As The World Turns Discussion Thread

[chrisml]

I read criticism from the soap press about Marland's second tenure on ATWT. They complained that his storylines went on too long and that he was not pacing the stories in a way to get viewers to tune in. A lot of the more vociferous criticism was aimed at the Caroline Crawford storyline which many felt went nowhere and took too long to get there (paraphrasing as I don't have the harsher comments in front of me). I read viewers' letters to the editors who also complained about how dull the show had gotten. It only got worse once he died, and then Margogate happened. 

I remember when SOW covered the Emmy race the year that ATWT won for Angel's rape. The columnist who watched the submissions said that GL had the best submissions but that voters would simply choose ATWT because of the subject matter. In another article (can't remember the magazine), a writer said it was obvious voters only gave ATWT the win for the story because they didn't even nominate Alice Haining who was the actress playing the main character of the story. 

[DRW50]

I do remember seeing a fair amount of criticism of ATWT around 1990 or 1991, although Marlena de Lacroix, IIRC, praises the show around 1991 (and points out the improvement). The Crawford story definitely got panned.

I don't know what GL's submissions were for that time but I don't really know why they had their nose in the air over ATWT getting an Emmy for that story. 

I'm not sure if they are implying that the show got an aware solely because of a rape/incest storyline; if so, I don't agree. AMC had a similar story around the same time, and it wasn't exactly racking up nominations. Genie Francis, a big star on soaps compared to Alice Haining (who should have been nominated), didn't even get a nod.

It's a very strong storyline. I went back and watched some again for the first time in a long time and there are some very ugly moments I had forgotten, moments I'm surprised even got through, like the various flashbacks Henry had to his mother controlling and abusing him. It wasn't just awards bait, the way a number of soaps treated those stories. 

[DRW50]

I don't disagree with you, but for some reason I do connect more with Marland's last years (not all of it - Rosanna, the John/Iva pairing, and yes, the therapy-speak and defanging of anyone beyond guest baddies). They seem most authentic to him and are a fascinating window, with some years-long arcs that aside from Carolyn Crawford have sizable payoffs. His first years are better soap, in many ways, certainly livelier, with a number of very strong set pieces, but they are also so Lily-heavy, plus the attempts at camp and comedy don't feel overly genuine to me. I also dislike the Margo/Tom stuff of that period more every time I try to watch it. 

That middle period, 88-90, may be the most interesting of his run, if we are analyzing, due to the producer changeover and Marland clearly struggling with where to go after the strike and a number of actor departures. 

Edited 13 hours ago by DRW50

[Contessa Donatella]

Okay, does that mean they'd vote FOR the ATWT incest/rape storyline or against it? Or does it mean they'd vote FOR whatever was on GL's reel?

[chrisml]

The columnist who watched all submissions said GL had the best submission. He said the overall material on ATWT's reel  was not as strong as GL's (but he praised Haining) but if ATWT won, it was because voters would be swayed by the topic of the storyline. The other writer pretty much said it was the rape/abuse storyline that voters chose for the win and he/she pretty much said that voters were just rubber stamping the storyline rather than watching it. I think there's some truth to voting for the subject matter because we see that in the Oscars with the documentary category where voters will select the winners based on the subject matter rather than the quality of the film. This year's winner did not even have a distributor and was hard to even locate for voters, but somehow won. Many pundits said it was because of the subject matter. In regards to ATWT v. GL, I think it's an understandable situation. If you're making a decision, you're going to feel bad if you don't put a rape/abuse storyline as number one in your rankings. 

[DRW50]

Thanks.

I do wonder how true that is for the Emmys at this time. Was there much of a history of them throwing awards at rape and abuse stories? I guess maybe GL winning in 1980, but that was for material after the rape storyline had already been on for months. They also got no writing or acting nominations at that time - no Maureen Garrett or Michael Zaslow. I also see nothing given for AMC's very strong Natalie rape storyline. Judi Evans won an Emmy for playing a rape victim, but I question whether anyone voted for her just for that reason.

I guess there was Santa Barbara, although they won three years in a row.

I'm all for calling out awards bait storylines - they are one of the main reasons I no longer watch British soaps - but I think there were other reasons for ATWT winning at that time than just this story. But I would have to go back and watch GL and ATWT or their submissions more closely to see.

Edited 12 hours ago by DRW50

[chrisml]

I wish we knew or I could find the issue that talked about the submissions. This makes me think of OLTL. When OLTL did the gang rape storyline, the main participants of the story were nominated: Haskell, Howarth, Smith, and the writers won for their work. Yet OLTL was not nominated for best show.

Getting back to ATWT at the time. It could be that voters simply chose to nominate ATWT for best show and had no idea about the Angel storyline because they didn't watch the show. That's also a possibility. Daytime emmy voters were not known for always nominating the best performances/shows of a given year because they simply did not watch the other shows.

[DRW50]

I wonder how much of the OLTL snub was down to how many people in the industry seemed to dislike Gottlieb. Marland seemed to have his share of beefs in daytime, but also seemed loved and respected by many.

[Contessa Donatella]

When Sheffer was HW at ATWT they had a year where they won for Show but got no nods for any thing else!!!!

The presumption has never been that the people voting watch the other soaps. Heck, they had trouble getting people to commit to watching submissions/reels! But, the presumption is not that you're considering the daily show. 

Also, there's always the potential for weird unexpected things to come out of changes. 

Like one year it was a new thing that they were hosting viewings. Screening rooms are basically small theatre auditoriums. Arrive, find a seat, some waiting, someone makes some announcements maybe. They turn off the lights & show soap reels. After & in between some people talked to each other, which made some people mad. When what is more likely with humans  in that setting for that  to happen. How is it no one thought people might talk to each other? If it matters the viewing should be individuals at study/library cubicles, not in small auditoriums!

 

[Khan]

I've wondered that myself.  Just as I've wondered how Gary Tomlin, of all people, was the EP who finally won the damn thing for the show, and for something as goofy as "Trading Places," or whatever the hell they called that country-ass dumb episode.

[MarlandFan]

Maybe I'm not privy to the inside workings of the Emmys process, but the 1991 Emmys was for material which aired from March of 1990 to March of 1991.  The Angel abuse storyline was in midstream in March of 1991, so I'm not certain if that story was a deciding factor for the program's win?  1990 was a banner year for ATWT: the climax of Andy's alcoholism story, Kim and Bob's marital problems and the Kim/Bob/Susan triangle, Casey's illness and Margo advocating for his right-to-die, Lucinda's lies and John's ending of their marriage. Other than the golden years of 1986-1987, I think 1990 was the highpoint of Marland's run.

But in general, the Emmy's have always been an imperfect committee.  It took them 13 years to realize the brilliance of Susan Flannery before she was finally nominated for B&B.  Kathryn Hayes was never even nominated - ever!  And for as much as he is regarded/remembered for his ATWT run, Marland never won for writing ATWT (and was nominated only 4 of the 9 years he was eligible).

[bboy875]

I remember the SOW article. The person who judged the tapes said that based on the tape submissions, in their opinion GL had the best overall submission, and while he or she found the Angel incest reveal riveting, they thought the rest of the tape was weak, and believed other judges would vote for ATWT based solely on the strength of the incest story. I think they said the GL tape had Josh and Reva, Dylan and Harley, and Roger and Holly. It may have been from the Florida Keys remote that led to Reva driving off the bridge. These votes were based only on submissions. I believe one tape was talked about, so I don't know if each submitted one or two episodes 

[Contessa Donatella]

I thought Chris was referring to that being what ATWT submitted from reading an article written by someone who had seen the reel.

[chrisml]

Thank you for providing more details. I also remember the writer commented on the color "red" being important to directorial choices in GL's submissions but I don't remember specifically what that referred to as I had not seen the episodes. 

It's so aggravating to me how it's impossible to find so much of soap opera news and history. I can request issues of TVGUIDE from my library, and I can find Soap Opera Digest occasionally, but it's so difficult to find anything from SOW or the other soap opera publications. Even when mainstream publications wrote about the soaps, you can barely find them because they're behind a paywall and you can't request them even through the library. It's maddening.

I've been trying to find info on Margogate and it's been such a struggle. 

[NothinButAttitude]