@alexreeve
Award-losing author of the Leo Stanhope series of historical crime novels published by Bloomsbury. Rep’d by Carrie Plitt at Felicity Bryan Associates. Otherwise, an absent-minded Professor. Tries to be a good egg. Also enjoys a good egg. He/him.
Hopefully, we can now go back to reading children's books by proper authors like Cat Deeley, Simon Cowell, Fearne Cotton, Dermot O'Leary, Meghan Markle and (checks notes) … (rechecks notes, adjusts spectacles and check notes again) … Keith Richards.
Huge commiserations to the HarperCollins PR team, who chose the last Friday afternoon before Christmas to hide, sorry ‘make’, their Walliams announcement. Didn’t work guys (I assume they were guys). Was never, ever gonna work.
I spent months on this investigation and gathered docs from the UK courts, Land Registry and a French local authority, to show that Raynor and Moth Winn's story is not as they claim. @tortoisemedia.bsky.social @observeruk.bsky.social
observer.co.uk/news/nationa...
Cute dog on sofa
I haven't much to say and the world seems a bit grim, so … here's Bobbie. She doesn't care about that stuff as long as she gets to chill on the sofa.
These kinds of thing don't work for me, but everyone's process is different. Creative inspiration is very personal, I think.
Thank you!
Pros and cons
Obvs not the point, but someone at The Spectator needs to read GRRM's books before abusing them. No such things occur.
Bit murdery
Yes - I guess some novels have a kind of meta story that reveals itself - eg Owen Meaney and Use of Weapons. I’d be tempted to read those again.
These things can edge towards snobbery, ie some novels are ‘worthy’ of repeat reads and others not, and I don’t accept that idea at all.
It’s so personal, isn’t it? I wouldn’t read Agatha Christie twice, but I know people who do. Whereas I might read James Ellroy or Walter Mosley more than once. I think it’s more about the reader than the writer.
I hear folks with big Twitter/X followings say they're reluctant to come to Bluesky because they'll have to start again. I get that. The problem is, those followers on X are either RW arseholes or the left-over zombie accounts of people who've come to Bluesky. Are they really worth staying for?
Thank you to the @societyofauthors.bsky.social & @samblakebooks.bsky.social for leading on this. Could we propose a code of practice for publishers to ensure transparency for stakeholders & customers, eg ghosts & illustrators must be named on the front cover? Smaller font perhaps, but present.
Other industries are required to give credit where it's due, eg movies and academia. Why not publishing?
There are grey areas here between 'written by', 'story by' and so on. I've heard of some celebs who genuinely think they wrote something which has been heavily edited / borderline ghosted by the publisher.
Yes. My only caution is that celeb books are propping up publishers' revenues, & it isn't clear whether they're cannibalising proper books or are additive. Some of each, probably. As a first step, a specific recognition of who actually wrote the book - preferably on the cover - would be positive.
Top stuff. Love it.
This is good and correct. Well done to the SoA. societyofauthors.org/2024/12/09/c...
Yep, for sure. He's messing with the WRONG demographic.
He's not easily bullied at corners and is a decent stopper. Old school, but good as a back-up.
Ryan Mason will be searching out his ‘Interim Head Coach’ business cards right now.
I agree. I truly don’t want to cut off a revenue stream for publishers, but they should be clear when a work is written to a great extent by someone else. As you say, this should be addressed more strongly by SoA, CWA, etc.
Yes, agreed. I daresay ghost writers like the income, and fair enough. I’m not against ghost writing per se at all. I just think the publisher should be more clear - find a form of words by which an interested reader can see who did what. It doesn’t seem a lot to ask.
This is a very good point.
Agreed, most likely, and sadly.
True, of course, and the books may actually be great. But can’t they be honest anyway?
Yeah, we’ve all grown kind-of accustomed to the celeb branding thing. People are inured to it. And I’m not trying to kill publishers’ businesses. But they could find a form of words that still allows the big, famous name on the cover, without being dishonest.
People seem to think writing for kids is easier (and they couldn’t be more wrong). Most of the celeb stuff is derivative merch designed to be given as a gift, not actually read more than once.
But if their job is reading an autocue, kicking a ball, cookery, politics or modelling - or they’re the Hawk Tuah girl - there’s a lower chance.