I came across the piece when reading by Jalarth Benson, 2018, An introduction to group dynamics and process, in Working More Creatively with Groups, Milton: Taylor and Francis Group, when reading about writers in the community and their wellbeing, concerning The Anti-group Phenomenon. The oscillating tension between the approach-avoid, attachment-separation dynamics of the love and will polarities in human interaction means that groups can sometimes create more problems than they alleviate. Nitsun warns against an over-optimistic and idealizing view of groupwork with the formulation of his concept of the ‘anti-group’. 21 He asserts the anti-group is a broad term ‘describing the destructive aspects of groups that threatens the integrity of the group and its therapeutic development’. An introduction to group dynamics and process phenomenon is really ‘a set of attitudes and impulses conscious and unconscious that manifest themselves differently in different groups’ and has three main sources:

• Resistance to participation in groups stemming from distrust, fear, anxiety and dislike of groups.
• Aggression and hostility arising in the group that not only threatens interpersonal cohesion but is aimed destructively at the ongoing life of the group itself.
• Accelerating destructive processes that could not be contained in the usual way.

I have described a psychotherapy group meeting in Belfast at the height of the ‘Troubles’ that was composed of several disturbed and aggressive individuals who believed that the group opportunity was a substandard form of help and continually agitated for individual treatment. Their hatred and contempt for the group was hard for the beginning and untrained therapist to bear and when the premises in which the group met was destroyed by a fatal bomb explosion, a spiral of destructive forces was unleashed in the group that led ultimately to the complete breakdown and dissolution of the group. While the therapist could just manage the hostility of the group before the bomb explosion, the massive disintegration of the external environment seemed to activate an equally massive disintegration and fragmentation in the internal and interpersonal world of the group. The implosion of the group was an inevitable consequence of destructive anti-group forces amplified by the environmental trauma. In this example we can identify several determinants of anti-group behaviour:

• Poor selection of members – too many highly aggressive members.
• Poor preparation for group – not enough attention paid to members’ anxieties and distrust of the group modality including the misconception that group treatment is second best to individual work.
• Flawed development of the group.
• The group therapist’s lack of training and lack of support.
• Group operating in a situation of civic conflict.
• A sudden group crisis that could not be managed.

An anti-group dimension is a natural part of the development of all groups (see Chapter 2) and can be understood and managed and even transformed. The group worker who accepts that conflict is a central feature of group life and is attuned to aggressive and
destructive forces are much more likely to be able to manage and channel these processes than a worker who is frightened of conflict and seeks to avoid or deny their presence. Rather than endeavouring to inhibit the expression of conflict the creative group worker realizes that hostility is a sign of hope and anger, often initiates change, and prepares the way for forgiveness and reparation. The following chapters all contain useful suggestions and strategies for contextualizing aggression and utilizing and reframing the positive value of hostility.

All I could think was, welcome to Northern Ireland. Let me know what you think.

I came across this article in The Guardian, dated 30th December 2024, about the rewriting of classics for modern sensibilities. My first thought was, could they not write something original? Why not just write something new instead of directly stealing from a well-known novel? Then for the copycat author to stand smug and self-righteous at their virtue signalling.

One such book was James, a reworking of Huckleberry Finn by Percival Everett. It was the unofficial book of 2024, topping best-of-the-year lists and winning the prestigious US Book Award for Fiction, yet it still lost out on the Booker Prize. I have to wonder, was it because it held a slave within it? Like it or loathe it, Huckleberry Finn was considered to be one of the most significant novels in American literature. Hemingway considered it “the best book we’ve had.” It was also controversial and one of the most banned. A new edition, with racist terms removed, was published in 2011. The New York Times complained that “there is no way to ‘clean up’ Twain without doing irreparable harm to the truth of his work.” May I suggest those who don't like reading novels from their time shouldn't read it? Remind me what the Nazis did with the books that went against their doctrine.

Its success followed that of last year’s women’s prize-winning (at least it wasn't gender-neutral) Demon Copperhead by Barbara Kingsolver, a 550-page updating of Charles Dickens’ David Copperfield, which transported to the author’s home region of Appalachia during the 1990s opioid epidemic. As the supreme chronicler of social injustice, Dickens provided Kingsolver with “a masterclass” in how to use narrative to make readers care about a latter-day underclass (which used to be the working-class).

This trend for repurposing famous canonical works is set to continue into this year. Call Me Ishmaelle by the Chinese-British writer Xiaolu Guo transforms the American behemoth Moby-Dick into a feminist adventure starring a cross-dressing female sailor (sigh). Guo describes her novel as “a homage to an American master, but with transgressive twists.” All three of these masters were white men (sigh, sigh). Dealing with issues of race, social injustice, gender, and our relationship with nature, each of these reimaginings of 19th-century novels gives a new slant on the contemporary American crisis. Oh my God, why can't people stop attacking Western culture and look to other parts of the world?

Recent edited versions of novels by Roald Dahl, Agatha Christie, and Ian Fleming have met with similar accusations of censorship. That is exactly what it is: censorship. By rewriting, rather than simply removing offensive language or storylines, it doesn't confront problematic texts but rather buries it, instead of learning from it. By changing the perspective of a novel, marginalised figures can be turned into the heroes of their own lives, to paraphrase the opening line of David Copperfield. Everett rescues James from the racial stereotypes of Twain’s original, giving him back his proper name, depth of character, and literacy. “With my pencil I wrote myself into being,” James says. But they weren't the novels written by Charles Dickens or Mark Twain.

From Jean Rhys’s landmark postcolonial and feminist prequel to Jane Eyre, Wide Sargossa Sea, in 1966, to Sandra Newman’s Julia, a powerful retelling of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four published last year, overlooked female characters are also being written into existence. Unsurprisingly, ancient myths have proved fertile territory for female-led reboots, with Margaret Atwood, Pat Barker, and Madeline Miller all going behind the battle lines of the Odyssey and the Iliad.

None of this is new. Shakespeare drew heavily on classical stories (Romeo and Juliet is based on Ovid’s tale of Pyramus and Thisbe). In turn, there are no end of Shakespeare-inspired offshoots. This is justified by saying, 'All storytelling is retelling,' which is true, but please try to come up with some originality. It goes on to say that returning to old books is not a failure of invention but a way of keeping the canon alive, but that is untrue, especially when modern political liberal values override the story. Whether the contemporary authors stick faithfully to the plot line (as Kingsolver does) or play fast and loose with the original (like Everett), they are unlikely to breathe fresh life into these characters and stories. The Guardian says, 'At their best, reworkings like James and Demon Copperhead are future classics in their own right.' Well, that remains to be seen, but I am pretty sure that most people really don't give a shit about liberal agendas. They want escapism, not morality lectures. It's no wonder the numbers reading novels are dropping. Let me know what you think.

I was shocked to learn that in a Guardian article by Kit de Waal, she quoted a 2016 paper, published by Dr Dave O’Brien of Goldsmiths, that it was estimated that almost half – 47% – of all authors, writers, and translators hail from professional, middle-class backgrounds, compared with just 10% of those with parents in routine or manual labour. This analysis, of the 2014 British Labour Force Survey, also identified that 43% of people working in publishing, including those in the influential editorial roles, were from middle-class origins, with only 12% from working-class backgrounds. Does that mean the talent pool in working-class backgrounds does not rise to the same levels as those from the middle-class or is it really all about networking? Perhaps self-publishing is truly the way forward. At least then I would be in total control in all aspects of my novel, such as when I published Meuric as an eBook, which I enjoyed. Let me know your thoughts.

What is the job of a writer? What do they do? For me, writers essentially create content for a designated audience with additional nuance for the reader. This can include advertising and marketing, book writing (including fiction and non-fiction), journalism, poetry, proofreading and copyediting, research, screen and scriptwriting, teaching, technical guides, and web design, to name just a few professions. It is estimated that jobs for authors and writers will grow 4% between 2021 and 2031. Let me know what you think?

Well, I did it again: I bought a book on a whim - The 39 Steps by John Buchan. My wife's not going to be happy (again). But then again, was it just a fleeting fancy? I have always been a fan of the movies and regularly wondered about the novel. I couldn't tell you why. It was just that old-fashioned spy caper with a mystery to solve. There's nothing fancy about it, but was popular enough to keep having remakes done, and I only just learnt that it was the first in a series. The author had a pretty interesting life also. A Unionist Scot, during his life he was a barrister, historian, journalist, novelist, politician, and he served in both the Second Boer War and the First World War, the latter in military intelligence. That was most likely the basis for his hero Richard Hannay and why he fled to Scotland in that first book. Let me know what you think.

An interesting thread today: how do you feel when you write? This is a pretty interesting thread for me. There is so much in the way of emotion, and as always, as probably most writers, all of it is internalised. Well, maybe my wife understands and my children to a slightly lesser extent. It reminds me of a book I'm reading at the minute, First You Write a Sentence by Joe Moran, which is almost like a philosophical discussion about being a writer.

For me, it is a passion, a drive, to get my voice out, to bring those story ideas I have whirling around in my mind to life. I can't tell you where it comes from. Certainly no one in my family is that way inclined. I feel joy as a story takes shape, but if I'm not careful, for me, it can become like a drug, and I would write all day to the detriment of everything else. I can't tell you the number of times I've received a stern word from my wife for running late because I was writing.

Writing comes easily. I don't mean to brag, but the issue for me is stopping; when enough is enough. I have my favourite themes, but I can just about write just about anything. In my BA I wrote a poem. Then I started thinking that I had to change it, tweak it, because that's what my tutor, whose speciality was poetry, wanted to see. It turned out that the first draft was my best work.

When I write, sometimes it feels like it is someone else penning the words, and that I am merely a vessel. When my wife reads my stuff, she can't believe it's me (I haven't decided yet if that's a compliment or an insult). I don't talk the way I write. That might be an interesting point for us to discuss later. 

Once I wrote a scene where I killed a character off in cold blood, and it affected me physically. On another occasion, I was in the kitchen, radio on, writing when my girlfriend (now wife) came in asking what happened to the station. At some point it had become static, and I was completely oblivious. I can become so single-minded that I've seen myself sit in the living room surrounded by my family, the TV on, and I could zone everyone out.

Funny story: I once wrote a battle scene in the kitchen, the big finale of my first novel, and all the while my daughter was telling me about her day, my wife was making dinner, and the music was blaring. I got it done and later found an American publisher (who lied about everything, but that is another story). So distancing myself from them, I sent my manuscript off to have it critiqued by someone independent. She remarked that that particular battle scene was one of the most exciting she had ever read. But to be honest, the damage was done, and I gave up writing for a number of years. I guess writing can also be heart-breaking.

It can also be frustrating. I have constant ideas. I can write. I'm not one of those smart literary people, but I think I can develop stories that capture people's attention and imagination. I believe that is where my strength lies, yet it doesn't matter how much praise I get for my work, I can't break into the world of authors. But then you see famous people promoting their most-likely-ghostwritten, books I think to myself, it's not fair.

But I'll never stop. I can't. Let me know what you think.

Just read an article by the psychoanalyst D.W. Winnicott in Playing: a theoretical statement, who compares children playing and exploring the fantastical alternative realities with writing. Here are my two-pennies worth.

All writers play, but internally, especially when it comes to fiction. Think about characters, location, plot, twist, dramas and conclusions, and all of it without a sound, stored within our minds, twisting and turning, whereas children are free to express themselves with no real thought to self or ego. They display their story by action, while we write it after formulating the plot, exploring the fantasy of genre writing in relative silence (with copious amounts of tea). But maybe play is the wrong word. Maybe when it comes to writing, it is more like a game. When I write a historical piece, the game is how to conjoin all the facts with a fluid narrative. But it made me see the overlap between writing and playing. 

(I) When Winnicott called the child playing all-consuming, we might be called single-minded.

(II) Their playing takes in an exaggerated world, and so do our stories, but within the mind.

(III) The child gathers objects or outside influences to push a fantastic, alternative reality, and so do we. How many of our characters are based on real people? How many locations have we travelled to that have inspired our plots? Even the societies we have grown up in have directed our thoughts. I grew up in Northern Ireland, and I find a lot of my stories have both Irish and British influences, whether it be history, legends, people, or settings.

(IV) And lastly, Winnicott says that ego disrupts play, which is true. You watch as children grow, their playing fades away. Imagination is replaced by objects, and children become increasingly aware of societal pressures on how they are expected to behave. I guess writers are lucky in that sense, as all our fantasies are in hidden silence until we set words to paper. But our disruptive ego, I believe, comes from self-doubt. Is our writing good enough? Are the worlds we try to invent nonsense? Is the story palatable? I share all these fears, but what I do know is that the art of selling fantastical narratives has been around for thousands of years and will hopefully last for a few thousand more. Well... until AI replaces us all. Let me know what you think.

Recently I read two articles about writing about the self. The first was by Hunt, Celia & Sampson, Fiona (2005), Writing: self and reflexivity. To be honest, it was a long-winded piece talking about how to write an autobiography, about putting ego to the side, about the humanist view of things and its history right up to modern times, and the true version of the true self, and I came away wondering if this article was actually about writing or about philosophy and psychology. It wasn't until I read A Novelist on Writing the Self by Mridula Garg that things clicked. Her view was much more direct and simplistic. The first was you simply can't write a true account of yourself. Ego doesn't allow for it. Her second point was that the only way to be truly honest was to write a fiction around it; you hide your true self within words. But while reading the article, when Mridula called all writers amateur psychologists, I instantly saw the connection with the previous article, and it made me think, writers are amateur psychologists. We dictate what our characters do, what they say, and how they react. Anyway, let me know what you think.

I have just read an online article about Katie Ward and her mentorship under Hilary Mantel. A struggling novelist at 27, she had 43 rejection slips when on the 44th one, she was asked for her manuscript. And even that was turned down. How crushing that must have been; still, it is reassuring to know that even an award-winning author such as her had to fight for her place and show resilience. After speaking with a friend, she was put in touch with Hilary Mantel of Wolf Hall fame, who took her under her wing and bestowed upon her some structure in writing. Out of them all, I think the strongest lesson is to have belief in oneself, to keep going, and to have faith in one's work. To look at my life objectively, I'm a middle-aged guy for the first time trying to become a traditionally published author. What am I thinking?! I have even been told that I am too old to do anything new. But I'm lucky. My wife believes in me, my kids, and even my closest friends. So I'll never stop trying. Any thoughts, let me know.

So I've been asked to complete a survey for my MA. Oh my God, I wish I had gone for the 14 months course and not the 2 years. I have sitting on my laurels for a few months now and it is just dragging on. Maybe because I've completed my new novel and my proofreading course, I'm just eager to get on with more things. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

So I've sent my manuscript directly off to a publisher for the first time. Probably not a good idea not gaining representation, but we'll see. Just a shame I have to wait possibly up to six months for a reply. Like me know what you think.

Well that's my Proofreading and Editing course done with the College of Publishing and Media, finishing with a distinction. I'll probably have to wait until after Christmas, but hopefully it will lead to something within the writing world. Let me know what you think.

So ITV has gone and applied for an AI innovator with a wage anywhere between £80-95,000 to work on character development. Is that what the future is to be for writers? To be outsourced to a computer program, making passion, originality, nuance, inspiration, and role models for future generations a thing of the past. If Shakespeare were about today, would he too be replaced by AI? Would JK Rowling, Stephen King, and George R. R. Martin be in the same boat? How about Lisa McGee of Derry Girls fame? Or even Scott Frank, the screenwriter of The Queen's Gambit. All those books, movies, novellas, plays, poems, serials, and short stories to date — would you have seen or read them if they were written by a computer program? Would you have enjoyed them in the same way if you knew they came from a place of zero passion? Ultimately, I think this is all about money. Why pay for a writer when AI could do it in ten minutes? What does that say about our future? Who might be next? Actors? Will anything with a screen be computer-driven, and if you want to see a real person, you would have to travel to a stage play where they earn pennies? Will radio broadcasters be replaced too? All you would need is a few recordings of their voice, and that would be it. Let me know what you think.

Well, that's another no from yet another agent on my manuscript. I suppose in reality it is only a few compared with the number I have sent, and those who have answered have all been positive. In my genre of historical/fantasy, I suppose I do limit myself, but it's what I love to write. Disappointed but not disheartened would be a good way to describe my mood, but I have to be honest, I am quietly confident in my skills as an author and storytelling. Perhaps overly so, but there's no point undervaluing myself. I have nothing to lose. Let me know if you suffer the same problems.

It's amazing what book ideas you can get from history. I was listening to a podcast on BBC Sounds about the life of Sir Walter Raleigh (1553-1618) and during it the historians started to get excited about his wife Lady Elizabeth Raleigh, nee Throckmorton (1565-1647), and I thought to myself how about a historical biography into her life of a literary novel with her as the main character. Let me know what you think.

I listened to a podcast today on BBC Sounds about the life of Robert Graves. A poet of repute, one of the commentators, Professor Fran Brearton, mentioned that most people know him first through I, Claudius. I had a wee chuckle at that. That was exactly how I first learnt about Graves, but I had read it so long ago that I had completely forgotten about the book. I'm thinking now I should buy my youngest a copy for Christmas this year. Let me know what you think.

Well that's my two assignments for my fourth module in proofreading done. Got an A. Halfway now. Onwards and upwards. I actually fancy doing the copyediting course next. We'll see. On top of that, I'm still working away at my manuscript since my wife read it. You'd be amazed how many wee small mistakes we both missed. Beginning to think I'm going to have to creat a twitter, sorry... X, account for this blog. Don't know if I could be overly bothered. A lot of idiots out there, but it might be a good way to meet like-minded people. Saw a post earlier of a woman who only got into writing in her mid-fifties. At 62, she got her first book deal. Well done to her. I wish I had taken a note of her name. Hope for me yet. Share any thoughts you fancy.

So I've started doing a Proofreading and Editing Course with the College of Media and Publishing. On assignment 04. Just hope the organisation isn't a con. Any thoughts, let me know.

Well, that's three rejections from literary agents. Not completely unexpected, since they all must be extra diligent these days. Margins are always tight and it is a business after all. Agents do have to make a living. Still, it is always slightly deflating. But on a positive note, their replies were encouraging. Only another ten or so to go. On a segue, my wife finally finished reading my manuscript. She cried twice, didn't see the twist at the end and wants to read more. Kudos to me, I think, as she is quite a methodical reader. Now, all I need is that once chance. Let me know what you think.