Letter from Edinburgh: A Cruel and Unusual Punishment

I appreciate that not everyone over there might agree with this.

Dear Don,

People over in the US need to understand that, for most of this who live over here, the death penalty is morally repugnant. The case of Christa Pike, on death row in Tennessee for over thirty years and subjected to two botched execution attempts this morning, has however proved especially disgusting.

She was only 18 at the time of the crime, so it was already the case that Crista Pike’s judgement was open to question, given the revelations that she’d been abused as a child herself. But Tennessee, egged on as ever by the current US President, was determined to kill her off. I’m honestly surprised the circus wasn’t broadcast live on television. Well, look where it’s got them: it’s more than likely that Crista Pike will be a vegetable for the rest of her life, on life support at the state’s expense until she eventually dies. I’m not sure her fate quite complies with the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution.

I can hear a response from death-penalty supporters: an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. The principle is as old as time, but it’s probably one of the most misunderstood in the English language. It does not, of course, mean that if someone knocks someone else’s tooth out in a fight, they should have a tooth extracted as punishment. It means that a tooth extraction should be the maximum punishment considered. It’s intended to put limits on the penal code.

What I personally find particularly distasteful is that so many of these death-penalty supporters claim to be ‘Christian’. Hopefully Trump would never claim to be any sort of Christian, but how does J.D.Vance square his views with those of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount?

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth. But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.”

The only country in Europe that still carries out the death penalty is Belarus, although Russia seems to find ways around that for people Putin doesn’t much care for. Membership of the Council of Europe requires countries abolition.

A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of listening to the legal thriller author John Grisham at the Edinburgh International Book Festival. Grisham is a Deep South lawyer himself, and all too aware of the vagaries of the US justice system. He’s an Ambassador for the Innocence Project, which campaigns for the release of prisoners DNA evidence proves were definitely wrongly convicted. (The US Appeals system still makes it difficult to overturn wrongful convictions.)

Grisham described a justice system which probably happens all over the world to a greater or lesser extent. Innocent people are arrested and interrogated, often in a questionable manner. Many of them are from ethnic minorities, poorly-educated and often vulnerable groups. Faced with the prospect of life imprisonment or worse for a crime they didn’t commit, they confess to a lesser offence which hopefully limits their prison sentence to ten or twenty years. Staggeringly, Grisham revealed it’s estimated that 5%-10% of all US current prisoners are in fact innocent.

I’d never suggest that Christa Pike is innocent, but I’d suggest that she’s been subjected to a cruel and unusual punishment to satisfy the bloodthirsty demands of people with no real stake whatsoever in the case. I really hope they’re feeling uncomfortable right now.

Till the next time

Gordon

Letter from Edinburgh: The Curious Incident of the Three Vans in the Night-Time

Strange happenings at a US air base in south-west England.

Dear Don,

For some reason, your US President has decided to get involved in a war with Iran recently. You might have noticed that it’s not been going too well. The US is now desperately trying to negotiate a ‘peace’ which gets as far back as possible to the position where the US went to war in the first place. Trump wants to portray that as ‘victory’; the rest of the world sees it as ‘back home defeated with its tail between its legs.’

Needless to say, Trump will never use gentle force where a sledgehammer can be used instead, and so US bombers have been attempting to lay waste to parts of Iran. Iran’s far away, though, so it’s been launching these strikes from assorted air bases around the world, including from the UK. Iran has declared any country that aids the US in this way to be a legitimate target, which might be a reasonable position seen from the point of view of a neutral. But Iran can’t really launch open strikes against Britain. It’s most likely approach would have to be to sponsor terror attacks here.

Last Saturday night, a group of men in three hired vans were spotted acting suspiciously near the US base in Fairford, Gloucestershire. The police were called, five men were arrested, the vans appeared to contain explosives, and locals had to be evacuated. Later, it transpired that one of the three vans contained a big barrel of petrol, which would certainly have created a stir if it had been ignited. The five arrested men have since been released on police bail under strict conditions while investigations continue.

Beyond that, the UK government has said very little, although they did say that the operation to thwart the men was not intelligence-led, it was triggered by 999 calls. One of those calls came from one of the five men arrested. Today, the government has said that it believes Iran was involved. That’s it.

There’s an old saying that if you’ve got nothing to say, don’t say it. I don’t think Donald Trump has ever heard of it.

According to Trump (and Marco Rubio), these five men are terrorists whom US intelligence has been following for some time. That’s odd. If the US knew about these guys, why didn’t they let the British know? Iran has denied any part in the attack, which is also strange if they want to demonstrate that they can hurt the UK. Even if Iran is involved, it might not be the Iranian government – it could be groups within Iran or acting on behalf of Iran. It’s also extremely amateurish to try to blow up a heavily-armed air base with three vans and a barrel of petrol. Even the IRA could put a serious bomb together from some fertiliser components.

There’s one other fact worth noting. These five men on bail – including the one who phoned the 999 warning to the police – were arrested, but none of them have been charged. The authorities here have stressed that, even if Iran in some form is involved, it’s perfectly possible that the men were being used as unwitting tools.

The truth is we don’t know. Enquiries are proceeding. Speculation and wild claims don’t help at all. Put a sock in it, Donald.

Till the next time,

Gordon

Letter from Edinburgh: The Perils of Publication

There are so many elephant traps in the book business.

Dear Don,

A writer we both know quite well has experienced issues with their publisher. In fact, it’s incredibly common.

There are, if you didn’t already know it, only five major publishers in the English language:

• Penguin Random House (UK/USA)
• Hachette (France)
• Simon and Schuster (USA)
• Harper Collins (UK/USA)
• Macmillan (UK)

Each of the above has many ‘imprints‘, names that they use to publish categories of books, for example Penguin Random House publishes reference books under the imprint Dorling Kindersley, while Hachette publishes literary fiction under the imprint Little, Brown. It means that, while there appear to be a vast number of publishers when you enter a large bookshop, in reality what you’re browsing has largely been offered to you by just five competing firms. Indeed, earlier this decade, it was nearly down to four: Simon & Schuster looked about to merge with penguin Random House. Eventually, however, the US Government stepped in to prevent the move on the grounds that it contravened US anti-trust (competition) laws.

It’s almost impossible to get your book into that large bookstore you enter – it’s probably Waterstones in the UK, or perhaps a supermarket – if your book isn’t published by one of those big five publishers. Such is their power that they can actually dictate on which shelves and tables their books will appear. If the store doesn’t play ball, it doesn’t get a fair access to the publisher’s books.

Meanwhile, you, the author, have no chance – zero chance – of being published by one of these big publishers if you and your book hasn’t been accepted by a literary agent. Agents appear to represent the author, but in reality they’re ‘gatekeepers’ whom the publishers use to sift out the manuscripts and authors that are likely to sell. And there’s the rub: it’s not about literary quality, it’s a business. A dirty one, at that. If you’re simply a wannabe writer, you’re probably more likely to win the National Lottery than to land a publishing contract with one of the Big Five. Even if you do, you’re not going to get rich.

So, if you can’t land a Big Five publishing contract, what other routes are there?

There are a myriad of small, independent publishers. Anyone can set up as a publishing house – I’ve done it myself. A common model is that someone writes a book and sets up a publishing house to publish it. Frequently, they get their spouse or partner to be the publisher, so the author can legitimately say they’re ‘conventionally published’. Your book is there to ‘swell the numbers’ to create a critical mass of titles that suggests that all the publisher’s titles are good – including the original writer’s. That’s OK, but be aware that your interests might well be secondary to their own.

But these small publishers face the same problems as individual writers: how to get their books into bookshops. This isn’t quite a no-hoper. There are also small independent bookshops that are happy to promote local writers’ work, and the output of local publishers that produce quality books – both in terms of the quality of the writing and the quality of print production. But the small publisher needs to establish a reputation first before its books will be taken on trust. That means favours have to be sought by the publisher on behalf of the writer and his or her book, usually in person. This is not the moment for the author to behave like a diva.

Once again, the author is at the foot of the food chain. And then there’s another issue. When you hand your book over to a publisher, you agree a contract that requires them to pay you royalties on any sales. But all sorts of things can go wrong. Your publisher might decide the costs of trying to promote your book won’t be recouped in sales. The publisher might sell the business to another publisher, along with all their books, and the new publisher decides your book isn’t up to much. In both cases, nothing happens, and you’re stuck until reversion rights kick in – if you’ve remembered to make sure that’s in the contract. Sometimes – surprisingly often, in fact – the publisher doesn’t pass on your royalties, but… just keeps them and disappears. Untangling that one can be quite costly and take years, especially if the publisher decides to file for bankruptcy.

There’s nothing worse than spending months, even years, producing something you’re quite proud of, only to discover that no one can see and enjoy it because the person you trusted lets you down. It’s little wonder, then, that writers are increasingly turning to self-publishing. You can hardly blame writers for falling into the vanity publishing trap, too. (A reminder: when you’re self-publishing, the author retains the copyright and all profits; vanity publishers take your book’s rights and much of any profits. In both cases, the author has to shell out money, but self-publishers can usually save on lots of costs.)

Next time you receive a rejection slip, consider this: perhaps you had a lucky escape.

Till the next time,

Gordon

REVIEW: Gordon Brown, Edinburgh International Book Festival *****

Interviewed by Lyce Doucet. 28th August 2026

Two of the people I most admire were in conversation this morning at the Book Festival, former UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown and BBC international affairs journalist Lyse Doucet. Unlike most former political leaders, Brown has been busy trying to make the world a better place in all sorts of ways. At home, he’s thrown himself into supporting the Fife Multibank, the charity that redistributes surplus goods from warehouses to poor or on benefits. Abroad, he’s a global ambassador on poverty, particularly with a focus on improving access to education for girls. In that respect he and Lyse Doucet have common cause, and there was clear respect and chemistry between the two. There was a little plug for the Linda Norgrove Foundation which brings some girls from Afghanistan to Scotland to complete studies.

Here, he had a new book to promote, The Future Starts With Us. Brown talked for much of the time about the factors and individuals who are responsible for the breakdown of community, peppered with amusing anecdotes – he’s surprisingly funny. Brown has been a major player on the world stage for so long that he’s met many global figures, and can count many as personal friends. I can see why; this is a genuine man with real passions, not fake.

Eventually, he moved on to the thrust of the book, how to improve our sense of community, both local and global. My biggest takeaway was when he drew on his fellow Kirkcaldy writer, the eighteenth century philosopher Adam Smith, author of The Wealth of Nations. It’s a much-misunderstood book, of course, one in which Smith writes of ‘circles of empathy’. Naturally, we empathise more with those we know and love far more than those in far-off countries, but that changes if we learn more about them. Trading with them more is simply part of that process, of course. Brown encourages us to think in terms of ‘circles of empathy’ rather than the zero-sum game of ‘them and us’.

It’s always good to have something worthwhile to take away from any meeting.

Till the next time,

Gordon