Jump to content

Retconning: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly


Recommended Posts

  • Members

 

You know, speaking of postpartum depression, I don't think too many soaps have dealt with just that subject, have they?  The only soap character that I can recall suffering from that illness was GL's Reva -- and even when it was happening, my eleven-year-old self had to ask Mama Khan if that's how all women who are pregnant and then are diagnosed with the disease behave.  (Her response: "Hell no!")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 318
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

 

But since then, there have been some accounts where some women do behave like that postpartum (Marie Osmond went crazy and took off after she had her last child.. and talked about it in length).  I think back in 1990, it was uncharted territory so people just dismissed it as over the top and plot driven.. but considering that Reva had tried to kill herself a few years before (and only climbing out of the water after hearing voices of her future children talking to her)... that it made sense for the character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

 

That may be how the show justified Laura's sudden mental problems, but it was used more for its shock value than as an examination of a serious medical issue. It think if a show tries to use mental illness as a story prop, they should still handle it responsibly. When Jack was raped on ATWT, the show treated it flippantly, and then dismissed it. The Doctors had a story about a child abuser, which TPTB decided to abandon, so the abuser just...instantly learned to control himself, and voila. End of story.  This sort of thing is careless at best and irresponsible at worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

As I noted on the OLTL board, the retconning of Cassie and Adrianna Cramer annoy me. 

 

Dorian had two daughters, that she never spoke of, kept in foreign boarding schools, and never visited?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

 I hate when young-adult, previously-unknown children appear out of nowhere. Veteran viewers can almost always point out why these newly-created characters cannot logically exist. Creating ONE faux child for an established character is bad enough, but multiple? It drives me crazy.  If writers have no betters ideas, just hand the shows over to me.

Please register in order to view this content

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I know Chloe did on DAYS after having Parker (and left him in Maggie's house with the oven on and nearly let him die of smoke inhalation as a result), but that became about her falling into prostitution with Vivian's OTHER retcon son that suddenly has ceased to exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The talk of Laura Horton reminds me of Days retcon of the reason for her being institutionilized was the affair between Bill and Kate Roberts, none of which actually  happened.

 

That sort of thing really annoys viewers who were around at that time and also tells them that TPTB don't really care about their years long devotion to the show. They're more interested in hooking in new viewers ...

 

The thing is Bill could have hooked up with Kate in the years that followed (while he was off the show)and still had Laura resent Kate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

With all due respect.. didn't Bill force himself on Laura resulting in her becoming pregnant with Mike?  Plus, didn't he also have a fling with another character also named Kate?  So it isn't as if he was an angel, so I figure this plot twist actually would have worked if the timing occurred post Laura being sent to the mental hospital (after 1980), not before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I believe they did confirm Kate Roberts is Winograd a few years ago if I recall right, something about when Kate's real maiden name came up. Elaine Princi was actually free too to reprise such a role had then were thinking it right, but then again she had been disastrous as the Linda Anderson recast in the mid-80s so probably not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Back then, the writing was layered and the characters were nuanced, thanks to William J. Bell and Pat Falken Smith.  Bill and Laura had been deeply in love and engaged to be married, when a serious problem with his hand led Bill to believe that he would have to abandon his lifelong dream of being a surgeon. Devastated about this, he left town to pull himself together. Believing Bill would never return, Laura realized that she had to move on. She agreed to marry Mickey, who was in love with her, even though Laura was still very much in love with Bill. Her feelings for Mickey were genuine but did not develop into true romantic love.

 

When Bill returned to Salem, both he and Laura realized that they still wanted to be together. Their mutual affection for Mickey and their determination to do the right thing compelled them to deny their feelings, but eventually, they just could not hold back anymore. They realized that it would be impossible to suppress their love forever. One night at the hospital, while hashing all this out, Bill started to come onto Laura. She resisted at first, but to me it looked and felt that her denials were borne from a sense of duty more than anything else. Bill persisted, and may have technically "forced" her to agree, but as I say, the writing was nuanced back then, and it was hard to describe the situation in simple, black-and-white terms of rape. It came across as Laura submitting to a sexual encounter that she truly wanted anyway, but was denying only out of moral duty. I TOTALLY agree that if a woman does not explicitly consent, then a man should back off. Period. But the moral ambiguity of the situation pulled your intellect and emotions in different directions, which made the drama fascinating. We always knew that Bill deeply loved Laura.

 

In 1978, the writing was in the toilet and our Salemites were often shifted around to suit the plots rather than driven by valid character motivation. At this time, when he was having trouble with Laura, Bill had an affair with Kate Winograd. Whom I loathed. The audience reacted negatively and the plot was quickly dropped. Bill reconciled with Laura and things were as they should be. 

 

Now we are supposed to believe that Bill was also horning it up with Kate Roberts, which precipitated Laura's mental crisis. I could accept the idea that while he was having serious issues with his wife. a lonely Bill made a stupid mistake and had a brief affair with Kate Winograd. But now we are told that he was having sex with everything that breathed (LOL), and had a child with another woman, which CAUSED (supposedly) Laura to break down. Bill carelessly being the genesis of Laura's destruction negates the epic love story that they had shared and makes him look like a selfish, callous pig rather than simply a man who made a single, terrible mistake by cheating with one woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

We also have another instance of mental illness as a consequence for liberated women of 70's soaps.  GL, AMC and, OLTL all had female characters who were independent and liberated then went nuts and had to be put into a hospital.  Just as Erica Kane is the only character to have an abortion and not to be become barren, liberated female characters in the 70/80's rarely ended well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • HAHAHA. Yeah, that's my bad. I misread that line. Sorry about going into "Unnecessary" detail about my username. Anyway, I love the story behind your Username.    reading on my phone...

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Completely agree with you. I think Bonita Brisker has been really good as Sharon. What Anita did was obviously awful, so she doesn't need to reign anything in. We're getting a good look at someone who's struggled in life compared to Anita "We're the Duprees!" Williams.   -- Anita is starting to look foolish for dredging all this up just so she  can get her ass back on stage. Is she so delusional she doesn't realize how she hurt Sharon and Tracy? -- Anita's line to Vernon "How can I expect Sharon to forgive me when I haven't forgiven myself" struck me as really selfish. After all that with Sharon, Anita again made it all about herself. -- Does anyone really believe Anita wants equal billing if the Articulettes reunite?  -- Colby Muhammad continues to be a standout. Her Kat more than holds her own with Leslie. -- The writing was very good for the father/daughter scene between Ted and Eva. It wasn't so good between Ted and Martin in their father/son scene. It didn't play like family to me, especially when Ted referred to "my wife" when talking about Nicole to Martin. -- Overall, a very solid show today.    
    • I honestly do not see the point of Max coming back again. Zoe does not surprise me. I've been waiting for that since Bionic Woman flopped in the US, frankly. I'm not against it vs. some other pointless returns. Some returns work and some don't, some are just there. Like, am I grateful that Kathy is alive? Yes, absolutely. Do I love any of her stories? No. But she's not utterly destroyed, she's just there.
    • I think Frank probably wanted to try for Jonathan with Kate Mansi. I actually can't knock the idea of a Lucky/Kristina affair or flirtation on paper, as a romantic obstacle to LNL2, but not with the characters in the places they are at present or have been over the last few years. It would be a mistake to do right now and would poison the well. I think Jonathan probably made it clear when he came back that he wanted what had been promised to him years ago with Elizabeth, and between his not being one of FV's preferred focal leads and Liz being a grudging afterthought if she's not with one of his OLTL stars, I suspect FV was content to leave them where they are vs. where they should be, which is central on the show. It's like I said a few days ago: A lot of this is how Lulu has always been. But back in the day the issue was that Lulu (and Carly) were deified for it, whereas now it's that Lulu is just used as the heavy because FV has a preexisting favoritism for Setton/BLQ. And that's a waste of a key character and talent, namely Alexa Havins.
    • Melanie Smith was very difficult to replace, but as KMH did last for a long time, she clearly managed to do so. I preferred Melanie, but the main issue with Kelley is I just think she was horribly written for most of the time. Initially the writing wasn't horrible, it's more she was not the right choice, but over time the writing genuinely became awful, and unplayable, with a few exceptions (I think her pairings with Chris and Hal worked and got to take her in some new directions).
    • Coming into June and...   TRASH. Or as I like to say for moments like this...HUNNI, WHAT IS THIS?   Outside of seeing Traci come home...and then...Ashley...not a darn thing is going on. So they are clearing stalling now, aren't they? It really hit me during the Phyllis/Daniel scenes. It was feeling like a B&B scene where two characters have the same repetitive conversation. And I have not seen Phyllis/Daniel scenes in that light lately so yeeeeah NOPE.   I did like the touch of Traci arrived outside of the Abbott mansion door and taking a breath and looking around. Very aftereffects of Martin. And I liked her and Diane having their conversation about Martin. I wished JG had allowed Traci to stay in town to deal with her feelings about Martin so at least we are getting some follow-up on that.    And same with Ashley and her talk with Jack. I will take Eileen Davidson anyway I can get her. Dare I say...will she be around for the Dumas reveal?   Outside of...   Kyle, Claire, and Harrison in a park IS NOT a storyline.   Sharon having to use the phrases (and in text) with Nick dinner as friends IS NOT a storyline.   Giggly Heffa giggly-heffa-ing around town IS NOT a storyline.    With Damian MIA and my love of Eileen Davidson...I might just go on break until the Dumas reveal if this is how we are starting June. 
    • Dragging this quote over from the Texas thread just because it shows a reference to Bay City as a fictional location at least as early as 1981. It doesn't quote Gail Kobe as saying it directly but the point she is making about the Houston setting of Texas does seem to take it for granted that Bay City is not real.
    • It's too bad they couldn't get access to the old music cues from the 80s and 90s, to run with the flashbacks or in the current scenes. That would have added a lot. Imagine if they had played the old Roman and Marlena theme.
    • Wonder if any of the Beyond the Gates people were asked. Admittedly, the show hasn't been on long enough for any of those actors to get much interest.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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