Members Khan Posted November 4, 2012 Members Share Posted November 4, 2012 Frankly, I don't think any reason, even bipolar disorder, would suffice in this particular situation. If anything, Sharon's is a cautionary tale for all writers to really "listen" to the characters and make sure each decision you make for them doesn't put them in the corner that Sharon is in now. I realize it isn't fair to Sharon Case, but -- hey -- actors aren't in it for the job security, know what I mean? They've written Sharon past the point of redemption, IMO, and the only right thing to do now would be either death or an indefinite (and offscreen) stay at a sanitarium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted November 4, 2012 Members Share Posted November 4, 2012 Now, what I might go for would be Sharon dying, and then Noah exhibiting irregular behavior that leads to him being diagnosed as bipolar. But I'm just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted November 4, 2012 Members Share Posted November 4, 2012 But when other characters on the show have done just as many bad things and past the point of redemption themselves (Adam, Victor, and Phyllis namely), it becomes a moot point. This show is filled with b!tches who I think are not worth the redemption effort at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Juliajms Posted November 5, 2012 Members Share Posted November 5, 2012 Well, I think it's fair if the writers wanted to get rid of Sharon Newman for good. I'm just saying that asking Sharon Case to wait around 6 months without pay and then expecting her to be there to pick up where they left off six months later isn't fair. They are two very different things. I don't think it's going to be an issue though because I can't see the writers taking that kind of risk with a character that has received so much investment over the years. She really has been the next gen Nikki and I say that as someone who is pretty ambivalent about Sharon Newman. I've gone on hate rants about this character on other boards, although I have respect for Sharon Case as a daytime actress. I see Sharon Case as a pretty good sport overall. I sort of like Sharon Newman as the unhinged bitch she's been lately, so I like the idea of the writers having an excuse to unleash that side of her now and then when she goes off her meds. I've only known a few people with a bi polar diagnosis over the years, but choosing to go off their meds seems to be part of the illness, so at least having her relapse would be pretty realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Skin Posted November 5, 2012 Members Share Posted November 5, 2012 She doesn't really need one. Sharon has only been "off" for a couple of years. I don't think she needs to go threw a gradual redemption arc honestly, her crimes are minuscule compared to that of the rest in the town and she always just seemed to be off her rocker rather then needlessly cruel. This would suffice for giving a reason why it happened and excuse the behavior she has exhibited which was not in character regardless. Overall she is being said to be not of her right mind and not healthy from circa 2009 onward. This is also inline with the fact that Sharon has been hospitalized before too. This story ultimately is pretty much all about creating a reset button to the real person Sharon is and who she was before MAB and co. decimated her character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted November 5, 2012 Members Share Posted November 5, 2012 For me it's not about her crimes as much as bizarre, disturbing behavior which was never explained, other than the show repeatedly blaming Cassie's death and then trying to say she'd been saved by true love. I'm still waiting to hear when and why she started stealing - they gave three or four different, random explanations. Sharon just became a plot device, and a blow-up doll. If they're still having her story revolve around Adam, then that isn't going to be fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted November 6, 2012 Members Share Posted November 6, 2012 Not necessarily. Sharon is past the point of redemption, and so are a bunch more characters, including the ones you've listed above. Sharon needs to go, and so do they. Will they? No. Is it reasonable to expect the writers to write them out? No. But it doesn't change my mind about any of them, nor does it change my opinion that sweeping their past crimes under the old rug or explaining away past, regretful story decisions through behavioral diagnoses or other means only eats away at the show's foundation and integrity in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted November 6, 2012 Members Share Posted November 6, 2012 On the other hand, from this point forward, whenever the writers need her to do something plot-dictated and un-Sharon-like (which, let's face it, will be often, since I think we're way past the point of her being relevant to this show), they could take the lazy simple way out and say, "Oh, don't mind her, she's just off her meds right now!". To me, that's about as bad as explaining away some heinous things OLTL's Viki did over the years (like murder Johnny Dee) as being, in fact, the action(s) of one of her many alters; and frankly, it's just as reprehensible and mocking of those out there with serious issues and problems. Say what you will about "Robin From the Block" Strasser, but she makes a good point: these shows need to be concerned first and foremost about what they're sending into people's homes; and somehow, I just can't see this story as saying anything more than "ret-con excuse" and "Bipolar = Crazy. As. Hell." Which is tragic, especially for a once-responsible show like Y&R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted November 6, 2012 Members Share Posted November 6, 2012 DeeeDee: "Yes, she does." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Juliajms Posted November 6, 2012 Members Share Posted November 6, 2012 I used to feel that way, but I don't anymore. I feel like it's the job of these shows to entertain me, not to teach me anything. If I stop liking what they send into my home enough, I'll stop watching. Why do some people worry about the "messages" soaps send out, but not the ones shows like "Breaking Bad" send out? I don't want or need my TV shows to send me or anyone else messages. It's a pretty condescending notion when you think about who's in charge of these shows. I mean, really, who was MAB or Cartini to send anyone messages or to send anything except entertainment into our homes? No one, as far as I'm concerned. That said, if people want to say this story isn't going to be entertaining, well, I agree that's very possible. I think the chances are very high it's going to suck. At the very least I expect Sharon's bi-polar to be like Adam's blindness. Something the writers eventually decide is too inconvenient to keep up with, so they simple "cure" her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted November 6, 2012 Members Share Posted November 6, 2012 I worry about the messages those shows are sending out as well. That's why I don't watch 'em. But I watch soaps -- that is, I used to watch soaps -- because they were the only form of scripted entertainment that emphasized redemption and retribution without being overtly preachy or condescending. Of course, times have changed, soaps are as ugly as everything else out there, and I watch only so I have something to snark about on boards with terrific guys like y'all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.