30/08/03

This is an attempt to analyse rationally and objectively an argument between some of my friends at school. If you know (or are) the people involved you may be able to identify the people mentioned. If you do, I would advise you to take caution if you raise this subject with them. I will not mention any of the people involved by name but simply refer to them as A, B and N.

In situations of this type, N is usually one person, or maybe two ‘inseparable’ persons, for this reason I will refer to them as the N persons.

A and B both represent individual people and will be referred to simply as person A and person B.

Initially, person A and the N persons are ‘best friends’, but a new person enters the group of friends, person B. The N persons get along well with person B, but person A does not get along so well and may feel threatened by the new presence. Eventually, person B takes over from person A and the N persons’ ‘best friend’, even if this is never actually said.

Understandably, person A does not like this change, but feels that there is nothing they can do about it and so allows it to happen and may join a different friendship group or may just stay on the ‘outside’ of the original group.

Next, for some reason, person A realises that they can go back to the ‘best friends’ state with the N persons if they in some way discredit person B. There is often some sort of trigger for this, such as a minor argument between person B and the N persons, especially if the N persons then confide or seek support in person A.

Soon after this realisation, person A exaggerates or completely falsifies a situation to discredit person B. Person A makes sure that their side of the story is the first side the N persons hear and encourages them to excommunicate person B. Person A then goes back to the ‘best friends’ state with the N persons.

Person B is obviously not happy with this and will probably become angry. This rage could be expressed against person A and the N persons. Person A will probably try to stir up this rage, as it will only serve to separate person B from the N persons even more, which is person A’s aim.

This situation is unstable and cannot continue for very long before it has to be stabilised. This will usually take the form of an argument between person A and the N persons, especially if person A tries to push things too far against person B. Or, the stabilisation could come if communication with person B is completely lost, i.e. they move to a different school.

Stability could also be imposed from outside. A concerned parent, teacher or friend could cause the members of the argument to think about things in a different way and in doing so solve to problem.

After the situation has been stabilised, the relationships of the friends may go back to any of the previous states, or may enter a new one, but all sides will be able to accept the situation. There is also a chance that stability may not last and things may re-enter this chain of events with the roles of person A and person B reversed, but it will eventually enter a state of permanent stability.