Claire Waller

I’m late to this debate, but it’s a very interesting one, so I hope no-one minds me resurrecting it.

My view on this is very utilitarian (I think), in that I always – consciously or unconsciously – try to work out whether the value of the book/music/art/movie/whatever is greater to me than the cost of reading/listening/watching it.

And the…[Read more]

Of course, I hadn’t fully considered how many cases there are until I started this. For instance, I read We Need to Talk About Kevin long before I knew anything about Lionel Shriver – possibly before she had begun the process of disseminating her curious bag of libertarian views* across the media and the web. I still consider it a beautifully…[Read more]

Just seen an interesting twist on this. A bookshop is making a donation to a charity supporting trans kids every time they sell a book by JK Rowling

I agree with what you say, Raine. I should have clarified what I meant by problematic. For instance there are readers who boycott writers just on someone else’s sayso – I think you should always do your due dillifence and try to find out the whole story in as far as you can. Three independant sources of verification and I won’t boycott a book…[Read more]

This is something that I end up discussing a lot with my co-dragon on Dissecting Dragons. Ultimately, I think it’s fine to read and enjoy problematic art by problematic artists. The important thing is that you are questioning both within your own mind. I’ve boycotted certain YA authors because they’ve been involved in horrific online bullyimg…[Read more]

One of the more bizarre aspects of Social Media is that Michael Rosen has indeed been labeled as an antisemite, and the ‘wrong kind’ of Jew. In fact, just a couple of months after the publication of his book The Missing: The True Story of My Family in World War II, which investigates the loss of family members in the holocaust, Rachel Riley lumped…[Read more]

I have to agree with Ath, Daeds: you are not a bad human being.

Since antisemitism has been mentioned, I’d like to highlight another problem of distinction (or lack of it). I’ve long suspected that the apparently endless fuss about antisemitism in the Labour party is due (apart, of course, from people finding any excuse they can to vilify Labour)…[Read more]

I wouldn’t put up with a thousandth of the crap Michael Rosen gets every single day for all the tea in China. The man is.. I was going to say saint, but you know what I mean. I didn’t mean you to alter or amend the original blog by the way, it’s at the very least a widespread view of Dahl and I wouldn’t say it was any less valid than mine (and I…[Read more]

You are not A BAD HUMAN BEING in spite of your assertion, and I have to point out that I am never wrong about these things. I note what you say, that I have no evidence other than a few sensational articles to confirm the smears, and most of all that he has been forgiven by Michael Rosen* He stays in my blog but with an amended text. I would love…[Read more]

I know I’m a bad human being, but still. I admit the Roald Dahl thing caused me a great deal of distress – not least because some of the articles circulating about him in the last few years contain a whole lot of horrible smears as well as the couple of horrible facts. But it’s difficult to come out and say ‘well yes, he did say a couple of…[Read more]

It wasn’t just white supremacy with H P Lovecraft. It was worse than that. About the only people he didn’t despise were those of what he defined as ‘Anglo-Saxon’ descent – whatever that means. He was a raging snob as well, both intellectual and social. His disgust at the ‘degenerate’ hillbillies in ‘The Dunwich Horror’ comes steaming off the page.…[Read more]

It was. I have a bit of a confession actually – in the first Cloud monthly competition I ever entered, I got more than one flash of inspiration and asked if multiple entries were permitted. The competition setter said OK, but after my third entry, suggested that maybe enough was enough 🙂

I think that’s a good call @libby. Don’t want to inhibit anyone’s creativity, but you’re right about the increased possibility of success

@libby I’m inclined to leave it up to the setter of the individual competition. I don’t see the harm in allowing one additional entry

It’s still possible to get in close, even using third person. It’s a bit of a knack, to get into your character’s head in this way – I often find myself rewriting complete paras when editing, because by the end of the book I’m so familiar with my character I can tell how they’re going to react, what they’re feeling or thinking. It’s a weird place…[Read more]