one.

The plot is about a 40 year old librarian who also happens to be a pseudo virgin (she hasn't had sex in 15 years and in case you forget that major "plot" point, she will keep telling you over and over again), who finds herself "falling in love" with the new maestro of the local orchastra and the hilarity that "ensues" as she discovers "herself." Throw in breast feeding (said "virgin" to her godson in order to "bond" with him - say what?), a convoluted romance (Oh! My! God! I've been in love with my boss for the last 15 YEARS and never even figured it out!), the maestro's jealous wife who may or may not be writing a mystery or planning to kill her show more husband, her "sex on legs" doctor mother, and all this other ridiculousness and you've got "Dewey Decimal System of Love."

There is no depth to the characters, there is way too much going on (sub-sub plot of one of her co-workers who is also "in love" with the boss, who then writes him a letter and the boss then writes "back" and tells to perhaps to think about "lesbianism" -- I mean, if he actually DID write the letter, why would our heroine want to be with someone who is so callous in a brush-off to a suitor he is not interested in?)/.And all this convoluted mess with her father (no one is as good a daddy!), there is soo much going on and nothing is wrapped up that I literally wanted to throw the book against the wall when finished. Poorly written, poorly executed, and severely poorly edited. It is written by someone who shows no concept of character development (the best friend is a lawyer and is quizzed about why she owns a cell phone-- this is the '00s for Pete's sake, and who the heck DOESN'T have a cell phone these days? Especially when said best friend is a high powered lawyer!) THe author relies on stereotypes to define her characters and the whole book just stank of poor development and execution. It felt like and read like a 7th grader writing their first romance, not of a "seasoned" writer. Stay the heck away from this book. show less

I' really enjoyed this book, I thought the writing was excellent, and the man character was unusual enough to keep me very engaged. I'm surprised that others disliked the book so much. There seems to be much kvetching about librarian stereotypes, but a librarian myself, I have to say the stereotypes never bother me. There is a glimmer of truth to that particular stereotype--we do tend to be brainy and largely female, if not scolding and all spinsters. But I enjoyed the twist on the stereotype and the way the book seemed so firmly rooted in Philadelphia.

Reading other reviews, I am annoyed with how many people preface their commentary with "I don't usually read chick lit but..." I'm really sick of the very idea that books written from a show more female point of view must be labeled something separate from regular literature, and that we must somehow apologize for reading them. Do people apologize for reading thrillers? Do we label them "man lit?" Apparently this book was originally marketed as a romance, but it doesn't have much in common with the romance genre, and the narrative voice is quite different from what I think of as the "chick lit" genre. show less

Ally is a librarian at the Free Library of Philadelphia. When she attends a symphony, she immediately falls in “love” with the conductor, whom she has never met, and not only that, he is married. She manages to get a volunteer position with the orchestra, so is able to see him more often. Meanwhile, his wife comes in to the library doing research to write a book.

Ally fit all kinds of librarian stereotypes, and initially I found it funny (I’m a librarian, too, and I fit some of those same stereotypes), but she just went way over the top. I also wasn’t crazy about the ending (although, I suppose, better than the alternative?). Overall, I’m rating it ok for the few parts I enjoyed.

I know nothing about the genre that's (somewhat disdainfully) referred to as "chick lit." I read Bridget Jones's Diary because it was recommended to me by my then-boyfriend (?) (I don't know why either, especially considering that he was generally a science fiction nerd), and that's where my knowledge of its tropes, concerns, etc. begins and ends.

And yet I am in the midst of writing a draft of a book that I'm calling chick lit. I don't know.

But anyway, in that spirit--the grand spirit of knowing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING--I picked up this book. It made me feel somewhat better about my own meager efforts, so that's something. And I liked all the Philadelphia references (but I'm not sure why she felt the need to express joy at moving away from show more Swarthmore--what, the Ville isn't good enough for you?).

But as a librarian...aw, man, as a librarian, I have to tell you, I am tired as all hell of the librarian stereotypes, even the ones that are supposed to be semi-positive. (We're sensible! We're secretly cool but you'd never know it! etc.) I am not so interested in the Celibate Spinster Know-It-All Becomes-Foxy-When-She-Takes-Off-Her-Glasses Librarian, and, moreover, I've never known a librarian who claims to stop drinking after one martini. (
But again, I know nothing about any of this. show less

I'd have liked more about the library & books, but at least the romance wasn't too terribly clichéd. It was gracefully written, with some real clever lines and images. One question though: Is it true that most women flirt with the idea of becoming a nun, in part for the traditional clothing? I certainly never did! Of all the references to different sections of non-fiction shared, I plan to check out only the 027s and the 153s.

This was a light, enjoyable book about a librarian who hasn't had sex in 15 years. Flitting around her periphery are Gordon, her handsome, womanizing boss, and Aleksi, the intriguing music conductor. The librarian gets sucked into a web of intrigue involving the music conductor's sudden interest in her library's collections and the conductor's wife study of poisons, supposedly for a novel she's writing.

The writing was a little weak and the pacing dragged a bit, but there was something charming and endearing about it, kooky as it was. I think most bibliophiles and library lovers would like it.

I'm still trying to figure out if I liked this book, or not. While I enjoyed the story of a librarian who comes out of her shell, I did find myself rolling my eyes at a lot of the unexpected (and unneccessary, IMHO) sextalk that cropped up in the first half of the book. About halfway through, though, it switches to more of a mystery, involving the librarian, a homeless guy, a symphony conductor, and his wife. The ending was incredibly abrupt, almost as if the author had reached her deadline, and needed to wrap things up in a hurry.

If it weren't for the fact that I found the character of the librarian amusing, I probably wouldn't have finished this book. As it was, I was reading this while sitting on an airplane next to my husband, and I show more kept worrying that he would look over and laugh at what I was reading! show less