vetsoapfan

The Loved and the Loathed: The Guiding Light edition Feeling very nostalgic about TGL lately, after being involved in the discussion of its history, I am curious: who were your favorite citizens of Springfield, the characters who made the show really feel like TGL to you; the characters whom you considered an intrinsic part of the fabric, and who would keep you loyal to the show, even if its writing were not top-notch for awhile? And who were the characters whom you simply loathed beyond endurance (LOL), whom you did not love-to-hate, but just...hated, and wanted off the show ASAP? It will be interesting to see in any particular characters show up on most viewers' lists. THE LOVED --Bert Bauer --Papa Bauer --Meta Bauer (particularly Ellen Demming) --Bill Bauer --Mike Bauer (particularly Don Stewart) --Ed Bauer (Mart Hulswit, and even Robert Gentry) --Hope Bauer (Elvera Roussel) --Peggy Scott --Holly Norris (Maureen Garrett) --Roger Thorpe --Ross Marler --Robin Lang (Gillian Spencer) --Dr. Paul Fletcher --John Fletcher (Don Scardino) --Sara McIntyre (Millette Alexander) --Amanda Wexler (Kathleen Cullen) --Vanessa Chamberlain --Henry Chamberlain --Maureen Bauer (Ellen Parker only) Honorable Mentions: Rev. John Ruthledge, Trudy Bauer, Kelly Nelson, Nola Reardon THE LOATHED (As they pop into my head) --Jeffrey O'Neill --Richard Winslow --Lesley Ann Monroe --Fletcher Reade --Susan Piper --Reva Shayne --Hawk Shayne --Minnie Pearl Shayne --Rusty Shayne --Roxie Shayne --Jackson Freemont --Cassie Layne --Danny Santos --Tony Santos --Abuela Santos --Father Ray Santos --Rose McLaren --Buzz Cooper --Beth Raines (Beth Chamberlin's unbearable version) --Eve Guthrie (It's harder to keep this list short, considering what a mess the show was in its final years!)

Someone commented here at SON that William Bell and James Reilly were the two most influential writers in DAYS' history. That may be true, but it was for different reasons. Bell made the show a huge success after its first tepid year on the air, and turned it into a mesmerizing, adult, high-quality romantic drama. Reilly came aboard with his high camp and low-brow, gimmick plots, and completely and forever destroyed the show's integrity and credibility. Bell influenced the show upwards, Reilly drove it into the toilet and kept on flushing. Goutman's destruction of ATWT was less obvious, more subtle, but the damage he did to Oakdale ended up crippling ATWT too.

Thank you, Katie, for that insightful and heartfelt analysis of the Bill Bauer saga. You expressed it PERFECTLY. I certainly did not hate Bill; indeed, I loved all the original core Bauer family members and loved watching their journeys unfold over the decades. I saw Bill as an essentially kind-hearted, quiet man who would have been perfectly content working at a comfortable, middle-class job and enjoying a tranquil family life at home. But no. That was not good enough for Bert, who was quite a shrew and a harpy back in the day. Not content with what she had (which was a stable home and security), she kept nagging and nagging Bill to earn more, to be more, to achieve more, thereby pushing her poor husband out of his comfort zone and inflicting undue stress on him. Papa Bauer had his own, old-school ideas of what it meant to be a man, and I don't think he really understood Bill's underlying contentment with just having a simple, quiet middle-class existence rather than striving for high-stress-inducing jobs and greater (unnecessary) financial gains. I think Bill turned to alcohol because he felt like a personal and professional failure, and he turned to other women because they made him feel like a desirable man. He got little support and little understanding from his family who put unreasonable expectations on him. This did not excuse his bad choices, of course, but his reactions were human and at least understandable. He was not a strong, naturally-aggressive person. He did not have the resources to fight the negativity he was receiving at home, so drinking and carousing were his coping mechanisms. To her credit, Bert eventually started to come around and see how life had hurt her husband. She finally started to respect him for the person he was, rather than the man she wanted him to become. One of my all-time favorite TGL episodes aired in 1966 (I think). Ed was railing to his mother about all of Bill's shortcomings and failures, and Bert finally had enough. She tore Ed a new one, vehemently telling him that Bill was a good man and a kind man; that he was ultimately a BIG man, and although it horrified her to acknowledge it, Ed was not. Ed was a nothing more than a small man who did not live up to his father in any way. IT WAS WONDERFUL to see such truthful, explosive family drama unfold that year, for characterizations to deepen, for Bert to grow as a person and come to realize her own guilt in exacerbating Bill's problems. What I always wanted the show to explore, was Ed's abject hypocrisy towards his father. For as much as Ed denigrated Bill for drinking, for infidelity, for failing the family, Ed HIMSELF became a drunken philanderer who abandoned and failed his own family in the exact same way. I did not want Bert and Bill to remarry after he turned up alive in 1977, for that would have undermined all the progress Bert had made during his absence. She had grown into a moral, strong, sympathetic figure who put her family's welfare above her own needs and ambitions. She had became "the guiding light" of the Bauer family and of the show. And while I had all the sympathy in the world for Bill's pain over the years, his allowing his elderly father, wife, and kids to believe he was dead for so long was inexcusable. I wanted Bill and Bert (and Ed) to finally work through their long-standing issues and come to some sort of understanding; at least an uneasy peace. Bert and Bill could have become sympathetic friends and allies to support their family, not husband and wife again, and if he had died at that point, after the healing process with his family was established, then Bill Bauer's death would have meant something. It would have had emotional resonance with the audience. It would have brought the character around full circle, back into the bosom of his family and the hearts of viewers. But the callous, indifferent way TPTB chose to kill off the character, with none of his issues dealt with, explored, or resolved, was simply a slap in the face. A cheap gimmick done for shock value that offered no emotional pay-off, no closure, nothing. An original character from the early days of the show, killed off for no reason other than to jump=start a ludicrous story that was not appropriate for TGL anyway. Sigh.

I thought Frank Beaty was attractive and charismatic in an absurd and over-the-top role. It's too bad he got saddled with this part. I would have preferred him on the show long-term, over many other actors we got stuck with. I don't think Dicopolous had much sexual heat with anyone on-screen either, but speaking as someone who has the heart of a 'ho, he looked very sexy in that tight blue T-shirt he wore in the 1980s. Woof! I could have tolerated Fletcher in small doses as a supporting-buddy kind of character, but that loud-mouthed, screaming, belligerent Buzz just HAD TO GO. I also prayed every night for the extermination of Richard, Jeffery (they brought him back...aaaaack!), Crassie, all the Santoses, faux Beth, and many others. On the other hand, by the time the show actually died, there were so many characters hanging around who were actively BORING and pointless, I just yawned my way through many episodes. (Peapack did not help.) In all the time from 1950 to 1982, I was NEVER bored.

I think that Long eventually evolved into a good writer, but some of her initial choices for TGL should have been vetoed (like the supernatural/sci-fi nonsense). In an interview years after the fact, she confessed that she had finally realized the fantasy stuff did not work and it was "better to get real." Many of her interpersonal-relationship scenes were quite poignant. She wrote Bert well. She wrote the Phillip and Rick relationship beautifully. (I, and Michael O'Leary, suspected Rick was subconsciously in love with Phillip, but Long pooh-poohed that idea.) If she had had a strong producer who knew what she was doing and who understood the show (Gail Kobe did not fit the bill), Long's more annoying, failed plots might not have seen the light of day, and her better, human drama might have taken center stage and been her primary legacy. Her second stint at headwriter, under Calhoun, was significantly better than the first. I credit the producer with a solid part of that. I agree that the Dobsons were better at TGL than Marland was, but ironically, Marland was better at ATWT than the Dobsons were. Different writers just click better on certain shows, I guess. Pat Falken Smith's scripts for TGL were excellent, and I was thrilled when she initially took over for Marland. She seemed to possess the best of the Dobsons' and the best of Marland's style. It was a major disappointment when she was so suddenly replaced. The writing deteriorated significantly and remained problematic for years afterwards. I'd like to know that too.

If there is a poster leaving irrelevant comments, I just scroll on by. If someone uploads irrelevant videos, I simply don't click on them. And voila! Life i on SON is peaceful. I have never looked for it or tried to use it, but does this forum have an IGNORE option?

DID was a major theme on OLTL for a long time. and this video relates to its effects on those suffering from the condition, as Viki did on OLTL. There's no harm in including this video among all the other ones posted. Why appoint yourself board police and get all vexed? Kick back, chill, relax. There are real problems in the world, you know?

There are indeed many viewers who embraced Reva and while I personally do not get the appeal. I am sure longtime viewers would have felt more charitable towards her in the 1980s, if her family did not seem to explode all over Springfield. I know she was Pam Long's muse, but did she suddenly deserve such a focal spot in the light? I agree with you that Bert never should have forgiven Bill for his past sins. Well, maybe she could technically forgive, but from a distance, and never forget. I did not want her to reconnect with him romantically or remarry him. You are right: it would have weakened her character. She was a strong woman who had put her weak husband behind her. (BTW, weren't those scenes with Bert and Josh just great?) Brandon died in 1979, after arguing with Lucille Wexler, who was wont to try killing anyone who vexed her. Lucille had found out that that the ailing Brandon wanted Amanda to visit him privately, and she was terrified that the old man would reveal to Amanda that Alan and Jennifer Richards were her biological parents, a secret that Lucille wanted to keep hidden. .Lucille confronted Brandon, who had been her lover decades before (eww), and became enraged when he said he wanted to claim Amanda as his grandchild. They argued strenuously and Brandon went into cardiac arrest...which was very convenient for Lucille. She waited as the old man died in front of her and then made sure he was dead. After the authorities confirmed Brandon's passing, Lucille thought her secret was safe. Little did she know. Decades later, under Paul Rauch, the show claimed that Brandon, himself, was Amanda's father, rather than Alan. Nope. Impossible. There were many stupid and careless inconsistencies with the Spaulding family history over the years. God knows why every Spaulding in existence felt they had the legal right to take control of the company Alan had built up. Probably the various writers over the years didn't even think about this logical question. Like you, I think Sara had a lot going for her, and could have been used indefinitely as a humane, sensible sounding board for the citizens of Springfield. Another missed opportunity.

What....? In another post, I went on about how much I liked Reva?!?! Nooooooooooooooooooo. I am notorious for consistently asserting my dislike for the character. I have said that Pamela Long wrote her better than another other writer, but that the character became cartoonish in later years. You are mistaking me for someone else. That is not a criticism. Just recently, I confused you with another poster who was born in 1987 (I think), but who liked to discuss soap plots and characters he had never seen, from long before his time. Confusion happens to all of us at some point when interacting with so many strangers on the internet. No sweat. Right, Long and Kobe made room on the canvas for other families I disliked (the Shaynes, the Raineses, and much later the Coopers and the Santoses and the Winslows) by undermining the historical foundation of TGL, gutting it of its pre-existing families, and essentially turning into a very different, much weaker show. I have always felt their butchering the cast so drastically was a destructive move. Also, never once did I demand that a new regime keep and use ALL the characters on the canvas. I have already referred to the Norrises and the Thorpes who could have been diminished in the 1980s, considering that their leads, Roger and Holly, were no longer on the show. Various characters come and go all the time on soaps, that's understood. But gutting The Waltons of the Waltons, Little House on the Prairie of the Ingalls (look how THAT turned out!), Dallas of the Ewings, or TGL of the Bauers is ultimately so destructive because it deprives the series of its very roots. When you chop away a plant's roots, it dwindles and dies. *I* was not paying attention to the Eli Simms story?!? That is absurd, of course. My assessment that it was a painfully-planned and poorly-executed plot that butchered history gratuitously and ultimately meant nothing does not mean Long and Kobe did something right by foisting it on the audience. It means that their bad choices live on in viewers' memories, as the beginning of the end for a once-great serial. I never liked Fletcher either, and never saw any chemistry between him and his leading ladies. If I were FORCED to save either him or Buzz, however, I would have killed off Buzz and tolerated Fletcher. But I wanted Fletcher off the show. If Don Stewart's ego kept getting in the way, I would have replaced him with another actor too (Jed Allan!), but for stability's sake, I would have tried to reason with Stewart and keep him on the show. After Simon left, I would have grabbed Mart Hulswit by his slightly-chubby ass and dragged him back to Springfield. Richard Van Fleet was even more miscast than Peter Simon as Ed Bauer! If they had made that putrid Jeffery (gag me!) a Bauer, I would have gone postal, LOL. Of all the unbearable characters TGL inflicted on us in its final decades, he was one of the ickiest. He made my skin crawl (much like Sonny on General Hospital).

Right, and if there had NOT been enough room (or budget) for all those families, stop introducing so many new ones. This is not to say that TGL could not phase out characters and families as time went on, of course, but it's never a wise move to annihilate a huge number of cast members in such a relatively short period of time, while simultaneously introducing a bunch of new ones. Maybe, say, the Norris and Thorpe families could have been phased out since Roger and Holly were not there at the time, but writing out almost all of the Bauers was egregious. Personally, I could have lived without every single one of the Shayne family. Great commentary and analysis, Zanereed. You are so right. The death of Bill Bauer seemed gratuitously cruel to me because it was so pointless. Without his presence beforehand in Springfield, without his renewed involvement with his family, there was no emotional resonance there, no reason to throw in the death of an original character except for momentary shock value. If Bill had first returned to Springfield suffering from a failing heart (after his transplants) and we had gotten to "live with" him again for awhile, his death would have mattered. As it played out, it was just gratuitous. The Brandon-Spaulding-is-alive nightmare was a terrible story and historically impossible, since we had seen him die on screen. Worse, with so many potentially-affected characters offscreen, it too lacked real emotional resonance. Mike should have been involved, with Alex, as someone with extensive dealings with the Spauldings and their nefarious behavior. And as you say, a Mike/Alex pairing would provide a lot of potential storyline fodder and sparks between the families. TGL in the 1980s was a study in bad decisions and missed opportunities. It reminded me of DAYS under Nina Laemmle's reign of terror, when she assumed the reigns as headwriter. The scribe announced that the show was "dull and repetitious" and that Salem was saddled a plethora of denizens who had supposedly run their course, so she very swiftly and unceremoniously axed 14 characters and brought in nine (I think) of her own. It was an abysmal failure which left fans alienated and howling. New writers who do not understand or have an interest in the heart and foundation of any long-running franchise must not be given carte blanche to do ANYTHING they want.

No, I never equated being "played out" ONLY to characters who were getting older. I meant that just because a writer could no longer use a character in the exact same way as when s/he was first introduced, or just because an actor/character was advancing in years, does not mean that s/he is no longer useful and therefore should be written out. TPTB can use the "played out" justification for eliminating anyone, regardless of age. The characters eliminated by TGL at the time were of various ages, younger and older, and the majority of them (IMHO) were still viable and had stories to tell. Long and Kobe's announcing those characters were "played out" seemed to be a catch phrase used as an excuse when the actors balked at the new direction the show was taking, or when the new PTB simply did not care to write for them anymore.

Yes, certainly. The natural aging process of any character/actor needs to be part of the equation. In the 1950s, TEON's Mike Karr was more of an action hero, getting involved in all sorts of crime busting, but as the decades went on, it would have been inappropriate, if not improbable, for him to be involved in physically strenuous and combative behavior. ATWT's Lisa Miller was a sexy vixen when she first appeared, but 50 years later, the exact same vixenish antics would appear ridiculous in a senior citizen. This does not mean that older characters are "played out" or should be dropped from their shows. It just means that TPTB should use them differently, according to their changing age and status. Right. There are as many different ideas and story possibilities out there as there are viewers and professional writers. No scribe who takes over a long-running series should be accused of lacking creativity ONLY because he does not acquiesce to the wishes of every fan, but a writer who cannot find ANY use for a show's established, extremely popular characters and history is not a good fit for that series. If he looks at a soap's canvas and truly believes that 2/3 of the core characters are "worn out" and have no remaining possible story potential, TPTB should not allow him to take a chainsaw to the cast. They should look for another writer who DOES have the creativity to invent new material for the beloved characters whom the audience wants to see. When Harding Lemay took over AW in 1971, there were characters whom he felt were bland and storylines which he felt were already played out, but with enough hard work and creativity, he BRILLIANTLY penned new and vibrant stories for them and helped the ratings rise in the process. Ditto Douglas Marland when he took over GH and Claire Labine when she became head writer of Love of Life. Soap scribes don't have to agree with the fans in order to be creative, but they do have to be able to create on their own. Who is to say that none of Mike Bauer's theoretical 12 kids could add diversity to the show in later years? Again, if a writer cannot make characters interesting, he's not right for the job. P&G kept introducing newbies during their shows' final years, many of whom did not find favor with the audience. Why not at least tie some of these otherwise irrelevant new characters into the shows' core by relating them to longtime beloved families? If the characters ended up boring, they would be boring whether they were Bauers, Hugheses, Matthewses or not, but at least longtime viewers might be somewhat mollified at the attempt to respect history.

I apologize. I confused you with another poster who was born in the 1980s, but who had read about the show's past and liked to discuss it. Everyone's opinion is 100% valid, regardless of when s/he started watching a soap, but my point was that viewers who "lived" with certain characters for years were more likely to be invested in them and understand their importance than newer viewers who had only heard about them, second-hand. If you began watching in 1978, then you certainly did experience several of the show's golden years. Again, I am sorry for confusing you with someone else. While I personally disagree with most of your opinions, you are right that arguing about such things is pointless. It's like looking at a prism from different angles as it reflects the light. Everyone might have a different perception from their own vantage point, but that does not mean anyone is "wrong". Absolutely true. After Mike was written out, I was hoping that we would have later discovered he had hooked up with Elizabeth and fathered twin boys. That would have explained her disappearance, assured the continuation of the Bauer family name by blood, AND provided storyline conflict (considering how much Phillip hated Mike but wanted a relationship with his mom). Alas. Yes, as the years went on, many once-promising characters were butchered thanks to bad writing. Long was the writer who understood Reva best, and that character became cartoonish later on, thanks to scribes who did not write her well. Long also understand the Rick/Phillip relationship better than any other writer, and their interaction was never as mesmerizing or poignant as when she was in charge of telling their story. It was sad watching female characters who had been three-dimensional and fascinating lose their luster. But the WORST was actually killing off Maureen, when she was the heart of the Bauer family and had so much potential left in her. Focus groups suck. OMFG! Those fake Bauers were blasphemy, LOL! The viewers had been bombarding the show for YEARS to get the family back in focus on TGL, and this was the best TPTB could do? Why create a bunch of characters who could not realistically exist within the established canon of the show's history, when so many better options were available? Mike could have returned, with twin sons in tow. Hope could have returned, also with another offspring or two if necessary. Meta's stepson Joey and his children (as Meta's grandkids) could have been introduced. Trudy Bauer's history was basically a clean slate and the writers could have created various descendants of hers to carry on the family legacy. Heck, Hillary Bauer had a brother, Paul Kinkaid, who could have been confirmed as Bill Bauer's son, thereby bringing in another blood Bauer to provide conflict within the family and Springfield. Rita Stapleton could have had Ed Bauer's child after she left town. There were sooooooooo many logical possibilities, to anyone who actually knew the show's history, and yet we got presented with the likes of...Lacey! Egads!

Yes, Phillip mentioned that Lizzie was named after Elizabeth, but again, I don't think (or remember) that he or anyone else explained where she was, what had happened to her, why she was never around, and whether she was alive or dead. Most soap fans tell me that the characters who were central when they first started watching are the characters who mean the most to them. Viewers who began watching TGL during the Reva-centric 1980s care for her more than those of us who had been following the show for decades, and whose longtime favorites were unceremoniously dumped in the early 1980s. I loathed Reva and her entire family and hated that clan taking up so much screen time. I also loathed all things Winslow, Santos, and most of the Coopers. I agree with your assessment of Hillary. She was a different sort of heroine, and refreshing, and inventive writers could have woven her into future storylines. I have often thought that many fans could run these shows better and more satisfactorily than the actual PTB.

I think your opinions are shaped from your point of view as someone who had no extensive, long-term experience of watching these legacy characters, so they therefore meant less to you than they did to veteran viewers. This is not meant to be a criticism in any way. Your opinion is just as valid as anyone else's, of course. But longtime viewers of any series are wont to be protective of the legacy characters and the essential components that had made their shows popular and enduring in the first place. Gail Kobe did not understand this as a producer. She felt that flashy plots were more important than the characters whom the audience regarded as friends and family, and she acted on that premise by gratuitously firing 2/3 of the cast. I would say that Bill Bauer's death was pointlessly cruel, and the idiotic, history-butchering, factually-impossible story it lead to held no merit and only hurt the show. With all the other Bauer's gone, we were left with Peter Simon's morose, listless Ed to carry on the torch. If Mart Hulswit had remained as the warm, affable and FAMILIAR patriarch, Ed Bauer might have been relevant in the 1980s, but with Simon and Van Fleet in the role, the new and unimproved Ed was merely another stranger in a sea of newbies. TGL was no longer TGL. Unless I TOTALLY missed it (and no viewer can watch every single episode of any show), I do not remember Phillip referencing Elizabeth's death in the early 1990s. (If anyone knows for sure, and actually saw this on-screen, please correct me.) As far as I know, Elizabeth remained unmentioned and in the Twilight Zone (LOL) until we saw her mentioned as deceased in Phillip's obituary. Anyway, even if the show did finally address her whereabouts in the early 1990s, it was sloppy writing to have let her absence go unaddressed for TEN YEARS. Viewers questioned this for a long time, all over the internet. Why was Elizabeth never there for the son she loved so fiercely?

Yes, I remember that obituary notice, but it just infuriated me because it was like the current writers simply put a sloppy band-aid on the problem of Elizabeth's inexplicable disappearance, and the fact that she had gone unmentioned for more than a decade, even when her son desperately needed her presence. "Oh, our show never explained what could have happened to Elizabeth, and no one ever refers to her at all, so let's just say she died ages ago, and then ignore her again!" I hate sloppy writing like that. Bobby Martin on AMC, Sam and Kirk on ATWT, Stuart Brooks on Y&R, Tommy Horton on DAYS...the daytime landscape is like the Bermuda Triangle. Characters cease to exist without explanation.

I think Mike Bauer was an essential legacy character who should never have been eliminated from TGL. You do not axe John-Boy from The Waltons or Spock from Star Trek just because new writers have no interest in them or are not creative enough to invent new material for such essential components of the series. Or because new viewers may have no clue about their historical significance. Inventive scribes, had they had been truly invested in Mike, could have easily created new ties, relationships, and storylines for him. Hope Bauer as well. Of course, Don Stewart's demands should never have been allowed to negatively influence or restrict the writer's plans for the character, and if he became too difficult to work with, he should have been replaced (I would have accepted Jed Allan!), but the character should not have been removed from the canvas. The problem with getting rid of Mike Bauer, Hope Bauer, Hillary Bauer and even killing off Bill Bauer was that it destroyed the heart of the show: the Bauer family. With Bert gone, and a woefully miscast actor in the role of Ed, the family was essentially gutted, and in the long-run that put the first major nail in the show's coffin. The 1980s were such a terrible time for TGL. So many viable, important characters butchered or written out for no reason. So many new, useless ones introduced, rammed down our throats and then (mercifully) dumped. Intelligent writing dumbed down with a focus on painfully STOOPID fantasy garbage. Other posters have mentioned Elizabeth Spaulding. It always annoyed me to no end that the character was simply dropped and ceased to exist, even though her relationship with Phillip was so important and their story unfinished. With her wiped out of existence, I suppose we were to assume she had passed away (like Stuart Brooks on Y&R and Tommy Horton on DAYS), but the whole mess reeked of incompetence. Thank heaven I have my memories of 1950 to 1983! Yes. The earliest episode of the radio version which still exists is from 1940. Months' worth of 1950 still exist too, and are available in a wonderful collection of MP3 CDs. The main story that year was about Meta Bauer facing murder charges after killing her husband Ted. (He deserved it.) If you do a youtube search for radio eps, you'll find a lot. There are also these resources: https://www.oldtimeradiodownloads.com/soap-opera/the-guiding-light https://archive.org/details/otr_guidinglight

While SFT was never my best-loved-of-all-time soap opera, I had known Jo and Stu for decades, and saying goodbye to them for the final time was heartbreaking, regardless of how much the show had been decimated over the years. It was barely recognizable at the end, with all these newbies and recasts running around, hogging up screen-time, but the core was always Jo and Stu, and as long as they were utilized in any capacity, I would keep going back to Henderson. I wish the great anniversary show were available on youtube, the one in which Jo prepared one of Marge's recipes and she and Stu spoke about their history together, complete with tons of flashbacks. That was a better tribute to the series than the actual finale. The recast, desorased Patti was a terrible mistake. I would have been more satisfied with SFT's last episode if it had just featured Jo and Stu curled up on a couch discussing the triumphs and tragedies of their lives. The debut ep from 1951 exists, and showing clips from that would have brought everything around, full circle. The finales of all the P&G soaps disappointed me so much. *I* could have done so better better by our old friends, and I'll bet many other devoted viewers could have too.

I miss Jo and Stu.

Mine! (Just sayin')

Billy Kay. Yes, he was talented and amusing, but not the typical vacuous "hunk" TPTB no doubt required for the role.

I felt the same way about Marty West, who briefly played Shayne on TGL. There was something sweet and endearing about the lad, even though his acting skills were solely lacking. I actually felt kind of guilty, snaking on his lousy performances when the actor came across as an innocent puppy, LOL.

How depressing it is to rehash the dreadful Peapack years, and to remember how totally gutted, crippled, and unrecognizable TGL was during its final years. It staggered to cancellation after being dealt so many serious, egregious death blows. Sigh. I'm actually surprised it lasted as long as it did. To me, the Light really faded after its core was decimated and identity gutted by Gail Kobe and Pamela Long in 1984-ish. I was ready to see it end then, but was glad when the show rebounded in the late 1980s-early 1990s, and then again (briefly) under Millie Taggart and Carolyn Culliton in 2003. Alas, the last six YEARS were basically unwatchable.

Thank you for the link. It's all coming back to me now. Eeeeek!

I am trying hard, but cannot even picture him in my head, and I cannot find anything about him on the internet.