vetsoapfan

Alan often comes across as befuddled and inattentive, and lacking knowledge about even the shows he worked on. He really needs to hand over the interviewing reins to anyone else.

Yes, Jamie and Sally could have been siblings in some fashion. I don't remember if the adoption was fully formalized before Steven died. If it were, I supposed Sally would have become Jamie's "half sister" (same legal father, different mother). If the adoption was only granted after Steve's death, then Sally was Jamie's stepmother's daughter. Maybe after the passing of a parent that wouldn't legally amount to much, but your stepmother's daughter is certainly not your cousin. There are historical references floating around that ATWT was originally set in Ohio. They used a shot of a Cincinnati skyline in the opening and closing of TEON for years. I've seen references to NY as being the original setting for EDGE too (there really is a Monticello in New York). At this point, who knows, LOL? On soaps, "facts" change at the whim of a writer's pen (or their ignorance about established history.) In the beginning, Somerset was definitely set in Michigan, as was Bay City. It was mentioned on air. Heather Lawrence )Somerset) complained to her mother Eve that she did not want to move with her to "that little town in Michigan!" But I know that in their final decades, most of the P&G soaps had been switched to Illinois.

When did P&G start to reference the various towns all being in the same state? When I was watching the shows decades ago, various P&G soaps were definitely in different states. Bay City was said ON AIR to be in Michigan but later mysteriously transported itself to Illinois, for example. And there's the infamous example of TGL suddenly being referred to as set in Springfield, even though viewers do not remember (and don't seem to be able to find information in history books about) how the action left Selby Flats. Just curious. A lot of things on soaps are not logical, like on AW when Jamie Frame said that Sally Frame was, "...a cousin or something." Um, no. Sally was adopted by his father's widow. That in no way, shape, or form makes them cousins. Also on AW, didn't an Ordway or two pop up in Bay City using the last name "Frame," even though they were Ordways? Inconsistencies about locales, names, family relationships, etc., have always given soap fans headaches. On SFT, Jo's best friends Stu and Marge originally had a son named Jimmy who disappeared for a while, and when he returned everyone referred to him as the Bergman's nephew. It's really annoying.

It was. Clueless PTB simply did not pay attention to the established facts and history of the soaps, and would change things at will.

Sadly, Rauch ended up being a liability on every show he (mis)managed.

Agreed.

Many of the so-called history books have errors in them, which fans are wont to notice and point out. It's very frustrating. Don't even get me started on those dreadful Soaps & Serials novelizations...yikes!

His lack of perception, lack of historical knowledge, and lack of interviewing skills grates on my nerves. How did he ever get and keep a job at P&G? (I realize that I should not even be asking this question about a company that kept MADD, Goutman, Wheeler, etc., employed. 🙄)

Jacqueline Courtney looked gorgeous in that May 29, 1980 episode. It was so nice to see all those beloved core characters in Llanview. Many of them would be axed within the decade.

I daresay that EVERYONE who reads and posts in this thread would be thrilled to see anything you wish to share.

Another child actor on the show (1974-76, I believe) was T.J. Hargrave, who played Joe and Sara's adopted son T.J./Tim Werner. Also, a boy named Robbie Berridge played Freddie following Gary Hannoch, from 1976 to 1978.

I hate unsolved mysteries, LOL.

Are we sure that the story about Charita's comment was supposed to be about a child performer from the 1970s? I wondered if they were referring to actor Damion Scheffer, who played the unbearable Jonathan Brooks in the early 1980s. By Scheller's own admission years later, he was miserable as a kid.

We are so fortunate that all these vintage treasures survived!

I'm sure it was more than just a (slight) degradation in Hulswit's appearance which led to his termination. Douglas Marland was too vitriolic, almost gleefully so, about the actor for the firing to be about MH's looks. And truth be told, Peter Simon was quite close in age to Hulswit, and had thinning hair as well, so Marland's contention that they needed a "younger, sexier Ed" was absurd.

Years ago, I read a column by Soap Opera Weekly editor Mimi Torchin. She wrote about an interview she had had with executive producer Gail Kobe, under whom The Guiding Light was decimated in 1983/4. Kobe and a novice writer named Pamela Long quickly eliminated 2/3 of the core cast, and introduced outlandish, campy stories to a show that had previously been literate and adult and predicated primarily on family dynamics and interpersonal relationships. Kobe told Torchin that plot was more important than the characters; that viewers tuned in to see "exciting" stories more than any specific set of characters. The fact that a woman who had such an erroneous perception of the soap opera genre was allowed to eliminate beloved characters, including the central Bauer family, and completely rebrand a show that had been successful for decades, boggled my mind. PTB who fail to understand how much viewers care about the characters are the ones who cripple the soaps. Sure, storylines are important, but if they are given to characters whom we do not care about, we are not going to waste time watching. I have often remained loyal to soaps during their badly-written and badly-produced periods, simply because I wanted to continue seeing characters in whom I had an emotional interest. If "my" characters are axed, and I am only left with weak stories, I tune out. It's my contention that putting plot mechanics over beloved characters has damaged most of the soaps over the last few decades. All this to say: I agree with you. Viewers care more about the characters than most new producers and writers ever could. The Guiding Light killed off matriarch Bert Bauer the year after actress Charita Bauer died in real life. Even so, because there had been a major gutting of the cast, very few characters remained on-screen who had had close ties to Bert, and no past characters were brought back for the memorial. As a decades-long viewer, it was disappointing to see. I almost would have preferred if the show had done nothing, and left fans with the idea that Bert Bauer was still alive and well and living in Florida with her sister-in-law. If Emmerdale went ahead with a funeral for Annie, and it was only attended by Victoria, Diane and the Dingles, I would be equally vexed, LOL.

Perfectly said.

Douglas Marland clearly had a personal beef with Hulswit, and was uncharacteristically obnoxious in the press about the actor. He mocked Hulswit for being a "dodo," and claimed that Lenore Kasdorf loathed working with him. How rude. Sadly, O'Leary was not as funny as he might have imagined, and his Rick Bauer became more of an irritant than a viable romantic lead or patriarch. He had very little chemistry with most women he was paired with and his mugging made me impatient. His best chemistry was with GA in their early years together. I would have replaced Rick with Tuc Watkins, who could actually be amusing on-screen AND function as a sexy leading man. (And for the record, I would NEVER have written out Ed and Holly. They eventually became the only remaining links to the "real" TGL of the past. They'd be eliminated over my dead body, LOL.) Robert Gentry was also excellent as Ed, and played the character's inner conflicts with gusto. Watching the show live as I did back then, I was disappointed when Gentry left, but Hulswit quickly won me over. Both actors could convey varying emotions with ease. Both actors were handsome and interesting to watch. The problem I had with Simon was that he was so listless and passive in the role. Ed no longer had the passion and fire that had always made him INTERESTING. Simon's Version was simply colorless. No wonder he faded into the background under writers who neither knew nor cared about the character's historical importance to the show and its core. I've always wondered about this too. After Simon quit the first time, Marland was gone, so it would have been the perfect opportunity to rehire Hulswit. Instead, the show went with Richard Van Fleet, who was a worse recast than Simon. Totally wrong for the part. Shudder. When TGL later rehired Robert Gentry to assume the role, I was hoping for a resurgence in the character's importance, but the show barely used Gentry and then dropped him from the canvas, only to hire Simon again. God only knows what goes on in the minds of TPTB. If Hulswit was the one who declined returning to the show, I would understand and accept that, but I have never heard that they even asked him back.

Hulswit was an excellent Ed. Replacing him with a morose, listless and reserved Peter Simon was a major mistake. Simon was excellent on SFT and even ATWT, but his interpretation of Ed left a lot to be desired, particularly when you compared him to the warm-but-sometimes-fiery Ed Bauer as played by Hulswit. TPTB claimed they replaced Hulswit because they wanted a younger, sexier Ed, which was absurd. Viewers do not need every actor on the soaps to be a hunk. (That being said, I personally found Mart Hulswit to be adorable.) Indeed, part of the appeal soap patriarchs and matriarchs have is that they look and "feel" like our own parents and grandparents. After Mike and Bert Bauer were gone, Ed became the family patriarch, and I don't believe anyone in the audience would have had trouble with him looking like one. Did anyone reject Bert Bauer for being chubby? Lila Quartermaine for being in a wheelchair? Katherine Chancellor for having a weathered face? On the contrary; viewers adored them all and were fiercely protective of them, regardless of their age and physical appearance. The audience is not as shallow as TPTB imagines.

Oh, okay, that makes sense. Thanks for telling me. The show is careless and stupid for doing this now.

Where was Diane? Instead of Marlon, I would have preferred to see Annie's daughter-in-law at the graveyard with Victoria.

Wonderful ideas. It always strikes me that long-time fans have better and more respectful ideas of how to say goodbye to beloved veteran characters/actors than TPTB do. I remember on The Guiding Light, possibly my all-time favorite show, the "tribute" they gave to its matriarch Bert Bauer was pathetic and mishandled to the point of being infuriating. TGL had its own version of the Dingles, the Shayne family, in attendance...while so many important characters who SHOULD have been there were glaringly absent. While I'm not expecting much at all, I hope Emmerdale handles Annie's tribute better.

If you could be in charge of producing the tribute on the show, how would you handle it, and what characters/actors would you try to bring back for guest appearances?

This is dreadful. I have not had access to the series for a long time, so I cannot watch it any longer. The "older characters," therefore, remain forefront in my mind. Killing off an iconic character like Annie, the original hub of the wheel, may be inevitable, but NOW? When a respectful and full-blown tribute to the actress and the character will be basically impossible. What a bitter disappointment.

I have two VHS tapes of this...somewhere. Unfortunately, they were not among the tons of material I sent to a friend, which he later digitized for internet purposes. If I find the tapes, and if they are still playable, I'll let you know.