I really enjoyed this book as an excellent read, but am not sure that I really agree with the author's (and some reviewers here) opinion that these women were independent, 'proto-feminists' who could be role models for us today. For all their beauty, glamour, money etc etc these women were, at heart, prostitutes, utterly dependant on men to whom they sold their bodies for money. Yes they maintained a kind of freedom in avoiding the patriarchal power of marriage, but they weren't any less defined by men, or any more able to construct their own lifestyles or self-identities, other than in what would be sexually-enticing for the men they needed to survive.
Most of them weren't married, not because they chose to be 'single', but because they weren't accepted in 'polite' society, an alienation which is played down quite a lot in the book. Similarly there's a lot of talk about their sexual independance, but while they were women who valued themselves, can someone be said to be independant when actually they are socially-ostracised, and have to sleep with men because that's their 'career' and only source of income?
It seems to me to be a little disturbing that there is a bit of trend for glamourising prostitution (Belle du Jour, for example, as a modern take on the same story), when beneath the money and the allure lies what appears to me to be a sad story of female victims dressing up their own dependancy as freedom.
Despite that (!), I did enjoy this book, in the way that I would enjoy a light novel, and there's undoubtedly a sense of survival about these women that is admirable. The shopping too is mouth-watering, but for all the women who raved about this for the 'independance' of the protagonists: be honest, is this really what we would want for our daughters?