Another World Discussion Thread

[j swift]

Do you think the plan was for Pat to cause trouble for John and Sharlene because of Sharlene's history with Russ?  Because doesn't that story get told when Olivia arrives? (Obviously not with Pat).

I've only read the novelization accounts of Sharlene and Russ, but she seemed very different in her second iteration as played by Anna Holbrook.  Almost as if she was Sharlene in name only.

Edited December 4, 2023 by j swift

[Mona Kane Croft]

I think a lot of fans assumed there was going to be a romance between Pat and John.  And I think I may have even read somewhere that was the plan.  But I suppose nobody knows for sure what the the original plan was.  It must have been curtailed pretty quickly --almost at the last minute -- because they taped the promo-commercial about it, and it aired only about a week before the anniversary episodes began.  

Regarding Sharlene -- yes the original Sharlene was very different from Anna Holbrook's version.  The original version was very insecure and tentative about everything.  When Sharlene returned in 1988, she was much more confident and secure, and she dressed and acted more like a traditional farm woman, growing a garden, making preserves, etc.  The original Sharlene seemed happy to be away from the farm, and dressed more like contemporary suburban woman.

[Xanthe]

I think we have to accept some level of difference in interpretation with recasts. What was that anecdote about Victoria Wyndham working with Constance Ford? "Rachel would never say it like that." "This Rachel does." or something along those lines. And I have some tolerance for retcons that mostly respect history and squeeze story into plausible gaps, while fuming over the kind that lay waste to facts we know and substitute completely incompatible stories in their place. [I'm looking at you, hooker MJ.]   I haven't read the Sharlene novelization in years though and I don't remember the storyline from when it originally ran -- would you say the differences were in personality and attitude, or in the facts supplied in the storyline? 

I had the impression that although Sharlene presented herself as down-to-earth and practical, part of it was supposed to be because she was hiding from her shameful past as a prostitute and being too strict with Josie because of her fear of her sexuality. Maybe that wasn't how Anna Holbrook was introduced and those aspects came out later when Josie pursued a modeling career and Lucas came on the scene and of course Sharly emerged? 

I wasn't quite sure how the timeline was supposed to have worked for Lucas to have been one of Sharlene's clients. It seemed odd to assume that he had been a successful businessman before the point in time when Sharlene married Russ.

[Mona Kane Croft]

I agree with you. I don't think there were implausible retcons to Sharlene's history, especially since she had been away from Bay City for 10 years in real time (more like 18 years in soap opera time).  And I thought Holbrook's Sharlene was a more flexible character, because she didn't seem to have the fears and neurosis the original Sharlene was plagued with. At least they were not on the surface.

But Holbrook's Sharlene was connected to one of the most egregious retcons in daytime history -- the mysterious relocation of the Frame Farm from Oklahoma to Bay City.  That retcon was completely implausible and went completely unexplained, even after Lemay returned as head writer after the strike. Later writers made small attempts to correct Frame family history, but it had been botched forever with the farm no longer being in Oklahoma.  Wasn't the Frame Farm in Bay City introduced during the strike, and written by scab writers?  That might explain the mistake in continuity.  

Edited December 4, 2023 by Mona Kane Croft

[Contessa Donatella]

I know what y'all mean. There are retcons and then there are retcons. Some are awful & some are okay. Whenever we talk about the Frame farm mysteriously - and absurdly - being relocated from OK to outside Bay City it makes me think about Michael Malone, I think it was, who had Jake & Vicky get that swing set from Lassiter, PA & bring it to a nearby neighborhood in Bay City, like that would really be something that would be done! I realize a farm is much bigger than a swing set but they both annoy me to no end!! (Might not have been Malone but it was around that time frame.) 

[j swift]

It had always been my impression that the farm where Sharlene lived was not the same farm where she grew up.  She lived where Jason had lived when he worked for the Love family.  My reasoning was because her mother didn't live there, and none of her siblings worked the farm.  Maybe there was some exposition that I've forgotten that would contradict that idea, but I always believed there were two farms until you brought this idea up.

[Mona Kane Croft]

When Jason first bought the farm, before Sharlene returned to town, he and Rachel talked about it being the Frame family farm where the siblings grew up, and Emma's farm. Jason and Rachel even implied that Emma was dead, without literally saying it.   And I believe when Sharlene first arrived she and Jason had similar conversations.  So my impression is it was supposed to be the original Frame farm that had previously been in Oklahoma.   But as I mentioned, later writers tried to back-peddle a bit by making the farm's origins more vague and by saying Emma still lived back home in Oklahoma.  But the damage had been done, and it was never truly explained away.

I even tried to think of ways the whole situation could be re-explained and undone.  I had a few ideas, but none of them really worked, unless those early conversations could be totally forgotten and contradicted.  

Edited December 4, 2023 by Mona Kane Croft

[j swift]

I guess that is what they did.  Because Emma comes to visit Bay City for Cass's wedding, and it was written as if she lived on another farm in Oklahoma.

I assume none of the first generation of Bay City Frames bought a farm, like Vince, Willis, or Steve.  Correct?

Edited December 4, 2023 by j swift

[Mona Kane Croft]

None of the first generation of siblings owned a farm near Bay City.  Although Steve and Alice's house was out in the country and did have some acreage. But it was never said to have been a farm.  Just a large new house on several acres.  They could have had Jason buy Steve and Alice's house to get it back into the family, but then they would have had to rebuild the set which they probably did not want to do -- that set had not been used since 1979. And it was clear in the dialogue in 1987-88 that Jason had not purchased Steve and Alice's old house.

[Xanthe]

The references to Emma's farm were too early to be scab writers. It seems to have come up at Christmas 1987 when Margaret Depriest was still headwriter.

Jamie and Lisa report that they went for a drive and noticed that the farm where Emma used to live is up for sale (about 5 minutes in):

Please register in order to view this content

Between Xmas and New Year's Rachel, Jamie and Lisa visit the farm and discuss Rachel's wish to bid on it so Jamie can have it. Jason has also come to town and announced his intention to bid on it.

 

[j swift]

Now, that would've been the perfect opportunity for Pat to come back and get revenge on Jamie by co-signing the loan on the farm for Jason (ha ha).

Please register in order to view this content

Edited December 4, 2023 by j swift

[Contessa Donatella]

I was just about to post with concern about where in the world was Neil Johnson, ... when I figured it out. 

[TEdgeofNight]

Unfortunately, people think that just because it's in a book it must be true. Harding Lemay's book is just his opinion. Harding's book is filled with wrong information and his ego. Same with Schemering's book. Yet people quote these books as fact. Research before you post.

[Mona Kane Croft]

Thanks for those videos.  I remember seeing those episodes back in 1987-88 and thinking, "What the hell are they doing to the show's established history?"  Oh well.

The most pathetic thing about this entire relocating the Frame farm debacle is that it was so badly botched that even Harding Lemay didn't attempt to correct it when he took over as head writer. He just went with it, and left it alone.  And he was the writer who had created Steve Frame's history, most of his siblings, and the farm in Oklahoma (he did not create the character of Steve).  Lemay must have been very frustrated at what DePriest had done, but it was too complicated to undo.  Poor guy.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Mona Kane Croft

[j swift]

I hadn't considered that as part of the issue with moving the farm.  Steve had been trying to ignore his past while establishing himself in Bay City, but that would've been difficult if his entire family lived just outside of town.

It is interesting to consider the parallels to Michael Hudson's background.