@EricMontreal22 Mary Ryan Munisteri (Loving's headwriter from August, 1991-early January 1992) was headwriter for Ryan's Hope for several months (looks like October 1982-February 1983) and Tom King and Millee Taggart (Loving's headwriters from September, 1988 - May, 1991 and then Taggart solo until August) were at Ryan's Hope from 1985-1987 (maybe March for both months).
Nixon departs as headwriter in August, 1994. I just checked I watched an episode dated August 30 or 31 where Clay begs Steffi to stay with him on the eve of the Alden Enterprises anniversary party, Dinahlee starts to miscarry after the plane crash with Jessica Collins still in the role, and Cabot is on the verge of revealing that the Aldens stole the formula for Lady Alden soap from the Sowolskys. In the episode end credits, Laurie McCarthy and Addie Walsh are credited as headwriters. Nixon is, as you later asked, listed as a story consultant.
McCarthy and Walsh were the associate headwriters for Loving when Nixon was headwriter in 1993-1994. The end up giving a lot of the previews during this time period.
While I wouldn't argue that Shana and Leo occasionally had a nice scene under Nixon, the meat of that story was under Taggart and Guza. I think Shana and Leo suffer the most under Nixon because they go from have deeply complicated characterizations (which I suspect Guza, in part, based on some of the Julie / Mason dynamic on Santa Barbara as well as some of his later misogynistic writing for characters like Sonny and Jason on General Hospital). The show never commits to whether or not Patti has developmental issues, which I think was more about the show being afraid that once they said she had something that they would have to stick to it. Leo, who was deeply misogynistic, was more insecure under Nixon, which I think could have been linked together, but never really was. The business loan element of their story is completed abandoned, which ignored a very intense power dynamic that was created by putting Shana in charge of Leo's business given Leo's sexism. A lot of the complexity of their relationship evaporates within weeks of Nixon's arrival. I think the short arc where Leo struggles toaccept Patti is powerful, but should have been part of a much larger story.
I'm not the biggest fan of the Curtis in the cage stuff. It's very campy and homoerotic (Thom Christopher would later embed some of the same subtext to the Carlo/Cristian brainwashing sequences on One Life to Live. The show got skewered in the press for having the sole Middle Eastern character on daytime being a villain. In Nixon's defense, Dante needed to appear to resolve the Curtis / Tess/ Buck backstory, but it just doesn't work for me. I do appreciate Tess sacrificing herself at the tail end of the initial arc in a rare moment of selfishness. I suspect Nixon wanted to bring back Dante later so that's why there was the vague resolution.
I am not even sure if the Gilbert stuff starts under Nixon, or, if it does, its in like her literal final episodes. As I stated earlier, all three parties are basically involved with the show between the two writing regimes, so it doesn't really matter who is credited for what as there seems to be a sort of overlapping creative force until Brown and Essensten arrive. I don't like the early Gilbert / Jeremy stuff, but I thought the final pieces once the show gets Ava and Sandy locked in the church with Gilbert is compelling stuff.
For the most part, I enjoy Nixon's run. I know @DRW50 has explained (validly) why he doesn't enjoy the Egypt / Ava murder mystery, which I do enjoy. @Kane has also made some analysis of that period regarding the story structure where a story will dominate for several weeks and then be ignored for a long stretch. I would also argue Nixon does a lot of chem testing which often shifts the story directions a little too quickly. For example, within four months, we go from Gwyn / Buck to Gwyn / Clay to Gwyn / Jeremy. The last shift wouldn't have been terrible if they had built a true quad around Clay / Gwyn / Jeremy / Tess who all had some connections to one another.
I loved what Nixon did with Steffi by having her become a model, which brought out a softer side of Tess, before having her develop an eating disorder and being pimped out by her broke status conscious mother Deborah to Clay while later falling for Cooper. Cooper and Steffi investigating the Cradle Foundation after Clay and Deborah's surprise wedding was a great sequence as well.
I loved Curtis gaslighting Dinahlee and Trucker into thinking Trisha was alive because, after all, she was. I didn't love Curtis' mental illness/PTSD story because I felt it was wrong for the character. It's hard to rectify early 1980s spoiled Curtis (Marcantel 1.0) with mid 1980s softened Curits (Ashby/Moses) as well as late 80s / early 90s romantic lead (Albers). Once you get to 1993 Curtises, the characters has just lived too many lives. I also liked the suggestion the show was going to revisit Stacey / Curtis in 1994 after Stacey punched out Curtis at Shana and Leo's wedding.
As we get more of the 1990s, I will say I am enjoying Jacqueline Babbins' messier Loving more and more even though it is flawed and imperfect. And some of the post-Marland, Nixon led material that has popped up on the Random Episodes channel is stronger than I anticipated. Though from the private listings of Loving episodes a few years back, I remember not hating what I saw from June, 1985 until the big AE board meeting in February, 1986, barring the Jonathan is the devil stuff.
By
dc11786 ·
Create an account or sign in to comment