Read Rachel Machacek's blogs and other content on the Penguin Community. Much like the author's dates, I should have listened to my gut instinct, stuck with blegh, and moved on.
Good Enough,” which while being equally autobiographical, is infused with real science from Ph Ds, scholars, dating coaches, statistical analysis, superior writing and a real personality behind its authorship. ) The misuse of the term ’science’ in the title of this volume, sets the reader up for a big disappointment. The book is rather tedious and really doesn't has anything to do with the absurd term of "chemistry", let alone "creating chemistry" at all.
The book itself is breezy, but ultimately, for those trying to increase their comprehension of an admittedly complex and confusing subject, remains as inconsequential as her lackluster story itself. The author goes in length talking about bad dates that it should've been called "Another Collection of Awful Dates." The great dates don't go into great length, men don't seem to be too into her and it dies off on her part.
But is that because the candidates are all weak or does the subject suffer from a fatal combination of awkwardness, bad attitude and aim?
(Are we really expected to better understand dating from someone who appears to be so bad at it herself?
After years of dating without a connection, Rachel Machacek vowed to try a more dedicated, less slipshod, more scientific way of finding love. So, she committed a year of her life to trying every mainstream (and not-so-mainstream) method of meeting the right guy.