Members Dana Posted December 20, 2011 Members Share Posted December 20, 2011 Remember too, this was the mid to late 60s, not the 30s, 40s, or even 50s. Racism still existed and still does exist, but it wasn't anywhere near as bad or life threatening as earlier times, and Ellen was there into the 80s. So I think she probably could have pushed more for things she wanted without having to fear for her life or her career. On the other hand, soap actors in general have never been treated well, and it's been pretty obvious that minority characters and performers have been ignored quite often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted December 20, 2011 Members Share Posted December 20, 2011 As far as I know, Agnes Nixon never gave even a Black villain a ridiculous and stereotypical "street name," like Mookie, or Jazz, or Bobby Blue. (Yeah, I mock "Tyrone," but one of the leading actors of all time also was named Tyrone. Better that, I guess, than Sugar Hill Guthrie.) And for a woman who once named a man "Seabone," that says a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted December 20, 2011 Members Share Posted December 20, 2011 Not if those Bryan and Claudia / Simone and Tom fans have anything to say about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members R Sinclair Posted December 20, 2011 Members Share Posted December 20, 2011 On second thought... never mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted January 6, 2012 Members Share Posted January 6, 2012 Khan hasn't been around lately, but there was a post over at Daytime Confidential which reminded me of some of the debates over Y&R and race. I have felt like the show has pretty much shunned black characters since Rauch came in (and it hasn't changed much since he left). I would be hypocritical to say I agree with all this when I often haven't agreed with Jamey Giddens, but I thought it was an interesting read. http://daytimeconfidential.zap2it.com/2012/01/06/harmony-refers-to-phyllis-as-miss-phyllis-on-thursdays-the-young-and-the-restless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NorrthCafe Posted January 6, 2012 Members Share Posted January 6, 2012 I would be less bothered by EH's story if it were the case that the ill treatment is how she started out... but in more than a decade, things didn't really change for her. It's incomprehensible to me that as things were changing (slowly) in prime time, they weren't changing very much at all in daytime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SFK Posted January 7, 2012 Members Share Posted January 7, 2012 Hm. What is Harmony's relationship with Phyllis? If she knows her to be a handful, I could see the line being written with the intent that "Miss Phyllis" was delivered more playfully, i.e., "Miss Thing" wink wink/knowing glance. "Miss" is also cultural/regional/age appropriate. That said, I have never known any of my black relatives to refer to a younger woman as "Miss" unless said lovingly to a little girl who was a relative or close friend, e.g., "Well hello Miss Elise, don't you look cute in your pink patent leather shoes..." Given Hamony's background and own insecurities about her "status", in her case, "Miss" may very well be her unnecessary/unwarranted show of respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted January 7, 2012 Members Share Posted January 7, 2012 I re-read WLS Tim Stickney's interview. The only thing that changed in daytime was that the dwindling daytime audience got more accepting. "I don't need black/Latino/gay characters, I just need "good" characters." (Because by definition minority characters aren't good.). "Why should I be outraged that there aren't any black/Latino/gay characters? What about Asians? Nobody is fighting for them!" (So if the show won't write for one minority group, it shouldn't bother to write for any?!) "Soaps need to concentrate on the core/legacy characters instead of newbies no one cares about!" (How many of those core/legacy characters started out as newbies?) And finally... "SAVE OUR SOAPS!" (They aren't our soaps. they're your soaps. Save them yourselves.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted January 7, 2012 Members Share Posted January 7, 2012 To me, she says it in a slightly mocking tone - eg, Phyllis is the big boss. I would like to believe they would have anyone who worked under Phyllis saying it that way. Unfortunately, the writing for her character seems to be some type of parody of a Good Times neighbor, so it's difficult to tell. The writing for Y&R in the last few years has given the impression that the extent of interaction between the writers/producers and minorities is a screening of Crash. I imagine MAB hugging a Latino servant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DeeeDee Posted January 7, 2012 Members Share Posted January 7, 2012 And giving them a clock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted January 7, 2012 Members Share Posted January 7, 2012 This attitude is so pervasive in general and it drives me crazy. The Huffington Post just had an article about how, even with all the gay characters we are starting to get in Hollywood movies, they never have romantic storylines, or sex scenes (it was instigated I think by the new NC17 movie Shame about a sex addict which has full on very graphic sex in nearly every scene except when the main character ends up sleeping with a man where it tactfully fades to black before anything can be shown--the movie is a pretentious mess BTW). A lot fo the comments in reply that were negative basically said "Why are you complaining? Hollywood isn't filled with romances and love scenes for Asians either and I don't hear them complaining..." WHich just goes to IMHO actually further make the original point (while at the same time completely missing the point). With soaps in general--and this has been pointed out on here many times--it's ironic that as soap ratings dwindled from the mid 90s, let's say to give a random date, the soaps started focusing less on minorities (in general) than they had since the 70s (maybe even earlier if we count OLTL and AMC). And ratings fell further, it's amazing that with all the people the networks have apparently hired to tell them how to gain more viewers, nobody notices a correlation there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted January 7, 2012 Members Share Posted January 7, 2012 Well, ABC did whine that they tried with the telenovela element on AMC; basically admitting the Castillos were tokens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted January 7, 2012 Members Share Posted January 7, 2012 I hate to even write this because it screams of precisely "blame the victim", but... I do have to wonder why in the early 70s when she was getting a lot of attention and had become something of a OLTL star, she didn't sign to better management, or try to make more demands? I can't help but think *some* of her valid anger is almost towards herself for (ugh I'm gonna regret saying this) letting it happen. Show business is a ruthless business and if you're not ruthless when maneouvering it you're gonna get walked all over. When she started on the show it sounds liek she genuinely was naive, and probably also thankful to actually be getting a major role on a TV show, but,... Which is idiotic, although I will say for its last few years, no matter what people think, AMC was one of the few soaps that you could tune on and see minorites in actual storylines, and not just some side story that appears for a few scenes every two months... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted January 7, 2012 Members Share Posted January 7, 2012 Just to be fair, ABC didn't say that, Sara Saedi did in some wretched blog post. Too bad it didn't occur to her and others that part of what makes telanovelas successful is the fact that Latino characters aren't tokens. True. AMC also had the least misogyny. Unfortunately, its ratings were in the toilet which will only make it easier for certain people to blame the minorities and the lack of rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted January 7, 2012 Members Share Posted January 7, 2012 Obviously part of it was the appeal of the Hubbards, but AMC didn't backburner them (*cough* except the idiotic treatment of Frankie which was mind boggling)... As dull as much of Swajeski and Kreizman were, they weren't misogynistic (which is why I have part of an issue with Fairman saying they were the worst headwriters of the year) and seemed to be trying to write from character, although some of their stories--like Erica/Jane weren't really saved till Broderick/Nixon came in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.