SOC's solution for the wrong problem

[isaac quatorze]

i sent the following lengthy rant to the dumteedum contact box, and Lucy suggested it might be well-received here on the forum!

Dear Lucy and Roifield,

that was a great podcast with your guest Kat Brown. I disagreed with her somewhat on characters… the characters she hates are some of the ones I like most, and vice versa.

but where I think Kat really hit the nail on the head was her perfect summation of the problem with the show’s current direction. she said she understands “They” are trying to pare it down and get back to the actual Archers who are the programs namesake, but They don’t seem to realize that often the Archers themselves are just boring.

if i could expand on that very astute observation… i feel like Mr. O’Connor is responding very proactively to a problem that simply doesn’t exist.

over the last few years people have had many complaints about the program…from stories brought to a climax on sister series Ambridge Extra, to various characters behaving against type, to some OTT stuff in the form of subplots involving the Russian mob, illegal dogfighting, and blackmailing arsonists.

the trouble is, Mr. O’Connor misunderstood all those complaints. what he heard was “we want the Archer family and only the Archer family on the Archers.”

only a few years ago, the Archers was rich with compelling characters like Tracy and Keith Horrobin, Rosa Makepeace, Matt Crawford, Amy Franks, Patrick, Brenda, Mike, Vicky and Bethany Tucker. those characters weren’t the problem, but they’ve all been lost to Mr. O’Connor’s ostensible “solution.”

when was the last time a prominent story line was given to anybody who isn’t an Archer or related to one through marriage?

this wouldn’t be an issue except for two things:

first, as Kat Brown pointed out, dullness. while Kenton’s struggle and Helen’s gaslighting are effective stories, i don’t care in the slightest about Ruth and Heatherpet, Tony and Pat’s retirement, or whatever the hell is going on with Shula and Alistair. and i honestly can’t think of anything the writers could do to make me interested in Pip and the Fairbrothers.

think of all the wonderful peripheral characters who aren’t being given a plotline right now because of this Pip horseshit: Lynda and Robert. Jazzer. Amy. Carrie. Ian. Nic. Every day we’re yawning through another Pip scene is a day we could be enjoying one of those other much-beloved characters.

secondly, as others have pointed out, this hack-and-slash mentality of Mr. O’Connor’s has led to sloppiness unbecoming of our Archers writers:
– Jamie and Kathy have vanished with no resolution to their plots.
– Darrell and Rosa may have had a reconciliation scene (barely) but still no explanation given for where they’ve disappeared to.
– Matt was written out of the show in the most half-assed way, as if the actor had died.
– even the Grundys, who could generally be considered an exception to the Archer-family-only rule, have been sloppily handled this year, as Will Grundy spontaneously gave up a decade of ill will and made up with his brother on his wedding day, and then there’s been no mention of them in the months since.

(on the topic of sloppiness, why are the likes of Mabel Thompson and Auntie Satya, Jamie and Kathy, Patrick Hennessey and Spencer Wilkes still listed with full bios on the official Archers Who’s Who website, despite being silent and unmentioned for ages, while Darrell and Rosa Makepeace’s bios were scrubbed off the site within days of their last episode?)

we expect better, and we’re not getting it. the problem with the Archers was never that it strayed from the Archer family. But because that’s the assumption Mr. O’Connor has made, the program is like a patient being treated for a misdiagnosed disease.

[isaac quatorze]

oops, Carrie above should be Clarrie.

[Annietomic]

Spot on.

[Spare Mousie]

There’s a lot in what you say, isaac, about abandoning peripheral characters for no good reason that I can see. I’m more of Kat’s mind in my likes and dislikes but that isn’t the point, really, is it? It doesn’t matter if we like or dislike characters or even approve of them, it’s do they work and are they entertaining? Matt did and was. I had a soft spot for Vicky though lots couldn’t stand her and I’m sorry she, Mike and Bethany have gone and I hope they come back. Hayley is a loss, too. Tracey was always good value for shaking things up and why hasn’t Johnny’s Mum come down to check up on her boy and make a few waves there too.

I very much agree with you that the Brookfield Archers and exceedingly dull, not to say smug, Kenton’s right about that. The Bridge Farm and Home Farm lot are so much more entertaining in their bonkers dysfunctionality.

One thing you didn’t mention was the glaring omission of Heather’s voice in a story to which she is central. And it doesn’t help that Ruth never reports what Heathers says, feels, wishes, she only reports on ‘me mother’ in terms of how all of it affects her, Ruth. It doesn’t give much of an impression that Heather is being allowed much say in anything. I can’t help feeling the editor didn’t intend this and yet check Twitter, it’s exactly how it’s coming across to many listeners.

[Miss Mid-City]

I agree with much of what you’ve said, Isaac. Many of your observations have been made before. No doubt they’ll be made again. For example, I’ve previously commented that I’m totally sceptical about the idea that story arcs are planned and executed meticulously (contrary to Keri Davies interview on the podcast many moons ago). I genuinely suspect there’s an issue with the availability of certain actors plus the quality of the writing in any given week can be “variable”. This week – and I reserve my full judgment until I’ve listened to Friday’s episode – has been pretty dull, in my view. But periods of dullness won’t last. And nor will the more interesting, exciting storylines. There’s bound to be some ebb and flow …

That aside, I take issue with the idea that Tracy Horrobin, Rosa Makepeace, Amy Franks, Patrick or Brenda were in any way “compelling” characters. Compelling? In what way?! And it’s very generous of you to describe Amy and Nic as “wonderful, peripheral” characters. Peripheral, certainly, but “wonderful”?! Each to their own, I guess. That list of characters just makes me wrinkle my nose a bit, shrug and turn down the corners of my mouth with indifference.

[Author]

Posts