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 :-).

Well as far as myself goes, I don't feel anything for the 8 soaps that are still available to me. I still watch 3 of them occassionally - the other 5 I have been fans of for years, but have just given up hope on them.

But to say I don't still love the genre and love the history of it is not right. I go to the message boards and gripe and bitch and moan because I do still care.

I have devoted 38 years to watching the daytime soap operas and although I don't love the current state of things and see so much wrong with it I still want to go and discuss the shows in general. And that is what I think of Brian. I don't know him and never was a member of his site - I just couldn't afford it. but I know that he loved the soaps.

It is weird that I know of several soap historians on the Internet (Matt, myself, Brian and several others) and what is weird that in the last few years we have all given up on a genre we have studied and followed. I think Matt and I still tune in occassionally but I think I watch a little more than Matt does.

But we all still love the soaps and still in some ways want to fight for them. There are three to four of the shows that I feel can still be saved. but for the others I feel like they have drifted so far and are suffering so bad that it is time to put them out of their misery. A year ago I would have never said that. I felt as long as the shows were on it was best for the genre. But seeing shows drift and struggle is not good for the industry at all. Seeing how bad GL keeps getting from year to year is only forcing viewers away from the shows.

At this point I feel for the sake of the genre it is time to cut the losses on some of these programs, restructure the remaining ones, and funnel the few advertising dollars left out there in to helping the others to get better.

For instance GL is so far gone. ATWT is almost but if P&G would quit GL and funnel the money from both shows into ATWT, it would greatly improve ATWT's budget and help them to maintain some things that will help to lure viewers in.

As the casts get smaller, good actors leave the genre due to cuts in salary, cheaper production methods continue to be used, etc. things are going to get worse. Sets to me don't matter much because one of my favorite shows was EON and they never had elaborate sets - so I don't need that. But I do need for sets to make sense. Sticking everyone living under the same roof is getting old and it is happening on too many of the shows - just because they can't afford to switch sets anymore. Certain things are needed. And even now hearing that certain scenes are taking place offscreen on some shows because they can only afford so many set changes is disturbing too.

I am one that likes to see the beats of a story - not just hear about them.

Given that the internet is the tiniest fraction of the viewing audience, shutting up isn't really an issue and "stop watching" has been happening for years. That's kind of the point.

I'm glad you said this. As unhappy as the internet fans are with soaps right now, I can honestly say that people I know who don't know a thing about the internet but have been watching soaps for most, if not all, of their lives (and I mean older people, in their 40s and 50s) are still tuning in regularly and still talk about the shows the same way they did years and years ago. I have aunts who have watched Y&R since the very first day and still make it a point to tune in, and they don't tune in thinking through the whole thing about what they don't like, but they tune in and enjoy it and have fun watching it. They still bring their laundry to each other's houses and watch the CBS lineup while filling up on coffee. It's what they've been doing for years and years and nothing's changed for them at all.

I think soap fans who don't use the internet (or don't use it for soap discussion) are very, very, very different than soap fans who do use the internet to discuss soaps and stuff. It's not a good difference or a bad difference, I don't think, but the difference is there.

Edited June 5, 200817 yr by All My Shadows

This blog sorta is abotu what I said abotu viewer erosion starting on its course in th every early 80s http://www.redroom.com/blog/lynnliccardo/giant-sucking-noise

I'm glad you said this. As unhappy as the internet fans are with soaps right now, I can honestly say that people I know who don't know a thing about the internet but have been watching soaps for most, if not all, of their lives (and I mean older people, in their 40s and 50s) are still tuning in regularly and still talk about the shows the same way they did years and years ago. I have aunts who have watched Y&R since the very first day and still make it a point to tune in, and they don't tune in thinking through the whole thing about what they don't like, but they tune in and enjoy it and have fun watching it. They still bring their laundry to each other's houses and watch the CBS lineup while filling up on coffee. It's what they've been doing for years and years and nothing's changed for them at all.

I think soap fans who don't use the internet (or don't use it for soap discussion) are very, very, very different than soap fans who do use the internet to discuss soaps and stuff. It's not a good difference or a bad difference, I don't think, but the difference is there.

that's weird because I am finding the opposite in my everyday life. My 2 daughters who were raised on soaps have finally given up their last ones. My oldest daughter quit Days during Hogan's tenure. My youngest daughter gave up Days last year and this year has lost interest in AMC. And I never gripe to them about them - didn't want to influence them to quit - they just got frustrated.

My ex-mother-in-law who had watched Days since it first went on the air, finally quit last year. She doesn't watch any soaps now.

My sister and sister-in-law who had watched Y&R since day 1 both quit it about 2 years ago. It was the last of the soaps still on that they were big fans of.

My mom's 2 oldest sisters who have been CBS fans since the 1950's both told me at a family reunion we had last month that they gave up all 4 of the CBS soaps in the last year.

Her other 2 sisters were NBC fans and both gave up Days in the last year.

My "life partner" Gil has started watching but the only soap he cares about is GH. He has always thought soaps were stupid. He tried them with me because he knows how much I love them, but he hated all of them except GH. He is a die hard fan of the show now. But he is the only other person in my real life anymore I have to discuss soaps with. Everyone else quit.

I was talking to my ex-wife the other day who was the biggest AMC fan I have ever known and she said she quit watching it.

it seems I am the last sole soap watcher in my family. And my family all the way back to my grandmothers are the ones that started me watching. Now none are watching.

that's weird because I am finding the opposite in my everyday life. My 2 daughters who were raised on soaps have finally given up their last ones. My oldest daughter quit Days during Hogan's tenure. My youngest daughter gave up Days last year and this year has lost interest in AMC. And I never gripe to them about them - didn't want to influence them to quit - they just got frustrated.

My ex-mother-in-law who had watched Days since it first went on the air, finally quit last year. She doesn't watch any soaps now.

My sister and sister-in-law who had watched Y&R since day 1 both quit it about 2 years ago. It was the last of the soaps still on that they were big fans of.

My mom's 2 oldest sisters who have been CBS fans since the 1950's both told me at a family reunion we had last month that they gave up all 4 of the CBS soaps in the last year.

Her other 2 sisters were NBC fans and both gave up Days in the last year.

My "life partner" Gil has started watching but the only soap he cares about is GH. He has always thought soaps were stupid. He tried them with me because he knows how much I love them, but he hated all of them except GH. He is a die hard fan of the show now. But he is the only other person in my real life anymore I have to discuss soaps with. Everyone else quit.

I was talking to my ex-wife the other day who was the biggest AMC fan I have ever known and she said she quit watching it.

it seems I am the last sole soap watcher in my family. And my family all the way back to my grandmothers are the ones that started me watching. Now none are watching.

See. I think it's different for different people. My next door neighbor (who happens to be my great-aunt) and two of her sisters were always "go-to" people for information on the "stories," but nowadays, it's not unusual at all for them to do their errands and grocery shopping in the daytime and get home in time for the afternoon talk shows and courtroom shows, which they love like crazy.

And I should also add that the people I know who still watch soaps, the older people, are probably the closest thing to old school soap fans I've ever seen. They don't know the actors and actresses' real names at all, they couldn't tell you who is writing what and when they started writing, all they know is that so-and-so is sleeping with so-and-so and so-and-so's husband doesn't know about it. They've been watching soaps for decades but they don't take them so darn seriously and that's why I think they can still enjoy them.

It's funny I came from several families who had no history of watching soaps. None of my grandparents watched them, no aunts, no one. All the people I know who watch soaps are my age or younger...

It's funny I came from several families who had no history of watching soaps. None of my grandparents watched them, no aunts, no one. All the people I know who watch soaps are my age or younger...

Aw, that's tragic! My warmest memories consist of watching "the stories" with my grandparents and other older relatives. That's how we bonded! I could recognize Victor Newman before I could recognize President George H. W. Bush!

with regards to OLTL's recent upsurge in quality, one thing I notice in myself as a viewer of this era (and have seen in many others here and other sites online) is a level of uneasiness/insecurity about how long we can expect it to last. The most positive attitude I can muster "I'll enjoy it while it lasts" - and there you see, built right into it is the inevitable failure at some point down the line. With all soaps in such bad shape, there isn't much reason to switch to another one. And even if quality was reason enough, with the genre fading there's the possibilty of developing a comfortable viewer-show relationship only to have the rug pulled out from under you - either through a sudden downturn in quality or cancellation.

For example, part of the reason I barely ever even looked at Port Charles was my lack of confidence in that time slot for ABC.

with regards to OLTL's recent upsurge in quality, one thing I notice in myself as a viewer of this era (and have seen in many others here and other sites online) is a level of uneasiness/insecurity about how long we can expect it to last. The most positive attitude I can muster "I'll enjoy it while it lasts" - and there you see, built right into it is the inevitable failure at some point down the line. With all soaps in such bad shape, there isn't much reason to switch to another one. And even if quality was reason enough, with the genre fading there's the possibilty of developing a comfortable viewer-show relationship only to have the rug pulled out from under you - either through a sudden downturn in quality or cancellation.

For example, part of the reason I barely ever even looked at Port Charles was my lack of confidence in that time slot for ABC.

Perfect, perfect post!!!!!!

Yes, I've been ducking, thinking this will be over by July. Thank you for articulating this so well.

Perfect, perfect post!!!!!!

Yes, I've been ducking, thinking this will be over by July. Thank you for articulating this so well.

Thanks Mark. It means a lot coming from you, as I have enjoyed your thoughtful posts on this subject.

Just to add, and I know this sounds a little screwy but bear with me... Part of my reason to become more invested in Y&R over the years was its apparent health. It has never been my perfect cup of tea, but it was always consistent, was always "what it was" and the numbers indicated a better chance for ongoing longterm soap viewing. Now even that is changing.

TC you didn't like The City at all?

I do get your point though and agree--the main reaction with me and others is "How long can this keep up" I doubt in the classic days viewers though that way at all. (of course before soap mags etc many viewers prob didn't even notice when a writers name would change in the credits, etc--especially since the writing credits only appeared a few times a month)

TC you didn't like The City at all?

I do get your point though and agree--the main reaction with me and others is "How long can this keep up" I doubt in the classic days viewers though that way at all. (of course before soap mags etc many viewers prob didn't even notice when a writers name would change in the credits, etc--especially since the writing credits only appeared a few times a month)

my problem was never with what was aired on ABC at 12:30 EST

Oh I liked The City, what I saw of it. And Loving as well, again what I saw of it.

I remember when Loving was about to start, all the advance pubicity, my sister and I were quite excited about the pedigrees of Agnes Nixon and Douglas Marland (which I was just becoming aware of thanks to my OLD SISTER LOL!, when was this? '82, '83? I would have been anywhere from 13 to 15 yrs old) collaborating on a new half-hour soap, produced in New York. The setup of Corinth and all its characters was almost flawless but somehow it didn't live up to all the hype. It was good, just not as spectacular as we expected. And James Kiberd - long before he was Uncle Porkchop - wow, this burgeoning young homo loved his fit hairy chest. Early loving that really moved me was his character's visit to the VietNam Memorial in DC.

Back then we were a fractured family with an estranged remarried father willing to do anything to buy our love. We had 4 VCRs going at once, and just as many TVs. My sister and I would gather our few closest friends and watch soap tapes (with a little herb) in my mother's rec room every weekend (until we got caught). Sometimes one of my older brothers would join us. He was the big GL fan.

When I moved out at 18 I lost touch with a lot of soaps and Loving was one of them. In later years I saw bits and pieces of what some would call the best of LOVING on French-speaking television.

The City - never watched it in its first run but saw it on Montreal's CH station in English with French subtitles. I thought it was a good "think small" concept for a half-hour show. I really liked it. A lot. Did The City get an ending?

The City got an awesome ending yeah. Glad I still have the last 3 months of it on tape. They did a good job of wrapping ups torylines but not making it seem too closed and then ended to a montage of the "Love you" Abbey Road/beatles track that showd all the characters and then showed behidn the scenes--the staff all waving etc

Originally Loving was to be done by Agnes with Dan Wakefield--the novelist who adored AMC so much he wrote All her Children in the 70s. I always wondered what happened

You had an interestign childhood TC

Edited June 7, 200817 yr by EricMontreal22

Yotuhbe used to have that epsidoe of Loving from season one when Marland was still writing before that mysterious fight and it is REALLy good classic soap opera--almost like AMC in the 70s

I think maybe that was the prob--by 1983 audeinces for soaps didn't want early 80s AMC. AMC was starting to get bigger--the big families and business we still know like Courtland Electronics, Chandler Enterprises and I always thought Agnes wanted to put back some of her old AMC to Lovin. They never really expolited the college campus part of it enough either... T hat said I wish I coudl find the tv movie that introduced it--i know it was on video for a while

The City got an awesome ending yeah. Glad I still have the last 3 months of it on tape. They did a good job of wrapping ups torylines but not making it seem too closed and then ended to a montage of the "Love you" Abbey Road/beatles track that showd all the characters and then showed behidn the scenes--the staff all waving etc

Originally Loving was to be done by Agnes with Dan Wakefield--the novelist who adored AMC so much he wrote All her Children in the 70s. I always wondered what happened

You had an interestign childhood TC

You don't know the half of it. But my parents did get back together and remarried before my dad died. My father's second marriage "experiment" was probably along the lines of SWINGTIME, from the little bits I've heard. The third was just a bimbo who lasted about a year. My partner/husband calls my mother DORIAN LORD.

For some reason CH stopped airing The City before the finale. There was always something cool about seeing it in English with French subtitles.

Edited June 7, 200817 yr by TC Greene