Is the soap world asleep?

[miajere]

I think the soap community is asleep, but I don't neccessarily believe that's a bad thing. In fact I think people will find that the more desperate the community gets, the more likely they'll start looking for answers outside themselves.

I think the problem lies that there are too many fans of the shows running the shows. People who've been familiar with these shows are fearful of outsiders coming in and retooling a few things because they don't think they would understand or respect the genre. Essentially we're afraid of visioned Brian Frons and LML clones looking to retool our soaps into something younger, sexier, with some CGI, and a mystery hour. We're excited about Hogan!

But we seem hellbent on constantly looking within our community to produce something new and I don't think that'll ever happen. We need story tellers, we need people who understand that this was originally a woman's genre, but we don't need another fan of soaps. It's not rehiring Malone, it's finding someone who still considers the soap world a mystery, and is wanting to understand it and who's watching.

The soap world is predictable and as long as people from this community continue to hold onto it and not share it, it will remain predictable, asleep, and at best unwatchable. WE are like the small town of television viewers, and I think as a community we have a small town mentality- conservative, fearful, and constantly misinformed about what's out there. I would even venture to say that the soap community doesn't want new viewers. I think alot of time we want more people like ourselves watching, but I don't think we're ready to share "our" shows with those who are different. JMHO of course.

The asleep aspect means that at some point, someone is going to have to wake us from our dreams- and for some of us nightmare- and show us reality; and I think the very idea frightens most people because it means the shows might get alittle more black, gay, older, younger, etc...

I'm curious to see whether or not this community would rather fail than wake up. GL makes me believe that it's possible that when pushed to the breaking point Otalia can emmerge. Is it a gimmick or sincere writing? Who knows, but it's interesting nonetheless.

[UCLAN]

I totally agree, especially that we need story tellers. I watch only 2 soaps, Days and GL. On Days, at first, I was totally pissed with the firing of the vets, but guess what, I like the stories, or some of them. Tell me a good story and I'm hooked. GL is telling me a good story (Olivia and Natalia) and guess what, I'm hooked. Asleep, maybe, complacent, yes. I see soaps as not wanting to move outside the box, thus the retread of old or previously use storylines.

[marceline]

I love this post so much I want to take it out behind the middle school and get it pregnant.

[Toups]

Major props for the 30 Rock quote!

[jfung79]

Me, I think we need more fans writing for the shows, not less. I am not aware that Chuck Pratt or Bob Guza were soap fans growing up.

Fans of a show often have many new, great ideas, while respecting what has come before and using the best of it. Doctor Who's successful relaunch was led by super-fan Russell T Davies, and many of the other writers were prominent in fan fiction during the 1980s when the show itself was thought to be in decline. I see a definite parallel between that and soaps/soap fandom. The many online soaps on this site are an example of what could be done with fan writers.

I also disagree with the idea that there is too much incestuousness in current soap writing. Recycling writers, using their experience, isn't bad. The problem comes from recycling the *wrong* writers instead of the right ones.

[DRW50]

jfung, I agree, bringing in or promoting writers who know daytime isn't always bad. That gave us Doug Marland, for one, and more recently, Ron Carlivarti at OLTL, or many of the better GL writers over the past decade. In the past I've seen some writers embraced just because they had no experience as daytime writers, and then those results were either disastrous ("Black & Decker" at ATWT, Ellen Weston at GL) or, at best, extremely mixed (Hogan Sheffer). I think some writers like Higley or McTavish give longtime soap writers a bad rap. The writers who hop from soap to soap to soap and bring bad stories wherever they go, like B&E, or Higley, give other longtime soap writers a bad name.

I think more soaps would benefit from strong producers. You only hear about strong producers when it's time to admire or fear heavy-handed ogres, but the many strong producers who quietly make difficult decisions every day, they're not as prevalent as they used to be. Instead there are people like Julie Carruthers at AMC, who has to essentially make a fool of herself in the press defending decisions she probably had no say in.

[miajere]

Incestuousness in soap writing....I like that. But who's going to decide who's the "right" writers. Should we do a poll?

I think we talk alot about fanbases on this board, agendas, etc...and I just don't think there's much separation, or I have yet to see it. Watching life long fans work their way up the food chains is inspiring, but I doubt there will be anything new. I hear those "great" ideas, most are recycled but they only stand to fix what the individual perceives as broken. What fans are capable of doing, is seeing story outside of corporate concern and executive control, and those perspectives are extremely important. Those who go onto write for these shows help keep the heart of the genre pumping, but it won't be anything new, just more "fixing" in relation to other soaps, and by the time they settle in with tptb, self loathing ensues and they're just happy to have a job.

That's not to say that an outsider taking over wouldn't have their particular tastes, standards, and customs, but they would have those independent of the genre. That's the only way we will ever see something new- innovation in story telling. In order for that innovation to take place, there has to be respect for your work and the soap genre. But the outsider can't perceive their particular show as being "broken". They mustn't be concerned with "fixing" the show we as fans perceive as damaged. Perhaps they would care less about corporate control because in the end, they will have more than the 8 options when fired.

BF is definition of that self loathing ambassador who loves the genre and hates the genre. He doesn't think soaps are as good and works to "fix" them. Guza is another who obviously felt the Sopranos was much better tv than the generality of General Hospital.

When the genre's down to a handful of soaps, perhaps we'll still be asking for the Hogan's of the world or checking the resumes of former soap writers, I hope not.

[CSF]

Where is Lorraine Broderick, Wisner Washam, Nancey Curlee, the Labine's? We need writers like them back in daytime. Where are producers like Wendy Riche or Linda Gottlieb. I know many people didn't like Linda Gottlieb at OLTL, but in many ways she helped the show. Wendy Riche made GH critically acclaimed and moved it away from the action/adventure stories that dominated GH throughout the 1980s.

I don't think fans should be writing soaps, per se. I think that will eventually cause a bias. What soaps need are writers with a strong creative aspect, who can take a story and develop it. Let it unfold before the audiences eyes, show the many dimensions of the characters involved. Stay true to the shows history and the characters origins. If you take a character and make them do something they never would do, the writer loses credibility and when you have no credibility in your writing, you lose the faith and respect of the audience. Daytime needs producers who worry about the production and look of the show and don't intervene with the writing aspect. Those involved need to stick to their assigned duties. Too much interference can lead to a shows downfall, hence ABC's soaps.

Any soap on the air today can have style, substance, and stories that are character driven as long as the right people are involved. ABC needs a major reconstruction. Actually, there is room for improvement on every soap. Never settle with what you have, you have to keep building it up, make it more lavish, make the characters more interesting, the stories keep flowing.

There are a ton of ideas today's writers can incorporate. Autism is in the news all the time. Introduce a child with that and how it's family reacts. Incorporate gay bashing in the gay storylines. Incorporate spousal abuse, child abuse. Eating disorders, age, race, gender discrimination. I always pull for social issues because I believe that television should NOT be solely for one's entertainment, it should also be used as a place to inform. A place to make viewers socially aware. Those topics that I mentioned are real, I didn't state them as a way to shake up a show and incorporate plot driven storylines, they can all be character driven without a doubt. It all goes back to the development of the characters we have on television.

I believe that part of the decline in soap viewership has to deal with stories that are not realistic. Many of the stories that have been produced in the past 10 years don't even hit home to the viewers. Daytime was a place to entertain, inform and educate. It was an endless parade of drama. Stories that pulled at your heart strings. As a college graduate with a dual degree in journalism and sociology I do not believe people are turned off, especially young people, by social issue storylines. I think it's the exact opposite, they want to be more informed.

When I think of The Bold and the Beautiful, it's a show who's roots are set in the world of fashion. Well where are the exotic models? Where is the concern for being thinner and more beautiful and being perfect? Where are the girls being pushed into eating disorders or into extreme diets? Where are those Andrew Christian wannabe designers? When do we see the consequences of all of this? That should be a focus on B&B. You put on America's Next Top Model, hell, put on Tyra Banks talk show and you see more of that!

Cyndi Lauper came to ATWT last summer and said to Luke Snyder that she believes it's better to reach out to a small towns LGBTA community because in a small town it's harder to have a voice than in an urban city. Why wasn't more drawn from that alone to spin off more gay storylines on this show? Have one of their asses kicked by some sick homophobe and let that homophobe get away with it by some fluke. Let all of Oakdale be outraged and come together and support gay issues and work to prevent future incidences from occurring. Let them work to pass laws in their town to prevent discrimination amongst gays. Then later have a storyline where that gay basher is severely punished.

Where are the sexual discrimination storylines against women working in hospitals on GH? Female doctors going head to head with male doctors who think they are in charge of GH. Where is the Nurses Ball?

Why doesn't OLTL have minority characters more front and center? This is what the show was originally about. Carla Gray kissing a white man. Victoria Lord being sexually abused by her father. The Jewish Woleks. This show could be the face of change and a step toward social equality, but for some reason it's not.

On All My Children, I thought the rape of Bianca was groundbreaking. I thought it was so compelling. As a viewer back then it made me so angry. It made me hate Michael Cambias and I've never hated a soap character before. It was terrible, but you know what, it was real! That happens all the time and you know what's the sad part, it goes unreported in most cases!

Social issues on soaps, on television can lead the way to address discrimination in society. They should be the place they once were to embrace change. You see that wrong being committed, you watch how it affects everyone at large, you observe how it's later dealt with. You see the consequences. Now you take what you've learned away with you.

Margo's gang rape on ATWT brought attention to AIDs awareness and hepatitis. The same with Maxie's heart disease on GH. When Agnes Nixon wrote Bert Bauer's uterine cancer on Guiding Light in the 1960s, she received so many letters from women saying if it wasn't for her storyline they would not be alive today as they would have never thought to be examined by their physicians.

I know this is a lot, but when I think of what soaps can be, how they can bring change and address so many issues, I just get so passionate about it.

[DaytimeFan]

To clarify, Joan Collins left GL (into what was a limited run anyway) because she had to do a book tour. I don't think anyone will know what really happened with Hogan Sheffer at DAYS, there was a lot of fuckery going on with Corday, Ed Scott and Sony.

I think daytime needs to die before it can come back. While I do think all the existing shows can be improved and perhaps recover somewhat, I do not think they can innovate or pioneer...it's like typecasting.

[cct]

All My Children did this with the character of Lily Montgomery.

All My Children did this in the mid-nineties with the Michael Delaney gay teacher storyline.

I believe AMC did this in the eighties, but I cannot think of the characters involved.

This has been done most recently on AMC with the characters of Ryan, Jonathan, and Erin Lavery.

Again, Bianca on AMC

The Willow Lake storyline on AMC

the Deconstruction storyline on AMC

OK, admittedly, I can't think of one for this one on AMC.

Now I'm not stating all this to celebrate all the social storylines on AMC in particular, but to take just one soap and show how many of these stories HAVE been done. Not that there aren't "new" stories to be told on daytime, but the truth is, it doesn't matter what a story is about; it's about HOW it's about it

cct

[DRW50]

I think it depends on the type of fan. If a fan only really loves a certain character or type of couple, then there will be a bias, but I mean a fan of what that particular soap represents. I think a writer can be a fan of certain characters or stories, and hate the soap itself, or what soaps represent. Guza for instance. Or, at ATWT, when Sheffer was headwriter, I often thought there was a thinly veiled contempt for what ATWT had once represented (family, warmth, history, a sense of community). His writing sneered at those types of characters and set a very negative tone for the show which still lingers now.

I think writers who really love a show and what that show means are a good fit for a soap, as long as they have some basic writing ability, or are teamed up with other writers who have that ability. Often today, the buzz is about how a new headwriter will change a show to suit his or her agenda, instead of wondering why the writer won't change to suit the agenda of the show.

[MarkH]

Well put. Also, it is always about the team/context. In the right situation, apparently Hogan can be sparkling.

Yes, yes, yes. I believe your sentence above perfectly captures it. Plus, these shows DO have an identity (and, since Vee questioned it, I think the "identity" represents the initial broad strokes defined by the creator...what town...what families...what major historical events).

I also agree NEW shows are needed to see innovation. I also do not believe that they can exist in daytime...and maybe not as daily strip shows. I really think that particular *form* is done.

For example, HBO had a 5-day a week show called In Treatment. Ostensibly, it will get a second season. Any buzz? Any major social hoopla? Any sign that this is the second coming? No. Definitely not the breakthrough that The Sopranos was...not even close. This will not reinvent the 5-day-a-week soap...or even the telenovela (which is what it probably was a bit closer to, in terms of the limited run).

These two threads ([a] The "old" shows cannot and should not stray too far from what they were, at their heights, and New shows are likely not to be daily and not to be daytime) come together to suggest to me that we will NOT see a 're-invention' of the genre as a 5-day-a-week daytime thing.

And I wouldn't miss that at all. I'm looking forward to seeing new serials, but I don't really care when or how often they air.

[CSF]

You're right, AMC did these stories throughout the years, but that is just one soap. There stories that brought critical acclaim to AMC for years. But look at it today and look at what it once was. If you look at all soaps across the board and the stories they brought to our attention and the things they've accomplished, they've done some really great things. But when you look at what they've turned into now, it's unfortunate. I'm not saying to recycle all of these, they were just examples of what all soaps can incorporate today, not just what AMC did at one point. And to a higher degree since AMC was really "the" first to tackle such issues, they should be advancing forward with more.

When you look at the ratings archive, when AMC was at it's highest points, which were many many times, it was always at the top of the ratings.

[All My Shadows]

I agree. If each soap was allowed to die a natural death (as opposed to the life-support system going on now), we'd have modern/hip/contemporary soaps on the air today that don't have to worry about acknowledging decades worth of history. Half of these shows probably should have been canceled 10 or 20 years ago.

[DRW50]

They made attempts at modern or hip soaps in the 60s, 70s, and 80s and 90s, and most of those shows (Where the Heart Is, How to Survive a Marriage, Generations, that beach soap ABC ran with Tony Dow, The City, Passions, among others) only ran for 5-10 years at the most, often less than that. I don't think TV does a great job at trying to capture a contemporary feel, and the audience more likely to watch daytime programs probably isn't interested. Even MTV, which did have contemporary, hip, entertaining serial programs at the start of this decade, dumped them and have never revived them.

If soaps were also allowed to die when on life support, then GH never would have been revitalized in the late 70s, ATWT would have been canceled after it ran into the ground in the 70s, DAYS would have been canceled in the early 80s, AW never would have been given another chance after Irna Phillips wrecked the show's early years. I agree that some soaps do linger on past their life expectancy (I'm not sure if anything can save GH now), but other soaps manage to return. They don't have the type of big comebacks they used to have but I think one of the most fascinating parts of soaps is how often they can come back from the brink.

I think if many of today's soaps had been canceled years ago, their replacements would probably have gone within a few years, and we'd be left with reruns and reality shows, or court shows. Or game shows, if those ever come back to daytime.