So, Snark posted a most fascinating comment from Brian D. Puckett on his website. (Even the link name is funny)

He labels the comment:

ONLINE OUTRAGE! WoSTBrian Slams Online Community

BREAKING NEWS: Poster Formerly Known as WoSTBRIAN Calls Daytime Pointless Exercise in Futility; Slams Online Community as Group of Historical Ignoramuses, Naive Pollyannas, and Shiftless Bastards!

Now, Snark is being deliciously provocative, but of course there is some truth here. Except, while I agree with WostBrian factually, I really feel like the anger he feels isn't necessary. For me, it hastens the pain of the death.

I posted this comment on Snark's blog (I don't know if he'll approve it), but it really is how I feel.

I find WostBrian to be factually right and emotionally wrong :-). On one of the sites he mentions (SON) I and others have recently posted ratings trends (since 1952) that support his thesis. The downward trajectory of soaps began in the 1950s, and you could predict we would get to this point, ratings wise, as early as the 1950s or 1960s. Social forces, like maternal employment, increased viewing options, social stigma about serial drama ("soap opera" was not meant as anything but a perjorative) that discourage new viewers...

I do not concur with Brian that the current creative problems have CAUSED the viewership decline. I find no strong statistical evidence of accelerated decline in recent years (although, I will acknowledge, there has been some acceleration...just not a lot). I believe that there is NO CREATIVE CHOICE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN MADE, of any time, that would have stopped us from getting to this place. A daytime drama is counter to the changing viewing patterns of Americans.

Again, I concur with Brian about recent quality declines. (Well, his thesis is they are not so recent). That is definitely happening, but I think that is symptom, not cause. As budgets get lower and lower and closer to the bone (an inevitability given the ratings decline trends that started in the 1950s), we see the consequence of that on screen. Now, there is no denying too that the taint of desperation--the scent of death--also is leading to some bad decision making. A poster at Usenet said something very clever recently: She said that the short term stints of headwriters and other creative types has led to a kind of existentialism. Because you doubt you'll be around next year, you write for NOW...for the current ratings spike...for what will save your job this month. That, of course, defies the logic of SERIAL drama, which requires setting up for the future.

So, again, I do not deny what Brian sees...but I dispute the causal structure of it. I think what we're seeing on screen today is effect, not cause.

Above, I also talked about the idea that Brian is "emotionally wrong". I'm teasing, kind of, but what I mean is this: All of us who loved WOST saw that Brian just kind of reached the end of his rope. If he was getting lots of complaints, I would have too! His labor of love was a love for all of us...I miss WOST every day. But my point is this: Brian's emotional response--the thing that helped him break free--was a "hardening of the heart". We all have coping strategies, and Brian needed to do his: The genre he loved was dead, some WOST users were emotionally toxic, and he had a more enjoyable life to get too.

That "hardened heart" shows up in this comment.

Again, I do not dispute what he says, but emotionally, I feel like this: Come, friends, let's enjoy these final days. We're down to embers, and they're growing dark. What we see now in no way reflects the bright fire we once enjoyed, but it's still throwing a little warmth. Let's enjoy it while it is there, and let's remember how gloriously it once burned. " If I accept the bitterness and the anger for myself, then I've already lost the genre I love.

Another analogy is the dying relative. Do you just say "She's basically dead already? I'm gonna turn my back?" Or do you sit by her side, stroke her forehead, and remember the better days? Either way, she's dying...nobody is disagreeing on that. For me, though, confronting it with gratitude and reverence makes the pain more tolerable. I don't direct my anger at today's creative types, because really, it doesn't matter. We would have come to this point no matter what. It could not be avoided.

I just felt Brian rolling his eyes :-).

Obviously I agree with Brian and I love your whole comment but especially this part:

Come, friends, let's enjoy these final days. We're down to embers, and they're growing dark. What we see now in no way reflects the bright fire we once enjoyed, but it's still throwing a little warmth. Let's enjoy it while it is there, and let's remember how gloriously it once burned. "

I could just hear Drink With Me from Les Miz welling up in the background...

Drink with me, To days gone by

Sing with me, The songs we knew

Here's to pretty girls who went to our heads

Here's to witty girls who went to our beds

Here's to them

And here's to you!

Another analogy is the dying relative. Do you just say "She's basically dead already? I'm gonna turn my back?" Or do you sit by her side, stroke her forehead, and remember the better days?

In the case of Frons, I'd like to hunt down her killer and make sure he never hurts anyone ever again. You take care of the old lady, Mark.

*marceline cocks a shot gun and looks at the camera*

I'm writing a new ending to this soap.

(What? Too much? I felt it so I went there...)

Edited May 24, 200817 yr by marceline

Obviously I agree with Brian and I love your whole comment but especially this part:

I could just hear Drink With Me from Les Miz welling up in the background...

Drink with me, To days gone by

Sing with me, The songs we knew

Here's to pretty girls who went to our heads

Here's to witty girls who went to our beds

Here's to them

And here's to you!

In the case of Frons, I'd like to hunt down her killer and make sure he never hurts anyone ever again. You take care of the old lady, Mark.

*marceline cocks a shot gun and looks at the camera*

I'm writing a new ending to this soap.

(What? Too much? I felt it so I went there...)

Hey, I love your version!

What can I say about my -- ahem --word choice. I was also feelin' it...and I obviously love melodrama :-)

Maybe I should quote Tolkien?

Maybe I should quote Tolkien?

Too highfalutin'.

Soap viewers are uneducated women, unemployable, with passels of children, residing in midwestern trailers.

No?

Too highfalutin'.

Soap viewers are uneducated women, unemployable, with passels of children, residing in midwestern trailers.

No?

Besides, it would be in that joke Edwardian-Biblical with made-up irregular past tenses, lots of compound adjectives, unintelligible passages and absurd plurals. And most importantly, there would be a total lack of any talent for dialogue (yes, I'm obsessed).

Also, I can go all Adorno (possibly the most elitist) on you. Or Schleiermacher or Dilthey.

But that would be the death of this topic.

Edited May 24, 200817 yr by Sylph

I agree with MarkH. Forgive me if I'd rather try to enjoy the genre before it goes away than just turning my back on it right there. Don't get me wrong, if a person prefers to just not watch anymore, that's perfectly fine. It doesn't work for everyone, though, so there are going to be people who will still tune in and have a good time doing so. IMO, and that's all it is, just an opinion, it's less depressing to accept what is than to reject because of what isn't. I'm young, so I'd love to see soaps the way they used to be, back when they were awesome and when they ruled daytime, but all it takes is a look at the ratings trend (thanks for pointing that out, Mark, I'd never seen it before) to realize that things just might not be the way they once were. I believe in hope, though, so I'll always think there's another chance for soaps, but at the same time, I wonder a lot about how long it'll be before they're gone.

Wasn't soaps on radios at one time. In 1950s was that when they started showing them on televisons.

Besides, it would be in that joke Edwardian-Biblical with made-up irregular past tenses, lots of compound adjectives, unintelligible passages and absurd plurals. And most importantly, there would be a total lack of any talent for dialogue (yes, I'm obsessed).

Also, I can go all Adorno (possibly the most elitist) on you. Or Schleiermacher or Dilthey.

But that would be the death of this topic.

Oh you want to go there?! Don't make me start bringing the Windelband, dawg!

You know I just looked that up on Wikipedia right?

But getting back to the actual topic, because I think its a good one. What I see happening to soaps now is akin to when they tell you not to try and rescue a drowning person alone because they will pull you under. So many soap fans fight tooth and nail against the very things that might slow the death.

Any character not from a "core" family is denounced as a newbie and being called a newbie in soaps is like being called a witch in 1692 Salem. Next comes the "trial" then the burning. It's harder than ever to do socially-conscious stories because even if a writer wants to do one, network brass freaks at the least little bit of controversy. People want love in the afternoon but that leads to fanbase wars. GL tries a new production model and everyone starts gathering jet packs for the coming apocalypse.

As the audience gets smaller and smaller, the remaining fans become bitter and xenophobic, effectively saying "You'll get my soap when you take it from my cold dead hands." And that's exactly what's happening.

Edited May 24, 200817 yr by marceline

Oh you want to go there?! Don't make me start bringing the Windelband, dawg!

You know I just looked that up on Wikipedia right?

But getting back to the actual topic, because I think its a good one. What I see happening to soaps now is akin to when they tell you not to try and rescue a drowning person alone because they will pull you under. So many soap fans fight tooth and nail against the very things that might slow the death.

Any character not from a "core" family is denounced as a newbie and being called a newbie in soaps is like being called a witch in 1692 Salem. Next comes the "trial" then the burning. It's harder than ever to do socially-conscious stories because even if a writer wants to do one, network brass freaks at the least little bit of controversy. People want love in the afternoon but that leads to fanbase wars. GL tries a new production model and everyone starts gathering jet packs for the coming apocalypse.

As the audience gets smaller and smaller, the remaining fans become bitter and xenophobic, effectively saying "You'll get my soap when you take it from my cold dead hands." And that's exactly what's happening.

i agree.

Since when is Tolkien highbrow LOL

Anyway I didn't think wost and Brian were still around? What a shame--that site was gold for me 5 or more years ago and will be missed. I dunno yes soaps seem to be slipping further and further away from us, but I've also heard about the death of soaps since I became really aware of the genre when I was 12 around 1993... It kinda just gets a yawn from me now.

Yeah, i have heard the death of soaps since i started talking to poeple about soaps when i was like 12/13 so...

But idont think i, nor anyone, eneds to turn the back on the soaps and walk away. sure if you no longer can enjoy them for what they are today and are unhappy walk away - i mean, whyw atch something you cant stand and hate? that i will never understand.

but i do enjoy some soaps still and will watch them, knowing they prob will, like 99% for sure, end soon.

I just try not to compare them to what theyw ere when i staretd watching. I try to watch them and not think about any of the goins on behind the scenes. I watch thjem becausei enjoy them still - somewhat for the most part anyways, and when i dont i turnt hem off (hello gh, gl).

Any character not from a "core" family is denounced as a newbie and being called a newbie in soaps is like being called a witch in 1692 Salem. Next comes the "trial" then the burning. It's harder than ever to do socially-conscious stories because even if a writer wants to do one, network brass freaks at the least little bit of controversy. People want love in the afternoon but that leads to fanbase wars. GL tries a new production model and everyone starts gathering jet packs for the coming apocalypse.

As the audience gets smaller and smaller, the remaining fans become bitter and xenophobic, effectively saying "You'll get my soap when you take it from my cold dead hands." And that's exactly what's happening.

At this point, I'm of two minds about this...because what Marceline says is absolutely true.

Pre-LML on Y&R, I was the opposite of "bitter and xenophobic". I invited whatever change might come (as long as it was done with integrity, and consistent with the history and tone of my show). Thus, I loved the first half of LML's reign.

But I got out of myself, and watched fan reaction. As we all know that was...not very positive.

As the anger and furor grew, I came to realize that people were responding out of hurt, disappointment, and anger that someone was mucking with THEIR show. Analogies I've used before include security blanket, comfort food... I heard virtually NO voice (not even my own, after a time) defending the changes or applauding the innovations. ONLY the loud beat of angry voices.

That was when I realized that these ancient dinosaur soaps are NOT candidates for innovation and updates...certainly not in anything more rapid than babysteps.

You alienate for more long-term fans than you gain stable, loyal new afficionados. It is just not worth it.

In any era prior to the current one, then, the obvious response is to let each soap play out without much innovation, and let it wither and die, and replace it with something newer for modern audiences.

The problem, of course, is that since the late 1990s, there is no more room for a "new soap for the modern era". There will be no more new soaps (on daytime television in the US).

Despite this, I say that we let these dinosaur shows serve as comfort food and security blankets for a few more years...and then move on. I see no other options at this point.

Another analogy is the dying relative. Do you just say "She's basically dead already? I'm gonna turn my back?" Or do you sit by her side, stroke her forehead, and remember the better days? Either way, she's dying...nobody is disagreeing on that. For me, though, confronting it with gratitude and reverence makes the pain more tolerable. I don't direct my anger at today's creative types, because really, it doesn't matter. We would have come to this point no matter what. It could not be avoided.

The sad thing is that we don't let a loved one just linger on suffering. We do everything we can to end their pain and suffering. We let them die with dignity.

Sadly the genre that I have devoted my life too since I was old enough to remember is dying without dignity. And it is dying a slow death - a death that has already been pointed out has been going on for quite a few years now. But until recently has only become too painful to watch.

A little over a year ago, I sat by my Mother's bedside for 9 months (she had actually been sick for 2 and a half years). Those last 9 months became too painful to watch.

Yes I adopted the theory at first that yes I needed to enjoy time with my mother as long as she was still there - be thankful that God was giving me another day. And all in all I was but the last 3 weeks of my Mom's life when she was in so much pain believe me I prayed fervently that the Lord would just take my Mom away.

I am getting that way with many of the soaps today. Why let them die without dignity. Many of the shows need to be put out of their misery. It is just too sad to watch them - even though there are small parts of them I still enjoy.

I do not want to watch all these shows I love die the death that GL is dying.

Sadly I have come to realize that the powers that be don't care anymore. They are not going to sink the money into the shows that they need to survive. The genre of daytime soaps that once was the bread and butter of the networks and paid for primetime and allowed many of those shows to stay on the air longer than they should have - is not worthy in their eyes.

With decreasing budgets on all the shows, it will be no time before more and more of them look exactly like GL does now. I don't want to see that.

Since when is Tolkien highbrow LOL

Anyway I didn't think wost and Brian were still around?

Well, geez, Eric... I'm not dead! Admittedly, I have very little interest in soaps these days but I catch up on what's going on every now and then. Once in a while, I'll try to catch random soaps to see if a particular show still sucks. They largely do, except for an occasional flicker of promise -- which is usually snuffed out by some clueless "suit" in short order. What has happened to Y&R SHOULD be enough to shake even the most insanely positive person... but, let's be honest, didn't we really see it coming when Bill Bell passed away? Then when his longtime associates were booted from the writing staff, it was only a matter of time...

I see there are those that disagree with the notion that soaps are dying. Well, that's fine... never give up hope I guess. But it's pretty clear the direction things are going. The vision of Brian Frons IS the future of soaps -- and that isn't a good one. What he is molding SoapNet into is a pretty good idea of what the genre will evolve into -- less soap and more of anything else that they think can get ratings. Of course, we know Frons and his "Legion of Doom" are wrong about it. Ratings will rise if you produce something people want to see... and what most want is for each soap to return to its roots and offer us compelling stories that are trademarks of each particular soap. Why is it so hard to understand that a soap can be contemporary and modern with progressive scripts from talented writers (not the hacks we routinely see today moving from one show to the next -- and what other industry can you get fired from so many jobs and STILL be hired on elsewhere???). Contemporary storytelling in the traditional format and presentation of the genre? Yes, it works.

I could rage on about it... but it is wasted breath because the industry isn't interested in what we all have to say. They really could care less about our opinions... and we're not the kind of people they invite to be part of their focus groups. Yes, friends, they really do hand-pick those people. How else could they justify maintaining course through a deadly field of icebergs? Executives find people of similar opinions, surround themselves with them, and feed off them so that they appear to know what they are doing and remain in control.

>>sigh<<

Brian