But I quite like the way you can talk about science without necessarily using mathematics, but using metaphors instead.

One of the biggest problems for beginning writers is this need to over-explain.

In real life nothing means anything. Stuff happens and there just is no structure.

I think about stories and their logic and wonder if there can be any such thing as simply "there is a book.

Some writers, notably Anton Chekov, argue that all characters must be admirable, because once we've looked at anyone deeply enough and understood their motivation we must identify with them rather than judge them.

I hate stereotypes and I hate cliche.

I think predictability is built into any good novel in some way - you begin reading Anna Karenina and you know pretty much what's going to happen at the end. But that doesn't mean you know what's going to happen in the middle. For me, it's that sense of what happens in the middle that's important.