AWHP EDDIETORIALS

• JOHN, SHARLENE, AND FELICIA
• THE DEATH OF BRIDGET
• THE TOP TEN REASONS TO DESPISE EXECUTIVE PRODUCER JILL FARREN PHELPS
• THE FIRING OF ALICE BARRETT
• THE FIRING OF CHARLES KEATING

I try to present an unbiased view of the goings-on in Bay City in AWHP files, but I'd like to take this opportunity to present my opinions on various controversial issues. I welcome any feedback.

JOHN, SHARLENE, AND FELICIA

Personally, I don't like this story. In fact I hate it. Part of me wants to like it: John and Felicia have some very romantic scenes, both actors are exceptional, and it's always enjoyable to see two people who really love each other fight to be together.

I have found the John/Felicia pairing so distasteful that for the first time in my life I'm actually using the fast-forward button. After some reflection, I've come to the conclusion that what I find so abhorrent is that this story destroys the most basic and fundamental principle of soap opera: that love is special, that love is good and strong and worthwhile. It destroys that tenet by wiping out John's love for Sharlene without any reason other than the show's desire for a John/Felicia pairing.

In the future, of course, the writers may resurrect that love for storyline purposes, but that, in my opinion, would even further discredit the character of John. Since last fall, John stopped loving Sharlene, completely and utterly. In fact he grew to dislike her so much that he could hardly stand to be in the same room with her. When she wasn't around, he gave no thought to her and didn't miss her, and for all he cared she might have dropped off the face of the earth.

The thing I hate most though is hearing so-called reasons why John is justified in feeling the way he does, for both Sharlene and Felicia. I'd like to take this opportunity to debunk some of those reasons.

FICTION: Sharlene put John through a lot, including sleeping with other men while in an alternate personality, and therefore John is justified in seeking attention elsewhere.
FACT: Yes, John has been through a lot with Sharlene, but (1) he didn't blame her for them when they happened, and (2) he has never pointed to them as the reason for his wandering. And neither of Sharlene's alternate personalities has ever slept with another man since Sharlene came to Bay City in 1988.

FICTION: Sharlene abandoned John soon after they were reunited by going to Chadwell.
FACT: This is often quoted by John and Felicia supporters, but it is full of bunk. Sharlene re-emerged, and thus John and Sharlene reunited, in August 1994. She and John were henceforth shoved onto the back-burner until February 1995 (their, how shall we say, reunion lovemaking scene wasn't even shown), then they had the Bailey Thompson story for two months. In May they were remarried. In July Sharlene left for Chadwell to deal with the lingering affects of her childhood rape. John didn't like the thought of being away from her, but they parted on good terms. At the time she left, Ben and Laurie Michaels had not even been introduced.

FICTION: Sharlene wasn't there to help John through the Ben Michaels crisis.
FACT: When Sharlene found out about John's suspension, she asked him if he wanted her to come home. He said no. As it is, Sharlene cut her trip short and came home early anyway.

FICTION: John really needed Sharlene's support because Ben's death brought some painful memories of Vietnam to the surface.
FACT: Initially, John's involvement with Ben Michaels was not about Vietnam; it was about John being sued for malpractice. (Even that was a stretch; Courtney Evans was the one criminally responsible for Ben's death by purposely neglecting to inform anyone that Ben was misusing his inhaler. John decided to take the blame for her because she saved Gregory's life.)
Sharlene made the decision to stay with her sister Emma, to whom she'd always been close, for a few days when Emma was felled by a stroke, instead of staying by John's side during the hearing into Ben's death. Perhaps she thought Emma needed her more, especially considering John had already gone through a similar experience (he was also unjustly suspended in 1991). The Vietnam angle wasn't introduced until three and a half months after Ben died, conveniently enough, just in time to "justify" John's affair.
[It was actually extremely bad planning on the part of the writers. They initiated John and Felicia's involvement about 2-3 weeks before Anna Holbrook came back from her maternity leave, which was 8 weeks long. Not only did they ignore John for those first 5 weeks, but since they timed things so badly they had to give poor Emma a stroke so they could get Sharlene out of town once again. The story seems hastily slapped together when it should have commenced the day Sharlene left for Chadwell the first time.]
I'm surprised David Forsyth voiced no objections over the use of the Vietnam experience. When John and Felicia were trapped in his jeep during the ice storm, John equated allowing himself to grieve over both boys who died (Ben and Tai) with allowing himself to give in to his attraction to Felicia. Drawing a parallel between adulterous lust and the horrors of Vietnam is disgusting, and using the latter to justify the former is really awful.

FICTION: As John himself says, his and Sharlene's marriage was in trouble long before Felicia entered the picture.
FACT: The marriage was rock solid. If you have a copy of the Match Dare episode, which occurred just a few weeks before Sharlene left for Chadwell, you'll see John and Sharlene happily dancing together. John's claim of marital difficulties is a lie, not from John, but from the writers, who must realize it's a bogus claim since they weren't even interested in retroactively establishing those problems.
The writers have yet to make clear the reasons for John's actions. Was it because he fell out of love with Sharlene? Because their marriage was in trouble? Because he felt abandoned when she left to visit Emma for what amounted to two days within the time cycle of Bay City? Because Felicia was able to help him through a rough time? Because he fell in love with Felicia? If anything, the show would have us believe that *all* those reasons are to blame, which is simply overkill.

FICTION: John wanted to make his marriage to Sharlene work, but Sharlene kicked him out.
FACT: That John told Sharlene, "I'll do anything to save this marriage" is in complete contradiction to everything he has done and said before, during, and after he first slept with Felicia, and as such, is an insult to the viewers. As it is, Sharlene was willing to take John back, on the condition that he give up his obsession with Felicia. John refused, and Sharlene kicked him out.

FICTION: John and Sharlene were boring.
FACT: For most of the time, yes they were. Why? Because, for most of the time, they were languishing on the back-burner. Whenever they did have a story, their great chemistry usually resulted in some great drama. The point is that absolutely every couple is boring when they're not being used.

FICTION: Adultery happens all the time on the soaps, so why make a big deal out of John's infidelity?
FACT: Adultery, real adultery, is extremely rare on a soap, at least on Another World. I need to distinguish between adultery and real adultery. Adultery happens all the time, to everyone, but for insubstantial reasons: the spouse was thought dead, or was thought to have been having an affair of their own; or one of the partners is a recognized villain who would do such a thing easily; or the couple were estranged. By real adultery, I mean the conscious decision of a good or neutral character to commit adultery, without any misconceptions over the reasons or the outcome. In all the years I've been watching AW, real adultery has happened only one other time, with Amanda and Evan. And even then, the show built up to it for a year and a half, battering Sam and Amanda's marriage on various fronts. When it finally allowed Amanda to take the final step, she was guilt-ridden. What John did, and the circumstances under which he did it, can not be treated as casually as everyday soap opera infidelity. That, and his cavalier attitude to it, constitute for many of us insurmountable obstacles in appreciating John and Felicia on their own merits.

FICTION: The story is good because it puts David Forsyth, Linda Dano, and Anna Holbrook on the front-burner in a meaty story.
FACT: Such thinking is extremely destructive. Ask yourself this: Would you rather have the story the way it is now, or would you rather the show had given John and Sharlene a front-burner story that remained true to their personalities as they had been portrayed to that point? Soap fans have to learn that they have power over their show's content, and do not have to settle for an inferior story structure in order to see their favorite actors.
If you accept that John could stop loving Sharlene without reason, then you have to accept that the same thing could happen to Carl and Rachel, to Cass and Frankie, and to anyone. If you accept John and Felicia, then you accept what they represent, and you give the writers the power to, at their whim, break up couples and destroy relationships without any rationalization whatsoever.

FICTION: John's actions make perfect sense. It's the sort of thing that happens all the time.
FACT: The bottom line is that the story doesn't have to make sense. It's not about "making sense." Making sense implies there is a correlation between was has gone on before and what is happening now, which is impossible considering the idea came from Executive Producer Jill Farren Phelps, someone who has little knowledge of past history and even less desire to learn. There is no past history between John and Felicia; they have never been more than casual friends. With a little effort, and some concern for history, Phelps might have uncovered the John and Frankie story from 1991-1992. (After Sharlene was presumed dead, John fell in love with Frankie and sought to marry her and make her a mother to Gregory.) When he felt abandoned last fall at Sharlene's absence, it would have made perfect sense for John to turn to Frankie for support. What would have given the story even more potential was that Sharlene never knew about John and Frankie's relationship.

FICTION: John and Felicia are great together!
FACT: Well, if you like them, then you like them. It's probably a personal judgement whether John and Felicia have chemistry. To me, having chemistry means the couple complement each other in most every way and become, in a sense, one entity. I don't feel that with John and Felicia. Don't make the mistake of confusing chemistry with good acting. The question of chemistry aside, a lot of us will never be able to get over the stumbling block of the shabby way the show broke up John and Sharlene. We can have no confidence in John's love for Felicia if he could treat Sharlene the way he has.

FICTION: John and Felicia can be enjoyed on their own merits.
FACT: The show is asking us to overlook John and Sharlene's history so that we may appreciate John and Felicia (who may in fact make an excellent couple, objectively speaking). In so doing they are asking us to betray the foundation of soap opera, its continuity. (This is incredibly destructive. Despite what anyone might think, the show needs neither historical rewrites or character overhauls to find fodder for great drama. John and Felicia supporters are harming the spirit of the show by supporting such destruction.) But the show's own failure is that it fails to wipe the slate clean, by writing the story from the perspective of the betrayal of Sharlene, so that the audience is hard pressed to judge John and Felicia on their own merits. Like I said, I personally can't stomach their love scenes, but that has to do with the indelible memories I have retained of John's character than with any value judgements of John and Felicia's compatibility.

FICTION: More and more people will forget the circumstances of last year and will accept and even root for John and Felicia.
FACT: Unfortunately, that fiction is fact. The more a soap fan is exposed to something the more likely he or she is to accept it. And that is this regime's main weapon against our memories. As John and Sharlene, Jake and Paulina, Matthew and Donna, Carl and Rachel, and Cass and Frankie, and their chemistry and excitement, fade from our memories, so will our desires, our expectations, and our standards. But only if you let them...

The death of Bridget was a travesty for at least four reasons:

(1) Barbara Berjer was fired because her age didn't fit into that regime's conception of the show. That Bridget was killed for storyline purposes is a lie. Her death lent nothing whatsoever to the plug-pulling story.

(2) Bridget's role on the show was indispensable. Because the show needs Vicky to be free to have adventures and romances, someone has to be around to take care of her two kids. With Bridget no longer around to fulfil this purpose, Vicky will most likely have to hire a nanny for the kids.

(3) If Bridget had to die, her death could have been the catalyst for a terrific story, as were the deaths of characters like Mac, Lucas, and Ryan. Vicky, Jake, Donna, even Michael would have been incensed at her death and inflamed with fury, more than enough fuel for a compelling story filled with motivation, something sorely lacking nowadays on the show. Instead, Andrew Miller has already been dealt justice and a tremendous opportunity has been lost forever.

(4) With Bridget gone, the show didn't have a single cast member, on- or off-contract, over the age of 55. This was unprecedented in the history of the show, not to mention in most shows at most any time in their history.

(1) The Lack of Romance

• Joe and Paulina were rushed into their first wedding five months after their first meeting. That Paulina would get married so soon after Jake's presumed death is bad enough, but to someone she hardly knows makes it worse. Their wedding in March was one of the most unromantic ones I've seen (that made pretensions of being romantic). During the most tender part of their vows, the camera's focus was on Jake and his reaction.
• John and Felicia were never given the chance to fall slowly in love. Inside of a few weeks, they loved each other completely and totally.
• Without showing any previous romantic interest in Donna, Michael one day decided he wanted sex from her (then decided he didn't want her after all). Shortly afterwards, they would both settle into de facto couplehood without any effort (or romance).
• Michael and Sharlene slept together without any romantic prelude whatsoever. Their relationship till then had been based purely on friendship.
• That Matthew would truly fall in love with Blair is insulting to all soap couples everywhere and doesn't even deserve further mention here.
• Gary and Josie's early relationship was nothing more than endless boinking.
• Morgan asked Courtney to move in with him to help protect her from Andrew, even though there was only one bed in his apartment. After a couple of days they were sleeping together, despite the facts that Courtney was an abuse victim and that they hadn't even gone on a date yet.
• Nick and Sofia decided to get married, not out of love, but because they needed it to legitimize the sex they wanted to have.

(2) The Increase in Violence

• There were innumerable shootings (Joe, Ryan, Ari, Josie, Blair, Fax) as well as well other forms of violent death (Andrew, Justine, Courtney )
• There were two *consecutive* full-fledged serial killer storylines in 1996, each complete with multiple killings and a falsely accused suspect (Morgan/Donna).

(3) The New Sets

• JFP spent a million dollars on her personal vision of what she wanted the show to be like, not what the show needed. While the Center Street sets might have been perfect for a brand new soap, AW was forced to completely redefine itself and its focus. No longer character-driven, the show became a vehicle for an endless string of crime and medical emergencies. The hospital and police station began to dictate overall plot as well as minor details. Every other week another character would occupy the revolving hospital bed or jail cell.
• All the Hudsons except Vicky in jail and in the E.R.... Listing all the characters who spent time in hospital or incarcerated would be take up too much space. Suffice it to say that the overkill completely deadened the excitement such scenes might otherwise provoke.
• Characters would find jobs at these sets despite their lack of qualifications. Michael became chairman of the board at BCGH without any previous hospital experience (except as a patient of course). Sharlene became Rita Madison's personal assistant despite no previous experience (and even though she turned down a job at the police station for similar reasons).
• Surgery scenes featured thousands of dollars worth of fancy equipment that presumably was meant to impress viewers. Each one should have a tag showing which actor had to be fired to be able to afford it. The Tucci gizmo must be quite impressive.
• The hospital has more than one floor even though they all look *exactly* the same. The police station has adjoining rooms and an entire first floor that are wasted space. How much better if the Cory mansion or Bay View Court, for example, had been treated to an expansion.
• The hospital set is constantly used as a backdrop for run-ins, even between characters who have no ties to the hospital.
• Though many do not remember, and some might disagree, the old hospital set was more attractive, with dark blue trim and wood paneling, as opposed to the stark white walls of the current set. The police station set doesn't work as the outside makes it look like something out of the 1950s, yet the inside is straight out of the 90s. The old police station had more character, and its small size prevented the show from focusing too much attention on police matters.
• JFP had this to offer as her rationale for the new sets: "When I first started watching the show about six months ago I had a hard time understanding who was related to whom and who was married to whom. It became obvious that to make the show more viewer-friendly, we needed to create an area where a lot of characters could interact. We have three prominent sets, and within each set there will be lots of little sets. One will be the hospital, one will be the police department, one will be Carlino's restaurant, and in the midst of that, there will be a neighborhood. I like to think of it as ER meets NYPD Blue and Cheers."

(4) The Rewriting of History and Characterization

• Lorna would marvel that such a good man as Gabe McNamara would actually love her, when a host of good men (Matthew, Kevin, and Victor) had loved her and were devoted to her.
• John transferred his feelings for Sharlene onto Felicia without sufficient reason.
• Felicia became desperate and man-hungry.
• Joe went from a sweet caring guy to this manipulative, double-standard holding, overbearing bully.
• Carl began to be condescending to Rachel. He patronized her and trotted her out only when he wanted sex.
• Rachel lost her drive and strength, gosh darn it.
• Paulina lost interest in Jake, the love of her life, because...???
• Vicky sold her house, in which she had lived with Ryan, and where both her kids grew up, without a second thought or a single tear.
• Maggie went from being a sweet kid (mostly) to hell on wheels.
• Michael and John became walking hard-ons.
• Donna regressed from sophisticated businesswoman to sex-starved ditz.

(5) The Focus on Minor Characters

• Established characters would receive new partners, but then third-party interference would originate from those new people, instead of drawing it from the established history of the established characters, making it hard to care about what was happening. Past ties to other characters were invented (e.g., Carl and Blair), and current ties were exaggerated (Matthew and Blair), all for the sake of establishing characters that would only be around for a few months.
• Laurie Michaels sued the hospital when her son died. Were we supposed to care about Ben Michaels? Were we supposed to be interested in the legal battle, when Cass took on the case of a stranger against his own brother, and the real guilty party, Courtney (who had purposely neglected to stop Ben from misusing his inhaler), received no punishment?
• Blair, a stranger, dominated the Gary/Josie story, often to the exclusion of Josie, when featuring familiar elements of Josie's past (Ian, Matthew, etc.) would have been more interesting to the viewer.
• Andrew Miller, a stranger, dominated the Morgan/Courtney story, often to the exclusion of Morgan, when featuring familiar elements of Morgan's past (Brett, Lorna, his mother) would have been more interesting to the viewer.
• Cindy, a stranger, dominated the Gabe/Lorna story, when featuring familiar elements of Lorna's past (Carl, Matthew, Kevin, Victor) would have been more interesting to the viewers. Does Gabe even know that Lorna used to be Carl's moll?

(6) The Ageism

• JFP eliminated multigenerational stories by firing all the actors over 55: Bridget (a beloved 11-year vet), Clara (shamelessly carted off to the old folks home), Spencer (even though he was an integral part of the Justine, then the Ryan/Grant story) and Eddie (thus reducing Joe to the role of heavy in the Nick/Sofia story).

(7) The Sexism

• Donna became the depraved older woman desperately pursuing Matthew, and took to uttering such inanities as "I always need a strong man to help me out."
• Felicia took to sitting in darkened rooms crying to herself because she felt that no one loved her (despite the fact that Marshall threw himself at her and told her how beautiful she was every single time he saw her). Then her whole life revolved around worshiping John.
• Lorna and Felicia would devote their mother-daughter get-togethers to gushing about how wonderful their men were and how lucky they were to be loved by them.
• John received little or no flak for his treatment of Sharlene, while Felicia, the one who showed signs of remorse, became the town pariah.
• Sharlene was deemed a failure as a woman because she had chosen to be a stay-at-home wife and mother.
• Paulina completely lost her backbone as she settled down and became Joe's little woman.
• Rachel became a mindless zombie with no purpose in life.
• Courtney was the classic abuse victim who needed a man to come to her rescue. When Courtney started showing signs of having a backbone, she was killed off.

(8) The Bad Writing

• Dangling plotlines such as: Joe's gambling, and his vow to repay Nick the money Nick gave him to pay off the debt on Carlinos's. Grant's attempted murder of Carl in the hospital. Tomas receiving no punishment for cheating on his EMT exam. The first time that Maggie and Cass met after they both found out they were related was never shown. It was never discovered that Maggie planted Sofia's photo in The Herald or that she faked her death. Felicia's screenplay that was to be filmed at BCGH. The Grant/Morgan confrontation in prison. The Bayside Park rapist. Sharlene's 60's emblem.
• A string of very forgettable stories: Joe and Paulina; Laurie Michaels, Andrew Miller, Fax Newman
• Stories recycled within the same period: Gary and Josie's leaving the force; John and Morgan's suspension from the hospital. Gary and Grace, and Gary and Blair.
• Overall stupidity, such as was apparent throughout the stalker storyline. Fibers found on all three victims matched, when Fax never touched Blair or Courtney?
• Hand-held cameras and constant E.R. scenes were used to create excitement, instead of conflict and drama.
• Vampires yet! There's nothing inherently juvenile about vampire stories; Anne Rice has crafted very complex, character-driven, and philosophical stories. AW's foray into that field was incredibly hokey, from the dialogue right down to the wardrobe.
• The cops were all made out to be complete idiots. The only time Gary showed any brains was when he was on suspension.

(9) Bad Hands-on Producing

• JFP hired possibly the worst actor the show has ever had, Jodi O'Keefe, and subjected her to us for five full months.
• Many recasts: Gregory, Courtney, Nick, Steven, Kirkland, Charlie, Nick, Maggie
• Overusing her personal favorites and underusing the rest. Tom Eplin, one of the most popular players on the show, languished on the backburner from fall 1995 to summer 1996 (when Jensen Buchanan, one of JFP's faves, returned from maternity leave). Never in his ten-year history with the show has Eplin been so underused. Not to mention Charles Keating, ignored for the first nine months of 1996. He won the Emmy for Best Actor and he still wasn't given a story.
• The killing off of Ryan. While it was PMV's decision to leave, JFP made the mistake of making it impossible for him to return to the role (in a substantial manner).
• The firing of Barbara Berjer. Jensen Buchanan herself says that Bridget is the character she'd most like to have return to the show.
• The firing and/or gross misuse of popular talented actors such as Christine Tucci, Randy Brooks, and Nancy Frangione.

(10) Putting on Airs

• JFP was supposedly against NBC's plan to turn AW into a clone of DOOL. Yet she created a DOOLish atmosphere by upping the violence quota, producing DOOL-type stories such as Justine and the Nick/Sofia/Maggie triangle, hiring models who couldn't act, and experimenting with supernatural stories.
• JFP took credit for increasing key demographics (women), which is apparently what she was hired by NBC to do. If you expect me to believe that she increased the violence and dumbed down the women characters *specifically* to increase viewership among women, well, I can't believe it. If the demographics did go up (and there is contradictory evidence whether they increased and whether the increase was sustained), then I can only believe that the increase is a coincidence.
• JFP said that she loved the characters on the show. If so, why did she rewrite much of their history and personality?
• Near the end of her tenure, JFP said that she "loved" Another World. Really? Did she hunt up old episodes? Does she eagerly tune in each day to watch the show, even though she's no longer EP? That's what it means to love the show. What JFP loved was being in control of a show and subjecting it to her latest fancy.
• And did she ever listen to the advice Harding Lemay was hired to give her? From what the show became under her hands, it seems not.

[Note: I wrote this out of frustration at reading posts praising the so-called romance and excitement that JFP brought to the show. Were 1994, 1993, 1992, and so on, all lousy years?
I didn't start out hating JFP. I was made to, for all the reasons outlined above. The first six months of 1996 stand out among the worst periods of the show.
By no means was everything she did bad. And certainly her successor has made her share of mistakes (including overplaying the Vicky story, the rapid and rabid housecleaning, and the complete descent into DOOLification]