I never thought of Nora Roberts' books as my "guilty pleasure". There is very often some doubt in me as to the 'pleasure' part of the equation, and as for the 'guilty'... well, I do need my literary equivalent of a bowl of ice cream from time to time. (Big plus - it's easier on the waistline.) I read the books. Sometimes, I even enjoy them, and am willing to give them a high rating."Bed of Roses" is exactly what it announces to be - a light story about two people falling in love and getting their happily ever after. Like most of Nora Roberts' books, it has all the necessary elements - take some relatively stereotypical characters, add some cataclyst, a harmless conflict, details square, some sex, the necessary one liners, a pinch of snappy dialogue and a romantic marriage proposal. Failproof formula, yes?No, because while you have the elements for an interesting comedy, you still have to put them together, and as someone who does mathematical problems, I can tell you that there is more than one way to get things tangled up. As always, Nora Roberts gives us an avalanche of details regarding the wedding business, which, at some point, we could have gone without. Also, I realize that this is a story about four women running a wedding agency, but that doesn't necessarily mean that after three months of knowing each other, the two heroes need to get engaged. In fact, I don't remember reading a single one of her novels where the hero doesn't pop the question at some point. Not that there is a problem with getting married, it's just not a formula that always works. And speaking of which...EMMA GRANT! Hell's teeth, I swear, I can punch this girl! Not only is she whiny and annoying, her motivations suck. First she stays away from Jack because she thinks he's her friend's ex, even though said friend never mentioned such a thing and the two have been friends for an eternity. Then she whines about how Jack is protective of his space (a problem which he himself barely realizes), but instead of calling him in on it, she just keeps her mouth shut and lets him do his thing. Finally, when she "can't take it anymore", she breaks things off without giving him a chance to even speak in his defence.What kind of a heroine is that?It wouldn't have been so bad if it weren't for the whole "Girls are always right" thing Nora Roberts has going on. So not only Jack's not only confronted, he is backed up against the wall, forced to face problems he's probably avoided for a reason, AND he's the guilty party. Well, color me flummoxed. If he wasn't so madly in love with Emma, this treatment could've almost been considered as an assault. In fact, the only good clash between the two of these is a brief exchange of lines, and it doesn't even happen in this book!I'm severely disappointed here. If "Twilight" debunks the idea of feminism, then "Bed of Roses" takes it to a whole new level. I wish that Jack had been given more credit, but since he hasn't been this thing only gets two stars.