j swift

12 hours ago, Soaplovers said:

I think in his own way, Lemay had to admit he was wrong about firing Jacqueline Courtney... but couldn't outright say he was wrong

Listening to Lemay's We Love Soaps Interview, he still seemed sassy and dogmatic in his opinions even 40 years after his memoir.  His derision of Doug Marland's rules and his clapback about the context of actors not wanting to play gay characters in the 1970's were remarkable.  In fact, it sounds like Marland rarely felt that he was wrong about anything.

To reiterate my earlier point, he doesn't get enough credit for his honesty about working with actors, networks, and advertisers.   I would argue that most of the fan supposition about how backstage politics affects the soaps, as well as a general awareness of how soaps change due to the headwriter comes from his memoir.  Thus, he not only elevated the dialogue within soaps, but he also made soaps fans into a more sophisticated audience.  

Today I learned that Robyn, (ex-wife of Mike Horton and mother of Jeremy Horton), was the niece of Robert LeClare (ex-host at Doug's Place and father to Dougie/Charles).  I had totally forgotten that Robert returned as part of Robyn's entry story (his son was in a French boarding school at the time of his visit to Salem).

Which bar hosted Tom Horton's beat poetry?

15 minutes ago, BuckyB12 said:

I don't feel like the Matthewses were really phased out until after Lemay left. They were eventually replaced by the Loves and the Mackinnons (and the first 1980-ish attempt at a new family - does anyone remember the Halloways?).

Lots of historic families were phased out over the years - The Hobsons, The Delaneys, and The Perinis to name a few, somehow the phasing out of The Matthews meant more to soap history-files, but I agree that neither Jim nor Mary were particularly intriguing characters and if only Aunt Liz survived, they picked the strongest member of that team.

I wonder if Lemay's memoir is the first instance of a writer admitting that their relationship with the actors and production affected their plotlines? 

We take it for granted and even joke about the relationship between certain soap writers and their muses, but I don't know if any other soap writer's memoir was so directly introspective.  Ken Corday's and Bill Bell's respective books were more of a timeline of events with some mildly juicy stories.  Lemay actually admits that he left AW because the expansion to 60 minutes wore him out and left him bereft of ideas for further plots which seems revolutionary in a genre that recycles the same five head writers over and over.

13 hours ago, Chris B said:

I decided to buy Harding Lemay’s book and now I am so obsessed with this world which is a shame since his material isn’t even available lol. 

Seven Years is a great memoir filled with funny anachronistic details.  From his fascination with Sleasar's mimeograph machines to the economics of a pre-WGA writing staff, it is a great read.  The stories of his early lunches with P&G executives and his phone calls with Ina are stuffed with sarcasm.   Of course, others may have had alternative perspectives, but they didn't write dishy memoirs, so we're left with Lemay's version (Churchill quote - history is written by the victors).

We should add Y&R alums, Lachlan Buchanan and Peter Porte.  Lachlan attended Peter's wedding in New Orleans last summer.

The point has been made before that the soap press has always been complicit in the "closeting" of actors.  Many gay actors have commented that if a writer knew their sexuality then the magazine profile just would not focus on their dating life.   Certainly, by the 1990s, productions were not actively suppressing stories about actors, more often it was a fan-driven press with a misguided effort to self-censor the topic.

Not to go off on a tangent, - but - it is interesting that as a member of the gay soap audience, we've tolerated magazines profiting off of photos of shirtless soap hunks pretending that their only subscribers were female while often including insensitive remarks.  In our review of the 1990 SOD Tumblr there have been numerous examples of humor derived from a misperception that sexuality is dependant upon binary gender roles that would (hopefully) make a modern reader cringe.  

Maureen Garrett

Kevin Spirtas

Paul Anthony Stewart

Michael Corbett

All came out after their time on soaps

Poor Anna had spent 1990 dating duds (Casey the Alien and Edge Jerome) and Robert was dating clingy women who were not exactly his type.  So, by 1991, it seems like they were the best each other could get at the time. 

Not for nothing, but this wasn't the first time that Dr. Chuck found himself raising another man's child.  I think Lil' Chuck also had a mortal scare under Chuck's watch.  One hopes his specialty was neither OB/GYN nor Pediatrics. 

And who brings a baby to The Chateau?  And why was it "The" Chateau and not "Le" Chateau (too European for those Pine Valley midwesterners)?

And why didn't the Tylers hire a night nanny if he was a doctor and she was going to sing at the local cabaret?

Chuck was not the brightest tool in the shed.

I'm reading the Classic Soaps recap of AW on Tumblr, they are at September 1982.  It is interesting that Corrine Jacker's character of Louis St. George was so similar to Richard Soderberg's Carl Hutchins.  Louis was Felicia's vaguely European ex-husband, scam artist, secret father of Cecile.  Carl was Donna's vaguely European ex-husband, scam artist, secret father of Ryan.  I didn't recall Louis as being menacing but reading about his scheme to sell stolen Nazi art through Rachel's gallery made me re-think that opinion. 

Does anyone else follow Fourrures's account on YouTube with soap clips of Women in Fur Coats?  There are many clips posted each week and this week's post centered on Guiding Light.  I have enjoyed the choice of clips, but I seem to be missing the point beyond that it is an amazing amount of fur coats.  Is this account trying to communicate something about women in fur coats?  Is it a media collection that just happens to center on women in fur coats?  Any information about the intent of these posts would be appreciated, just for context.

Also, (just for the trolls), let's avoid any political/moral/ethical/social or perverted discussions of fur coats in this thread.  

I was just thinking about all of the lost Courtland heirs.

Andrew, the son of Cynthia, was adopted by Palmer because they had such a close bond.  Then, he caused Alex Hunter to fall off of his horse, which led to a heart attack, which was judged as involuntary manslaughter, Andrew went off to jail, never to be heard from again.

Ross, Palmer's unknown son, started off as a good guy and unfortunately wound up as a rapist.

It seems like there was a period when various writers were trying to find Palmer a son.  Just like the Quartermains have always had a daughter-like figure at GH, the Courtland's kept trying to give Palmer a younger guy with which to spar.  Either Andrew or Ross could have been redeemed and would have been great partners for either Brooke or Erica.

I understand the plot value in getting rid of Gunner.  A part of the focus of the story was Ariel, so killing off Gunner moved her story forward.  Also, Gunner was never going to be Barbara's "end-game" or the love of her life, so she needed to be free.  Finally, being a rich orphaned teen made Dusty a perfect love object.

However,  Gunner and Burke played such similar roles in the story that they even died of similar diseases.  Gunner was around for just under three years, so it was probably the end of Hugo's initial contract.  So, I still wonder why were they both necessary to the plot as it was initially designed? And was it always the plan to kill them both?  Was there critical backlash to Hugo's performance? Did ratings go down during the romantic story?

It just seems like there were an unnecessary amount of Stenbeck heirs.

Upon reflection, it strains credulity that James would be so concerned about the heir.  He had already inherited his fortune legally, so no court could make him give it back.  Gunner and James were both already successful in their respective legal and criminal businesses, so they wouldn't need additional income.  Senior Stenbeck (who I always confuse with Brandon Spaulding) knew who was his legitimate heir when he wrote his will, and he could leave his money according to his wishes; regardless of legitimacy.

I was wondering about Hugo Napier/Gunner today.  The character's disease and death come out of left field, especially given Burke Donovan's mysterious brain disease earlier in the story.  Hugo also left AMC, so I wonder if it was an actor or a character issue?  I understand the plot value of having Dusty as an orphan, but both of his father figures (besides John Dixon) were gotten rid of rather quickly.  Is there any scoop? 

In my initial post, I was actually referring to Jack Krizmanich who played Grace's faux-long-lost-son John Hastings.  I am willing to bet that he spent more days being photographed for the soap mags than he did on-set.

I need a memory refresh on Matt McCandless.  I recall that at the end of the serial in 1987 it was resolved that Matt was a member of the Royal Family of Baraq.  However, I also recall that Christopher Durham left in 1984, following the revelation that his blind girlfriend was the daughter of Natalie Wood's sister and Sam Clegg and he was paying for her eye treatment in Europe.

So, did Matt return at the end or was he just mentioned?  Why involve him at all if he wasn't on-screen?

I was just reading the Crane Family Wiki and it struck me that Passions came along at a particular point in internet fandom when everything was cataloged, but there was still a communication barrier between the audience and the productions, (in the age of Twitter no soap could have had that much rape).

I remember a character who was heavily promoted by NBC daytime with photos of his long hair and string necklaces; only to disappear from Harmony, like so many of its townspeople (BTW my most vivid memories of Passions were those annual summer hunk photo sessions).   

For a soap whose fans recorded every episode with a summary, there were certainly a lot of loose ends.

One last note:  I really liked the way Reilly played with time on his soaps.  He would stretch out stories until the audience wanted to scream, and then resolve things in one week or never at all.  It felt like the pace was deliberate, and almost a meta-parody of the genre itself.

Christopher Atkins has always been my number one hunk, but I've only recently begun to appreciate that he never wore underwear on-screen

Blue Lagoon BTS screen shot

Pirate Movie - final scene

Cady McClain was on TV Guidance Counselor podcast this week http://tvguidancecounselor.tumblr.com/

I've been trying to suppress my disdain, but I had to let it out.

She mentions that Y&R was the least professional of the soap sets.  She goes on to say that production banned cue cards a year before she started; which seems unlikely given that she was on within the past five years and no soap production could afford cue card writers since budgets were slashed decades ago.   As soap fans, we've heard already this trope from other dissatisfied actors.  It absolves them by suggesting that they learned their lines while shifting the blame onto their former co-stars.  I can imagine that there are many frustrations of working with people who have been on the same set for 25 years, but Cady played Kelly like a maniac whether or not cue cards were present.

She also mentions being a bad barista in a coffee shop after ATWT.  So, unfortunately, she doesn't seem to have much of a plan B if her current documentary on female directors doesn't make more than Mary Poppins at the box office this weekend.

The Richard Character Profile reminded me of Alonzo and Rob; two very temporary spanners in the Richard and Cassie saga.  Alonzo, the real heir, of a democratic sovereignty, came along just when nobody cared about the story anymore.

While I was not a fan of the period, I enjoyed the Beth and Cassie conflict.  I preferred when Cassie and Reva had a common enemy.  While it seemed unlikely that Beth of the Four Musketeers would harden into Lady Macbeth, the casting change and acting choices kept it interesting.  Today, I would hope that we would explore more of what made Beth devolve into such manic character that she began kidnapping people, but given the times, ladies arguing in ballgowns was always fun to watch.

Worth repeating: the San Cristobal stuff also reminds me how unlikely it was to produce a motorcycled-jacketed, brunette-ponytalied, scruff like Jonathan.   When Marlon Brando owned an island he stopped dressing like a character in the Wild Ones, but somehow Jonathan Randall was the Stanley Kowalsky of the Carribean?!? 

I was reading Today in Soap History at the welovesoaps website and there's a mention of Rachel encouraging Sharlene to go to the Snowflake Ball.  I found it remarkable because I recall a more adversarial relationship between the two.  Sharlene seemed to always be talking s%^& about Rachel when Josie was dating Matthew.  She also was snippy about Rachel to Jason.  When did their relationship change, or was the animosity one-sided?  

Sorry for the simplicity of these questions in advance but:

I know Penny was Ellen's friend, so were they younger than Lisa?

Wasn't Marcy's Prince somehow related to Penny?

Was Penny involved in the London remote to find Sabrina (or was there any reference to Penny living in London in that story)?

It was discussed recently that Rosemary Prinz regretted that Penny had been written into a corner by the time she left.  So, I went back and read the character history today and I wondered when she would have considered Penny to be beyond the point of no return?  Her first love Jeff came and went relatively quickly, but she was paired with multiple other partners.  I wonder if she felt that Irna wouldn't let Penny commit fully to a man after the passing of Jeff?  

I always thought that both the casting and characterization for Jonathan were poorly executed.  Here's a kid who was born on a fairy tale island, the son of Prince Richard and Reva, raised by Olivia's sister in the Midwest.  So, why was he long-haired motorcycle jacketed thug who looked ten years younger than his father?  

The whole idea that he was seeking revenge because of his childhood abuse made no sense because why would he blame Reva (who had amnesia) and not Olivia or Richard?  Also, if Edmund was threatening her baby while she was the princess, why didn't Reva have any agency over him getting punished?  Why didn't Olivia check in on the progress of Jonathan as he grew up?  Why didn't the Royals give the Randalls a lot of money to raise the prince in order to ensure a good education?  Weren't they ever going to bring him back to the throne? 

Overall, it lacked logic that Jonathan's main motive was Mommy-issues rather than wanting to run a kingdom.