Members You're Soaking in it Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 Being a response to a response, I'm not sure if that traces back to my previous comments. I just want it to be a clear that I was in no way defending her or making excuses for her comments. When I said she was a nice person, I was referring to her demeanor at that time several years ago. I think she what she wrote just now is not nice at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vee Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 Quote of the year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members You're Soaking in it Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 Notice that even though she's claimed to have washed her hands of soaps (pardon the unintentional pun), she still refers to them in her bio? It's been 8 years since she last worked for a soap magazine - and hasn't really had anything to do with them since. What's interesting is that there are two sides to that circumstance - of being let go or quitting a soap magazine. There are those who reveal that they never liked soaps in the first place; that the experience was "beneath" them. Then there are those who are convinced they are royalty to the soap opera genre - and that everyone else - fans included - should bow to them. (I'm not referring to the Mimi Torchins and Connie Passalacquas out there - whom I consider infinitely envaluable to the medium.) I agree that underneath the surface, it's all about not being too happy with your current state of affairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TC Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 Just curious, does the article cause you to reconsider your previous opinion of her? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members You're Soaking in it Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 I'm not sure how to answer that since I didn't have a positive opinion of her to begin with: Her work was lazy and too often it fell on other people. She didn't care and that was obvious. My opinion of her has become a whole lot worse, if that's what you mean. Now I more clearly see her attitude, though. Stephanie Akner (that was her name) seems to still have issues with her experience. I admit I have my own gripes here and there about the way some people handled themselves in difficult times. But I wouldn't trade the experience for the world! "Taffy" was presented with so much opportunity in her role, and was turning her nose up to it. Reading this piece, I believe SHE didn't feel good enough for where she was. It obviously sticks with her that she was fired; I imagine that hurts her quite a bit. At least that's what I get from the article - which, ironically, isn't what she wants the reader to take from it. I'm sorry that she had such disrespect for soap viewers and actors. That, in some subtextual way, probably came through in her writing. She never should have been working there in the first place. There were other people out there who would have really appreciated having a job like hers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vee Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 How bad do you have to be to get fired from the soap press? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LoyaltoAMC Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 Besides being a poorly written, unenlightening article, I find it disturbing that she includes bisexuality with depression and infidelity as "ugly truth about the actors." Don't mean to get all PC, but I find that insulting. Who is this woman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members You're Soaking in it Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 If you think that everyone who ever wrote for the soap press is "bad," then whatever answer I offer to your question probably won't satisfy you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 Nelsonella Brankman von Krapping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vee Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 You'd be surprised. I don't feel they are all bad but there is no denying that at least in the last twenty years, their professional standards have grown quite low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members You're Soaking in it Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 I think her wrapping those things together is probably more an indication of how poorly and disrespectfully she communicates in her writing. The "bisexuality" you mention is really about actors who are having homosexual relationships while presenting to the public a heterosexual orientation. That was weird for me to observe, too. But that's a whole other subject! Who is she? As big a nobody as I am! The difference is that I loved what I was doing and certainly have no regrets about it. She probably finds her article cathartic, attempting to put down soaps to elevate herself. She wouldn't even be writing for webzine had it not been for her soap mag experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members You're Soaking in it Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 I only half-disagree with you, Vee. I think it all started nosediving about a decade ago. But there were people doing their best to hang in there and give readers the intelligence and respect they deserved. The person who manages Weekly now, the last of its originators, is a class act who genuinely cares for this industry. However, there's an entity above her that ultimately controls what comes out of that magazine. There is no question that the magazines, overall, aren't nearly as insightful or objective as they were before. That isn't entirely the fault of the editors... Some editors (like the ones who are "Star-effers"), yes, have contributed to the downslide. But I think there are many out there who really had passion and talent for covering soaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members soapfan770 Posted December 16, 2009 Members Share Posted December 16, 2009 I wonder if Taffy will soil herself at Marlena De Lacroix's aka Marlenadlc lovely comments. Sad thing is, I recognize Taffy's name from 10 years ago too and it doesn't surprise me that she was fired/laid off/involuntarily resigned. Here she prides herself for her screenwriting degree poohs poohs journalism majors yet her own damn screenwriting career never happened. Speaking as a history writer myself this article serves as an example of a failed and bitter writer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members koos Posted December 17, 2009 Members Share Posted December 17, 2009 "The shows I was responsible for covering were As the World Turns and Another World (this as a result of an editor who didn’t like me much, for these were the days without DVRs, and both shows aired simultaneously)." Hello, VCRs? I used to record three TV shows at the same time. This is just whiny and retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TC Posted December 17, 2009 Members Share Posted December 17, 2009 Oh yes. She's still eating those sour grapes, it seems. Between the lines I read a lot of excuses for her own sense of failure. A true soap mind would have spared herself the embarrassment of writing for a soap publication by letting an alter do it. Oh wait. She did. Or is "Taffy" the alter? That whole article is about her, what she sneers at, and nothing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.