Members brimike Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 I don't disagree with any of this, Cat... and it's true that what might be considered more commonplace in urban areas might not be what those in the Minivan Majority want their little angels to know. But at the same time, history has shown that what starts in urban areas eventually makes its way into rural areas. Hell, look at crystal meth - it's a far greater issue now in sprawling farm towns than it is in a metropolitan area like New York City. Daytime used to be cutting edge, and tackle issues that those in the Minivan Majority might not have wanted to know about (or their kids to know about), but would be something they would have to confront eventually. They took those gambles. I think what many are saying here is that this feels old-fashioned. I also think there is a way to "sensitively handle" a lot of stories, whether it's weed, meth, cocaine, alcoholism, abortion, homosexuality, etc. without it sound like an after-school special. I also think it's really premature to be analyzing this story, as we don't really know where it's going yet. It's only been one week, and one joint. To be honest, I don't have a lot of issues with marijuana myself, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't freak out a little if my 13-year old son had a joint in his backpack. What I really wish I saw were scenes where Bo talked about his own marijuana use. (Bo Buch was in 'Nam - don't tell me he didn't smoke at least once or twice). And why he still feels it's wrong for Matthew to have a joint, whether he did it in his own youth or not. To me, that's sensitive AND realistic, both to parents AND to kids. It resonates for many generations watching now, and it can still be anti-drug without sounding like a "Just Say No" ad. Plus, I think it's a lot of what parents are dealing with today - their own experimentation with drugs in the 70's/80's, and how to reconcile that with their high school-aged kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cat Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 Oh, I totally agree. I'm just relaying what a lot of my friends with young kids/newborns are feeling -- many want a "return to innocence" for their kids, perhaps in reaction to what they feel (rightly or wrongly) they didn't get from their parents? I don't know. I'm just merging that with my observation of how US TV works today which, aside from cable, really panders to the suburban segment known as the "Minivan Majority." (And they are considered an important majority because by 2000 more people were living in suburbs than in urban areas and Karl Rove began to target them aggressively during the Presidential campaign. They also found that these suburban dwellers overwelmingly moved out there once they started having kids). I would love it if OLTL -- or, hell, ANY soap -- would surprise me with a big-issue SL like drug abuse or sexuality or whatever and didn't pander to the audience or treat it like a huge, let's-educate-the-little-people PSA. The pot SL (perhaps as a springboard to harder substance abuse) could work if some of the writing/direction currently on offer didn't make the After-School Specials of my childhood look R-rated. Oh, and I love your Bo Buchanan idea -- bringing in his experiences in Vietnam and, perhaps, Nora growing up in a more permissive era nuancing their view of Matthew's pot-smoking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MarkH Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 Calling you out, ! Brimike I don't think I am in any majority, but I am in a minivan! (sometimes...when my family-sized sedan isn't available). I live in the suburbs, and while I usually avoid the big box stores, I definitely watch for sales. While I'm at it, I'm a PC...and sometimes a MAC too. You've said before, on here, you live in a big urban area...you've got to be careful! I think you're making the same mistake a lot of people on the creative side of soaps are making! We're a rainbow! One size DOES NOT fit all. Gas-guzzling minivans may be chosen for reasons OTHER than transporting six kids to soccer. Soaps are wildly populist entertainment, and even if we restrict the "desirable" audience we are writing for to 18-34 or 18-49 females, there is TREMENDOUS diversity in that group. See, if soap writers thought like you did, I think it would breed a certain dismissiveness. Either in the form: "let's educate the minivan majority" (pandering, avuncular, patronizing) or "let's write something that won't inflame the minivan majority" (narrow minded, give little credit). Brimike, you're one of the most sensitive, balanced guys on here...so I hope this doesn't ignite one of your heartfelt but totally unnecessary apologies. I totally know where you are coming from. We hear labels like this on CNN all the time. But labels, IMO, are bad. They are shortcuts, and they close the mind to the real diversity underneath them. There are some ROCKING minivan moms out there! More than a few! Maybe one or two of 'em even did some drugs in their day :-). They don't all go to church OR Sam's Club on Sunday. I think if a drug story is written with authenticity...not nec. to preach or educate, but to show the human consequences of a situation...fans of all stripes will respond. Even those in Dodge Caravans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members brimike Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 Who, moi? LOL! Hey, my car (back when I owned one) was a red minivan. It's all good. Absolutely! I kinda thought that went without saying. I only took the phrase "Minivan Majority" from Cat's post. Yes, it's a stereotype, and certainly one I wasn't trying to encourage. I know plenty of very uptight, conservative, hands-over-ears-I-can't-hear-you-la-la-la people in the city I live in too. I was merely referring to Cat's earlier posts in terms of drug use, and the markets ABC is targeting with this story. See, the point of my last paragraph was that you DON'T need to write dismissively. You can still write about a sensitive subject by being realistic and confronting it dead-on. Am I that predictable? LOL! Yeah, I know I am. Of course labels are bad. I'm certainly not saying everybody who lives in the suburbs or drives a minivan is a complete ignoramus when it comes to drug use and abuse. Just reacting to Cat's theory that Frons and ABC are targeting a specific demo, and were already acknowledging the divide that's in this thread with the divide that's in this country right now over this subject (allegedly). Mine wasn't a Dodge Caravan. But I still stand strong - I drove it proudly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cat Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 Oh, don't blame brimike, MarkH! It was I who used the term "Minivan Majority." I didn't mean to use it in a disdainful way, just using it to illustrate the way networks, political statisticians and survey companies carve up a potential audience/voters. It is a way of typecasting a huge population in easily digestible chunks, you know? As for what Minivan Moms may or may nor be thinking, I'm not a mom (yet), I'm just going by what some of my "new mom" friends have said to me generally. They all have different opinions about a range of things, some will probably be more permissive than others, a few are churchgoers, others are agnostic or aetheist... as you say, a rainbow. However, when it comes to drugs and their children, and regardless of their own personal experiences (or not) with drugs, they are overwelmingly anti drugs. Because whether certain types of drugs are viewed as "soft," "medium" or "hard," there is usually a reason why most have been outright banned and classified as felonies. P.S.: I used the term Minivan Majority in the context of being targeted by Bush's presidential campaign in 2000 and 2004. This is the same segment that pretty much assured Obama's victory, too. Just FTR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members brimike Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 Thanks, Cat! And honestly, I didn't think you were encouraging stereotypes with the "Minivan Majority" line. It's how the networks think. You were just trying to step into their shoes, as frustrating as it is that they think in those terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members teplin Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 Most parents I know – in a good-sized, conservative Midwestern town – would definitely "freak out" about finding marijuana in their 13-year-old son's backpack. I would as well. And remember, Nora is a District Attorney -- no matter how ubiquitous marijuana may be, it's still against the law. Her perspective may also be skewed by her experience -- a D.A. is in a position to see a lot of lives ruined by drugs. And while the vast majority of marijuana users never graduate to anything stronger, most people with drug problems probably started out with marijuana. I generally detest teen storylines, and I'm not really looking forward to this one, but I don't fault the premise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 Part of the pitfalls of doing "socially relevant" stories like these is that it either confirms or clashes with viewers experience. Some people think that Starr's prgnancy was well-written, others think it wasn't. IMO, stories like these are best when keep intensely personal and fit into a specific character's development. Cole's drug use could be that kind of story. It would make perfect sense for Cole to turn to drugs and to slide fast. Matthew? We'll see what his role in all this is. It takes a certain amount of risk-taking, bravery and sensitivity to make a story like this anything other than typical Lifetime movie fodder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members All My Shadows Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 A thought just occurred to me. If Nora isn't pissed for any other reason, she should at least be pissed that Matthew running around with joints in his JanSport could have very well turned into a scandal if he had been caught by anyone other than her or another family member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 Pot, weed, reefer, Mary J.... This thread makes me feel like I'm in an episode of "Dragnet". WTH, lol? You have a good point, though. Why not write a story about drug dependency where the dealer's some squeaky-clean, All American-type whom no one would ever suspect? Very rarely do I watch the local evening news and see that the dude who's been arrested for dealing meth and/or running a lab out of his garage looks exactly like the guy Erica tried to score pills from on AMC. That's a good point, too. If I caught my kid with any kind of illegal substance, I'd panic immediately, regardless of how I felt about the drug, because of the legal ramifications. (We'd deal with the emotional, physical and psychological ramifications later, but not TOO much later.) I don't fault OLTL for telling a story about teens and drugs, but I will fault them for relying on cliches to advance the plot. And the fact of the matter is, it isn't marijuana, cocaine, ecstasy, heroin, or meth that's the problem. Don't get me wrong, these drugs are a scourge; and we, as a nation, are doing a half-assed job in ridding ourselves of them. IMO, though, the real problem, to quote Grace Slick, are the "ones that Mother gives you". I'm talking about the drugs parents have in their medicine cabinets - the pills you take for your arthritis, or your back trouble, or your migraines; or to relieve stress and anxiety; or just the cough medicine with codeine that you take on occasion when you're having trouble sleeping - that are perfectly legal and FDA-approved - and in many cases, even prescribed by your family doctor - and that more and more kids are using today to cop a cheap high. When it comes to telling stories about drug use on daytime, you almost have to scare your audience out of their complacency about the issue. IMO, there's always a good opportunity to tell viewers that the real dangers of the world are not "out in the streets", but in their own homes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members miajere Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 Whether you're in the city or a suburb...I have to wonder if the parents are freaking out because they don't know what pot does, or because they are convinced this is something to be concerned about. This may sound a bit out of sorts and I don't have children, but I have to wonder if most parents would just prefer their kids not to be stupid enough to get caught? especially considering that large portion of parents raised in the 70's probably used... Is finding pot in your kids bag a sign that they are "out of control", unable to keep it to recreational places and activities? Does coming home with a stinch of pot signal a sign a rebellion or disrespect and a sign of crossed parental boundaries' to come? Like an employer, is the sign of pot smoking offensive to the authoritative sensibility more than a concern for one's health and well-being? I think it would be interesting if they did a meth story line. But then they would need to hire someone older looking to assume the role after they get help.. Meth heads always look like they aged 20 years- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bright Eyes Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 Thank you for not taking offense. I do agree it is a good way to start as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MarkH Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 I enjoyed Nora and Bo's reactions, and how they played off each other. The writers found a beat of humor in this, which is good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DavidEvanSmith Posted January 12, 2009 Author Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 Oh, I would have actually preferred if they went this route! Some old pain pills lying around from when Nora was comatose and had to re-learn how to walk, or something Renee has been using to sleep at night since she's missing Asa. So Matthew and his little troublemaker friend from school decide to mix those pills with something in Clint's liquor cabinet. Or even inhalants like White-Out. I don't recall them exploring that in daytime, and THAT could have been a less cliched way to open the door to the "harder" drugs like cocaine. It could even shine a light on whether Renee is coping well enough with life without Asa, or whether she has a dependency as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members brimike Posted January 12, 2009 Members Share Posted January 12, 2009 I know it seems like the Department of Redundancy Department, but if Renee's slow, hidden addiction somehow was the unknown cause of Matthew's experimentation, and they told dueling stories of a teen and his "grandmother", and how they're the same and different, it would definitely be ground-breaking. I'm not sure it would be every viewer's cup of tea, but it's a great character study. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.