People I read

Posted by Athena Scalzi

https://whatever.scalzi.com/2025/11/20/the-big-idea-colin-brush/

https://whatever.scalzi.com/?p=58327

When writing a novel, a lot of people think of the process as sort of rigid. You have a specific story to tell and it needs to be an unchanging vision all the way through. Author Colin Brush, however, says in his Big Idea that flexibility is required when creating a story. Follow along to see how in the making of his newest novel, Exo, he made sure to be adaptable and listen to those around him.

COLIN BRUSH:

The budding novelist with some notes for a story is faced with one gargantuan problem: how to turn their few scribbled words into a compelling 100,000-word tale? Months, often years, will elapse before this conundrum is solved to their satisfaction.

But then comes a smaller but no less significant problem – the exact opposite of the first. Now you need to pitch your novel to an agent or publisher. You need to condense your 100,000 words into a succinct hundred or so that will persuasively sell your book.

This, of course, is the challenge publishers face every time they launch a new book. What’s the hookiest way of pitching the story? Both editor and author know the story backwards, but is that any help in persuading someone who hasn’t read the story that they’d want to read it? The multiple elements that draw a reader through a tale often aren’t the same elements that invite the uninitiated in.

For the last twenty-five years, I’ve been a copywriter at one of Britain’s largest trade publishers. Over that time, I’ve written the jacket copy (the blurb, in the UK) for over 5,000 books, both fiction and non-fiction. From classics that are hundreds of years old to the latest romantasy sensation.

It is my job to boil down that 100K story, those months or years of work, into fifty to two hundred words. (Frequently, even half a dozen words for a cover shout line.) Many authors and editors shudder at the prospect. It is not because they find it hard to write short, but rather it is because they are so close to the book. When you’ve been cutting a path through the dense trees of a story it can be difficult to remember why you went into the wood in the first place. From the wood’s farther side – bleeding, sore, exhausted but exaltant – it’s easy to lose sight of what from the outside made entering so appealing.

When it came to writing my own novel, I thought I knew what the process needed to be. Much-missed author Terry Pratchett once advised writers: ‘if you think you have a book evolving, now is the time to write the flap copy – the blurb. An author should never be too proud to write their own flap copy. Getting the heart and soul of a book into fewer than 100 words helps you focus.’

Well, I certainly wasn’t too proud. I had a novel idea: the last murder at the end of a world. I had a tough lead character: an uncompromising eighty-year-old former policewoman wandering a bleak, uninhabited planet. I had an adversary: the Caul, a mysterious multi-dimensional entity that had transformed the oceans into an annihilating liquid. And I had a plot: the truth about the murderous Caul had been discovered but someone was killing to keep it secret. I even had a title: Exo. 

I’d written half a million words of blurbs. Writing a couple hundred more about my own novel-to-be would have me up and running.

Reader, it didn’t quite work out that way.

It turns out writing a novel and writing a novel’s blurb are very different activities. When you write the blurb the story is set. You know how it works: beginning, middle and end. The path through the woods is clear. When you’re writing a novel, the story tends to evolve. New ideas inveigle their way into the narrative. Characters don’t behave as you expected. Your big denouement doesn’t land as you hoped. Beginning, middle and end – the path – meander and shift. Sometimes, even the woods go wandering!

Writing Exo’s blurb did not help me, unfortunately. I spent years, on and off, reworking the story to get it to come good.

But – and here’s the big idea – being a blurb writer did help me write and rewrite my story. Writing 5,000 blurbs means you encounter a lot of different stories. But you also have to pitch these stories in multiple ways. I was once asked to do the blurb for a schools edition of Albert Camus’ The Plague. What do teenagers prefer? Reading books that are metaphors for the human condition, or scaring themselves silly at the cinema? So I wrote it like a horror movie, beginning with rats vomiting blood . . .

As a blurb writer I’m constantly re-pitching stories in alternative ways to reach new audiences. You work with the story, knowing you mustn’t misrepresent it; that would please no one. A pitch is all about what you put in and what you leave out. Sometimes the author hates an approach and you have to start over. Or the editor likes the beginning but wants the ending to land differently. As a blurb writer, working to a brief, addressing multiple audiences, you have to be versatile. You never say no.

So when I was struggling with Exo – revisions from my agent, suggestions from interested publishers: ‘how about setting it on Earth?’ – I never once said no. I looked at what I had. I saw where changes could be made – elements added or taken away – and the path shifted. Exo was my novel, but it was also just a very long piece of copy. (Writer Randall Jarrell called the novel: ‘a prose narrative of some length that has something wrong with it.’ Mine had plenty wrong with it.)

As someone who regularly writes five different versions of a blurb for a prospective bestseller, I know that there is no correct or incorrect copy. There are just different responses to a brief – different pathways. Some paths will seem more appealing than others. And the eye is always in the beholder.

It turned out my job as novelist was to find a way of telling my story that others wanted to read. That meant exploring many different routes. My day job, pitching stories in a variety of ways, reminded me that versatility and stick-to-itiveness – never saying no! – were the key to beating the best path through the story woods.

Exo: Amazon US|Barnes & Noble|Powell’s|Bookshop|Publisher|UK retailers

Author socials: Website|Instagram|Bluesky

Extracts: Read Day One here | Listen here (read by Gildart Jackson)

https://whatever.scalzi.com/2025/11/20/the-big-idea-colin-brush/

https://whatever.scalzi.com/?p=58327

Posted by Athena Scalzi

https://whatever.scalzi.com/2025/11/19/the-big-idea-holly-seddon/

https://whatever.scalzi.com/?p=58312

If everyone had less than an hour to live, would your actions in those moments matter more or not at all? Author Holly Seddon explores this question in the Big Idea for her newest novel 59 Minutes, taking a closer look at whether people are capable of being kind and good up until their last breath. When the rules no longer apply, who would you choose to be?

HOLLY SEDDON:

The terrifying premise of 59 Minutes is that everyone in the UK receives an alert to say nuclear missiles are on their way, and the characters have a race against time to get to their loved ones to say goodbye. I’m very proud of this hook, I know it grabs people’s attention. 

But the theme, the big idea, behind the hook is, How do people behave when all the usual rules no longer apply? 

This has always interested me. It’s what draws us to shows like The Sopranos, where characters operate in a world that eschews the rules most of us live by, often running within the guard rails of a whole different set of rules. It’s why films like The Purge are so compelling. 

But even if the rules go up in smoke, I have to believe, as a human trying to negotiate my way through this life, that most people are good and well-meaning. 

So, in writing 59 Minutes, I was in a constant dialogue between that good and bad human impulse. The selfless and the selfish. 

Because some people really would use their last minutes to do terrible things. A last hurrah. You only have to look at the boom in crimes that happened under the cover of darkness in the blacked out London of World War Two to know that. Muggings. Sexual assault. Even murder. The serial killer Gordon Cummins who murdered four women and attempted to murder two more over a six-day period in 1942. 

But I have to believe that plenty of people, plenty more people, would have sacrificed their own safety to help other people. They always do. 

When I first had the idea for 59 Minutes, and started to cautiously tell people the premise to gauge their reaction, I noticed the same thing happened repeatedly. Their eyes would glaze over, they’d clearly stop listening to me waffling on and then they’d snap back to attention and apologize. What they said next was always a variation on the same thing. “I’m sorry, I was just thinking what the hell I would do.” 

I understood. That is the universality of the hook – every one of us if forced to confront extinction would have somewhere we wanted to be, some people with whom we wanted to spend those last minutes. But what if, like in the novel, it’s not that simple. What if missing children need help, do you stop and lose those minutes? What if you are forced to choose between your own safety, and the safety of someone you loved? 

In writing this book and asking my readers to consider such existential questions, I couldn’t shy away from them myself. I’d like to think that, if not brave, I would at least be kind right up to the end. But we all like to think we’d be heroic, don’t we? 

So what about you? What would you do if the usual rules of the world just no longer applied. How would you spend your final minutes? 

59 Minutes: Amazon|Barnes & Noble|Bookshop|Powell’s|Simon & Schuster

Author socials: Website|Instagram|Facebook

https://whatever.scalzi.com/2025/11/19/the-big-idea-holly-seddon/

https://whatever.scalzi.com/?p=58312

Posted by John Scalzi

https://whatever.scalzi.com/2025/11/18/two-years-post-twitter/

https://whatever.scalzi.com/?p=58293

For various reasons I was reminded that two years ago this week, I quit the former Twitter for good; I had been doing a slow draw down of my presence for most of 2023 but on November 16 I abandoned the place entirely, mostly decamping to Bluesky, with additional outposts at Threads and Mastodon. At my peak on Twitter I had 210,000 followers (down to about 180,000 when I pulled the plug), accrued through a dozen years of being on the service, so it was no small thing to go. But the other option was to stay and be complicit in the machinations of a fascist asshole who was actively turning the place into a cesspool. Off I went.

Two years on, I’m happy to say that I don’t regret leaving. One, and most obviously, I’m not wading in a dank hot tub of feculent right-wing bullshit, which is a positive for my mental well-being and my general ability to be online. Two, my career hasn’t suffered a whit for not being on the former Twitter; my book sales have chugged along rather happily and my other opportunities have not lessened at all. Three, those 200+K followers have been replaced by more than twice that number on Bluesky, Threads and Mastodon (there are repeat followers on each service, to be sure). So surely my ego is assuaged there.

That said, the business aspects of being on social media are not my primary reason to be there, although of course I do tell people when I have new books and other projects out, or when I’m doing appearances. Mostly, though, I’m just hanging out. And while none of the other social media services are perfect (he said, delicately and understatedly), none of the rest of the ones I hang out on are so aggressively tuned to be unpleasant as the former Twitter was when I left, and still is today. It’s possible to chat and hang out and have fun on Bluesky (and Threads and Mastodon) and not feel icky for being there. That’s the real win for me: I’m enjoying myself online more. These days, that is not a small thing.

I’m aware that people are still on the former Twitter and even prefer it there, for whatever reason, and they are welcome to their own karma. There’s nothing and no one there that’s so essential to my day-to-day life that I need to go back there. Likewise, outside of a few right-wing dickheads who like to snark about me, the former Twitter seems to have entirely forgotten that I exist, and I can’t say this bothers me greatly. It’s a pretty clean separation.

I don’t imagine I’ll do another update about this again; there’s not much point to it from here on out. But again, maybe I’m a useful anecdotal case study. What happens when you leave the former Twitter? For me, mostly, online life just got better. If you’re still on the site, maybe it’ll work that way for you, too.

— JS

https://whatever.scalzi.com/2025/11/18/two-years-post-twitter/

https://whatever.scalzi.com/?p=58293