Mona Kane Croft

I don't remember that anecdote, but if it was in Lemay's book, how the Hell would Lemay even know what Dwyer did with her clothes? Did she come to the studio one day and announce it? And if so, was Lemay even in the studio that day? Seriously, I don't remember that from the book, but I haven't re-read it for a few years. Still that sounds like hearsay or gossip. Why would he even expect his readers to take something like that seriously??

Agreed. And to be honest, Lemay simply did not understand the soap opera archetype of the traditional loving matriarch (Mary Matthews, Nancy Hughes, Alice Horton, Bert Bauer, etc). He admits that in his memoir. Soap matriarchs are usually fundamentally happy women -- not flawless, sometimes interfering, but fundamentally happy. And Lemay preferred writing for unhappy characters. Think about it -- Lemay's favorites: Pat, Lenore, Steve, Liz, Mac, Iris, Elliot, all of the Frame siblings, Robert Delany, Rose, Angie, even Alice, were all unhappy people or at least in a fairly permanent unhappy situation. Lemay had no idea how to write for a happy woman like Mary. So first, he tried to make her unhappy and meddling by writing for her as if she were Liz Matthews. And when Dwyer didn't play his scripts that way, he simply brought Liz back to the canvas and killed-off Mary. Years later in his memoir, he tried to blame Dwyer's firing on her acting skills, while vaguely admitting he did not know how to write for a traditional matriarch. Virginia Dwyer was perfectly cast as Mary, and her acting skills were strong. In his memoir, Lemay toyed with the idea of being truthful about Mary's exit, but his pride got in the way -- and he blamed it on the actress. I love Lemay, but he made some huge damned mistakes.

Absolutely! Although all the old soaps had great untapped histories, Another World's history was especially ripe for new (or resurrected) storylines because of the unfortunate multitude of short term writers who were constantly writing character in and out of the show. If AW had ever had a long-term head-writer in the later years (like Lemay, Nixon, Marland, or Bell), things could have turned out very differently in 1999. The soap opera is the only genre that can use its long history as fodder for new stories. And fans love nothing more than that! LOL, Donna. Then they'd have been a perfect couple! Although Dru was probably almost old enough to be Ada's father.

I'm not sure Mitchell Dru liked women.

I don't think this is necessarily a bad idea. I assume you're talking about -- when a conversation begins to go off-topic, it would be moved to this new thread. The only problem I see is, I've noticed that when OT conversations are moved currently, they often just die because the participants don't move along it. But I understand your idea, I think. Personally, it doesn't bother me when a conversation goes off-topic because so many things in the world of soap opera are meta anyway. All soaps share many of the same creators, writers, executive producers, fans, actors, and even plots. So to me, it seems only natural when discussing ATWT, that the conversation might veer to GL or AMC or AW. And if I get bored by an off topic discussion, I just scroll on by. But I do realize some folks do not like OT discussions. So I'm cool with whatever decision is made.

I think it is unrealistic to expect an end to the occasional discussion the firings of 1975 (Dwyer, Reinholt, and Courtney). This is after all, an Another World discussion thread. Those firings were shocking at the time, and very unique decisions in the entire history of daytime. Fans, especially long-term fans, have strong opinions about something that was very important to them at the time, and we enjoy speculating and revisiting that part of AW's history. I understand it can seem repetitive, but nearly every topic on this entire message board has been discussed ad infinitum. Frankly, there isn't much new to discuss in the history of cancelled soap operas. If we criticize every repetitive topic, there won't be much action here in the future. Of course not every topic is of interest to everyone, that should be expected. Just my opinion.

Oh yes -- Janet Matthews. I had forgotten about her. Perhaps she could have returned sometime after Jim died, and tangled with Liz. Janet was a complicated and fundamentally unhappy character, having been involved with two married men before leaving Bay City. With the right head-writer, she could have brought some realism back to AW in the mid-80s. But in the hands of the wrong writer, Janet's history would have likely been forgotten. Maybe Lemay in 1988 would have been a good writer to reintroduce Janet, since he was good at writing unhappy characters. Sadly, by that time, Liz would have been the only person in Bay City who had ever even met Janet. And later, Russ in 1989. I believe Agnes Nixon wrote Janet off the show before introducing Ada and Rachel. And some wishful casting for the role -- Rosemary Prinz.

For any of us old enough to remember -- name 3 or 4 pre-1979 Another World characters you think should have returned to the show anytime after 1985. Not at the same time, but in separate storylines. I'll go first. Gerald Davis, Pamela Davis, Sven Petersen, Missy Matthews. (Pamela Davis would not technically be a return to AW, but she was a regular on Somerset)

Thought of another detail slightly related: I read a while back that in the script for DOOL's very first Christmas episode, it was explained that the ornament tradition was started by Tom Horton's parents, and passed down to Tom and Alice. Does anyone know if this is actually true? If so, then the flashbacks from last week sorta changed history by having the ornament tradition be Alice's idea, with no mention of Tom's parents. No big deal 55 years later, I suppose. But real nods to established history are actually one of the things that soaps do best, if they choose to.

So all this focus on the Horton house and the newly created flashbacks featuring a young Tom and Alice -- is this just a flash in the pan, little more than a stand alone episode?? Or is this actually going to lead to something, like an ongoing plot? Or possibly a renewed focus on the Horton family? Funny (or is it tragic?), they always talk about the Hortons as if they are still very important to the show, but mostly is seems like all talk. In other words, they pay a lot of lip-service to the Hortons, but it never seems to go anywhere past the talking stage. Is this time going to be any different? What do you think??

It seems to me, based what's going on with the remaining television soap operas, that the shows have completely given up on attracting the youth demographic. It seems they are seeking ratings in general without pursuing a particular age group. If they had made this decision 20 years ago, there might be several more soaps still on the networks. Does does anyone else agree?

Does anyone know which building was used as the SOHO apartment building on The City? What was it's real address? And did ABC lease the place, or just get permission to shoot the exteriors? Anyone have pics of how it looks today?

I enjoyed a lot of Sheffer's writing. He was good at going back and connecting earlier plots to his current storylines, especially during the early part of his tenure. And he wrote several plots and situations that were unusual for daytime, but still compelling and believable. But I hated that crazy plot he wrote for Bonnie, when she discovered that her African American mother was actually of Scottish descent (or something like that). And the Griffin's actually owned a castle in Scotland. All of that was so unbelievable and unnecessary. Mostly because Bonnie was already of Scottish descent (through her father), and the McKecknies already owned a castle in Oakdale and a large property with a huge manor-house in Scotland. The entire storyline was silly and redundant for a character with Bonnie's existing heritage. If Sheffer wanted to explore Bonnie's heritage, he should have brought back Duncan and/or Jessica and written something that seemed authentic. I also disliked a lot of what Sheffer wrote for Barbara. He took her too far off the deep end, almost to the point of being unredeemable. But Coleen Zenk seemed to love that sort of thing. In my opinion, Sheffer needed a co-head writer or a stronger executive producer -- someone who could hold him back a bit. Much of Sheffer's writing had "good bones", but he lacked self control.

Of course, you are correct. That is EXACTLY what brings up ratings. The more popular actors a soap has, the better!! Soaps that focus too much on one star usually end up in a bad place.

Is Spotify the only place Linda's podcast is available now? Why would she suddenly limit it to Spotify after months on several platforms? I don't have an Instagram account. Is Spotify free? I apologize for the seemingly stupid questions.

Agreed. Soaps need to go back to their roots. Compelling human drama is so much cheaper to represent on screen. It requires no special effects, no location shooting, and minimal sets. All it really takes is good writing and good acting.

Now the front door has been moved closer to the stairs, so the front door is now visible from the couch -- more or less straight in front of the livingroom door. I think something similar happened to the Matthews house on Another World. I believe in the early years, the door in the foyer near the stairs led to another room (a study or something) and was often shown open. But by the early-1970s, that door was just a closet. They also had stopped showing the Matthews front porch (the full porch) and kitchen by around 1972.

Does anyone know why Linda Dano has stopped her podcast? The last episode seems to be October 23, 2023; an interview with Joe Barbara. At least that is the last episode available on Amazon Music.

Has the Horton set changed a lot over the years? I know it is basically the same layout, but isn't the foyer smaller now? Wasn't there originally a closet door between the bottom of the stairs and the front door? What else has changed on the set, aside from paint color and furniture??

These copyright nazis believe they are doing the Lord's work -- supposedly protecting OTHER peoples' copyrights. LOL. They are nuts!!

You probably know this, Donna, but YouTube will accept a copyright challenge from ANYBODY, without regard to whoever actually owns the copyright. So there are copyright nazis (living in their parents' basements) who spend their time searching YouTube for anything that might possibly not be public domain. And then they send copyright challenges to YouTube which, as you said, just assumes they are right. Sadly, Wikipedia handles similar challenges the same way -- just assuming the claims are correct. I completely support the rights of copyright owners. But if the copyright owners don't care, why should someone completely unconnected to the property be able to file a challenge?? I do not understand how that is good for anybody.

The City did consistent location shooting in SoHo throughout its entire run. In fact, I believe there was only one fake outdoor set used, and it was a small alley corner near a dumpster. Otherwise, every scene set outdoors was really on location.

Are you trying to list every character Lemay created on AW? That list would be almost endless. You have many of the important ones here, but still dozens are missing. I wouldn't even know where to begin.

Absolutely correct.

Thank you. Okay then, Robert Soderbergh would be my #3 most influential head-writer.