j swift

Ironically, I was going to write that I missed the huge wedding episodes of the 1980s. A trend that was clearly influenced by the Royal Wedding of Charles and Diana. Then, I read an interview with Judy Evans where she detailed the torment that actresses went through to film those episodes. Unlike a real wedding which last 5–6 hours, soap brides had to wear their costumes for anywhere from 12 hours to three weeks. So, they trudged around in heavy headpieces, corsets, and complex hairdos, unable to use the loo, eat, and sometimes sit! I'll think about that the next I moan about characters getting married in their living rooms.

@Paul Raven It has to be farce, right? The comment you mentioned reads like it was written as a monologue for Archie Bunker in 1974. From the references to first wave feminists, to the archaic views of women's careers, to the incel-like personal attacks on posters. We can debate the use of violence in storytelling, and it's historic context, without all of this delirium. PS, If they mention Phil Donahue or Alan Alda in their response I am going to die laughing. Also, @SamandWillowFan I respect your premise, through a modern lens it looks as weird as when Ricky Ricardo threatened to spank his wife on I Love Lucy.

@1974mdp Yes, but Kendall is a better example of The Lichtenstein Dilemma, because she came about at a time when they didn't want/need to SORAS Bianca. And, the writers had to bend over backward to explain her existence. Which are two key factors.

What is up with Leo and Ava getting phone calls from their co-conspirators while in the interrogation room? Surely there was a more creative and plausible way to convey that information.

On today's episode of DAYS we learn never to trust what a woman says they want. Holly doesn't want to date Tate, and ghosts him over the phone. So, what does the teen's father tell him? Go over to her house and keep pursuing her no matter what. Julie doesn't want Everett to write a story about her. So, what does he do? Walks into her house unannounced, and charm her until she invites him for dinner. Chanel doesn't want Johnny to lead Holly on because she has a crush on him. What does he do? Lead her on and remain oblivious to her feelings. On DAYS we learn that women are silly creatures, but if a man romances them (aka invade their space and exert their will), they'll do whatever a man wants. Happy Thanksgiving!! (today's synopsis used sarcasm which can be difficult to infer by the written word, of course I think we should believe all women, always)

Their tweets (X's?) are nuts, they keeps regurgitating old news This is literally from an hour ago

Cheers to @AbcNbc247 for keeping up the summaries even on a holiday!

Reading the NYT article about the As The World Turns episode that was being performed live during the Kennedy assassination made me think about how weird it is that none of the long-running NBC soaps were effected. Another World and DAYS both premiered after 1963, so they weren't on air during the crisis. I'm trying to recall if Another World ever responded to national events within the story. John Hudson and Cameron Sinclair were veterans. Elliott Carrington had been a war correspondent. And, they incorporated current events like the AIDS epidemic and Designer Drugs. But, I don't recall if they responded to breaking news events like the Gulf War, Ronald Reagan's assassination attempt, or the Stock Market crash. I know there were stories inspired by Watergate, and other events, but I don't remember any direct references to contemporary news from the world outside of Bay City.

Perfect example In my mind, the Lichtenstein Dilemma and SORASing work hand-in-hand. Because every soap has a female character who stays in that late 30s/early 40s era. Then a group of new teens or young adults comes along, and if the female character was single, they suddenly need an offspring to stay in the multigenerational story. Even though, it may not have been in-keeping with a character like Brooke to adopt a teenager, one is suddenly thrust upon her for plot-driven purposes. Much like Brooke herself, and Hilary, got trust upon Phoebe Wallingford (who didn't forget to have kids, but they all left town or died) That's why I wouldn't be surprised if B&B's Katie or GH's Diane suddenly gets a new teen within a couple of years (p.s. I know Katie already has a kid). Because it already happened to Donna on B&B, even though we never see her son anymore.

The soap’s scheduled episode was canceled on Monday, Nov. 25, amid CBS’s continuing news coverage. One line of that episode’s unused script holds special poignancy: “A dream can be aborted before it’s even born.” That is a lovely bit of reporting, thanks @wonderwoman1951

I would argue that they knew who that the Salem Strangler would be Jake from the first murder, because it was foreshadowed from the start. However, in Salem they went back to that well far too often. For example, wasn't Renee's murder and the feather clue like a year later? I forget if that's when Andre was impersonating Roman? But then we got Harper Deveraux as a serial killer. Serial Killers were a dime, a dozen down by the docks.

I don't understand how Clyde has any leverage? First, Stefan is the CEO of a multinational corporation. He could either go to the warden with Clyde's threats, or use his media empire to expose the corruption of the prison. Stefano would never cower to this thug. So, why is Stefan acting like a little punk? The Dimeras pay off judges all the time. You can't tell me that Stefan is powerless to free Gabi without running drugs, and still try to get me to believe that being the CEO at DI is that prestigious. Second, the last time Clyde was on parole he had no money. So, how is he funding a drug ring, an international kidnapping plot, and the managerial staff at The Bistro? Finally, did I miss it or did Stefon go to the prison and not visit Gabi?

I think it is fascinating in terms of mass media culture that people alive that day often associate the image of Walter Cronkite announcing the breaking news with the assassination, and people born after 1963 often associate the Zapruder film images with that event, because it wasn't released until years later. So, the visual memory may depend upon when you were born. Can someone help fill in the details? I recall an interview later where that cast of ATWT mentioned not knowing that Kennedy had been shot, because they kept going even though the episode was interrupted. So, they didn't hear the news until they were done recording the episode.

Didn't Fresno also have the unfortunate scheduling date against a big national event that affected ratings? I think the “Arms for Hostages” deal with Iran was announced in a national prime time address from the White House on the second night and that overtook pop culture that week.

Point taken, my second pass would be long term female characters who were uncharacteristically made into instant mothers. Which is why I chose Felicia and Dorian, neither of whom were motivated by domestic desires. Also, I decided to focus on women because there are more logical and plot-driven reasons why a man could meet his long-lost children. But, I believe that you understood my point because you cited an excellent example.

I also enjoy that EJ is not always a cliché. So, when he saw Eric hugging Nicole, he didn't become instantly insanely jealous (which would have been totally inappropriate given the circumstance). And I like that they are allowing him to grieve, so that it doesn't feel as if this is only happening to Nicole.

@Paul RavenYes, but the term Lichtenstein Dilemma is not just about a long-lost kid, as much as it is about a woman who uncharacteristically became an instant mother as they aged up.

Based on Roy Lichtenstien's famous print, I've coined the term The Lichtenstein Dilemma for female characters who aged out of being a romantically-viable lead protagonist or an ingénue before having kids. In order to maintain a multigenerational tale, surrogate kids were invented, or long-lost children appeared. Often resulting in soap writers having to bend over backward to explain why these people never mentioned having kids, or why their long-lost children happened to move to the same town. The first example that comes to mind is Felicia Gallant on AW. About a decade after she appeared in Bay City, there was a sudden rush to get her a daughter. First there was Jenna, then Lorna. Felicia never spoke about wanting a child, missing a child, or needing a child until it was decided that she should be a matriarch. Perhaps the best example was Dorian on OLTL . Over time, we found out that she gave birth twice to little girls who were raised in foreign schools; Cassie and Adrianna. Herb Callison didn't flinch when Dorian's full-grown daughter was suddenly introduced in 1981. But even more incredibly, it happened again in 2003. Followed by her adoption of Langston in 2008. Dorian was spitting out daughters left and right, despite the fact that we never saw her being pregnant. Bobbie Spencer on GH forgot to have kids. So, first she fostered Melisa, then she was a surrogate mother to Terri, and then Carly magically appeared. And, of course, Lucas and BJ. Erica Kane and Victoria Lord had long-lost daughters, but that feels slightly different because they already had children on the canvas. And giving them full-grown daughters felt like an excuse not to SORAS the kids they already had. There are a bunch of men who had long-lost kids, like Carl Hutchins on AW, but somehow that comes with the territory on soaps. I mean, two out of five of Mac Cory's kids were long-lost, and half of Adam Chandler's kids were long-lost. But, in order to prove my thesis, I need other examples of women who suddenly acquired offspring after being on a show for more than a couple of years. And were all the long-lost children of female character daughters? Or did anyone find a son?

Point taken It is not as if Sloan was desperate to be a mother, or was even that upset when she had a miscarriage (compared to Nicole). So... yeah, Melinda would've been a better friend by either helping Sloan come up with other reasons to ensnare Eric, or encouraging her to get some self-esteem and find a guy who makes her a priority. To me, the dumbest part is that Eric has never expressed interest in meeting the birth mother. Sloan goes on about how she's having trouble parting with the baby. Meanwhile, Eric knows nothing about her and wasn't involved in the process at all.

4–5 months of PTO is a nice benefit. Yet, I had never considered that it is pretty remarkable that they maintain physical consistency throughout their time off. Obviously, nobody in Salem ever gains weight. But, there are also few notable changes in hair or tanned skin over the course of a year. I know the Dark Weeks are rarely consecutive, but that's a lot of personal maintenance for an actor. Although, I noted that RSW seems to add to his tattoos every summer, and it seems like a burden for the makeup crew to have to airbrush them. Between RSW and Greg Vaughan, I wonder how they choose which tats to cover?

Neal McVane was the George Santos of Colorado - two congressmen who were bad at drag (Thanks @te. for giving me the opportunity to repeat my joke which got crickets in the Dynasty thread.)

Thanks for the reply Also, we have no way of knowing if the scab writers will recall that detail 🙄.

https://www.jason47.com/days/productionschedule.html There are so many dark weeks in summer/autumn 2023 (although it is in keeping the usual 15-18 week off schedule since 2016). I assume to account for the changeover in producer, and then the writing staff. However, I wonder if that reduces the number of episodes written by scab writers versus other productions? If the WGA strike ended 9/27/23, and DAYS was dark 10/2-10/6, with episodes filmed 10/9-10/13 airing 3/5, they may only have 8-9 weeks of scab material (assuming that the current writers got back to work immediately). My concern/interest is will the scabs move the story forward like GH, or will they tread water? Also, looking forward to summer 2024, I wonder if DAYS will take an Olympic break? Obviously, they air on Peacock so it is unnecessary, but I wonder if they'll delay it for bandwidth in order to air all the games on Peacock?

As noted

Agreed that Melinda's going too far on her first case as an adoption attorney. However, I thought the dialogue about giving away her firstborn provided some additional insight into her motives. Also, she provides plausible deniability for Sloan when this all blows up. Is the “smoking gun” EJ's note that he wrote on the envelope with the DNA results? Does anyone recall where it is? I know Sloan replaced the results, but the detail about him writing on the envelope seemed purposeful.