Having fun in the margins.
For those who know: I have recently self-published something for the first time ever: a historical romantasy, Binding the Cuckoo, set in Gilded Age London.

So, to nobody’s surprise, self-publishing is hard, as I have found out. Harder by far than I’d anticipated. And, even with somewhat of a track-record, the truth is nobody is exactly waiting for another indie book. Anything that happens, happens because the author tortured themselves with yet another late-night marketing tutorial marathon.
And so the thing that must keep you going, the thing that makes all this effort fun, cannot be the hope of a sales outcome.
The true joy of writing, even in my more seriously-serious-Sirius books, for me sits in the little vignettes, the bits of funny dialogue on the margins of a story. A cheeky one-liner. An unhinged concept that has horrified my friends, and yet I find a way to smuggle in with a bit of cheeky humour.
I am such a serious writer, of course. An auteur, with an extra ‘eur’ for good measure. When I’m asked to pose as one.
But inside I so often feel like a kid, in my own, custom-designed playground. Where anything goes, and the slides go up, as well as down.
And if I want to add a little cuteness, then I shall do so.
Below I include a little extract, which I had included in my novel for no better reason than because it amused me. If it amuses you as well, well then my heart is full.
[an extract from Binding the Cuckoo]
She almost jumped with the shock and ended up pushing the needle into her finger.
“Ouch! Stephen, you startled me!” She put the pad of her pricked finger in her mouth.
“Are you a bampire?” he asked, his pale eyes narrowing with suspicion.
“A bampire?” Her mouth hung open, as Posy’s son climbed onto the sofa next to her.
“A bampire,” he replied and rolled his eyes. “Open.” He leaned forward and put his fingers on Hare’s chin, to which she objected weakly.
The domovoy made a chortling sound from the edge of the sofa, then bolted before Stephen could turn his attentions to the very fluffy creature at Hare’s side.
“Steffen”!” Francine Winchfield burst through the door and stood like a diminutive valkyrie, her hands on her waist, all outrage. All she needed to complete the picture was a little horned helmet. “Why you do?” She gestured towards him.
“I believe Stephen was enquiring whether I’m a…” Hare glanced at him.
“A bampire.” He scoffed at his sister and went back to inspecting Hare’s mouth.
“Stephen, I would really like to know what you’re doing.”
“So would I.”
Hare’s heart leaped at the familiar voice. She looked to the door. Ernest stood behind Francine, his hands folded behind his back. But the moment she saw his face, any hope she might have held out left her. He wasn’t even looking at her, focusing his attention solely on Stephen.
“Steffen wants to check if Aunt Edwina is a bampire.” Francine turned to Ernest and spoke in the tones of a school mistress when addressing a particularly dense student.
“Indeed.” Ernest’s eyelid twitched, like he almost wanted to glance at Hare. Instead, he chose to address his niece. “Miss Walker is not your aunt, Francie.” There was tension in his voice.
Hare tightened her lips into a line. It’s not like she told the girl to call her an aunt. What did he want, for her to be mean to a child?
“Oh.” The disappointment made Francine’s mouth droop for a moment. Ernest picked up the girl and walked up to the seat opposite Hare’s.
“Stephen, why did you say Miss Edwina was the… the thing you said?” Ernest asked.
“She drank blood!” the boy pointed an accusatory finger at Hare.
“I beg your pardon?” Hare felt as if she was having an out-of-body experience.
Ernest looked equally puzzled.
“She did!” Stephen folded his arms. “She put a needle in her finger and then blood came out and then she put it in her mouth!” He grimaced and shook his head in disgust.
“Ah, I see.” Ernest nodded seriously. “Excellent powers of deduction there, Stephen.”
“Are not!” Francine stuck out her tongue at her brother.
“So what is the next step in your investigation?” Ernest placated Francine with a pat on the head and leaned forward. He was enjoying this.
“I will check her mouth.” Stephen nodded sagely. He’d reddened with pleasure at his uncle’s praise. “You always have to check the mouth of a bampire.”
[end of the extract]
First 5 Chapters free for all subscribers.

Butter and (Un)healthy relationships in fiction
I have just finished the absolutely transformative Butter by Asako Yuzuki, which gives such nuanced thoughts about women, their perception of themselves, and how their bodies are scrutinised in public. In the context of my own writing, it made me think of what we consider a happy relationship in fiction, especially in romance. While some level of objectification feels necessary (after all, romantic partners generally have to find each other attractive), in a lot of romance and romantasy novels I read lately, a lot of emphasis is put on the size disparity between the protagonists. The female characters are usually tiny, to a point of fetishism (with the notable exception of some Sarah McLean novels), with their partners being almost grotesquely larger.
The male romantic lead so often is portrayed as a bit dangerous, usually uncommunicative, with a very distinct strength/power disparity between himself and the female protagonist.
I wonder just how much of those differences come from the reader’s desire to relinquish control in a safe setting, and how much comes from our society’s fetishisation of toxic/controlling relationships. I personally tend to feel a bit uneasy with such scenarios, especially when such relationships are idealised in romances.
Whilst I’m not here to judge anyone’s preferences in reading, it is important to me to create a space in fiction for healthy, communicative and equitable relationships, and writing passion that comes from true connection, rather than the thrill of danger. And, most importantly, I want my readers to feel happy once they’re finished reading Binding the Cuckoo. I want them to feel confident that the protagonist is, in fact, quite, quite safe with her chosen partner.
I want my Happily Ever Afters to have no caveats to them. I like to write my romance romantic, and my horror horroresque. And I tend to leave the two distinct from each other.
New Book Announcement!
Some stock of WHISPERS IN THE EARTH still available!

Our successful kickstarter campaign last year has allowed us to create two beautiful editions of our folklore anthology: a paperback and an exclusive hardcover.
Now that all the backers have received their copies, we can distribute the remaining stock via The Broken Binding. But please note, the stock is very limited, so consider purchasing soon, to avoid disappointment.
Each of the twenty stories is illustrated with a hand-carved linocut print. No AI in sight. Slow art, one could say!
Again, thank you so much to all who believed in this project and helped me to bring it to life.
Click here to see the listing.
KICKSTARTER NOW LIVE!
WHISPERS IN THE EARTH – an illustrated anthology
A NEW YOUTUBE SHOW AND PODCAST!
WRITING ADVICE: 1st or 3rd person POV
Pinocchio: A short story
Life with no fear?
From the series of “random thoughts I can’t shake off”, I got to thinking about how a highly socialised animal like a human function, were their brain/body unable to feel fear. Partially the question was inspired by a short story “Shudder” by Daniel Morden’s upcoming collection “Strange Tales”.
In most of the animal kingdom, the lack of fear usually means death. A parasite infects a mouse, making it fearlessly approach the cat. The cat eats the mouse, thus providing a fine intestinal habitat for the parasite.
However, in human societies, the lack of survival instinct on this basic level would not mean automatic demise, seeing as tigers and bears seldom roam our streets anymore.
Additionally, some types of survival-based behaviours in humans are simply taught. As a child you learn, for example, that should you be mean to your friends, they will cease to BE your friends. That is unpleasant. A small child might not have a concept of ethics, but they understand the unpleasantness of being left out. So they learn to avoid behaviours that cause it. Same with pain. If you touch the fire, your hand will sting. You learn not to touch the fire. In most people, they learn to experience fear in tandem with the avoidance instincts.
So what if you simply did not experience fear? You wouldn’t know you don’t experience it, necessarily. Humans find iti hard to conceptualise experiences that are alien to them. To a person with aphantasia(where you can’t picture things in your brain), the concept of imagining and conceptualising things develops in a different ways. The brain wires out the gaps, and creates a new mode of behaviour. Yet a seeing person with aphantasia might eventually realise that others do not experience the world in the same way, because the description of the process of imagining something with your eyes closed is related to something they are ALREADY EXPERIENCING.
Not so for a person with no fear. The heart palpitations, the sweaty palms, the fight of flight response… How can that be explained to someone who does not have the same physiological response.
Another question I’m mulling over is how do we categorise fear for such a hypothetical person? Are anxiety, the “jump scare” response, dread and the tingling warning that something wicked this way cometh all one and the same? What about the fight or flight response? Are fear and aggression linked?
Now for the benefits. It’s easy to conceptualise the negative result of experiencing no fear. Would you jump out at the last moment out of the way of a speeding car? Run from suspicious people eyeing you in a dark alley? Possibly, depending on your analytical skills and calculated risk avoidance. But something I wondered about was: would there be long-term positive consequences to the lack of fear response? Often, different pathways wiring their way in the human brain, can bring unexpected benefits. Once more, for people with aphantasia, they can often find their recovery from traumatic events and grief somewhat easier, as their brains don’t play the nasty tricks on them, replying in technocolour the most devastating experiences of their lives. So what, if any, benefits could there be to the lack of fear response?
One possible positive result that popped into my mind is the advantage that comes with risk-taking in business, and life in general (though that can just as well be a negative, as the lack of fear wouldn’t influence the person’s other talents and skill-sets. A bad gamble is the more likely result of over-confidence and underestimating the consequences). What about the joie de vivre? Without fear, would we all truly carpe the hell out of that diem? Or would we once again underestimate the threats? I somehow imagine the survivor bias would be strong in any research ever done on the subject.
So here it is: My list of questions with no answers. Sometimes I like it better this way.
