Finished reading All U Can Eat by Emma Holly.

It’s about Frankie Smith, a diner owner whose boyfriend leaves her for another woman. Soon after, a body is found behind Frankie’s diner, and she becomes a suspect in the murder — and catches the eye of police chief Jack West.

To say that this book is steamy is a major understatement. There’s a lot of sex in this book. A lot. That, in and of itself, didn’t bother me. What bothered me were the characters, Frankie in particular.

In the course of the book, Frankie sleeps with four men (five, if you count the boyfriend who dumps her in the first chapter) — including two at the same time. She does this all in about the space of two weeks, after having been in a long-term relationship with her boyfriend.

I just didn’t understand her motivations for being with all these men. One guy is pretty much a complete stranger to her, while two more let themselves into her house uninvited. If I came home to find two guys inside, I’d be screaming my head off, calling the police, getting a gun, and siccing my dog on them. All at the same time.

Plus, I wish there had been more scenes between Frankie and the hero, instead of the two of them just thinking about each other while they were seperated.

In short, this book just wasn’t for me.

But steamy romance is a major trend in publishing these days. The sexier, the better, some folks say. But I think there’s a point when it just becomes gratuitous. I don’t mind all the sex scenes — I just want the characters to have a reason for being together, other than being hot and bothered. I want them to care about each other, even if they don’t realize it yet. I just didn’t get that feeling in Holly’s book.

What about you? Is steamier better? Iniquiring minds want to know …

I’m on a reading roll. Just finished Hundred-Dollar Baby by Robert Parker. It’s his latest Spenser book and finds the intrepid private investigator trying to help a madam manage her upscale, call-girl business.

Like all of Parker’s books, it’s heavy on dialogue and light on description with very short, easy-to-read chapters. I can read one of his books in about two hours. And still savor every word.

Every time I read a Parker book, I can’t help but marvel at his heavy emphasis on dialogue. That’s really all his books are. We are talking minimal description of everything else — rooms, people, cars, the weather, etc. The most-used word in his books is probably said.

The only other person that I know of who writes in a similar style is James Patterson.

What about you? Which do you prefer — lots of description or lots of dialogue? Inquiring minds want to know …