Khan

Knowing BM, too, she'd let him prattle, wait a beat, then smile and say, "Well, thank you, Mr. Jerome, I'll certainly keep what you said in mind," all while giving him that look that was known to cut people dead.

My personal knowledge of THE DOCTORS is limited. In fact, I have no memories of any soap before 1981/1982. So, as far as THE DOCTORS are concerned, that amounts to bits and pieces of Alec Baldwin, Lydia Bruce, Elizabeth Hubbard, Meg Mundy, David O'Brien, Jada Rowland, and Kim Zimmer. Based on what I do know from before that time period, though, from reading various story synopses and what-not, I think NBC gave up on this one too soon. Granted, it wasn't in the best of shape when it ended, but I feel like enough was there at the core - with Matt, Maggie, Mike and Kit; with Althea and Penny (it wouldn't be the first time a character came back from the dead); with Steve and Carolee and a sprinkling of new and returning Dancys and Aldriches (would Billy, Mona and Nola have even been written off for good if not for the quick ratings?); and maybe a new family headed by an African-American patriarch who comes to work at the hospital - to keep trying. A hospital can be a great community setting for a soap, I think, allowing characters from various walks of life to interact on all levels.

"So You Want to Be a Soap Star!"... Looks like SoapNet weren't the first to think of the concept.

I'm sorry, Carl, I thought it was SOD's mistake, not yours.

"As for the few who remained, Amy married Belle - perpetuating the Amy vs. Belle conflict." Yeah, I could see how that would keep the conflict going. (Oh, SOD, how your typos do amuse me.)

I fight so hard for these shows to my friends who scoff at the idea of soap operas having redeeming qualities. Then, I hear a name like "Mignon Sentell," and even I can't keep a straight face at that point.

Thanks, saynotoursoap, for the information. I think Sunny's rape came much later, Carl. IIRC, Gary Tomlin wrote the actual episode.

"Steve" and "Betsy" were less than 30 feet away, and neither the audience nor the contestants could have cared less.

Actually, I think it was, although I can't remember who came first, Travis or Luke. I don't recall how John Wyatt died. Was it a heart attack? Also, I think the Corringtons went the wrong way in getting Maree Cheatham booted from the show. To SEARCH fans, Jo was "their girl," and Stu "their guy." Stephanie should have gone after either one of them, hurting them either physically or psychologically. That would have turned the tide against her for sure.

MG was right about the lack of focus on the subject of homosexuality -- especially where GL was concerned. I'm trying to think a gay-themed storyline besides Otalia and...I can't.

Didn't ABC own all their soaps at that point? If so, then that's probably why the P&G- and Bell-produced shows on CBS were more resistant to change, because they weren't network-owned.

Couldn't you say the same about AS THE WORLD TURNS?

Nope. Brian Frons - yes, Brian Frons - canceled SEARCH because he felt the show was too old-fashioned and would never capture the sort of young, upwardly mobile crowd that its replacement, CAPITOL, would. By the way, Frons would go on to cancel SEARCH again when he became president of NBC Daytime.

But in Slesar's defense, I don't think it was a reflection of any dip in EDGE's quality. As with SEARCH FOR TOMORROW, EDGE's big problem was CBS' monumental(ly unsound) decision to move its time-slot, not taking it into account that especially where EDGE was concerned, time-slots made all the difference.

Conventional wisdom? Well, you could argue that de-emphasizing Jo as the show's central heroine hurt it. Yet, judging from ratings alone, SEARCH managed to hold onto its audience throughout all that. You could say, also, that certain HW's preference for crime-oriented storylines played as a factor as well. Yet, SEARCH seemed to be the kind of show that could support both crime and "domestic" stories. On the other hand, when CBS moved its' time-slot and then refused to move it back...it wasn't so much the change that hurt it irrevocably as it was P&G's reaction to it. My belief is that if P&G had just waited a bit longer, SEARCH would have rebounded. It would've taken time, of course, but all that was really needed, IMO, was the audience getting accustomed to seeing their show at a new time. That's it.

I loved RYAN'S HOPE during that period as well. Granted, thanks to SoapNet, I've had multiple opportunities to watch the show's first 5-6 years and then compare it to the years I remember (1982 onward); and, having done so, I can understand why most would look upon the last 9-or-so years of its life unfavorably. Those who dismiss RH in the '80's, however, do so at their own peril. Some of it was atrocious, but some of it was good, too. And I think the one constant in all that, aside from the core actors, was EP Joe Hardy, a fine director who, IMO, gets a somewhat harsh rep for working with HW's who weren't as brilliant as Claire Labine and Paul Avila Mayer had been.

Not necessarily a farm family, Mitch. (The Reardons weren't farmers, were they?) But, yes, I believe Marland would've taken one look at SEARCH's canvas and asked, "Where are the have-nots? Where are the blue-collar folks striving for a better life?" And yeah, he definitely would have restored the Bergman/Walton clan, too. True, hacks working in soaps are nothing new, especially where the West Coast soaps are concerned. I hesitate in labeling Fred Bartholomew as one, however. (For one thing, it's hard to hate on little Freddie Bartholomew, know what I'm saying, lol?) By my estimation, he, along with Bob Short, Stan Potter, and Ed Trach, was part of the old guard at P&G who cared deeply about this industry and about their shows in particular. Were they conservative? Yes -- and okay, they were conservative to a fault, point taken. But ask anyone (well, almost anyone) who worked with these gentlemen BITD, as writers, as directors, as producers, and most say they also were supportive of their production teams. Compare that to what happened to P&G once they retired and/or quit, and their successors began allowing the networks to have too much control over their product. God knows not every decision they made or supported was the right one. We have to remember, though, that in the late 1970's and early '80's, there was tremendous pressure on all shows to capture younger audiences. Now, perhaps I'm being a tad too apologetic on their behalf (I tend to get that way when it comes to the so-called "glory days" of the P&G soap factory), but P&G's shows were, by and large, very old-fashioned to the point of becoming passe. The production values still were...pretty good (although, SEARCH, in particular, often looked like "The Sun Also Sets"); and of course, they always employed the best actors. From a writing standpoint, however...well, there's a difference between evenly paced and downright glacial. Factor in that push for youth, and P&G was on the horns of a proverbial dilemma. It had to catch up with younger audiences but not at the risk of alienating older ones or throwing out the basic tenets of serialized storytelling. I think the evidence speaks for itself: some shows (AS THE WORLD TURNS, EDGE OF NIGHT, GUIDING LIGHT) managed the balance okay; others (ANOTHER WORLD, SEARCH FOR TOMORROW, TEXAS), not so much. Moreover, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Fred Bartholomew EP when Bridget and Jerome Dobson first joined ATWT in 1980? Now, I'm not saying that period compared to the Irna Phillips/Bill Bell/Ted Corday years. Not by a long shot! Some of that material is available online, though; and what I've seen of it...it's pretty good! It holds my interest, anyway. But then...so does the stuff that's available from before the Dobsons, and Bartholomew was EP then, too. Frankly, aside from the occasional "rough patch," ATWT was an engaging, character-driven show from the beginning straight through to the late-'90's, when, again, the network started exerting more and more influence on the show, making terrible decisions that ultimately cost the show its life... Besides, if anyone took a hatchet to ATWT in the '80's, it was Mary-Ellis Bunim.

All these years later, and it still feels like ABC taking a big dump on the legacy of LOVING.

They must've interviewed Adam Crane between rehearsals with his barbershop quartet.

No, Jo and Stu never would have run a place like the River Boat. To me, Jo served best as owner and proprietor of a boarding house, allowing her to become involved with various people living in Henderson. According to the credits at the end of the 1983 episode, Fred Bartholomew, not Joanna Lee, still was EP. I once heard a rumor about Douglas Marland becoming SEARCH's new HW before returning to AS THE WORLD TURNS. I wonder if there was any truth to that, though.

I think the only time where I had to question Marland's vision for a particular story was during the "Who Killed Carolyn Crawford?" period. Not so much because it went on for almost two years, but because it seemed as if for most of that time, the story just lacked momentum. I mean, you really had to keep notes, or you'd forget the story was still happening.

I blame the WGA strike for the confusion with Sonni/Solita. The Valere story, though -- that was just bad writing. He didn't. Say what you will about Pam Long, but if not for her '87 return, there's no telling what would have happened to GL.

When Peapack has you looking back at Diamondhead and the Paul Valere murder mystery with fond memories, you know something's wrong.

It depresses me to see Doug Marland's writing picked apart so much, lol. (Seriously, was I wrong for loving his ATWT as much as I did?)

AFAIK, Linda Hamner (who worked as a production assistant on "Soap" at one point) worked with Gary at ANOTHER WORLD and TEXAS, and worked alone at GH and SANTA BARBARA.