Jump to content

As The World Turns Discussion Thread


edgeofnik

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Some stuff from Marland's bible

My intention with Clem's introduction (along with using his presence to great advantage in Lily's story) was to introduce a struggling, lower income family of Holdens as a much needed contrast to the upper middle class family units that now dominate the tapestry of ATWT. Since we must assume that the more rural areas that surround Oakdale would certainly include farms and their farmers (and since to my knowledge there's no such family existing on other daytime dramas), I feel the contribution such a family might make to the overall canvas of our series, would be invaluable. In my final notes you will see the list of existing characters I would suggest writing out and my reasons for their exodus. This would afford us the opportunity (and budget) to bring in the Holdens and the added richness to existing storylines I see them contributing strongly to. I don't suggest we suddenly flood the screen with several new characters, but rather introduce them as needed, always keeping other family members and close friends alive off screen as possible antagonists or protagonists for future story complications. In looking carefully at the Hughes family unit, Lisa, Brian, Barbara, certainly Lucinda and her brood, there seems to be no representation of the "have nots" in our society who want the comfort and financial ease that is represented by our more affluent, successful characters. Clem of course is one of those "have nots" who can make a dramatic and sexy contribution to the Lily/Dusty storyline, but I feel the gradual introduction of other members of the Holden clan are necessary in time to allow us to understand Clem better by learning more of his background. I urge your consideration of this point, believing it would add realism to the series and broaden its audience appeal.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • DRW50

    2970

  • DramatistDreamer

    1958

  • Soapsuds

    1716

  • P.J.

    823

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

 

Interesting. So at what point was the last name changed to Snyder I wonder. It's hard to believe there were no other rural characters on other soaps at this time. I thought there were some on Another World. I didn't watch AW but weren't the Frames lower class, and didn't Sharlene Frame live on a farm?

 

I'd like to see his list of people he was writing off. Did he change his mind on any of those? What possible reason could he have given for writing Maggie, Frank and baby Jill off? There was so much they could have done with them. Plus it was nice having a female attorney on a soap since they were rare in daytime, especially in the 80s.

 

He did flood the canvas with newbies. By the end of 85 he'd added Holden, Emma and Iva (Meg would appear the second week of January 86), plus there was Harriet Corbman and all those characters for the Doug Cummings mystery. And he had Tonio in the wings to complicate Craig and Sierra's relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

About a decade ago, Tom Casiello had a blog that looked at Marland's bible. His bible only referenced two new characters: Doug Cummings and Clem Holden. He discussed writing out Maggie, Frank, Jay, Heather Dalton, and Cal Randolph, all of whom were written out. He also discussed writing out Paul and Andy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Well he did write out Paul in 85. In those newspaper synopses it says that Barbara sent Paul away to a boarding school. Obviously done to age him off camera. He came back in time for James' return from the dead in late 86. I don't know about Andy-- did they age him/recast him too?

 

I still think it was a mistake to write out Maggie, as she was connected to Lyla and Lyla's brood. Even though the bible only mentioned Clem Holden there is the comment that Marland planned to bring in the rest of that family. And he wasted no time doing that. Holden was introduced in mid-October 85 and Emma and Iva were on screen the first week of November, with Meg appearing two months later in the new year.

 

Today a headwriter would not be able to write out someone like Heather Dalton. A token minority character would not get cut. She might experience a reduction in screen time but she would not get fired. I agree that Cal Randolph had run his course by this point and was deadwood. Ditto for Jay.

Edited by JarrodMFiresofLove
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'd like to read the bibles of subsequent headwriters who justified the removal of some of Marland's characters, especially those Snyders who were written out (like Iva and Caleb). And how they justified re-building the Snyders around cousin Jack and his brother Brad.

 

Also I'd really like to see the memos where they decided to let Patricia Bruder go. Getting rid of a historic character like Ellen Stewart was a big thing, but they did it sort of quietly. I am sure their reason was budget and lack of story ideas for her. And it would be interesting to know how they decided to kill Hal off instead of continuing with one of Ben Hendrickson's replacements, after his suicide. All those interesting behind-the-scenes things that we can only speculate about.

Edited by JarrodMFiresofLove
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Marland talked in his bible about introducing characters slowly... yet within weeks of starting, he floods the show with the Snyders and isolating them to a farm instead of a working class section of Oakdale.  And I never bought spoiled princess Lily willingly wanting to go to a farm, even spending the night there countless times... it just never rang true.  Now if the 1st actress playing Lily was still playing the part, I would have bought it because the actress played Lily more like a town boy than Martha did.. who played Lily as an over dramatic teen princess that seemed happily at a country club than on a farm.

 

What was his reason for writing Maggie/Frank out of the show?  

 

And watching the show a pre-teen in the early 90s, I understood why Iva was written out since her story seemed to be complete once she married and left to start life anew.. same with Seth/Angel.  Some characters have a shorter shelf life than other characters.. and writers sometimes don't recognize that.  I think even Marland recognized that hence why he had mentioned the Kasnoff clan in his future outlines before he passed away.. since I think even he knew the Snyders shelf life was coming to an end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

The Snyders' shelf life was extended by Jack. If not for Jack (and Brad), Holden would have just been absorbed into Lily and Lucinda's world with their kids and the Snyder farm as a setting would likely have been dropped.

 

I agree that Martha's version of Lily wanting to hang out at the farm was contrived. If anything it should have been the other way around-- characters like Meg and Ellie wanting to get off the farm and spend the night in town.

 

When Marland makes the show more business-based in 1989 and after, he really gets away from the whole idea of the have nots. By that point, Holden has married Emily then Lily and has come into money. Ellie has married Kirk and come into money. Iva's got a good job at the hospital and involved with John who has money. Meg's married Josh and isn't Josh working for Cal Stricklyn, which means they have money. And Emma was selling books and involved with Ned Simon who had money. Seth was an author and making money and living in New York.

 

The only character in the family that did not become well-off was Caleb who was a working class policeman. So for the most part Marland had upgraded the Snyders financially. Within a five year period they were far removed from anything related to rural poverty or rural hardship.

Edited by JarrodMFiresofLove
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I wouldn't say Marland got away from the concept of "have nots". Yes, in the '90's, Emma's eternal farm struggles quit being a plot, but there were other people introduced---the Hutchinsons, the kids of the Earl Mitchell Center, Julie, Duke, Jess' family who felt like she "got out" and left them behind, Hal's Kentucky roots, etc. Granted they may not have "invaded" Oakdale ala the Snyders, but it was a more balanced show than the herd of doctor/lawyers at the beginning of the '80's.

 

And I still rankle at it being called an "invasion" of Snyders. Yes, Emma, Holden, Iva and Meg were introduced in the first four months of Marland's tour. Seth appears from 86-88 (and returns from 91-94), but Caleb and Ellie show up in 88 and Meg leaves in early 89. I'm sure you could point to numerous families (ala the Montgomerys or McColl's) who showed up in a similar roll out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Well, I don't know about that.  Y&R continues to add token POC characters and give them marginal story before unceremoniously writing them out.  The Michaelsons and Jordan Wilde immediately come to mind.  The only difference is that with Y&R's recent characters, they were attached to core families but in all honesty the Winters have never fully occupied screen time the way that the Newmans and the Abbotts do.

 

 

That's the one realistic thing about the Snyders.  Marginalized people like low income and many minorities tend to be fairly well, marginalized in the U.S., except for working spaces.  Even in working class sections of a town or cities there is an invisible "red line" that people are relegated to.  In the beginning where Holden only interacted with the Walshes at work, through the stables...that was a dose of reality.  Where the soap opera fantasy comes in is where Lily crosses that line by walking into the Snyder house (muddy shoes and all).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Jack/Brad should never have been introduced... the Snyders were finally gone by the mid 90s and it felt like heaven.  

 

I'll probably be slammed for saying this.. but when the show had the all female 50th special... I thought Emma was out of place and didn't belong.  It was fine with the other six.. and it just symbolized how Marland and future writers kept trying to keep the Snyder family going past their expiration date. 

 

Yeah, it would have made more sense for Meg to buddy up to Lily.. and want to venture to the Walsh Mansion.. and to hob nob with all the rich teens that Lily knew... over Lily wanting to spend all her time at the Snyder Farm.

 

And the isolation would have still worked if the Snyders were on the poor side of Oakdale... but I guess Marland wanted to have a throwback to how the Hughes family started out as a farm family until Chris H made the break from that life to live in the big city.  I guess perhaps having the Snyders realize that the farm is too much for them to handle and to have them sell to a corporate entity thus becoming more middle class would have been more realistic given the farm crisis in real life in the late 80s/90s where small family farms were being eaten by corporate farming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I do think there was a desire (in Marland) to achieve what the show had previously left behind, part of the soap's origin story of an agrarian farming family. 

When ATWT began, the Hughes family had all but completely abandoned the farm, even Pa Hughes was struggling to adjust to live 'in town'.  Marland likely was fascinated in showing what life might have been like for an agrarian Hughes family in the Snyder clan.  I'm not mad at that but there were some problems for a rural family being dramatized on a daytime soap and that is the isolation involved and we know on soaps, characters generally are most effective when they mix it up with lots of other characters on the canvas.  This is probably why the Snyders became somewhat incestuous, in a matter of speaking (fun parlor game is to count the number of Snyders who shared the same partners).

 

Roy's family lived in Oakdale and they were definitely isolated, so much so that when they once tried to have Roy's parents mingle at the Mona Lisa, presumably to attend Nella and Meg's graduating party (from the nursing program), it felt contrived and I kept thinking that it was a nice attempt but Nella's parents looked out of place.

I think the Franklin's could've been better, ahem, integrated onto the canvas but that would've involved more screen time.  For example, Roy's father Leonard (yes, I remember his name, lol) was a bus driver for Oakdale's transit department and there were characters like Meg, who supposedly frequently took the bus to get into Oakdale.  There could've been a scene (or more) where Meg is riding into town, presumably, at a time when she wasn't supposed to be, lied about here comings and goings when Leonard inadvertently mentions her being at the bus as a certain time of day to Iva or Holden or some family member who he's likely to run into in town.  That could've been the beginning of making more connections among other characters, as a start anyway.

 

There are ways of connecting characters but it would involve spreading screen time out among more characters and soap fans can sometimes me averse to this.

Marland with his tendencies to concentrate storylines among certain characters, was still one of the more judicious storytellers in terms of how many characters he tended to incorporate into his stories.  I've seen headwriters who were far more stingy with what/how many of their characters got meaty stories on soaps.

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I agree with this. I couldn't put my finger on it at the time but I think you're right. I just chalked it up to the theme that all those women had once been involved with John-- but I never felt that Emma would have ever caught John's eye. That was Marland trying to make the Snyders relevant and connecting them to one of the show's iconic legacy characters like John Dixon. So when they included Emma in that anniversary episode it reminded me of how forced the Emma-John relationship felt when I first watched it in the 80s.

*****

Speaking of Roy's family, how many Franklins were there shown on screen? I can't even remember the mother's name. The party at the Mona Lisa to celebrate Nella's graduation from nursing played up the fact that Nella was friends with Pam Wagner who had also just graduated from the nursing program at Oakdale Memorial.

Edited by JarrodMFiresofLove
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

    • If Betty Rea was the casting director, why was so much of GL during JFP's reign cast by her? Walker, Deas, Crampton, Lando, etc. JFP takes credit for Dusay as well. What is the point of having a casting director, if you don't let her do her job? What happened when Rea left? 
    • So much on here slips my mind but this is the first I remember hearing of Peterson's passing. Very sad. Nell was a thankless role, clearly set up for a cheating storyline with Frank, but Peterson did her best.  Betty Rea Rea was the casting director for the soap opera “Guiding Light” from 1970 to 1996 and simultaneously the casting director for “As the World Turns” from 1979 to 1983.
    • Sorry, just one more post on the Thorntons. How did Ruth and Edna feel about each other prior to Tad dating Dotty?
    • I can't remember exactly but I think it may be 1995 as Jake was trying to hide from a loan shark.
    • I also wonder if it was considered controversial at the time to show a morally corrupt doctor?(another character troupe for Agnes Nixon, the upstanding male citizen who is hiding secrets back at home) Up until the early 1970s, prime-time would very rarely tell stories about the private lives of doctors, because advertisers tended to shy away from such content. @robbwolff -- so is this wrong that Ruth dated David before marrying Joe?  Dr. David Thornton is a fictional character from the ABC daytime soap opera All My Children, portrayed by Paul Gleason from 1976 to 1978.  He was introduced as a respected physician in Pine Valley, presenting himself as a widower to his colleagues at the hospital. This facade, however, concealed a darker truth: his wife, Edna Thornton, was alive, and he was leading a double life. David’s character is defined by manipulation and secrecy, as he maintained a carefully curated public image while engaging in deceitful and criminal behavior in his personal life. His relationships were marked by control and betrayal, particularly in his marriage to Edna and his romantic entanglements with other women. David’s charm and professional status allowed him to navigate Pine Valley’s social circles, but his actions revealed a calculating and ruthless nature. Career David was a doctor at Pine Valley Hospital, where he was well-regarded by his peers for his medical expertise. His professional life provided him with a veneer of respectability, which he exploited to mask his personal misdeeds. However, his career was not a central focus of his storyline; instead, it served as a backdrop to his personal schemes. His position at the hospital gave him access to resources, such as the drug digitalis, which he later used in his attempt to murder his wife. David’s professional life unraveled as his criminal actions came to light, tarnishing his reputation in the medical community. Personal Relationships and Family David’s family and romantic relationships were fraught with tension and deception, shaping much of his narrative arc: Edna Thornton (Wife): David was married to Edna Thornton, with whom he had a daughter, Dottie. To his colleagues, he claimed Edna was deceased, allowing him to pursue other relationships without suspicion. In reality, David was plotting to kill Edna, motivated by his desire to be free of her and possibly to gain financial or personal freedom. He began poisoning her with digitalis, a heart medication, which caused her to experience heart pains. Edna was unaware of David’s true intentions until after his death, when the truth about his poisoning scheme was revealed. Dottie Thornton (Daughter): David and Edna’s daughter, Dottie Thornton, was a significant character in All My Children. Portrayed by Dawn Marie Boyle (1977–1980) and later Tasia Valenza (1982–1986), Dottie was raised primarily by Edna. David’s neglectful and manipulative behavior extended to his daughter, as he showed little genuine care for her well-being. Dottie’s life was impacted by her father’s actions, particularly after his death, when Edna became a wealthy widow. Dottie later married Thaddeus “Tad” Martin in 1985, though their marriage ended in divorce in 1986, and she suffered the loss of an unborn child with Tad. Ruth Parker (Fiancée, 1976): David was engaged to Ruth Parker in 1976, furthering his pattern of deceit since he was still married to Edna. His engagement to Ruth, who was also involved with Jeff Martin, highlighted David’s willingness to manipulate romantic partners for his own gain. The engagement did not lead to marriage, as David’s true intentions and double life began to surface. Christina “Chris” Karras (Lover, 1978): In 1978, David began a romantic relationship with Dr. Christina “Chris” Karras, a fellow physician. This affair added another layer of complexity to his web of lies, as Chris was unaware of his marriage to Edna and his poisoning scheme. After David’s death, Chris was initially accused of his murder due to their relationship and her access to medical resources. However, Jeff Martin’s investigation cleared her name by proving David’s death was caused by his own actions. Parents: David’s parents are unnamed in the source material, and both are noted as deceased. No further details are provided about their influence on his life or their role in his backstory. Death David Thornton’s death in 1978 was a dramatic and fitting conclusion to his villainous arc, brought about by his own treachery. Intent on killing Edna to escape their marriage, David had been secretly administering digitalis to her, causing her heart issues. In a twist of fate, their daughter, Dottie, innocently switched Edna’s drink with David’s during one of his poisoning attempts. Unaware that the drink was laced with a lethal dose of digitalis, David consumed it and suffered a fatal heart attack. His death was initially investigated as a possible murder, with Chris Karras as the prime suspect due to her relationship with David and her medical knowledge. However, Dr. Jeff Martin conducted a toxicology screen on David’s body, which revealed that the digitalis poisoning was the cause of both Edna’s heart pains and David’s death. This evidence exonerated Chris and exposed David’s plan to kill his wife, cementing his legacy as a tragic and self-destructive figure. Impact and Legacy David Thornton’s storyline, though relatively short-lived (1976–1978), was impactful due to its intensity and the ripple effects on other characters. His death left Edna a wealthy widow, altering her and Dottie’s circumstances and setting the stage for further drama, including Edna’s manipulation by conman Ray Gardner. David’s actions also strained relationships among other Pine Valley residents, particularly through his engagement to Ruth Parker and affair with Chris Karras, which intersected with Jeff Martin’s storyline. His character exemplified the classic soap opera archetype of a charming yet duplicitous villain whose downfall is precipitated by his own hubris. Additional Notes Portrayal: Paul Gleason’s performance as David Thornton brought a compelling intensity to the role, making the character memorable despite his brief tenure. Gleason’s ability to portray both charm and menace suited David’s dual nature as a respected doctor and a scheming husband. Storyline Context: David’s arc occurred during the early years of All My Children, a period when the show focused on intricate personal dramas and moral dilemmas. His poisoning plot and double life were emblematic of the show’s penchant for high-stakes interpersonal conflict. Lack of Additional Family Details: Beyond Edna and Dottie, no other family members (such as siblings or extended relatives) are mentioned in the source material, limiting the scope of his familial connections. Conclusion Dr. David Thornton was a multifaceted antagonist in All My Children, whose life was marked by professional success, personal deception, and a fatal miscalculation. As a doctor, he wielded authority and respect, but his secret plan to murder his wife, Edna, revealed a cold and calculating core. His relationships with Edna, Dottie, Ruth Parker, and Chris Karras were defined by manipulation, and his death by accidental self-poisoning was a poetic end to his schemes. David’s legacy in Pine Valley lived on through Edna’s newfound wealth and Dottie’s subsequent storylines, making him a pivotal figure in the show’s early narrative. His story remains a classic example of soap opera drama, blending betrayal, tragedy, and retribution.
    • The only blonde I see is one of the actual women staring at first & then screaming & running later.  DAYS: Vivian's manservant Ivan is in a long curly red wig. 

      Please register in order to view this content

      Y&R: long straight black wig is the actor Peter Barton whose character name I am blanking on.   
    • I very much liked office Cleary and the actress who portrayed her (as you say, Mary Peterson).  A shame her turn didn't evolve into a contract role.   BTW, does anyone know the timeframe/years that Betty Rae served as casting director?  If i understand correctly, she not only led the effort for contract roles, but also for shorter 13- and 26-week roles.  IMO, GL had LOTS of very well-casted, limited roles, too. I'm surprised the actors throughout the soap industry, and especially P&G actors, have not assembled a book or something similar, praising Rae.  Each actor could write a few paragraphs or a page of text describing his or her experience.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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