With news that

Bryton has been moved to recurring, there is no 'anchor"

for the characters of Ana and Tyra in Genoa City anymore.

It is not fair to Ms. Marcille to keep her in "Genoa City"

without a "family"

. Given that the actress has oodles of opportunities, and that maybe her character has not "caught on" as well as some have hoped, perhaps it would be best for all concerned if she could spread her wings and seek new opportunities?

I say this with full respect, as I do not wish this performer to feel she is being picked on.

Edited April 6, 200916 yr by MarkH

If the goal was to have decent stories for black character, it would not matter what color the skin of the writer; so I maintain that is not the goal. A writer can write for anyone because that is what they do. All the things that are written for white characters could easily be written for black characters if TIIC wanted it.

ANDREA

If it takes a fleshed out Lily put on the forefront and the rest of the Black cast put on the backburner, I'd take it.

They're a waste of space. And soaps are supposed to be about angst-ridden melodrama. None of these characters are capable of being angsty because they are not considered to be real.

If it takes a fleshed out Lily put on the forefront and the rest of the Black cast put on the backburner, I'd take it.

They're a waste of space. And soaps are supposed to be about angst-ridden melodrama. None of these characters are capable of being angsty because they are not considered to be real.

Rhythm-is-a-dancer, I think the angstiest Lily got yesterday is when she confessed to Coine that she "missed modelling." The trauma!

Don't you think if we had an African American co-HW, that could make a difference? I realize one shouldn't need such a person...but if one could get a TPTB of color?

I'm thinking about the alleged introduction of a

gay

character. It seems not coincidental to me that this is timed with the introduction of an

openly gay BDW

. At the very least, they can pick his brain about personal experiences.

So, too, maybe there would be more heart and soul in the characters of color if the people writing them saw them as real people, and wrote more authentically. Whether it is Jamey Giddens "I was more like Noah" or whatever...the background is irrelevant...it's just that a writer writing for someone "like themselves" might help increase the richness of the characterization.

Am I misguided?

It's interesting because during the Bell years, I truly believe VR had a lot to do with what was happening with the Winters, and made her voice be known about her character. What was great was tptb listened and she cared! It's why people do scream "where the hell is Dru?" She was a trouble maker, a "problemed" women. Same could be said of Mamie- they gave her the role of maid, she played by the rules, but she truly represented that strong matriarch of the African American community. Perhaps it was because of her role on the show, her perspective was allowed to be aired in respect to that. "we clean your houses, raise your children, and yet, we have a family of our own." Socio-economics had some twist and turns, but nevertheless stayed honest.

I'm here to say, that I don't think there would be more heart and soul if there were an AAptb. I would argue that what we watch on screen with Neil- his need for loyalty, his need to assimilate, his battles in corporate America, his "required loyalty to the network", he would move slow, and perhaps "too aware of himself". One AA HW in daytime would essentially be Neil Winters. Four of five HWs, more breakdown writers, more script writers...that is the only way this honest and true injection of heart and soul could happen without fear with an AA HW; because as I've suggested, there are plenty AA perspectives. One cannot cover them all.

The suggestion of a co-HW is interesting because I understand that this is a recommendation for a Bell soap, but I imagine it would the same for any other soap missing a HW- not by you necessarily, but by others. Whether it is the dominant liberal POV or the conservative these ideas will remain much the same. I suspect it's a suggestion of "you know, someone to help out with the AA perspective. For other stories, we have uh...someone else."

Are we referring to the Neil Winters of the world, or (in my theory) the Clarence Thomas'? Of course we are, tokenism always serves a purpose but at the end of the day has its limits. Neil/Clarence is willing to make those sacrifices for that "co-HW" position and serve his network. Perhaps they'll give him his own show!! Perhaps when the HW sucks they'll finally promote him!! The issue with tokenism is it always embraces mediocrity- too afraid of the Drucilla's, and not moral enough to stand up to the Mamie's. They will tell him "he's not pro-active enough, or to tone down his ideals, they're too much." By the time he's changed and converted his work will be mediocre, and most likely even more dishonest.

I've listened to DC Jamey Giddens- he's great, quite the riot. It's quite possible he would do great for these networks, but he is what I've always feared of the "soap fan taking over". I say this with respect, but perhaps it is their "wanting in" that colors my judgement. "Wanting in to the point of wanting to stay in no matter the cost." To be a great HW, great creator, you have to be ready and willing to get fired. Perhaps a balance between your Roark and Keating, a balance between the Dru and Neil. Like her or not, we need the Lily Winters, Neil is essential, as is Dru, but Jamey tends to discount some characters (or more commonly the actors), and while we're missing key characters, the Lily's are just as important. I've also heard his opinion sway abit too close to the "soap vision" which can be brainwashing indeed. I wonder, but since he's not here to talk on this subject himself, I'll leave him out of it. It would be interesting none the less.

Doesn't mean it can't be done, but like I said it won't rest with the JGs- it rest in 10 JGs doing a number of jobs, not just for AA characters, but to write good work in general. That's when you hire the Mia Korfs and talk to them about their experiences. I don't believe people/characters are tokens, rather tokenism can take hold of you.

People's willingness to bring up other characters in similar socio-economics and similar "s/l fight" tend to represent the dominate liberal POV- it goes color blind in retrospect and denies the battle that takes place behind the scenes and in the television industry in general. Its "fair shake" ideals can't abide by an unfair world. It's difficult to argue, because the dominate liberal POV usually wants to argue other atrocities in the world and have difficulties staying focused on just the one topic- Victor Newmans. But at least it's passionate.

Of course, I agree with Jamey!

When I watch YR, which is about 2.5 times a week (depends on who's playing Tennis on any given day), the only story I'd rather not watch is anything remotely related to the Winters. As a black person, this is disturbing because this current bad story is no fluke. It's simply the way it is. The weakest actors are telling us the most god aweful stories (and I agree with whomever said that Kristoff is not an amazing actor because he is anything but. Nia Peeples trampled all over him the other day).

And Khan, I too would like to be entertained, but I also want to be entertained by someone who looks like me, and not just in a 1/2 hr comedy.

ANDREA

I think we place too much responsibility on these characters to make it happen 365 days out of the year. Partly because they are one of the only AA families in daytime! We need them to deliver- perhaps even to represent all the time, but it can't be done by just this one family. It never could be. Perhaps the old days were better, because they had better representation of diversity across the board, and didn't have to be "everyone's one go to".

I don't think people are too hard on their s/ls- they can be awful and difficult to sit through. I think we're living in a fantasy world if we believe they are ever going to be what we want them to be and still be viable for the network. When I watch their scenes, there's an interesting self- loathing that takes hold. "Why aren't they better? Why are they acting like this? Where's a real story?" They're quite interesting and unique.

(and I agree with whomever said that Kristoff is not an amazing actor because he is anything but. Nia Peeples trampled all over him the other day)

And if Nia "The Party Machine" Peeples makes you look bad? Something's amiss.

And Khan, I too would like to be entertained, but I also want to be entertained by someone who looks like me, and not just in a 1/2 hr comedy.

See, that's where I'd have to disagree (respectfully, of course). I'm Black. That's enough for me. If I want to be entertained by people who look like me, I'll just go spend some quality time with my whacked-out family. ;-)

And if Nia "The Party Machine" Peeples makes you look bad? Something's amiss.

See, that's where I'd have to disagree (respectfully, of course). I'm Black. That's enough for me. If I want to be entertained by people who look like me, I'll just go spend some quality time with my whacked-out family. ;-)

See here is where we part ways (I think). If you are going to put black characters on, make them interesting. Make them real and not just tokens to increase the audience for the white characters. It's not just about seeing people like me on tv, it's more of why are they giving such ridiculous boring storylines? Like Antoyne said, don't make half assed attempts at a story. Go all the way. But unfortunately, the energy goes into the stories for white characters, some of which I enjoy immensely, but if you are going to do it, if you are going to pay actors, DO IT RIGHT!

Look at what is given to Nick, Sharon and Phyllis. Why couldn't I see this with the dreadful 3 in the Winters so called story?

ANDREA

See here is where we part ways (I think). If you are going to put black characters on, make them interesting.

I'm not disagreeing with you there.

Make them real and not just tokens to increase the audience for the white characters. It's not just about seeing people like me on tv, it's more of why are they giving such ridiculous boring storylines?

I'm not disagreeing with you there, either.

But unfortunately, the energy goes into the stories for white characters, some of which I enjoy immensely, but if you are going to do it, if you are going to pay actors, DO IT RIGHT!

Nope, still not disagreeing. (Where do we part ways again, lol?)

What I'm saying, I guess, is that TPTB shouldn't try to incorporate Black characters just because they are Black audiences out there. I think we, as Black Americans, gravitate toward any story that's told well (which is true for everyone, isn't it?) regardless of the characters' skin color. If TPTB are worried there's only one Black actor in a front-burner story, they shouldn't panic and flood the canvas with sixteen others to make up the difference. Because it won't make a bit of difference, if the actors/characters are inorganic to the stories. Does that make sense?

Edited April 22, 200916 yr by Khan

I think we, as Black Americans, gravitate toward any story that's told well (which is true for everyone, isn't it?) regardless of the characters' skin color. If TPTB are worried there's only one Black actor in a front-burner story, they shouldn't panic and flood the canvas with sixteen others to make up the difference. Because it won't make a bit of difference, if the actors/characters are inorganic to the stories. Does that make sense?

I think it varies for me. I watch a variety of shows for a variety of reasons- some of the reasons being I love seeing black people on tv. Sometimes I'm willing to put up with some extra crap (i.e. bad storytelling) just to watch it. Sometimes, not.

When people speak of bringing on AA characters there's the begging of question- "why when the one AAs on don't have a story?" or "Not if they aren't going to be organically integrated." I don't think anyone has to think of plausible reasons for liking characters that sound, look, and act like them. And if a writer can't pull those strings together- I don't think he deserves to have his job, because it's not always about making every black character related. Especially at a time like this when characters are brought in just for the sake of completing a plot. Let's face it, there's no real reason to bring on a character unless you need to tie up a plot, or entice your audience with something new.

But I feel we've been conditioned to only asking for things we "need" and not "want"; and when the daytime audience asks for that diversity we have to have valid reasoning- rational thought process, and anything less is irrational- "that's too many black characters!" AS for these floodgates, I have to ask, "why is there only one black character on the show?" Was everyone else busy? Was daytime too much for them? Too little? Too hard? I wonder about the difficulties they face in getting material, and then out of the blue, needing to turn that material into gold, whereby there is no continuity.

There's plenty of reason why to bring these characters on, if just as an extra treat for an audience that is black or for people who relate to the black experience. We want these characters to get the same treatment and to hold them to the same standards as the rest of the canvas- but how can we when they aren't being treated the same or being held to the same standards by the networks? Why not bring them on because they're black (there's a strong black audience)? If tokenism is already taking place across the board by the networks, what do we have to lose now, our pride? We can't talk pride when we're FFwding through these scenes.

.............. TPTB shouldn't try to incorporate Black characters just because they are Black audiences out there. I think we, as Black Americans, gravitate toward any story that's told well (which is true for everyone, isn't it?) regardless of the characters' skin color. If TPTB are worried there's only one Black actor in a front-burner story, they shouldn't panic and flood the canvas with sixteen others to make up the difference. Because it won't make a bit of difference, if the actors/characters are inorganic to the stories. Does that make sense?

Makes sense and IA. I also agree with the opinions voiced here that a good writer should be able to write a convincing storyline for any character no matter what, because, IMO if the three C's (color/class/caste) are taken out of the equation what you have left are people ( alone or in concert with others) striving for the same thing ( no matter what that is).

a good writer should be able to write a convincing storyline for any character no matter what, because [...] what you have left are people [...] striving for the same thing [...].

Exactly. That's why I don't think the argument here is about character motivation. IMO, the argument has more to do with attitude and disposition.

If a Black character entered a scene, wearing his hair in corn-rows, dressed in a basketball jersey and baggy jeans, brandishing a bottle of malt liquor, and yelling, "'S'up, my niggas!", many would want to cry foul. But, if that same Black character entered, dressed in a Brooks Brothers suit, wearing his hair closely shaved, and speaking in "the King's English", many would want to accuse him of being "bougie". It's a thin line, and you always have to tread it carefully.

That's why part of me says, "Why bother [incorporating Black characters for the sake of having them]?" No matter how you depict any of 'em, someone is bound to be offended by the depiction.

However, in Y&R's case, they truly are equal-opportunity; they're proving Blacks can be just as boring and vanilla as Whites.

Edited April 23, 200916 yr by Khan

Exactly. That's why I don't think the argument here is about character motivation. IMO, the argument has more to do with attitude and disposition.

If a Black character entered a scene, wearing his hair in corn-rows, dressed in a basketball jersey and baggy jeans, brandishing a bottle of malt liquor, and yelling, "'S'up, my niggas!", many would want to cry foul. But, if that same Black character entered, dressed in a Brooks Brothers suit, wearing his hair closely shaved, and speaking in "the King's English", many would want to accuse him of being "bougie". It's a thin line, and you always have to tread it carefully.

That's because neither represent an entire community and in most circumstances these cries would take place on a show were they are one in a few. One black character, one black writer, one black anything cannot be everything for everyone.

I can see a writer penning these characters without said complexity or interest in the character's core. But if this more urban character were the hero of said story, trying to get ahead in life, or working hard to do the right thing, and all people on the canvas saw was "the backwards hat, his corn-rows" what would that say about society/canvas then?

And if this character in suit were villainous, a wolf in sheep's clothing, only out to integrate into a town and seek his revenge, and people were trusting of him simply because he was a black man in a suit, what would that say about the canvas? If people's kindness to him only revealed more complexity perhaps infuriated him?

To write for black characters requires a love of writing about people, society, and in conclusion to have a conversation on industry and capitalism in America.

If a Black character entered a scene, wearing his hair in corn-rows, dressed in a basketball jersey and baggy jeans, brandishing a bottle of malt liquor, and yelling, "'S'up, my niggas!", many would want to cry foul. But, if that same Black character entered, dressed in a Brooks Brothers suit, wearing his hair closely shaved, and speaking in "the King's English", many would want to accuse him of being "bougie". It's a thin line, and you always have to tread it carefully.

That's because neither represent an entire community and in most circumstances these cries would take place on a show were they are one in a few. One black character, one black writer, one black anything cannot be everything for everyone.

I can see a writer penning these characters without said complexity or interest in the character's core. ....... To write for black characters requires a love of writing about people, society, and in conclusion to have a conversation on industry and capitalism in America.

ITA, and I think of the character Devon with all the miss opportunities for him.

Devon's story cried out (IMO) for him to be a "B"-boy. It's in his back story and after he lost his hearing AND THEN his rescuer/anchor/adopted mother- Dru , that's where he should have gone spinning back to-- if only for safety/sanity sake. Instead, we have this bland character who appears every now and then. And then along comes Trya (like her or not) to take away what little he had left. I guess Neil calling him "son" was susposed to make everything alright. Good writing would have milked this for all it was worth.

Devon's story cried out (IMO) for him to be a "B"-boy. It's in his back story and after he lost his hearing AND THEN his rescuer/anchor/adopted mother- Dru , that's where he should have gone spinning back to-- if only for safety/sanity sake. Instead, we have this bland character who appears every now and then. And then along comes Trya (like her or not) to take away what little he had left. I guess Neil calling him "son" was susposed to make everything alright. Good writing would have milked this for all it was worth.

I totally, totally agree here.

Good writing would have milked this for all it was worth.

Or any writing at all.

I just wanted to add my two cents & why they brought on Tyra.

IIC tried to replace Dru through Lily. They try by telling us that CKLily was just like her mom during the modeling thing. Most people didn't buy that. Or the few people who like CKLily because she isn't nothing like Dru. So they brought on Tyra by drilling the same thing they try to sale us on CKLily. That Tyra is just like Dru. Nobody is buying that either. Either they bring back the real Dru or they need to shut the [!@#$%^&*] up. & get rid of Tyra unless she becomes useful with her own identity.