I'd say the writing is very often one star. Why did we need to read about the exact materials and props Amber used to give the shop windows a makeover (in the style of 'and then she took a piece of red ribbon and added it to her display') or the precise steps Josh and Amber took towards making the shop more sustainable (sentences such as: 'and they had even started using glass bottles'). Every little step the characters took towards transforming the shop was detailed, to the extent that the book included sentences like: 'Amber looked up a tutorial on YouTube on how to knit pumpkins'. I don't think I've ever read a book that was so mundane. I am all for books that focus on the domestic, but here the pacing was just so slow.
As a whole, the book was badly edited. I can't count the number of times inanimate objects were said to 'jostle for space' next to other inanimate objects, or the number of times a character 'blew out a sigh'. The book has an utter fear of sex (this is to be expected, given the Hallmark-type of genre, and so isn't *really* a point of criticism) and the descriptions of the characters' actions are often entirely bland: 'Josh kissed Amber with passion'. I don't agree that 'showing' is always better than 'telling', but this book could certainly have done with more 'showing'.
Concerning the plot, my major complaint is not that it is entirely predictable - this is to be expected based on the genre - but that it had some mad plot elements in it. It is completely out of character for Josh and Amber to want to expand the shop's customer base on the basis of dishonesty and subterfuge. And it is very difficult to believe that all these bus drivers would be pretending to break down at the shop: completely far-fetched. Not to mention the fact that it is pretty unrealistic that one woman would (more or less) single-handedly be able to combat the forces of secularization, gentrification, and so on, that the book mentions. The focus on sustainability and local products came across to me as if the author had once read a few newspaper articles on these topics and decided to include them to give the book a more 'contemporary ring'. All it led to, in actual fact, was more 'filler' for the book: sentence after sentence on 'glass bottles' and 'locally grown produce'. The book had very little content: a shop that needed a makeover, two people who needed to fall in love, and a tractor. And this was spun out in great, great detail.
What also struck me was that the characters were quite flat and seemed to have very few traits. Amber's backstory was treated as if there was a secret to her past that had to come out, but it was actually quite clear from the start what had 'happened' to her: she had been bullied at school. Which was more or less conveyed to us through the sentence 'teenage girls could be mean', repeated about five times throughout the book. As a result, when the 'secret' was finally revealed to Josh, this was underwhelming, as we already knew about it.
Finally, why do female characters in so many feelgood books do nothing but 'blush' at the drop of a hat? And why do there always have to be male characters that make them 'blush' - and why are these male characters considered to be attractive, and these female characters considered to be relatable? I am all for writing about characters' insecurities, but not in such a gendered way. All this does is present a model of a 'helpless female' falling for the first man that comes along and 'lifts her chin towards him', as these male characters always seem to be doing. I would like it if books presented different, less stereotypical models of femininity, and don't think this is out of the question for the genre.
I have given it two stars as it wasn't entirely without merit. I could quite vividly picture the village in my head, for instance. And I suppose I could understand why Amber wanted to stay living there.
** my main criticism is not directed at the author, but at the editor. I find it a shame that so many books in this genre are badly- or under-edited. With more editing, it could have at least been a decently written, if still entirely predictable, story.
** the quotes are not exact, as I listened to it as an audiobook.