DramatistDreamer

Davenport herself is nearly 6ft3, so how tall must this kid be at only 14?!

And these are the same fools who don't want to wear masks and will gleefully spread disease wherever they go.

Who had been previously infected, so that aspect of natural immunity after infection may not have as much weight.

The actress who played Penny, Rosemary Prinz has stated that she didn't want to be locked into long-term stays on the soaps, as she loved being on stage. Not sure about the actor who played Don, but Prinz preferred shorter stints, as she wanted to spend more time in theater. As a theater person, I can't really blame her. The show in the late 90s was languishing and could have really used some long remembered characters doing meaningful, if brief story arcs. The show attempted some form of this, bringing back Duncan McKechnie briefly when an adult Bonnie, his daughter, was on the canvas, but the story and its execution was laughable. If the writers aren't knowledgeable enough about the show's story DNA, trying to bring longtime favorite characters wouldn't matter anyway. After Marland's passing, the show should have made an offer to Susan Bedsow-Horgan to be the headwriter--an offer she couldn't refuse. She knew the show's storyline DNA, as she was there before and during aspects of Marland's tenure as HW. She would have had a better sense of continuity, while adding her own stamp on the storytelling. And she might have been more successful at bringing back some of the show's longtime favorites, who were more likely to trust her skill for storytelling. An actor who was nominated for an Emmy award during her time as a writer, would more likely return with her as HW as they would be more likely to trust her. Actors don't like the possibility of seeing their characters undone by poor storytelling any more than longtime fans do, and we know this happened a lot to characters who were brought back in the late 90s/early-mid 00s on ATWT. We all heard the stories of P&G wanting to exit the business of producing soaps, but ATWT could have at least made a case for their survival by writing consistently better stories, or at least end with a higher degree of dignity.

I would have ended ATWT in the mid 90s, years before the onslaught of horrendous storylines that befell the show in the decade and a half ahead. Don't bring back any ridiculously written long-time characters, don't bring back legacy characters to have them sleep with other characters they consider father figures. Don't kill off legacy characters that long-time viewers saw born onscreen in two years, especially less than two years after they are brought back. And don't devolve characters that put in so much work to evolve in the first place. I'd rather end it when the characters were still recognizable to people who actually knew the history of the show's stories, before the pandering to the new fans that never came and other who wouldn't stay anyway.

Before this, I really never spent any time considering what characters that I thought would return, as it seemed like so many returns on my favorite soaps had been a bust, I didn't want to think too much about it, but a post in the Cancelled Soaps thread, triggered a thought. With all the multiple returns of James Stenbeck on ATWT, I wondered why Ariel Aldrin (Judy Blazer) never made her way back to Oakdale. As long as you had Barbara, Paul and even John Dixon, there would have been plenty of characters that she could have mixed it up with. The character was off the canvas by the time Lucinda Walsh entered (I think), so given the fact that both were married to John, I think it would have been fun to see them interact. Both could be on the troublesome side at times.

Speaking of Judy Blazer, have you seen this? https://www.judyblazerstudio.com/

The U.S., like the U.K. before it, has now a reported death from the Omicron variant, as well as Israel.

Another aspect to consider is that the South African population has had a different level of exposure to previous coronavirus variants (Delta, in particular) than the U.S. and Europe that had much greater access to vaccines than South Africa. Exposure, coupled with a population that skews younger may yield different results, just to keep in mind. I have read that the U.K. reported its first death from the Omicron variant. Hopefully that will remain a rare report.

Somehow, I doubt they care, if they ever did. They've got the I.O.C. in their pocket, so they can stage their Olympic Games (as hollow and de-populated as they might be, if they do, in fact take place). The world has basically talked then promptly turned a blind eye when this happened to other notable and famous Chinese (Fan Bing Bing, Jack Ma) in the past, so there's no reason for the Chinese government to believe the reaction will stray from the usual playbook. From their vantage point, it's going according to the usual plan. I'm sure the Chinese government/sports ministry also believe, that, given enough time, they can convince the WTA to do business with them again. Just look at Evert's reaction already.

Please remember that South Africa's population is much younger than the U.S. and Europe's populations, so the criteria and results may not be exactly applicable. In fact, the African continent tends to have a younger population overall. Now, if milder symptoms turn out to be the main in Europe, which has an older population, that may have more correlation to the U.S., which has more in common demographically.

After the tirades about CRT faded (times just after November elections, quelle surprise), I just knew the deficit hawks would rear their heads. Manchin is a conservative (no way is he moderate), of course, he'd start scolding about deficits-straight from the GOP playbook.

And omicron is on an even faster path, as unfortunately, I knew it would be.

Oh, I see. Well, glad you made it through. It's too bad you couldn't get the research assistance that you needed. Sometimes a person can be ahead of the times and maybe there may be some developments that come along that could help someone else with a similar ambition.

Sorry to hear that you are having so much trouble, @will81. I'm trying to think of who you might contact who might be able to point you in a more helpful direction. Have you tried any of the actors associated with the shows you're interested in? Some may have some suggestions. Some actors are accessible via social media, a few even have YouTube channels where they have posted clips, episodes and reels. Have you heard of a blog called We Love Soaps? Last time I checked, it hadn't been updated in quite some time but one of the blog's founders, Roger Newcomb is active on social media and he seems like an affable guy, who is fairly knowledgeable and frank. He may be a good person to contact. If you have read any books lately on your topic, check some of the writers, see if you can contact them and explain what you're working on, they may have some pointers based on their reference materials. If I can think of anything else, I will let you know. Good luck and keep the faith! Over the summer I read a book called When Women Invented Television by Jennifer Keishin, she had extensive passages on Irna Phillips and has done quite a bit of research on soap operas. She's on Twitter, last time I checked. She could be a good person to contact @will81. Just a suggestion.

This is what I've been saying for years, but the people in charge are all asleep at the wheel. As @Khanso astutely pointed out, people in charge have found ways to continually bring back DS to various platforms. I would think political scandal can have just as much appeal as vampires.

The daytime soaps currently still on air will definitely have better preserved archives. Bill Bell Sr. didn't mess around. His episodes were archived from day one. I'm sure from his experience working on other soaps previous to Y&R, he must've learned what not to do fairly quickly. All of these shows should've known from at least the early 70s to preserve their episodes, I mean, how foolishly short-sighted. I still wonder about shows like Texas and Capitol, that had relatively brief runs, comparatively. There are streaming platforms for everything these days. Streaming a show like Capitol wouldn't take much, unless the archive has deteriorated.

In "I guess somebody has to do it" news, (also making up for my faux pas post this morning).

This is very cool.

Oops, reading headlines too early in the morning. Dysfunction in the British government, but not the kind that I mentioned previously. H/t to @OzFrog. Thanks for the correction.

Hospitalizations should be given a bit more weight as they are a lead indicator of how much damage us being done to our health systems and the public at large.

I love TT and am always glad to hear from her but Alan got certain show details terribly wrong and it's annoying to long time fans of the show. I don't expect her to remember because it's been ages but Alan failed to prepare and to me, it shows a lack of respect. I genuinely believe that, had P&G showed that they had more confidence in her ideas, she might have been a different person. Had P&G listened to her, The Guiding Light would have been on TV before it actually did but they sabotaged efforts because they thought television wouldn't last. Once they finally did allow it, she urged them to get rid of the organ music, as she believed it would become a source of mockery of the daytime drama and, no longer being on radio, they didn't need the organ cues to signal the end and start of scenes and P&G didn't listen. Whenever any comedy sketch show wants to lampoon soaps, what's the first thing they do? Of course, that organ music plays. Yes, she was a b*tch but I am interested in the reasons how and why she became that way. I doubt her neuroses sprang up in a vacuum. And there is documented evidence that P&G consistently undermined and she became more combative as the years passed.

Unpopular opinion: daytime soaps that were linked to production companies that also produced movies were/are in a much better position than the daytime soaps that were linked to corporations that had production companies. A Warner Brothers and a Sony Pictures will always treat the issue of archives with more regard than a corporation like Proctor and Gamble.

It's a bit of irony that the best way to write characters that will be universal is to write them with specificity. Marland wrote the Franklins as well as the Griffins with specificity (the way he wrote the Snyders or Hughes with specificity) bit he wrote themes that were common to many people. He wasn't trying to make either the model Black family, they had flaws and dysfunction, just like the White families on the canvas, but some aspects were specific to a Black family, especially in regards to Roy's family, the way some elements were specific to the Snyders being a farming family. This is what's missing from the writing today in many soaps. So many characters today seem interchangeable, or easy to forget. Something Tunie mentioned about Marland has been a recurring theme with him, he often gave actors the space to leave and do other projects and return. He trusted the actors and gave them the freedom to explore various aspects of their craft Compare that to what we've read about Irna Phillips, who appeared to want to keep her actors tethered to the show and micromanage their every move. Was this because P&G micromanaged her, and she didn't feel as though they trusted her vision and in turn she didn't really trust most of her actors?