Jump to content

Guiding Light Discussion Thread


Paul Raven

Recommended Posts

  • Members

@slick jones Thanks. I was barely watching by then, but I did remember hearing of this and liking the idea (I wonder if they did it because of the very positive response the 70th episode received).

@Mona Kane Croft The reason I mentioned it is because I was trying to figure out if the 2000 Meta speech was establishing Reverend Ruthledge as a fictional character she listened to (a wink at GL itself being a soap), or if he was a real person she listened to on the radio, or someone she knew, etc. So the later mention would lean more toward establishing Ruthledge as a canonical character.

Ed did have two kids, and if Christina had stayed on the show I think the show likely would have treated her as Ed's daughter, but they did seem to avoid giving Mike another child for a long time. Maybe they thought of him as a hunky leading man and didn't want him to be tied down with kids. 

This seemed to be more of a mindset with soaps until later years where characters started having 3-4-5 children. 

Ed also only had one child until Michelle...around the same time Mike had been pushed off the canvas.

Edited by DRW50
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

At least they tried with Ed before Michelle (between Chrissie and the child Rita miscarried). I'm unaware of any other child Mike even potentially fathered. It's probably a product of the times, when there wasn't as much time or story to fill. And, tbf, even having siblings doesn't guarantee anything---the Stewarts pretty much died out on ATWT because both Dan and Paul were killed off.

I'd grudgingly admit that MOL always hit some kind of wall in "serious" scenes, the writing didn't often give him the ability to stretch either. He was always in GA's shadow. 

Edited by P.J.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I know I already said this earlier but I do think he did a good job with Abby's exit, even if there were some odd choices made (didn't they have him do the entire thing shirtless...and did he sink to his knees or am I just making that up). And maybe when he found out Blake's son wasn't his, although I may just be thinking of Jerry.

I wonder if Don Stewart also didn't want Mike to have any other kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Rick was generally a character I liked but didn't have any real attachment to. I think he was hurt so much by a lack of family, but then if the Bauers had been in a stronger position they may have recast him anyway instead of bringing MOL back in 1995. 

I thought he worked well with Barbara Crampton, but she was on the way out the door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, it was supposed to be, I think the grandson of John Ruthledge but that was yet another bit of revisionist history. John only had a daughter and, after she married, she became a Holden and so were her kids. It couldn't have even been a nephew or grand-nephew. John only had one sister. There's no way the Ruthledge name could have been passed on with this new Reverend Ruthledge that Josh met. I wasn't watching at the time so I'm not sure who he claimed to be but I do think he claimed to be Reverend John Ruthledge's grandson. Sure, you could say (and rightfully so) that nobody would know or care about that but I doubt anybody watching at the time even knew or cared about who the original Rev. Ruthledge was so what was the point of the reference? Again, I guess it's nice for them to give a nod to history but the inaccuracies tended to negate any joy I found in the references. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The odd thing is, the GL I remember always seemed more invested in Phillip than Rick. While I'm sure there must have been a younger version of Rick, I have never caught a glimpse of him in any of the late 70's stuff online. (and I'm truly amazed there was a teen Rick before MOL. MOL doesn't show up until just before Rick, Beth and Phillip's graduation.) There's plenty of Jarrod Ross' Phillip, and Ed is preoccupied with Chrissie. But Rick could be playing in traffic for all Ed seems to care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Most of these historical inaccuracies come about because TPTB are not really interested in the history or maintaining continuity.

That really took hold in the 80's when pretty much anything pre that time was seen as irrelevant.

Of course it's impossible to reference every story/character from the past but more care should have been taken

eg Were Meta and Trudy mentioned when Bill reappeared in 77? Was there thought to bringing Ellen Demming back for a few appearances-she only left a few years before.

Mike and Leslie should have been given a child-a boy to carry on the Bauer name.

And have Meta return after Bert's death to be the new Guiding Light for family and friends.

But they thought the adventures of Roxie Shayne were more worthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I can see where the inaccuracies would annoy you, especially as the info was probably available somewhere. You could say that his grandson called himself that to honor his grandfather, if you want to reach, I suppose. 

I was surprised to finally see a bit of that Rick (Phil McGregor - ? can't remember) when some early 1983 material was uploaded. He wasn't bad. You're right, they had no real interest in Rick. Probably down to Ed mostly having romantic stories with women who had no ties to Rick, while Philip had four parents on the show for a number of years.

That's one of the reasons I didn't care as much about Blake/Rick sleeping together in terms of inappropriateness (I did think it was a very hacky writing choice), because even though they were meant to be raised as close, I don't know if I have ever seen them together in old clips.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, Meta's hearing Reverend Ruthledge via radio broadcasts in her youth is less problematical, canon-wise, than other theories about how she could have "known" him. In a radio episode from 1950, Meta said she was 31 years old, so born in 1919. She would have been old enough in the late 1920s-early 1930s to remember radio sermons from her childhood.

We really ARE putting more thought into this than is warranted, ROTF! Did the writers even care this much? Probably not!

Yes, Josh met a supposed grandson of Rev. Ruthledge's, and told him that his grandfather was "a legend around here." Ouch. Ruthledge could not have had a grandson with that surname, without seriously revising history, and...why would the original John Ruthledge be a legend in Springfield? (Was it through memorable radio sermons from many decades before, which were broadcast throughout the country, from Selby Flats to Illinois?

Please register in order to view this content

)

Overthinking, part two.

The show never used the family effectively in TGL's final decades, so even with a few remnants around, the Bauers were no longer considered by TPTB as the soap's core, anyway. They were cast aside for the Shaymes the way Emmerdale's Sugdens were wiped out and replaced by the Dingle-berries.

 

Edited by vetsoapfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There were so many Stewarts that the show could have used to keep the family front and center over the years (I mean, Annie alone birthed a football team, LOL), but obviously, the interest just wasn't there. So many soaps stopped nurturing their roots in the 1980s or so.

He was an adequate (if not great) actor, but could never fully overcome his limitations, and TBH, he did not age well, which worked against him as a leading man.

Perfectly said. Why even give such a lame nod to history, when it was inaccurate AND bound to be irrelevant to most current viewers? The audience members who did know the history would only be annoyed at how much the show screwed it up, so...what was the point?

I came up with the same possible rationalization, but honestly, the audience shouldn't have to do mental gymnastics all the time to justify blatant historical gaffes. TPTB ought to do the research; it's their responsibility when they take over long-running franchises.

I was there when Frederick was born, and still watching when Christina came along and raised as Ed's daughter and Bert's granddaughter. The Rick/Blake hook-up turned my stomach, much like Craig targeting Dani on ATWT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

My problem with Rick and Phillip was that they were sort of the same person. Rick being more like AMC Tad or Phillip being more like Loving's Curtis would make them more interesting. I never cared for the casting either, although it was Grant Aleksander whom I didn't like very much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

To me Philip often had much more of an edge than Rick. I do think Rick suffered from being in Philip's shadow, and it seemed like they had no real idea what to do with the character for most of MOL's first run after they split him from Mindy (which seemed to be a popular pairing - I'm not sure why they went with Kurt instead, unless it was down to Kurt being hunkier).

I can definitely see where a viewer of the period would have found the material disgusting. 

I think ATWT even had Dani calling Craig "Daddy," which means they weren't unaware (as GL may have been, just as I doubt OLTL's '96 writers knew Cassie used to babysit for Kevin), they just wanted people to get off on the perversion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Emphasis on the work...VANISH.

      Please register in order to view this content

          I've discussed this at length in the monthly threads on the main A stories as established by Week 1...which Martin's secret was one of them. Most soaps would have an A story one week with all the B/C plots just orbitting about. BTG did that well itself in the first two/three weeks. But like I mentioned before one of the A stories (Dani/Bill/Hayley) they can't keep going to that at the moment since it was already overkill by the end of Month 1. The other one...the Silk Press storyline...was really the only one that has been well-paced in my opinion with twists, turns, and builds...including subplots and near-misses. But that was not going to explode before May Sweeps. So that left Martin's secret...which as I said...started off well. I loved how it started with Martin having problems sleeping, but NO images. Then we got sounds. THEN we started to get images. And NOW those images are getting more established. But before we got all that, his storyline...which has been established to be a main one...vanished for a month and a half. While it worked for the storyline since Month 2 gave Martin (and Brandon Clayborn to grow) time to be more established...along with his family...the story of his secret could have also been a story that had a nice slow burn (which I love) to the show while having the other B/C plots orbitting it. Again, not mad at it since it allowed the audience to learn more about Martin and his family life. It also allowed for other B/C plots to grow on the audience. I also think the story development for that A story might have suffered from the writers still trying to find a rhythm that works for this show.   In any case, I also said that I felt they might go old school soap in May. And by old school I meant as an A story is climaxing, the writers take another story that will be the next one and start to build it up again, while also starting another plot as a C plot. And right now, we have the SilkPress storyline climaxing while Martin's nightmares (with images) have finally started to come back into play. I mentioned when I saw the promos of Martin vs Ted that hopefully the reveal would trigger Martin to the point that we FINALLY get to see what he did. So far...how Martin's been acting since the reveal, being so triggered, I still feel that is how we will see how things happened...allowing the next A story to finally take off.    Fingers crossed.   
    • You know what? After all the men she's been with dying, it's only appropriate that she try her hand with women. Only then will she discover how much of a curse she is when it comes to relationships. Of course, I don't think the show would go there, but if they do, I wonder how Carly would react to her daughter being with Robin's.
    • If I'm not mistaken, much of this took place while Claire Labine was writing LOL -- and believe me, it was a very compelling show!  Probably the best soap on the air during Labine's short tenure as head-writer.  I assume Labine left LOL to create Ryan's Hope in 1975, but much of the action your describe seems to be her work.  Not sure why -- maybe some dates are off.
    • Felicia and Rachel were suddenly represented as friends when Mitch came back to Bay City in 1986 in order to try to add tension to the storyline of Mitch and Felicia getting together. I suppose we are lucky that Margaret DePriest didn't eliminate Felicia as she did Quinn and Maisie for being outside the "core families" of McKinnon/Love/Cory.   Felicia was more antagonistic when she was first introduced. She brought Carl to town not knowing he was Donna's ex. She was carrying on an affair with Cass while he was sneaking around with Cecile behind her back and was livid with him when she found out. She was resentful when Cass signed Julia to Winthrop Publishing. She was friendly with Lily though IIRC.     
    • Just coming to comment about Joss and I see there is some conversation. I want to know what's with the subtle "moments" between Joss and Emma. I've been noticing it, but maybe I'm just overthinking it. 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • In regards to Sam and Amanda... both of them were immature and crappy people.  She was a spoiled daddy's girl while he had a chip on his shoulder.  Both were stubborn and pigheaded... and I'm thankful I've resisted wearing the 2025 lens of assuming women are empowering and men are toxic.... when quite frankly both men and women could stand to be a little less toxic (in real life, of course).. not on my soaps where toxicity should be the norm.
    • I'm copying and pasting the entire post because, while I enjoyed the watch, I agree with every single one of your points (as I posted above I thought the dialogue tried for clever sophistication without sounding realistic throughout, in fact.)
    • I've just been over Josslyn since her corn costume on Halloween, putting her into a "leading lady" kind of position, simply because she is Carly's daughter, all while backburning other children is annoying AF.
    • Hilarious that Steffy just barges into Brooke's house to see Hope without knocking. Ridge bought it, so I guess she feels she's entitled to.
    • Joss is nowhere near the top of my list to keep currently.  I just wouldn't kill her off and consider bringing her back sometime down the line.  I guess it depends on how well the show is able to develop the next generation of talent with Rocco, Danny, Georgie, etc.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy