Mona Kane Croft

If Laura Collins was Jamison's mother, and Jamison was Roger's father -- does that mean Roger married his own grandmother? I had never thought about that until a few days ago.

1 hour ago, Soaplovers said:

It seemed like Irna, and to a lesser extent Bill Bell, were attempting to take all of the tropes used in soaps and add more controversial elements (or for 1964 standards).

Problem was that the 1964 characters were too trope..or copies of previous Irna characters without anything new.

Mary Matthews was a warmer Nancy Hughes.

Granny Matthew's was a female version of Papa Bauer and Hughes.

Janet Matthews was a less developed Edith Hughes.

Susan and Pat Matthew's were variations of Penny Hughes  and Ellen Stewart.

Liz Matthews was a colder Nancy Hughes/Claire Lowell combination.

Alice Matthew and Russ Matthews seemed like a young siblings that were the greek chorus.

I think had the bible been followed more..it would have been an interesting show..but Irna's neurosis and P & G being so conservative hurt the show in the early months as it struggled to find its footing.

Nixon helped focus the show by using some of her AMC bible..and also bringing out the psychological elements Irna was intending.  She created Lahoma, Rachel, Sam, Ada, and helped develop Missy...which was the have not section of the show to play off the Matthews/Randolphs/Curtains as the haves.

And not only did start Alice/Steve/Rachel...she made Bill/Missy popular... and depend Lee's character into a tragic anti heroine in the Sam/Lahoma/Lee triangle.

Interesting observations.  And then a year later, NBC asked Irna to do it again, and create another ATWT clone - Days of Our Lives.  DOOL also had many parallel archetypes, and also had a very slow start before gaining popularity.  

1 hour ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

Found out earlier this year that Agnes wrote for The Brighter Day but her scripts never got used because the show was canceled before they got to them. However, in those scripts were the characters & mother/daughter relationship that was Rachel & Ada in AW. So, the first iteration of the troublesome daughter with the put upon mother is "LikeRachel" & "LikeAda" in TBD before 1962. (Then AW, then AMC & then LOV)

Does anyone know who was head-writing As the World Turns when Lisa and Alma were created?  Could Agnes Nixon have been involved?  I've always believed Lisa and Alma (in their early years) to be quite similar to Rachel/Ada and Erica/Mona.  Any possibility Nixon might have created Lisa/Alma?  

25 minutes ago, Xanthe said:

And @vetsoapfan was able to confirm that the episode had happened

Do you feel this was solidly confirmed?  Are you aware one of the existing scenes from that day's episode actually includes Pat, Dennis, and Louise (along with Alice and Steve)?  So to me, that seems to confirm the episode was not a two character episode.  Unless I'm misunderstanding something.  

24 minutes ago, Xanthe said:

The AWHP details in the daily synopses for 1979 seem to support the March 6 date with the caveat that apparently the script for March 6 was missing from the Bowling Green collection. But John seems to be alive at the end of March 5 and to have had scenes on March 6th.

http://www.anotherworldhomepage.com/aw1979d.html

It's odd the AWHP says they had to use flashbacks for their partial March 6 synopsis, because isn't the entire episode available for viewing on YouTube?  At least I believe it used to be on Youtube.  

17 minutes ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

Oh, yes, I checked & it was March 5th, 1979 AW first 90 minute show & death of John Randolph: GL Roger raped Holly: OLTL Karen Wolek took the stand. It was the next day that she broke down under cross & revealed her life as a prostitute. That was a big week for soaps. 

It's not a very important issue, I suppose.  But the Another World Home Page lists John Randolph's death as March 6.  I've also always heard he died on the second 90-minute episode, which would be March 6.  The first 90-minute episode was March 5. Aside from the AWHP, I don't know any other way to verify this.  

Wow. This all makes Jim and Mary's branch of the family sound much more working-class than things ever seemed on the actual show.   Gives some insight into Irna Phillips' and Bill Bell's original vision of the family. And it makes Liz's upper middle-class dislike of Jim and Mary much more understandable.  Frankly, it sounds exactly like something Harding Lemay might have created.   How ironic, right??  

11 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

I guess none of those plans for Russ went through either. Doesn't even sound like the same character.

Did Ann Fuller, the social worker character, exist on the show?

Yes, Ann Fuller appeared on the show.  I believe she was Missy's social worker early in the story.  

What were the original plans for Russ?  Russ went away as an adolescent, and Agnes Nixon brought him back a few years later as a young doctor, played by Sam Groom.

22 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

Daughter-in-law and mother-in-law relationships are trickier.

Yes, that is interesting insight.  I think that relationship is less folksy and loving.   And certainly less appealing to watch play out.  Again, maybe sexism speaking . . .

38 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

Did any at the show ever talk about Granny Matthews? Was she Irna's attempt at another version of Grandpa Hughes and Papa Bauer, but someone decided she wasn't needed? Was she ever mentioned again?

(I guess Janet wasn't either)

Janet actually survived for several years, well into the James Lipton era. I've often been a little surprised Lemay never brought Janet back to the canvas -- since she was a complicated woman with many flaws.  Just the type of character Lemay enjoyed writing.    

Granny was written out very early in the series.  And yes, I believe she was originated to be a counter-part to Grandpa Hughes and Papa Bauer -- imparting sage wisdom when needed.   I have no idea why the character didn't succeed.   Could it have been underlying sexism?   Meaning the audience accepted wisdom and advice from Pa Hughes and Papa Bauer, but was uncomfortable accepting wisdom from a woman?  Who knows???

Was Granny ever mentioned again? I have no idea.  I started watching AW regularly in 1971, and she was certainly never mentioned while I was watching.    

25 minutes ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

I thought it was March 5th the first 90 minute episode. Anyway, he told them he would quit over the 90 minute show & he did. 

No, John died on March 6 -- the second 90-minute episode.  The first 90-minute episode (March 5) was more Cory-centric, and it set up the events of the next day.   

I have seen no verifiable evidence that Micheal Ryan (John Randolph) voluntarily quit the show because of the potential increased work load.  (Damn it, another myth?  Really?) A couple of individuals have posted that on the internet -- but that's the internet! For God's sake.

At the time, the soap press reported Rauch and Lemay wanted a big event to begin the 90-minute era, so what's bigger than putting both Alice and John in danger of burning in a fire? 

2 hours ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

But Another World towers over all comers in this respect in having its seams show publicly. Consider the following: In more than 30 years on the air, the show virtually wrote out its entire core family not once but twice; 

This is my most hated urban myth in the history of Another World -- the myth that James Lipton replaced (or was replacing) the Matthews family with a new core family, the Gregorys.  Actually, the Gregory family replaced the Baxter family (not the Matthews). The Baxters began to exit after Pat Matthews' first trial for murder, so Lipton wrote-in the Gregorys. In fact, Lipton wrote-out no members of the Matthews family.  Although Grandma Matthews, Susan, and the adolescent Russ had been written out by earlier writers.   

Another somewhat incorrect myth about a later head-writer is that Harding Lemay wrote-out the Matthews family. Here is the truth: I will admit Lemay's writing choices eventually led to the decimation of the Matthews family on AW (by killing-off the family matriarch (Mary) and two long-term popular sons in-law (Steve Frame and John Randolph), and recasting the female romantic lead of the show (Alice) -- all during Lemay's tenure.  Whew!  But it is important to note that, as those characters left, Lemay repopulated the Matthews family with returning family members and grown-up children.  So, believe it or not; in February 1979 (just before the 90-minute expansion), the Matthews family was still the largest family on AW (still larger than the Cory family, including in-laws and not including servants).  

John Randolph was killed-off on March 6, 1979, and by mid-April Harding Lemay had resigned as head-writer.  After that, the Matthews family disappeared one-by-one in fairly quick succession.     

20 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

Guiding Light is the only one I can think of, shifting focus to the Bauers in the late '40s. 

Yes. I wonder if Irna Phillips was writing GL during the make-over?  If so, that would be another case of the creator making the changes.   

13 minutes ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

Although I would suggest that is what Agnes Nixon did at AW. 

Nixon didn't really change the cast of characters drastically. But she certainly improved the writing.  In terms of cast, she really just got rid of 3 or 4 members of the Gregory family, and introduced Ada, Sam, Rachel, and Steve.  Nixon made AW perhaps the best soap on TV while she was there.   

1 hour ago, vetsoapfan said:

Reinventing the (very successful) wheel generally does not work with soaps. Bill Bell was able to do it with Y&R in 1984, but most writers and producers who toss 0ut everything that had been there before they arrive end up crippling the show. 

I believe revamping Y&R was only successful because Bill Bell was still in charge, and he had been the creator of the show.  He knew his audience, he knew his show, and of course he was a brilliant writer.  

I can't think of another soap opera that was reinvented successfully.  Soap opera fans generally tune-in for the characters they know and love.  The audience will tolerate a good deal of bad writing without abandoning the show.  But if their beloved characters disappear, the audience loyalty typically disappears also.  

17 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

As @vetsoapfan has said before, I think it's obvious when watching old clips that Courtney is perfectly strong as Alice. We even have clips of the breakdown story which Lemay ended early because he felt she wasn't a good enough actress. And we have similar clips of Susan Harney breaking down after John's death. Harney who was, per Lemay, a better actress, just not possessing star power. To me, Courtney is just as good as Harney, or better, at the dramatic work.

I'd suggest Courtney was a far superior actress to Harney.  Harney was okay with what Lemay wrote for her on a day to day basis.  But she was incapable of playing the emotional stuff in a believable way.  Her artificial wailing and sobbing after John Randolph's death is embarrassingly bad, in my opinion.  Having said that, I did generally like Harney in the role and I completely accepted her as Alice -- again, on a day to day basis.  But the woman simply could not play strong emotion, and that had been Courtney's strongest skill.    I would have preferred an actress like Jada Rowland or Denise Alexander as a replacement for Courtney.  Even if they weren't blonde.  

45 minutes ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

My goodness, I certainly do not agree with your take on this but I wonder if you are aware of all that was written, said, documented, etc. about Reinholt's behavior that pushed Rauch to the point of having to take action when Reinholt would not take anyone's direction about his being disruptive to cast & crew alike. Believe me, I am not at all accustomed to being a defender of Paul Rauch but he did do some things right. To name a few, firing Reinholt, this example of a special Steve/Alice episode, trying to keep CBS from making GL do the clone storyline & fighting tooth & nail for his shows. When he died, even though he was retired he was putting parties together to try to find a new venue for GL. 

Rauch was probably one of the most successful and effective executive producers in the history of daytime.  But that does not diminish his mistakes.  He was great at production values, stretching the budget, attracting and hiring talented actors, efforts to get what writers wanted in terms of sets, permissions, etc.  But he made huge mistakes at every show that hired him, including leaving AW with no structure, and by the time he left -- about half the cast was made-up of characters nobody cared about.     

8 hours ago, vetsoapfan said:

I just don't believe firing Courtney and Dwyer was "for cause." Lemay simply had an irrational hatred for both women. The justifications he used in his book to fight for their dismissal were blatantly ridiculous and hypocritical. Considering that Courtney consistently ranked at the top of audience popularity polls and was awarded for her acting multiple times (in Daytime TV, Daily TV Serials, Afternoon  TV magazines, etc.), it wasn't her acting that needed to be changed to placate a petulant writer; Lemay needed to get over himself and accept that it's destructive to fire hugely popular leads from any series based on personal ire.

Lemay was a wonderful writer, but he often allowed his ego to get in his way.  He did not like actors who were known as soap opera stars (Dwyer and Courtney, for example), regardless of their acting talent, popularity, or status on the show.  He claimed to have populated Another World with actors he "grabbed" from the theater, but actually nearly every major role cast during Lemay's tenure was cast with a former soap actor who also had theater experience (which was typical for all New York soaps).  He did grab a few theater actors directly off the stage, but nearly all of those had minor and temporary roles on AW.

Lemay also did not understand the purpose or importance of the traditional soap opera matriarch (Nancy Hughes, Mary Matthews, Alice Horton, for example).  Plus he did not like writing for happy characters who had little conflict. (If you notice, nearly all important characters on AW during Lemay's run were fundamentally unhappy people.)  So he set about to turn Mary Matthews into an unlikeable meddling shrew, who would stir up trouble for her adult children.  That is more the Phoebe Tyler, Liz Matthews, Mona Croft type of character.  Virginia Dwyer knew that this would not work for Mary, so she worked to minimize his efforts.  She did play some of it however -- specifically when Mary turned against Steve and actively discouraged Alice from returning to him. In reality, Lemay wanted Mary to behave like Liz Matthews. He clearly explains this in his book.  When Dwyer didn't play it his way, Lemay hired Irene Daily to return as Liz and minimized Mary's presence on the show by having Mary often out of town, or by simply not writing for her much at all.   He also more and more gave Mary's lines to other characters -- specifically Liz and Ada during important scenes.  Lemay's ego and his growing hatred for Dwyer (and Courtney) should have been controlled by someone in management -- either Paul Rauch, or higher-ups at P&G.  Lemay could have written everything he wanted to write, without dismantling the structure of the show.  But again -- ego.

So within a four-year period, Another World lost five leading actors (four were fired, and one left for Hollywood).  Those five are Virginia Dwyer, Susan Sullivan, Jacquie Courtney, George Reinholt (all in 1975), and Michael Ryan (in 1979). Four of the five were important members of the Matthews family.   

15 hours ago, Soaplovers said:

Also...I like Mary...but I often feel she would have been better served playing  Liz's daughter Susan Matthew's instead.  Susan was a therapist with ties to Jamie, Liz, etc...and could have filled the same function with a tie to the Matthews.

I would have preferred Denise being cast as Missy Matthews, Liz's daughter in law.  Missy was AW's first ingenue and a part of AW's first popular romance (Missy/Bill).  Plus in my opinion, Missy had more star-power and a stronger back-story than Susan Matthews.  The historical conflict between Liz and Missy (along with Missy's son Ricky Matthews) could have driven interesting material for years.   

9 minutes ago, Efulton said:

I would love to hear what Judith Barcroft (Lenore), Barbara Rodell (Lee), Ariana Muenker (Marianne), Susan Keith (Cecile) and Laurence Lau (Jamie) have to say.  

Does anyone know if Beverly Penberthy was invited?  

3 minutes ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

There was a swing set on the playground in Lassiter, PA that Vicky & Jake would go to, as a special place where they would go when things were awful. And in an incredibly stupid move the show had them move it to Bay City. 

Ahh, okay.  I sort of remember that.  Also -- around the same time, wasn't there a tree with their names carved into it that also miraculously moved from Lassiter to Bay City??

Reminds me of the Frame farm which unexplainably relocated from Chadwell, Oklahoma to Bay City around 1987-88.  Jeeze-Louise!  

45 minutes ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

When was it that they moved the swing set from PA to Bay City? 

What do you mean by "swing set"?  I don't understand this question.  Sorry.  

16 hours ago, danfling said:

He was the husband of Anne Barcroft (Ann #3) and the father of Ian Washam (Little Phillip #1).

Judith Barcroft.    

1 minute ago, AbcNbc247 said:

All these blunders seem to be all part of an even bigger problem that AW had post-Lemay/Rauch.

There was never a lot of investment in some characters. So many characters were put through so much and then a new writer/producer came on, they either completely changed them or sent them packing. 

Agreed.  In the 20-year post Lemay/Rauch era, AW never hired a well-known head-writer with a history of success, who would have had the creativity and gravitas to grab the bull by the horns and make the show a successful soap opera again.  I'm talking about a head-writer like Nixon, Bell, Marland, Phillips, or Labine.  I realize some of those writers were not available to work at AW, but just imagine what any of them could have done with the show -- especially if they had a very good executive producer working in tandem!  To AW's credit, they did briefly hire Michael Malone who had great success at OLTL, but for some reason his work at AW was a complete flop.  I don't understand why he was not successful, but the things he tried to do just didn't seem a good fit for Another World.  It has been suggested by others that Malone was most successful with he had a good writing partner, so perhaps the lack of a partner contributed to his failure.  Or perhaps there was not a good fit between Malone and the executive producer.   But I can just imagine what Douglas Marland would have done at AW.  Too bad Marland didn't come to AW directly after Lemay!  

10 hours ago, danfling said:

I had known that the very early soap operas had black backgrounds in their sets.    I am suprised that Search for Tomorrow in 1953, only one year after the 1952 debut, had sets that elaborate.

If you notice, most of the sets on SFT during this era actually do have black backgrounds (black walls) with windows, doors, pictures attached.  I'm surprised the black walls are not more distracting, but it is easy not to even notice them.  I'm assuming the audience accepted the black walls because the show was aired in black and white.  Or course this never would have worked in color.  

2 hours ago, Paul Raven said:

The irony...

I get it.  But when somebody does something right, I'm thankful for that.