One of the most unexpected parts of releasing The Catalogue has been watching readers turn into investigators.

Not casual readers.

Full-blown analysts.

I’ve received messages dissecting dialogue, questioning motivations, connecting tiny details across chapters, and building theories that honestly feel like intelligence briefings. Some of them made me laugh. Some made me uncomfortable.

And a few were dangerously close to the truth.

That’s one of the things I love most about espionage fiction. A good spy thriller should make you suspicious. It should make you question whether people are telling the truth, whether institutions deserve trust, and whether the protagonist is even someone you should be rooting for.

So I thought it would be fun to react to some of the most common reader conspiracy theories surrounding The Catalogue… and hint at which ones may not be as crazy as they sound.

Without spoiling too much.

Theory #1: Jake Penny Knows More Than He Pretends To

This is probably the theory I receive more than any other.

Readers started picking up early that Jake rarely reacts like a normal homicide detective would. He notices too much. He adapts too quickly. And even when chaos erupts around him, there’s usually a strange level of control underneath his decisions.

Several readers have messaged me some version of:

“Jake feels like someone pretending to be Jake.”

That observation is very intentional.

One of the core themes in The Catalogue is identity. Not just fake identities in the spy-world sense, but the psychological toll of becoming different versions of yourself depending on who’s watching.

Jake exists in that tension constantly.

There’s a reason certain characters seem to recognize things about him before the reader does.

And there’s a reason he avoids answering direct questions whenever possible.

Is the theory true?

I’ll just say this:

Pay attention to the moments where Jake appears calm when everyone else is losing control.

Those moments matter.

Theory #2: Zasha Was Never Just a Journalist

A lot of readers caught onto this one surprisingly fast.

From the beginning, Zasha Avery operates differently than most civilians would in the situations she’s thrown into. She adjusts too quickly. She asks the right questions. And perhaps most importantly, she survives situations that should completely overwhelm her.

That wasn’t accidental.

Zasha was written to feel adaptive. Dangerous in subtle ways. The kind of person who learns quickly when thrown into high-pressure environments.

Some readers even told me they trusted her less than the actual operatives in the book.

Honestly?

That’s probably smart.

One of my favorite things about Zasha is that she doesn’t fully fit into a single category. She’s not naive enough to remain innocent, but she’s also not fully consumed by the world she’s pulled into.

At least not yet.

Theory #3: V.E.N.O.M. Isn’t the Real Villain

This theory fascinated me because it means readers picked up on something central to the story.

A few people have argued that V.E.N.O.M. itself isn’t truly evil. That it’s simply a more honest version of the systems already operating behind governments, intelligence agencies, and global power structures.

That interpretation is absolutely intentional.

I never wanted V.E.N.O.M. to feel like a cartoon villain organization. Real-world power rarely works that way. The most dangerous systems are usually the ones capable of justifying themselves logically.

That’s what makes them seductive.

That’s what makes people willingly participate in them.

There are moments throughout The Catalogue where different characters rationalize morally questionable decisions because they believe the alternative is worse.

That moral gray area is the entire point.

If readers occasionally find themselves understanding V.E.N.O.M.’s perspective, even while opposing it, then the story is functioning exactly the way I hoped it would.

Theory #4: Ethan Parker Was Secretly V.E.N.O.M.

This theory made me laugh because readers became deeply suspicious of Ethan Parker almost immediately.

To be fair… I understand why.

Parker constantly feels like he’s managing information instead of sharing it. He’s manipulative, controlled, politically aware, and always seems to know slightly more than he should. A lot of readers interpreted that as evidence that he was secretly tied directly to V.E.N.O.M.

What’s funny is…

In very early drafts of The Catalogue?

That theory was actually true.

Originally, Parker was written much closer to the center of the conspiracy. His role in the story was darker, more deceptive, and much more directly connected to V.E.N.O.M.’s operations.

But as the story evolved, I realized something more interesting:

Parker didn’t need to be V.E.N.O.M. to represent the same kind of moral corruption.

That made him feel more believable to me.

Because in real intelligence and political systems, some of the most dangerous people aren’t secret members of shadow organizations. They’re individuals operating completely inside legitimate institutions while slowly compromising themselves for power, control, or survival.

So while Parker may not literally be V.E.N.O.M…

Some readers correctly picked up that he shares more DNA with that world than he’d ever admit.

Theory #5: Do Shen Was a Victim of the System

This might be the theory that divided readers the most.

Some readers saw Do Shen purely as a manipulative mastermind.

Others saw something more tragic underneath him.

A product of the very systems he learned to exploit.

Honestly?

I think there’s truth in both interpretations.

One thing I wanted to avoid while writing The Catalogue was creating villains who were evil simply for the sake of being evil. Real-world intelligence work is filled with people shaped by ideology, trauma, nationalism, betrayal, and survival.

Do Shen understands systems because he was forged inside them.

That’s why he’s dangerous.

Not because he’s chaotic.
Because he’s rational.

There are moments throughout the novel where Do Shen speaks less like a traditional villain and more like someone who genuinely believes the world already operates according to the rules he’s exposing.

That discomfort is intentional.

Because if readers can occasionally understand why Do Shen thinks the way he does, it forces a harder question:

At what point does surviving a broken system turn someone into a reflection of it?

I don’t think The Catalogue gives an easy answer to that.

And I never wanted it to.

Theory #6: The “Catalogue” Matters Less Than What It Represents

This one genuinely impressed me.

Several readers pointed out that the digital file itself almost feels symbolic at times. Less like a traditional “object everyone wants” and more like a representation of control, leverage, and hidden truth.

That’s exactly how I viewed it while writing the novel.

The Catalogue isn’t just dangerous because of the names inside it.

It’s dangerous because information has become the most valuable weapon in modern espionage.

Not missiles.
Not guns.
Not armies.

Information.

Who controls it.
Who hides it.
Who weaponizes it.

That idea sits at the center of the entire story.

The Truth About Easter Eggs

I’ll admit something openly:

There are details hidden throughout The Catalogue that most readers haven’t caught yet.

Certain lines of dialogue.
Certain recurring phrases.
Specific reactions.
Moments that seem insignificant until you look at them twice.

I love stories that reward rereads. The kind where a conversation means something entirely different once you know the truth behind it. Some readers have already started connecting those dots. A few have gotten very close. But nobody has fully solved everything yet. At least not publicly.

The Theory That Made Me Pause

One reader sent me a theory connecting:

• Jake’s emotional detachment
• Do Shen’s interest in him
• repeated references to identity
• and the meaning behind “The Wraith”

I won’t repeat the theory here.

But I will say this:

When I finished reading it, I just sat there staring at my screen for a minute.

Because they noticed something important buried beneath the surface of the novel.

Something subtle.

Something intentional.

And something that may completely change how certain scenes are interpreted.

Now I Want Your Theories

Honestly, this has become one of my favorite parts of interacting with readers. Seeing what people notice.
What they mistrust.What details stick with them after they finish the book.

So now I’m curious:

• What’s your biggest theory about The Catalogue?
• Which character do you trust the least?
• What scene felt “off” in a way you can’t explain?
• What detail do you think other readers missed?

Send me your theories.

Seriously.

I read every single one.