Videnbas

I agree Brooke starting a relationship with Eric was motivated by her wanting revenge on Stephanie, on a subconscious level (and the rest of it was transference of her feelings towards Ridge). The scene between Brooke and Stephanie at Ridge and Caroline's wedding makes it very clear that from that moment, Brooke is on a mission to get back at Stephanie. Interestingly, Brooke seemed to blame Stephanie for sabotaging her relationship with Ridge, even though the rivalry between Brooke and Stephanie had nothing to do with his choosing Caroline (and Stephanie in fact had spent a lot of time trying to keep Ridge and Caroline apart, not Ridge and Brooke). I actually forgot all about Bill and Alex! You are right, that idea really never went anywhere. But on the whole I think the show was a lot better back then at following through on their storylines. And how refreshing it was to see a major character, young, single and attractive, actually not have a love interest until about six months after she was introduced.

Where did you hear that? If that is the case, it is truly incredible! Let's hope they keep going and keep up the pace!

I just came across this clip today when I was randomly browsing Youtube (I'm sure you've all seen it, it's been around for quite a lot of years and I occasionally stumble upon it when looking for old B&B clips online): And besides being a pretty powerful scene in its own right, it got me thinking about the archetype/mythology angle again, because out of all the storylines I remember on B&B, this one has always stood out to me as particularly influenced by classic tragedy (not any one in particular, but in terms of its underlying structure). This entire storyline had this undercurrent of inevitability and impending disaster, starting almost a year before this scene, and the irony of how trying to escape a tragic outcome can actually cause the very outcome you were trying to avoid (kind of like the plot in Greek tragedies about how you can't escape fate). It also had a great sense of dramatic symmetry where it had a kind of mirror form and events at the beginning of the plot were repeated at the end. And every single character involved had a character flaw that propelled the story forward to its "predestined" conclusion (meaning everyone made wrong choices, but they weren't really choices at all because they were a consequence of their inner character). * Brooke and Thorne were a perfect storm of colliding obsessions (Brooke's pattern of going after Forrester men as replacements for Ridge, Thorne's pattern of going after women who were rebounding from Ridge) - Taylor called it "folie à deux" early on and she was pretty accurate. * The storyline ended the way it had begun, with the revelation of Brooke and Thorne's affair causing Stephanie to have an extreme reaction and collapse in a stroke/TIA. * A lot of dramatic irony in play: The threat against Stephanie's life made everyone agree to keep the affair a secret, and this secrecy caused Macy to miss vital information that could have saved her from disaster. In the end, the attempt to save Stephanie (the Venice scheme) caused Macy's death (she was doomed from the moment she met Thorne in Venice - from that point, the snowball was set in motion and there was no going back). Everybody was so focused on the threat to Stephanie's health that the threat to Macy's health flew under the radar until it was too late. * Macy's downfall began with one impulsive journey to save Thorne from Brooke (Venice), and concluded with a second impulsive journey to save Thorne from Brooke (Big Bear), closing her character arc symmetrically. There, I'm done over-analyzing B&B for now! (though I do enjoy it...) Do you have any favorite storylines in terms of narrative structure or references to archetypal/classic stories?

I think in the early episodes, Brooke's family seems to know her better than she knows herself (and later on, I'd say Stephanie has the same insight into Brooke's character). It's clear that her interest in Ridge and the Forresters early on goes deeper than she cares to admit and that she is just not that into Dave, although she is kind of in denial about that. I agree that she probably got cold feet with Ridge (OR maybe she was telling herself all along she was just pulling a prank, while using that as an excuse to do something she really wanted to do herself).

I love it. Those nicknames were so Ridge-y. That and his constant affectionate fidgeting with the woman's hair.

I absolutely agree about Steffy as a "cool girl"! That fits her very well. Hope I'd say is a "sweet girl" and a contrast to Steffy (although Hope also borders on Mary Sue territory, especially during the HFTF hype days). I like to think of the show as built around "force fields". The structure of the show during its best years was a combination of two force fields: Stephanie-Brooke (struggle for power within the Forrester family) and Forrester-Spectra (struggle for power in the fashion business). Everything significant that happened was charged with "electricity" from either of these. I really think the loss of first Sally, then Stephanie made the show lose its power, like a battery that runs out. Since, there have been lame attempts to recapture these two central power struggles but nothing has really filled the void. The problem with the show today is that there are no true opposite poles. There’s really only one extended family, and only one significant place of business. As for Brooke's story arc, I feel her natural end point would have been to "become" Stephanie. They seemed to move her in that direction in the late 90s when her opposition to Amber mirrored Stephanie's opposition to Brooke, and Stephanie took Amber under her wing. But then Brooke's character took a wrong turn IMO, first with her aggressively pursuing Thorne while declaring him her new destiny (which was pretty out of character for Brooke) and then with her affair with Deacon which really hurt her credibility as a maternal character. After that, she became more a seductress than a matriarch in the making. And that was really a dead end for the character because with every passing year, Brooke's lack of growth and maturity as she continued to "follow her heart" became all the more jarring. There was a hint that Hope's birth could have been Brooke's "road to Damascus moment" and sparked a permanent shift in her. It would have been a beautiful character arc and led Brooke to a viable end point, but the show never followed through on it.

Worst written death ever (or whatever it was supposed to be, I'm still not sure). It was like the writers just woke up one day, realized the actress was no longer available, and threw in a line of dialogue saying "oh, by the way, too bad this character died off screen". You know you have failed as a writer when the viewers' reaction to a major character's death is "wait, when did that happen, there's got to be an episode missing". No emotional payoff whatsoever, just total confusion.

I only watch B&B and Macy was the first character that came to mind too. When the show tried to reintroduce the Spectras in 2017, it made no sense for her not to be a part of that (especially since establishing the new Spectra characters proved problematic due to lack of connections to the show's history and other characters).

Thanks! I can't say I'm all that familiar with the archetypes in the Jungian sense beyond a pretty general idea, but I do find mythology and tropes in fiction interesting (I highly recommend the TVtropes site - it's a lot of fun when it comes to discovering the underlying structures and tropes of fictional plots and characters, and it even has its own page for B&B!). I really get a kick out of trying to find common traits in different characters and plots. And I think there's a lot to discover in classic B&B. Steffy is a difficult character to analyze. She seems not really archetypal in the classic sense but rather modern, very much a child of her time (the internet influencer type). I would like to see her as an adventurer, but that side of her has been pretty "domesticated" as she has grown up. She also has transformed from a rebellious little sister to more of a big sister type who has everything under control (or would like to). Oh, and a few more I forgot: Beth Logan - archetypal caretaker/mother Felicia - very much a rebel Kristen - daddy's girl Sheila - well, Sheila when written well IS an archetype in her own right. She is basically what you get if you remove the little voice in our minds that says "no, wait, this isn't right, I can't do that". Dollar Bill/Massimo Marone/Bill Sr/Eric Forrester - variations on the "King" type Pam - the old maid whose life has passed her by. Which is why it was so sweet when she finally found Charlie.

Good question! I think her archetype has not always been the same. Starting in the late 90s (probably around Brooke's Bedroom), she became "the Siren" - the irresistible woman who leads men astray (this was especially apparent with Throoke). But she wasn't always like that - in fact, what defined her relationship with Ridge for the first decade or so was that she *couldn't* win him completely, no matter how hard she tried. Early Brooke I see as "in love with love", she has a pretty self-centered and naive idea of romance (it's all about following her heart) and believes in "destiny". But she is pretty complex in the early years and I can't really place her as just one archetype. I think she saw herself as Cinderella, but she really wasn't. I can't really find an archetype for the current Brooke either, but that is for the opposite reason - they simplified her by making her a siren, and then she outgrew that role and now the character is just a void the writers are struggling to fill. This is a very interesting discussion and it made me start looking for more archetypal characters and plot structure on the show! (I feel the early characters are probably richer in that regard.) So far, these are my immediately thoughts. Stephanie is clearly the Queen, of course. But there is also a Cassandra aspect to her at least in the early years - she frequently sees what is going to happen down the road but her warnings are usually ignored. Oh yeah, and then there's her very Oedipal relationship with Ridge. Stephanie and Eric could also be Hera and Zeus. Caroline starts out as the Virgin type, but mixed with Helen of Troy (the woman whose beauty starts a war). Ridge is Don Juan (he even has a book of women!) Thorne/Ridge - Cain/Abel? Sally is the clever thief + mama bear + the weeping clown Clarke is the proud, arrogant, self-destructive creative genius who is brought down by his own flaws (sure there's a fitting mythological person but right now I can't place him) Macy is a mix of Juliet (to Thorne's Romeo) and Eeyore (and also functions as the Spectras' "straight man" during comedic scenes). Darla is the dumb blonde (but frequently subverts this trope). Katie is the Ugly Duckling. Taylor is the sage advisor (until she isn't). A more recent example - Aly is Hamlet.

Several of these were the first that came to my mind too, especially making Ridge Massimo's son. That right there is the source of almost every icky pairing the show has done since, and didn't lead to much else. Ridge/Bridget was the very worst of these. Ridge's paternity is probably the biggest gamble B&B has done, and the biggest mistake. Also, unnecessarily killing off good characters in a way that just provided short-term shock value and no benefit long term (like Macy's second death, Darla's death, Phoebe's death or Aly's death). Maya being transgender which was played only for shock value and then immediately resolving the story without showing any of the drama. I also agree about Taylor's (second) resurrection. In retrospect, that was a jump the shark moment.

I think B&B in general does a very poor job with this trope. They routinely "redeem" characters in a way that feels completely undeserved and undeveloped. Sometimes they don't even acknowledge that a character needs redeeming, but instead move on to the next storyline as if they just hit a reset button. Redemption on B&B more or less equals saying "I have changed" (and possibly a few other characters echoing "s/he has changed"). Bell also has a thing for redemption by organ donation (three times and counting). Some examples of failed redemption would be Quinn (who literally gets away with murder) and Flo. Then we have characters like Bill and Brooke, who never actually change or redeem thenselves but everyone just seems to forgive them no matter what they do.

It's been a year since I watched that particular episode, and yet I know EXACTLY which scene you were referring to! Yes, the tension between the characters was so thick you could carve it with a knife, and I wouldn't be surprised if that was the moment that made Bell Sr go "never mind Stephanie vs Beth, this is the epic rivalry of the show"!

Are the episodes on the official channel complete and in good quality?

I actually appreciate this slow build of the early years. To me, everything prior to Thorne shooting Ridge in 1988 is like the first act of a play - introducing characters and relationships, planting seeds for future conflicts, setting the stage for what is to come. There are a lot of clues dropped in passing during those years that foreshadow future storylines and absent characters that were yet to be introduced. For example, the Angela storyline and the Spectra vs Forrester storyline really start back in 1987, years before the principal characters of those storylines are first seen. The rivalry that culminates with Thorne shooting Ridge builds continually from the very first weeks of the show. Stephanie's character building is wonderful. I get the greatest kicks when watching the early shows catching all the little moments of foreshadowing.

This is definitely true of the current episodes and the past few decades. The Bill Bell episodes take a lot more time building characters and playing every beat in a story.

I am not sure how I feel about this. Maybe a recast is what is needed to make the Taylor character viable again, but the character history is what it is, and the mess that they made of Taylor post 2005 can't really be undone. Taylor getting away with shooting Bill and leaving him to die, as well as her part in the illegal adoption of Beth, are very problematic for a character who is supposed to be essentially a "good" person with good judgement. On the other hand, Taylor is a character I feel is "recastable" (I am currently watching the 1990 episodes with the temporary Taylor recast and they work OK). The new actress looks the part and will hopefully work well in the role. And I do like that the show seems to moving in a direction where several legacy characters from the show's best years are being brought back (Sheila, Deacon and now Taylor), I hope this trend continues because those old characters, many of which were created by Bell Sr, have more layers than the ones invented more recently.

I have currently reached October 1990 (I think) and there are some things that just strike me: The Jake storyline - wow, I can't believe the show did such a serious storyline and actually explored it at depth! I can only imagine the mess Brad Bell would make of such a storyline today. But Bell Sr treated it with a lot of sensitivity (even though the ending, as I recall, was a bit of a cop-out). The Julie subplot - I have to admit this has me confused. So Bill Sr is being blackmailed by Sally who happens to know about his porn magazines. But how is hiring Julie to seduce Clarke going to help Bill get ammunition against Sally? I don't really follow his plan and I don't know if I'm missing something of if there's a little plot hole here. Eric/Ridge/Stephanie/Taylor/Brooke - so funny to see Stephanie scheme against Taylor in favor of Brooke/Ridge! It's easy to forget that Stephanie was supportive of Brooke/Ridge for a substantial part of the early years - first because it kept Ridge away from Caroline while she was married to Thorne, and then because it kept Brooke away from Eric when Stephanie hoped to reconcile with him. And isn't Brooke's pregnancy unusually long (at least for a soap)?

Yes, Donna/Bill was an interesting dynamic. He seemed genuinely smitten by her and she was torn between wanting revenge and being grateful to him for giving her a chance at Spencer.

I am actually looking forward to Macy's Bikini Bar days. I think that time period added a lot of depth to her character, in terms of fleshing out some tendencies that had always been there but weren't fully realized before (her role as a professional singer, as well as her darker self-destructive side). If it weren't for her Bikini Bar days, Macy would be neither a performer nor an alcoholic, and those were arguably two of her most character-defining traits.

I have the feeling the Ridge/Brooke/Caroline/Thorne situation was always meant to end with a violent or tragic confrontation between the brothers. To me, everything leading up to Thorne shooting Ridge felt like the "first act" of B&B. We got to know the characters and the main conflicts, and then starting in late '88 or early '89, things started becoming more intense, in several storylines, and we began seeing the payoff.

Oh yes, Pierre! He was such a sweet character! So warm and friendly, and an entertainer. Every scene he is in, he puts a smile on my face. It's funny with the BeLieF theft, the show didn't have many loose ends in the early years, but this was definitely one of them. Such a major plot point, and it was never resolved. I still think Jake confessed only to get Macy off the hook, which basically leaves Clarke as the one remaining suspect. But it was never confirmed whether he did it. And yes, Hunter Tylo was stunning back in the day. Still was until 2002. And the character was well written until that point. Just imagine how differently we would remember Taylor's character if she had stayed dead after Sheila shot her! I really think her second resurrection was a mistake. The less said about Blake, the better. I can never unsee his seizures/panic attacks/bouts of rabies/whatever those things were supposed to be. I loved Thorne and Macy's spontaneous singing! It was like the entire soap operated according to a certain set of fictional rules, with a pretty high level of "realism" (unless we're talking explicit fantasy sequences), and in come Thorne and Macy and suddenly those rules don't apply to them. It's funny how at first the writers tried to find realistic ways to make them sing (like the charity benefit, or them singing together while Thorne played the piano) and then, pretty early on, they gave that up and went "oh well, just let them sing!", threw realism out the window and just let Thorne and Macy be in a movie musical of their own while the rest of the show stayed in the soap genre.

That is an interesting observation. I do think the Logans worked in the early years, but I also think it was the right decision to shift focus away from them when the Spectras came to the show because it made the show take place in "one world" (the fashion world) rather than two. But the early Logan years were necessary to create a backstory for Brooke and a strong foundation for the Stephanie/Brooke rivalry (I still think this was the main goal of teasing Eric/Beth because romantically that relationship never really went anywhere, being based mainly on nostalgia, but it did serve the purpose of making Stephanie and Brooke enemies). Personally, I found Donna more dynamic than Storm. Storm rarely carried a storyline while Donna had several storylines of her own during those first few years. Katie I'd put in the same category as Grandma Logan - mainly there to create the "family" feeling.

Yes, at least for a while she pretended to be an intern at Spencer Publications and she wrote an article that Bill found genuinely impressive. Donna was really ruined by the recast when they pretended she was just a "dumb blonde". Actually, I think recasting Thorne with Jeff Trachta worked really well, even though I liked Norcross as well. Trachta's Thorne had the same softness and sweetness that Norcross did, but added a more humorous and extraverted side to Thorne which worked well in his interactions with Macy and the Spectras (in fact, it was needed to match them). I also think Thorne's scenes with Stephanie became more interesting after the recast. For me, recasting Trachta with Harmon was far more jarring because his Thorne was completely different from the character played by either Trachta or Norcross. We got a less refined version of Thorne, and the qualities that made Thorne Thorne - the softness, the contrast to Ridge's playboy style, the vulnerability - were downplayed.

I have to say, I almost miss this early attitude towards recasts. The writers clearly had a story to tell with the character and weren't dependent on any one actor to tell it. It's a refreshing change from the current actor-centered writing where the story tends to be adjusted according to which actors are available.