The Archers

I like the Archers. So do all right-thinking people.

End communication!

I thoroughly second this statement

millerqueen wrote:I thoroughly second this statement

And I third it.

I have listened to The Archers for about ... ooh, thirty years now.

I think the longrunning storyline about Jack and his Alzheimer's is being done rather well. One of the things I like about The Archers is the slow way some stories unfold over years.

Poor Jack. Poor Peggy.

The Archers is the only soap that goes on at almost human pace. But this is a double-edged sword. Earlier this decade there was a storyline about Pa Archer's inheritence that dragged on for months. Though it was one of the most believable pieces of fiction I have ever heard, listening to four middle-class middle-aged people squabbling over the finer points of will was mindlessly tedious.

Of course, it's all set in a village in which the inhabitants can never leave where cricket is worshipped as a god, Tasmin Grieg does some lambing and and all the children are possessed by Satan, so it's not all realistic...

stanmore wrote:The Archers is the only soap that goes on at almost human pace. But this is a double-edged sword. Earlier this decade there was a storyline about Pa Archer's inheritence that dragged on for months. Though it was one of the most believable pieces of fiction I have ever heard, listening to four middle-class middle-aged people squabbling over the finer points of will was mindlessly tedious.

Of course, it's all set in a village in which the inhabitants can never leave where cricket is worshipped as a god, Tasmin Grieg does some lambing and and all the children are possessed by Satan, so it's not all realistic...

Not just any old human pace but a slow human pace... Just right for me!

The will story was tedious but not because of the pace. It was tedious because families squabbling over wills and falling out is usually tedious and nonsensical to others anyway. Added to which, some of the squabblers were not exactly my favourite characters in the first place (and less so after the squabble).

This is true. But only Archers writers would try and capture the tediousness of such situations (which they did perfectly) and then stretch it out for months.

So, any votes for most kickable character?

stanmore wrote:This is true. But only Archers writers would try and capture the tediousness of such situations (which they did perfectly) and then stretch it out for months.

So, any votes for most kickable character?

I'll have a think about that.

andrea wrote:

stanmore wrote:This is true. But only Archers writers would try and capture the tediousness of such situations (which they did perfectly) and then stretch it out for months.

So, any votes for most kickable character?

I'll have a think about that.

I've thought and can only come up with: Most Boring Characters - Elizabeth and Nigel Pargetter. Anyone agree?

My heart sinks when there is a storyline involving one or the other - or both.

I want to kill Tom Archer. Always gabbling about his ruddy sausages.

I also want to kill Brian, for reasons obvious to anyone with half a brain.

I quite like Nigel - when his mum was around he was quite good foil. Admittedly, foils don't tend to do too well by themselves. Elizabeth is a pointless, whining, figures-based metronome of a human being (like her sister). Tom shares some of those qualities with extra pork-products. I can't hate Brian - at least things change occasionally when he's around - but I can hate Charles Collingwood for being the Budget Brandreth on ruined episodes of Just A Minute.

stanmore wrote:I can't hate Brian

No worries. I can hate him enough for both of us.

Lucy McGough wrote:

stanmore wrote:I can't hate Brian

No worries. I can hate him enough for both of us.

Um, er, we're wrinklies. Is it appropriate for us to actually hate characters?

Hate the character, not the actor....

millerqueen wrote:Hate the character, not the actor....

That's my creed. I have nothing but respect for Charles Collingwood, who is an excellent actor and works very hard. However, I wish Brian Aldridge would fall down a hole and die.

Charles Collingwood is a rubbish panellist though, coming across as a self-satisfied greaseball.... which coincidentally is the parts that he gets to play...

millerqueen wrote:Hate the character, not the actor....

Seriously, I don't find it easy to hate the characters. I fear I may take The Archers a bit too literally as I would feel I was hating a real person! Funny how a radio programme seems more real than any television programme.

I love the archers. The most kickable character is Kate.

sheringham wrote:The most kickable character is Kate.

She's the nearest thing the show has ever had to sexy. Well, before the children and the taming down. I was an odd 13-year old.

I also like the archers (possibly due to subliminal influences in the cradle) I've been listening to it for all my 49.5 years

Anyone else beginning to find the Matt and Lilian storyline a bit tedious? Well, not the storyline exactly as I think the idea of Matt being involved in fraud quite a good one and the way their relationship is going downhill is believable. I just find having great chunks of episodes devoted to people sniping at each other a bit tedious. My husband walked into the room partway through an episode and declared it sounded like Eastenders.

andrea wrote:Anyone else beginning to find the Matt and Lilian storyline a bit tedious?

YANA.