Bite by Sean Michael

[reviews_and_ramblings]

I think I could recognize a Sean Michael's book even without the front cover. It's the particular style, the writing is a flash of image and situation, a never ending flow, with a lot of dialogue and bit here and there of setting to complete the picture.

In Bite, Anton is a very rich and handsome werewolf who discovers a powerful attraction for his in-house cook, Greg. Greg is an easy-to-go man, who likes the simple things of life, like cooking and making sex, and who has not many demands if not a man to love him back and possible in a strongly manner. And Anton his a very alpha male and also a strong one, who happens to be also very possessive and from the first time he decides that Greg has to be him like mate. No matter if Greg is willing or not. Luckily Gregg is very willing. But someone else is not so happy they have found something good together.

Anton is like Sean Michael's writing, an overwhelming flooding that can be stopped. He is all you have in mind for a classical alpha male: strong, action no words type of man. Instead Greg is not the classical cute omega bottom. He is open and friendly but he is also independent and clever. He "decides" to be overwhelmed by Anton; I think that, if he would want, he could overpowers Anton in cleverness. And I imagine him like a gypsy, who chooses where to stay and when to go.

Overall Bite is a pretty long book which you read in few time, cause it goes down smoothly and easy.

http://www.torquerebooks.com/zencart

Amazon: Bite

Reading List:

http://www.librarything.com/catalog_bottom.php?tag=reading+list&view=elisa.rolle


Cover Art by Rose Meloche

Comments

[elisa-rolle.livejournal.com]

Well, it's not so simple. Define the romance? Essentially romance is a novel with a love story in it. Happily ever after is not an obligation, but it's highly preferable. And usually the point of view is those of the woman (but not necessary) and the author is a woman (but not necessary). So a lot of books can be classify as "romance". I think that the term is officially born in the '70, but there are a lot of romance writers even before (every two week I write a post about Romance History, and there are a lot of author in the beginning of the twenty century).

> In romance stories writers must follow the rules, and as a result stories tend to be stereotypical.

this is not strictly true. If you want to be published by the Big Company in their series (like Harlequin or Mill&Boons) they have "rules", but you can also write something without rules and be published by someone else (I think the paranormal genre is born like that).

> Is that the reason critics don't regard romance novels as literature?

Ahh. This is an old matter. Why thriller are literature and romance are popular fiction?

Read what has written Elizabeth Lowell, a very good romance writer:

"What do I say when my friends make fun of romance books?
Ask your friends why are they sniggering about a book that involves a man, a woman, and love. Would they rather read about murder, mayhem, and revenge? Disappointment, dismay, and depression? If so, fine.
But their choice of reading material isn't inherently superior to yours. Just different.

And if the word "formula" comes up:

Do point out that mysteries/thrillers are formulas--the mystery is always solved and the good guys win. Same for science fiction. Almost all popular fiction is descended from the heroic tradition of good vs. evil, gods vs. mortals, etc. In this fiction, people rise above their limitations and grab the brass ring against the odds.

Literary fiction? By definition (formula?) literary fiction CAN'T have a tidy, upbeat resolution. Does that make it superior because it is more "real"?

No. It just makes literary fiction part of the modernist rather than the heroic tradition. Since the modernist philosophy has only been around for a century or so, and the heroic has been around for thousands...you do the math.

Have fun discussing reading with your friends."

If you think well, Shakespeare is mostly romance (without the HEA, happily ever after), Alessandro Manzoni with "Promessi Sposi" is a big romance, Lew Tolstoy (War and Peace, Anna Karenina) is romance, Charlotte Bronte, Jane Eyre, George Sand, they are all romance, and I can go on with hundreds of name.

Elisa

[maximvanziel.livejournal.com]

Thank you for answer!

>literary fiction CAN'T have a tidy, upbeat resolution. Does that make it superior because it is more "real"?

Indeed.

>the modernist philosophy has only been around for a century or so

Using this words I think you're genuine North Italian. Since my true major was Medieval Philosophy(T.Aquinas etc), I can expect suchlike phrase only from Italians(and few Greeks).

>Lew Tolstoy (War and Peace, Anna Karenina) is romance

Is that why I abandoned them?

I think you are specialist of romance novels by now. I see you'll make a page for their history with chart chronological table :D

[elisa-rolle.livejournal.com]

> Using this words I think you're genuine North Italian. Since my true major was Medieval Philosophy(T.Aquinas etc), I can expect suchlike phrase only from Italians(and few Greeks).

ehm, I would be happy to could say these are my words, but from " to " they are words by Elizabeth Lowell (and I think she is a very North American woman... does it count?)

Elisa

[maximvanziel.livejournal.com]

Bravo to her!