Jump to content

ALL: Do soaps value DIVERSITY?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Someone mentioned something about this not long ago so i wanted to bring it back into discussion. Why are people of color lagging on soaps? I started watching the CBS soaps when I was a little boy with my mom. Most people think it is kind of strange for an 18 year old male college freshman to be watching soaps, but even though they are so predictable and suck half the time, it's almost a force of habit to watch for me. Anyways I have watched Guiding Light for the better part of the last 14 years and it seems like there was so much more diversity back then than now. I was on youtube and saw the ending theme for GL in 96' and look at how the demographics have changed!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAKbc4J8Rfo...ted&search=

You had the Grants, Speaks, later the Santoses and some other people. My point is that when you look at the show now, or many of the other daytime soaps, they might have one or two minorities but they never do anything. Remy is not integral to anything right now. Neither is Mel or Father Ray. It feels like the TPTB feel that we are not deserving enough to be in significant storylines or something. From Blacks to Latinos, Asian Americans to Native Americans and beyond, we make up 40% of the U.S. population but we are no where near represented like that a lot of times. Y&R is commendable for their efforts towards diversity, as is Passions and DAYS use to be that way-maybe with Lexi coming back that will help them. B&B is suppose to be in LA, one of the WORLD's most diverse cities but they just don't get it. I use to say that maybe it is because of GL's and other soaps budget problems that limit them to have a wide range of characters but that isn't a good enough excuse to almost make certain groups invisible. Does anyone else agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 10
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I agree soaps have gone backwards in every way.

The scarcity of non-whites, or non-whites as major characters, is glaringly obvious. And the characters that they do have, they tend to group under huge umbrellas...you basically have 4 "stereotype" groups...whites, blacks, Latinos and all others. Even among the huge casts of whites, they think diversity is North vs. South. Either they are WASPY types, or they slap a Southern accent on them and make them either like the rich Texas Ewings or slutty trailer trash. One of the things I loved so much about Ryan's Hope was that, even though most of the cast was white, they were very different ethnically and in a lot of cases, that ethnicity was a core part of the characters...the Irish Catholic Ryans, the Jewish Feldmans and Greenburgs, the Italian Jack Fenelli...and you had names like Novotny, Pavel, Nieves, Szabo, etc. When he was first introduced, there was much mention of Seneca Beaulac's French-Canadian/Seneca tribe ancestry. I miss seeing some of those ethnic elements among characters and families. Since I watch OLTL, the best example I see there currently is the Vega family. Regardless of whether I like/dislike any of them, I do appreciate seeing their Latino ethnicity in the way they interact with one another. As an Italian, I identify more and see more familiar things within that family than in the "white" families.

The soaps may think they are going forward but what I see is they have mostly gone away from simply having a diversity of characters on canvas as a regular, integral part of the cast and telling good stories to depicting caricatures, stereotypes, and an overall monotony/sameness. They do things for short term attention, controversy or shock value and pat themselves on the back for being so "progressive" when in reality, they didn't have the courage to go any further. It's like those facades of buildings they use on sets....all facade and nothing behind it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You have to agree with that - the Lopez-Fitzgeralds are pretty much front and center and then Whitney and Chad are featured a lot as well. When it comes to diversity the award would have to go to Passions set aside whatever you feel about their out there storylines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Soaps have gone steadily backwards somewhere between the 90s and now. I think now the folks in charge don't want to come off as too "PC". Plus there is just less of an obligation felt towards representing and keeping in touch with reality. Homogeneity seems to rule, and efforts made to counter this only serve to remind me how far soaps have sunk back. I wish race, religion, class, all that stuff was treated as ways to enhance characters and setting and plots, incorporated simply as real aspects of real human beings.

PS Good post by applcin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

yea. i agree with pretty much everything everyone else said. I never got to see Ryan's Hope but I remember hearing how ethnicity was a big part of the show. That's a great place to start and show the different cultures people have. Isn't Nora on OLTL like the only Jewish character in daytime now? That too is said!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Ryan's Hope was amazing.

As for soaps its quite sad how they seem incapable of injecting any diversity into their casts. All soaps are guilty of this including ATWT. Although ATWT use to be pretty decent in this catergory the random disappearing acts of Jessica AND Dallas have basically left Jade as the only person of color on the show which is quite depressing. I love Jade and all but there need to be MORE characters of different backgrounds on shows. People of all races have issues. People of all races can be evil, sweet, funny, in love, and involved in business.

I have a question though. Do you think its too late to introduce a new major core family to a soap? Like for examply I'd love for ATWT to create and implement a storyline that involves bring an Indian family to Oakdale. It could be as small as a man and woman with 2 daughters and 1 son. 1 daughter is in the Paul Ryan/Meg/Emily age group while the younger daugther and boy (who are twins) are in the Paul/Gwen/Casey/Maddie group. I don't think it would hard to do this and EXPAND them so that over the next 5 years we get cousins, uncles, long lost relatives, untold paternity secrets, etc. Until they're just as much a part of Oakdale as the Ryans, Hughes, and Snyders. As long as its original and they create interesting, uniqute characters I truly don't know why it wouldn't work. The most important thing though is that this NOT be like Desperate Housewives Season 2 with the Whites who were only there for a few months. This would be an actually long term/forever undertaking in my view.

I'd love to hear peoples opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think they made a longstanding character on Y & R Jewish recently as a means to create a story? Nora's ethnicity is seldom brought up unless it's to serve a plot, like it is now because she was the victim of a hate crime.

With RH, it was just part of the characters' lives. Maeve talking about Ireland, the Ryans celebrating St. Patrick's Day, the Feldmans having Sabbath or having problems with their daughter dating a non-Jew, Jack cooking, or saying things in Italian sometimes or being called Giovanni by his old friends at the Gennaro Social Club, Seneca having some Indian mementos in his apartment. You had a very clear sense of these characters just from these added touches, it really enriched them and made them seem more true-to-life. I really enjoyed GL when they had the African-American Grant and Speakes families, and the very Greek Eleni and Stavros gave the Coopers (aka Kouperakis family) a nice sense of that culture. On OLTL, I like the touches when the Vegas speak Spanish or say "Mami" or make ethnic foods...it makes them feel more like a family to me.

Nowadays, the diversity, if you can call it that, seems to be more along the lines of which side of the Mason-Dixon Line they came from, or by economics/class, and those distinctions often either get stereotyped or just get eroded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • BTG: A-  DAYS: B+  Eastenders: C
    • There was a rumor that Jean will die and that’s probably why she’s back then
    • There has been some confusion about Michael & facial burns. Please see this post: https://bsky.app/profile/shallotpeel.bsky.social/post/3lqkrryu54226 I've chosen to put this here instead of the Classic Thread because it is now with the appearance of recast Michael that this has come up. Different places online, including at least one podcast, remarks have been made about how remarkable it is that he is without facial scarring. Other fans say it was clear from the first that he did not have facial burns. What is included in this post is 2 screengrabs where you can see his face at the hospital & a very quick edit of that day in the hospital. 
    • Put me in the LOVE KMH camp. As a poster alluded to above, her detractors seem to come from people who first experienced the 80s Emily actress. And that's often the case with soaps, myself included. I enjoy the original actor so much that I just never take to the recast. However, KMH played Emily far longer than the original - for almost 20 years - and when she had great material, she was great. I get the sense she didn't like playing the whiny oh-woe-is-me Emily which was all the material she got from about 1996 until she took over the Intruder in late '99/early '00 and got to play a stronger kiss-ass woman who didn't care what anyone thought of her. (Some would call that a bitch but, if a man was in that role, he'd just be called a smart and savvy businessman.) Her relationship with Hal was great. The transformation was done realistically and I thoroughly enjoyed those years the best out of all. Once the writers decided to break up those two, they went back to writing Emily half the time as whiny and pathetic. I preferred when the writers made her stronger.
    • Hahaha - I do. I've always been the type, though, that can't miss anything. I get FOMO, so I'll not skip episodes or fast forward anything. There are only a few TV shows I've dropped because they got so bad vs. sticking it out to the end.  The promise that GL 1997 is better is what keeps me going. I especially want to see the fallout of Blake's lie about her twins and then Annie's descent which I believe won Watros's Emmy.
    • Rita's rape is an episode i constantly search on YouTube hoping one day that it will show up. I always feel like I may have seen it, but I was only 6 at the time and can never figure any of the things I have vague recollection of 
    • FROM THE VAULT: NON-SOAP DAYTIME RATINGS: HIGHLIGHTS FROM FEBRUARY 1973 & MAY 1973:

      Please register in order to view this content

        FROM THE VAULT: NON-SOAP DAYTIME RATINGS: HIGHLIGHTS FROM AUGUST 1973 & NOVEMBER 1973:
    • The rape was in 1979 after they were married. Blake was the result of Holly cheating with him while she was married to Ed. I believe she was born in 1975. 
    • No. Ed and Holly were married and having problems. She had an affair with Roger and that's when Christina--Blake--was conceived. The rape happened much later, after Holly and Roger were married.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy