CatherineEarnshaw

Aug 2 2008, 09:49 AM

The assertion by some seems to be that the audience isn't willing to accept anything new. I am not against anything new, but it has to be grounded in what the history of the show is (if it applies to existing characters); if it is new characters, they have to be connected to existing characters.

The last time I remember a writer grounding a character into a consistent point of view was almost fifteen years ago with Sheri Anderson and James Reilly with Billie and Austin.

Since then, the characters seem to change for the exigencies of the plot. Nicole is a prime example. She starts out good; then with no explantion, she turns bad.

Then, her character blows in the wind over the next few years as the plot dictates. I find it hard to care about her (or any character) when their behavior isn't based in their history.

As for the supercouples, too much history has happened to see them with anyone else for most fans imo. So the trick is to give them new obstacles without trying to assassinate or destroy what made them appealing in the first place. Deidre and Drake, Peter and Kristian and Mary Beth and Stephen are consistently paired (even through the bad wrting) because the fans want it because they love their chemistry.

So soaps should be a blend of new and old but history must be respected. Any self respecting soap writer needs to read Marland about history.

Kyrai

Aug 2 2008, 10:07 AM

CatherineEarnshaw

Aug 2 2008, 09:49 AM

The assertion by some seems to be that the audience isn't willing to accept anything new. I am not against anything new, but it has to be grounded in what the history of the show is (if it applies to existing characters); if it is new characters, they have to be connected to existing characters.

The last time I remember a writer grounding a character into a consistent point of view was almost fifteen years ago with Sheri Anderson and James Reilly with Billie and Austin.

Since then, the characters seem to change for the exigencies of the plot. Nicole is a prime example. She starts out good; then with no explantion, she turns bad.

Then, her character blows in the wind over the next few years as the plot dictates. I find it hard to care about her (or any character) when their behavior isn't based in their history.

As for the supercouples, too much history has happened to see them with anyone else for most fans imo. So the trick is to give them new obstacles without trying to assassinate or destroy what made them appealing in the first place. Deidre and Drake, Peter and Kristian and Mary Beth and Stephen are consistently paired (even through the bad wrting) because the fans want it because they love their chemistry.

So soaps should be a blend of new and old but history must be respected. Any self respecting soap writer needs to read Marland about history.

ICAM! Nice post.

Sariah

Aug 2 2008, 10:23 AM

ITA that character assassination for the sake of the plot is one of the HUGE problems at Days. This isn't helped by the fact that the headwriter position seems to change every six months to a year so that we bring in someone else who writes the characters the way they want instead of how the characters actually are.

And as far as pleasing its audience - I've seen posts before saying Days can't possibly please every fanbase, and I don't think it should have to. But it's not pleasing anyone. Better to please a majority than a minority as they're doing now.

Sariah

Aug 2 2008, 10:23 AM

ITA that character assassination for the sake of the plot is one of the HUGE problems at Days. This isn't helped by the fact that the headwriter position seems to change every six months to a year so that we bring in someone else who writes the characters the way they want instead of how the characters actually are.

And as far as pleasing its audience - I've seen posts before saying Days can't possibly please every fanbase, and I don't think it should have to. But it's not pleasing anyone. Better to please a majority than a minority as they're doing now.

JustJo

Aug 2 2008, 10:29 AM

Sariah

Aug 2 2008, 10:23 AM

ITA that character assassination for the sake of the plot is one of the HUGE problems at Days. This isn't helped by the fact that the headwriter position seems to change every six months to a year so that we bring in someone else who writes the characters the way they want instead of how the characters actually are.

And as far as pleasing its audience - I've seen posts before saying Days can't possibly please every fanbase, and I don't think it should have to. But it's not pleasing anyone. Better to please a majority than a minority as they're doing now.

I agree. You can't blow off most of the fanbases and expect people to tune in.

CatherineEarnshaw

Aug 2 2008, 09:49 AM

Since then, the characters seem to change for the exigencies of the plot. Nicole is a prime example. She starts out good; then with no explantion, she turns bad.

Then, her character blows in the wind over the next few years as the plot dictates. I find it hard to care about her (or any character) when their behavior isn't based in their history.

CatherineEarnshaw

Aug 2 2008, 09:49 AM

Since then, the characters seem to change for the exigencies of the plot. Nicole is a prime example. She starts out good; then with no explantion, she turns bad.

Sindacco

Aug 2 2008, 01:02 PM

So you want the show to tell you who or what to root for instead of deciding that for yourself.

Steve Frame

Aug 2 2008, 02:35 PM

Sindacco

Aug 2 2008, 01:02 PM

So you want the show to tell you who or what to root for instead of deciding that for yourself.

I can't speak for who that was directed to, but I can speak for myself.

Many times in my 38 years of watching soap operas story has dictated who I root for. I for one do not get stuck on one character and root for them no matter what - never have and never will. I don't even pick one type of character and always root for them.

Direction of story and so forth do that for me. That is what being a fan of the whole show means. I have always been a fan of Sami and even though I didn't root for her many times, I still enjoyed her. But the direction of the way she has been written last year and even some this year have ruined the character for me. I cannot root for the whiny little wimpy Sami at all.

Often times characters do things that are inexcusable - even characters I have rooted for in the past. I was a big EJ fan until he raped Sami. That caused me to no longer root for him. I still like James Scott, but the direction of the story caused me not to root for the character.

I am not a fan who will make excuses for my fave. I deal with the writing as it is and that is all I can deal with. I hate when a fan will justify what their favorite is doing by saying well that is the way he is being written right now. It leaves me going WTF because it is a soap opera and the way the character is being written is how he is - it is there now - it is part of that character's history now and it is what we have to deal with - it is what is on screen.

Steve Frame

Aug 2 2008, 02:35 PM

Sindacco

Aug 2 2008, 01:02 PM

So you want the show to tell you who or what to root for instead of deciding that for yourself.

I can't speak for who that was directed to, but I can speak for myself.

Many times in my 38 years of watching soap operas story has dictated who I root for. I for one do not get stuck on one character and root for them no matter what - never have and never will. I don't even pick one type of character and always root for them.

Direction of story and so forth do that for me. That is what being a fan of the whole show means. I have always been a fan of Sami and even though I didn't root for her many times, I still enjoyed her. But the direction of the way she has been written last year and even some this year have ruined the character for me. I cannot root for the whiny little wimpy Sami at all.

Often times characters do things that are inexcusable - even characters I have rooted for in the past. I was a big EJ fan until he raped Sami. That caused me to no longer root for him. I still like James Scott, but the direction of the story caused me not to root for the character.

I am not a fan who will make excuses for my fave. I deal with the writing as it is and that is all I can deal with. I hate when a fan will justify what their favorite is doing by saying well that is the way he is being written right now. It leaves me going WTF because it is a soap opera and the way the character is being written is how he is - it is there now - it is part of that character's history now and it is what we have to deal with - it is what is on screen.

Sindacco

Aug 2 2008, 01:02 PM

So you want the show to tell you who or what to root for instead of deciding that for yourself.

Sindacco

Aug 2 2008, 12:43 PM

CatherineEarnshaw

Aug 2 2008, 09:49 AM

Since then, the characters seem to change for the exigencies of the plot. Nicole is a prime example. She starts out good; then with no explantion, she turns bad.

Then, her character blows in the wind over the next few years as the plot dictates. I find it hard to care about her (or any character) when their behavior isn't based in their history.

You obviously haven't paid attention to Nicole's history.

Quote:

 

Exactly!

Marlena is being written awfully right now. The wishy washy, I don't know thing is simply not her. I love her but she really has to stop talking about that darn disc! I have really grown to hate that disc.

I hate NuJohn because he is an unfeeling jerk, and yes I get that he has no emotions but if he doesn't care about anyone who he hurts why should I care about him. The writers have to give me something to feel for and have yet to deliver with Jawn!

I like EJ and Ejami but I think Sheffer et al, did a huge disservice to fans of the show by making him rape Sami. This wil continue to cause many to hate EJ because that action is unforgiveable especially if you claim to love the person you raped!

Its complicated yet somewhat simple.