I know it will just be me, but the whole George storyline is depressing me.-a It's probably because in my working life I saw youngsters who were misunderstood and needed more help but because of their behaviour
weren't getting it. As a teacher, I was mostly completely helpless.
That's what's difficult to hear, when you know what's needed but can't provide it.
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think.-a The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do.-a That's what's depressing.-a (What will happen when Ed hears of the latest row?
Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since probably
about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a child of ten in 1964.-a But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
On 30.12.25 09:50, Jane Vernon wrote:
I know it will just be me, but the whole George storyline is
depressing me.-a It's probably because in my working life I saw
youngsters who were misunderstood and needed more help but because of
their behaviour weren't getting it. As a teacher, I was mostly
completely helpless. That's what's difficult to hear, when you know
what's needed but can't provide it.
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think.-a The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do.-a That's
what's depressing.-a (What will happen when Ed hears of the latest row?
Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since probably
about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a child of ten in
1964.-a But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
I find the story objectionable for a number of reasons.
1.-a He is not an Archer.-a Prime storylines need to revolve around the family.-a Too many episodes do not feature an Archer and even when they
do (tractor run) it is tangentially.
2.-a It is completely unrealistic in character development.-a He manages nearly a year in prison without losing his temper.-a He emerges and has a supportive family and a fiancee and suddenly starts hitting relations.
If he was really an angry git then there would have been fisticuffs in prison.
3.-a I do not believe that Ed would have lied over the black eye (at
least to Emma) - as a one off he might have accepted the fall down the stairs although I think Ed would have wanted to pursue it with Emma sooner.
4.-a We know Neil and Eddie were reconciled but (presumably due to limit
on character numbers) have not heard them discuss George.-a More
importantly any soap is driven by strong women - so where are Clarrie
and Susan?-a Susan never had that apology from Amber and I feel Clarrie / Amber / Susan should have been sat in a room to talk about it.
5.-a Emma has completely indulged and spoilt the child.-a Only Nick saw
him for what he was - was that why she died?
6.-a We are promised contemporary drama in a rural setting.-a A wrong 'un adjusting to life after prison is not a rural story and it is hardly contemporary as it has been the case for centuries.
Meanwhile what are all the Archers doing?-a Why did Pat not grasp the
nettle of Tony and get George work once he returned?-a Bridge Farm are
two men down - Tony is far too old to be milking the Montbelliards for
all the time since Johnny left and they have apparently coped since Adam downed tools.-a Yet Tony still has time to decorate the Fergie (which I
am convinced he did not replace after selling it, investing in his MG
Midget instead).
So frankly yes I listen - but the plot holes are so immense I wonder if
a black hole exists in Birmingham and is sucking all the good stuff into another universe.
The recent "bubble" week written by Keri was so obviously poor and
lacking in continuity it really was not worth 73 minutes.
OTOH I do think there is something fundamentally nasty about G. He's had some rough breaks and made some bad choices and maybe could have
overcome them in different circs but underneath it all he's a Grundy and
an 'orrobin.
I agree with most of the rest - there are huge holes in plots and huge suspensions of disbelief required, like why a seemingly intelligent if somewhat woooly-headed girl like Amber would have been attracted in the
1st place.
On 30.12.25 09:50, Jane Vernon wrote:
I know it will just be me, but the whole George storyline is depressing
me.a It's probably because in my working life I saw youngsters who were
misunderstood and needed more help but because of their behaviour
weren't getting it. As a teacher, I was mostly completely helpless.
That's what's difficult to hear, when you know what's needed but can't
provide it.
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think.a The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do.a That's
what's depressing.a (What will happen when Ed hears of the latest row?
Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since probably
about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a child of ten in
1964.a But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
I find the story objectionable for a number of reasons.
1. He is not an Archer. Prime storylines need to revolve around the >family. Too many episodes do not feature an Archer and even when they
do (tractor run) it is tangentially.
2. It is completely unrealistic in character development. He manages >nearly a year in prison without losing his temper. He emerges and has a >supportive family and a fiancee and suddenly starts hitting relations.
If he was really an angry git then there would have been fisticuffs in >prison.
3. I do not believe that Ed would have lied over the black eye (at
least to Emma) - as a one off he might have accepted the fall down the >stairs although I think Ed would have wanted to pursue it with Emma sooner.
4. We know Neil and Eddie were reconciled but (presumably due to limit
on character numbers) have not heard them discuss George. More
importantly any soap is driven by strong women - so where are Clarrie
and Susan? Susan never had that apology from Amber and I feel Clarrie / >Amber / Susan should have been sat in a room to talk about it.
5. Emma has completely indulged and spoilt the child. Only Nick saw
him for what he was - was that why she died?
6. We are promised contemporary drama in a rural setting. A wrong 'un >adjusting to life after prison is not a rural story and it is hardly >contemporary as it has been the case for centuries.
Meanwhile what are all the Archers doing? Why did Pat not grasp the
nettle of Tony and get George work once he returned? Bridge Farm are
two men down - Tony is far too old to be milking the Montbelliards for
all the time since Johnny left and they have apparently coped since Adam >downed tools. Yet Tony still has time to decorate the Fergie (which I
am convinced he did not replace after selling it, investing in his MG
Midget instead).
So frankly yes I listen - but the plot holes are so immense I wonder if
a black hole exists in Birmingham and is sucking all the good stuff into >another universe.
The recent "bubble" week written by Keri was so obviously poor and
lacking in continuity it really was not worth 73 minutes.
Has Helen got a reason to not want him working at Bridge Farm?
couldn't he work for her?
I know it will just be me, but the whole George storyline is depressing
me. It's probably because in my working life I saw youngsters who were >misunderstood and needed more help but because of their behaviour
weren't getting it. As a teacher, I was mostly completely helpless.
That's what's difficult to hear, when you know what's needed but can't >provide it.
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think. The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do. That's >what's depressing. (What will happen when Ed hears of the latest row?
Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since probably
about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a child of ten in
1964. But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
On Tue, 30 Dec 2025 09:50:57 +0000, Jane Vernon
<jane@clothandclay.co.uk> wrote:
I know it will just be me, but the whole George storyline is depressing
me. It's probably because in my working life I saw youngsters who were
misunderstood and needed more help but because of their behaviour
weren't getting it. As a teacher, I was mostly completely helpless.
That's what's difficult to hear, when you know what's needed but can't
provide it.
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think. The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do. That's
what's depressing. (What will happen when Ed hears of the latest row?
Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since probably
about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a child of ten in
1964. But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
I imagine then, that with your background you'd be amongst the first
to confirm that many a child's life is not all King Street Junior.
After however many staff meetings, parent meetings, governor meetings, multi-agency meetings you attended during your teaching career I'm
sure there were still some children who could not be helped, would not
be helped. All children deserve a good future but unfortunately not
all of them get it and in schools you can't sacrifice the futures of
30, 40 -maybe 50 - children because you are determined to keep a one
person wrecking ball contained in the same space as all the others.
In the old days those damaged children were simply excluded from
school and would be seen mooching around the town centre, getting into
more and more trouble; then efforts were made to get them to work from
home - which most of them didn't. These days, in West Yorkshire and
I'm sure in many or all other places we have Pupil Referral Units
where excluded children can receive 1-to-1 care and attention. Though
I have no figures for the success of these units, actually trying to
do something positive for them must beat doing nothing for them but it
all begins by getting those destructive, disruptive elements away from
the regular classroom so the other children may heal from their
experiences and go on to live happy and constructive lives.
George needs to leave so that Ambridge can heal.
Nick
On 30.12.25 09:50, Jane Vernon wrote:
I know it will just be me, but the whole George storyline is
depressing me.-a It's probably because in my working life I saw
youngsters who were misunderstood and needed more help but because of
their behaviour weren't getting it. As a teacher, I was mostly
completely helpless. That's what's difficult to hear, when you know
what's needed but can't provide it.
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think.-a The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do.-a That's
what's depressing.-a (What will happen when Ed hears of the latest row?
Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since probably
about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a child of ten in
1964.-a But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
I find the story objectionable for a number of reasons.
1.-a He is not an Archer.-a Prime storylines need to revolve around the family.-a Too many episodes do not feature an Archer and even when they
do (tractor run) it is tangentially.
2.-a It is completely unrealistic in character development.-a He manages nearly a year in prison without losing his temper.-a He emerges and has a supportive family and a fiancee and suddenly starts hitting relations.
If he was really an angry git then there would have been fisticuffs in prison.
3.-a I do not believe that Ed would have lied over the black eye (at
least to Emma) - as a one off he might have accepted the fall down the stairs although I think Ed would have wanted to pursue it with Emma sooner.
4.-a We know Neil and Eddie were reconciled but (presumably due to limit
on character numbers) have not heard them discuss George.-a More
importantly any soap is driven by strong women - so where are Clarrie
and Susan?-a Susan never had that apology from Amber and I feel Clarrie / Amber / Susan should have been sat in a room to talk about it.
5.-a Emma has completely indulged and spoilt the child.-a Only Nick saw
him for what he was - was that why she died?
6.-a We are promised contemporary drama in a rural setting.-a A wrong 'un adjusting to life after prison is not a rural story and it is hardly contemporary as it has been the case for centuries.
Meanwhile what are all the Archers doing?-a Why did Pat not grasp the
nettle of Tony and get George work once he returned?-a Bridge Farm are
two men down - Tony is far too old to be milking the Montbelliards for
all the time since Johnny left and they have apparently coped since Adam downed tools.-a Yet Tony still has time to decorate the Fergie (which I
am convinced he did not replace after selling it, investing in his MG
Midget instead).
So frankly yes I listen - but the plot holes are so immense I wonder if
a black hole exists in Birmingham and is sucking all the good stuff into another universe.
The recent "bubble" week written by Keri was so obviously poor and
lacking in continuity it really was not worth 73 minutes.
On 30/12/2025 10:18, Kosmo wrote:
On 30.12.25 09:50, Jane Vernon wrote:Up to a point Lord Copper.
I know it will just be me, but the whole George storyline is
depressing me.-a It's probably because in my working life I saw
youngsters who were misunderstood and needed more help but because of
their behaviour weren't getting it. As a teacher, I was mostly
completely helpless. That's what's difficult to hear, when you know
what's needed but can't provide it.
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think.-a The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do.
That's what's depressing.-a (What will happen when Ed hears of the
latest row? Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since
probably about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a child
of ten in 1964.-a But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
I find the story objectionable for a number of reasons.
1.-a He is not an Archer.-a Prime storylines need to revolve around the
family.-a Too many episodes do not feature an Archer and even when they
do (tractor run) it is tangentially.
2.-a It is completely unrealistic in character development.-a He manages
nearly a year in prison without losing his temper.-a He emerges and has
a supportive family and a fiancee and suddenly starts hitting
relations. If he was really an angry git then there would have been
fisticuffs in prison.
3.-a I do not believe that Ed would have lied over the black eye (at
least to Emma) - as a one off he might have accepted the fall down the
stairs although I think Ed would have wanted to pursue it with Emma
sooner.
4.-a We know Neil and Eddie were reconciled but (presumably due to
limit on character numbers) have not heard them discuss George.-a More
importantly any soap is driven by strong women - so where are Clarrie
and Susan?-a Susan never had that apology from Amber and I feel
Clarrie / Amber / Susan should have been sat in a room to talk about it.
5.-a Emma has completely indulged and spoilt the child.-a Only Nick saw
him for what he was - was that why she died?
6.-a We are promised contemporary drama in a rural setting.-a A wrong
'un adjusting to life after prison is not a rural story and it is
hardly contemporary as it has been the case for centuries.
Meanwhile what are all the Archers doing?-a Why did Pat not grasp the
nettle of Tony and get George work once he returned?-a Bridge Farm are
two men down - Tony is far too old to be milking the Montbelliards for
all the time since Johnny left and they have apparently coped since
Adam downed tools.-a Yet Tony still has time to decorate the Fergie
(which I am convinced he did not replace after selling it, investing
in his MG Midget instead).
So frankly yes I listen - but the plot holes are so immense I wonder
if a black hole exists in Birmingham and is sucking all the good stuff
into another universe.
The recent "bubble" week written by Keri was so obviously poor and
lacking in continuity it really was not worth 73 minutes.
I don't really care too much about whether Archers are in it or not.
We don't really know whether he controlled his temper in chokey or not - much easier to control if you know the consequences will be severe which they would not be with Ed.
Ed would not have lied if asked outright, but I can believe him not
coming out with it at first to make it easier. I think he has the most sympathy with George because of what happened to him, and I don't think
the conversation would have ended with G. being kicked out if Ed was there.
OTOH I do think there is something fundamentally nasty about G. He's had some rough breaks and made some bad choices and maybe could have
overcome them in different circs but underneath it all he's a Grundy and
an 'orrobin.
I agree with most of the rest - there are huge holes in plots and huge suspensions of disbelief required, like why a seemingly intelligent if somewhat woooly-headed girl like Amber would have been attracted in the
1st place.
On 30.12.25 15:40, BrritSki wrote:
OTOH I do think there is something fundamentally nasty about G. He's
had some rough breaks and made some bad choices and maybe could have
overcome them in different circs but underneath it all he's a Grundy
and an 'orrobin.
On this I can agree 100%.-a There is the spectre of Alf in the Grundy
genes and Clive on the Horrobin side.-a However some of the things George has said about his parents were never properly challenged or addressed
and so his misinterpretations have never been corrected.-a I feel that
his perception of reality which means he can take cars, move people into
the driving seat and set Holly on Kenton (open to dispute but Kenton believes it) means that he cannot distinguish between right and wrong - which is an educational failure perhaps?
I agree with most of the rest - there are huge holes in plots and huge
suspensions of disbelief required, like why a seemingly intelligent if
somewhat woooly-headed girl like Amber would have been attracted in
the 1st place.
As she herself said she thought he was a good person who had done
something bad (almost by accident).-a I am not sure she is that clever myself - but then I am not sure I understand this social media /
influencer activity or how it works so she must be brighter than me to
have worked that out.
However none of it is really related to being rural or being an Archer -
so I am not sure it should be appearing at 7.02 each evening.
On 30/12/2025 10:18, Kosmo wrote:
On 30.12.25 09:50, Jane Vernon wrote:I don't find George's behaviour out of character.-a In prison he had the safety of the system plus the knowledge of being 'protected' by one of
I know it will just be me, but the whole George storyline is
depressing me.-a It's probably because in my working life I saw
youngsters who were misunderstood and needed more help but because of
their behaviour weren't getting it. As a teacher, I was mostly
completely helpless. That's what's difficult to hear, when you know
what's needed but can't provide it.
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think.-a The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do.
That's what's depressing.-a (What will happen when Ed hears of the
latest row? Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since
probably about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a child
of ten in 1964.-a But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
I find the story objectionable for a number of reasons.
1.-a He is not an Archer.-a Prime storylines need to revolve around the
family.-a Too many episodes do not feature an Archer and even when they
do (tractor run) it is tangentially.
2.-a It is completely unrealistic in character development.-a He manages
nearly a year in prison without losing his temper.-a He emerges and has
a supportive family and a fiancee and suddenly starts hitting
relations. If he was really an angry git then there would have been
fisticuffs in prison.
3.-a I do not believe that Ed would have lied over the black eye (at
least to Emma) - as a one off he might have accepted the fall down the
stairs although I think Ed would have wanted to pursue it with Emma
sooner.
4.-a We know Neil and Eddie were reconciled but (presumably due to
limit on character numbers) have not heard them discuss George.-a More
importantly any soap is driven by strong women - so where are Clarrie
and Susan?-a Susan never had that apology from Amber and I feel
Clarrie / Amber / Susan should have been sat in a room to talk about it.
5.-a Emma has completely indulged and spoilt the child.-a Only Nick saw
him for what he was - was that why she died?
6.-a We are promised contemporary drama in a rural setting.-a A wrong
'un adjusting to life after prison is not a rural story and it is
hardly contemporary as it has been the case for centuries.
Meanwhile what are all the Archers doing?-a Why did Pat not grasp the
nettle of Tony and get George work once he returned?-a Bridge Farm are
two men down - Tony is far too old to be milking the Montbelliards for
all the time since Johnny left and they have apparently coped since
Adam downed tools.-a Yet Tony still has time to decorate the Fergie
(which I am convinced he did not replace after selling it, investing
in his MG Midget instead).
So frankly yes I listen - but the plot holes are so immense I wonder
if a black hole exists in Birmingham and is sucking all the good stuff
into another universe.
The recent "bubble" week written by Keri was so obviously poor and
lacking in continuity it really was not worth 73 minutes.
the other inmates.-a George has suffered from insufficient boundaries all his life.
I think it's all just that everyone, especially George, underestimated
how hard it is to re-adjust after prison.-a Susan's experiences were different.-a It's not surprising that the people who were affected by the events of the crash are suffering trauma from it all still.
I find it absolutely believeable that Ed would try to give George
chances, just as Oliver did for him.
On 02/01/2026 12:28, Jane Vernon wrote:
On 30/12/2025 10:18, Kosmo wrote:
On 30.12.25 09:50, Jane Vernon wrote:
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think.-a The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do.
That's what's depressing.-a (What will happen when Ed hears of the
latest row? Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since
probably about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a child
My sympathy for him has I think reached breaking point (and that was soof ten in 1964.-a But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
6.-a We are promised contemporary drama in a rural setting.-a A wrong
'un adjusting to life after prison is not a rural story and it is
hardly contemporary as it has been the case for centuries.
Meanwhile what are all the Archers doing?-a Why did Pat not grasp the
nettle of Tony and get George work once he returned?-a Bridge Farm are
two men down - Tony is far too old to be milking the Montbelliards for
all the time since Johnny left and they have apparently coped since
Adam downed tools.-a Yet Tony still has time to decorate the Fergie
(which I am convinced he did not replace after selling it, investing
in his MG Midget instead).
I don't find George's behaviour out of character.-a In prison he had the
safety of the system plus the knowledge of being 'protected' by one of
the other inmates.-a George has suffered from insufficient boundaries all >> his life.
I think it's all just that everyone, especially George, underestimated
how hard it is to re-adjust after prison.-a Susan's experiences were
different.-a It's not surprising that the people who were affected by the >> events of the crash are suffering trauma from it all still.
It is interesting, and hopefully no coincidence, that the two people who have shown most sympathy for George, Ed and Alice, have both had
positive experiences of therapeutic interventions.
john
On 02/01/2026 12:28, Jane Vernon wrote:
On 30/12/2025 10:18, Kosmo wrote:
On 30.12.25 09:50, Jane Vernon wrote:I don't find George's behaviour out of character.-a In prison he had
I know it will just be me, but the whole George storyline is
depressing me.-a It's probably because in my working life I saw
youngsters who were misunderstood and needed more help but because
of their behaviour weren't getting it. As a teacher, I was mostly
completely helpless. That's what's difficult to hear, when you know
what's needed but can't provide it.
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think.-a The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do.
That's what's depressing.-a (What will happen when Ed hears of the
latest row? Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since
probably about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a
child of ten in 1964.-a But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
I find the story objectionable for a number of reasons.
1.-a He is not an Archer.-a Prime storylines need to revolve around the >>> family.-a Too many episodes do not feature an Archer and even when
they do (tractor run) it is tangentially.
2.-a It is completely unrealistic in character development.-a He
manages nearly a year in prison without losing his temper.-a He
emerges and has a supportive family and a fiancee and suddenly starts
hitting relations. If he was really an angry git then there would
have been fisticuffs in prison.
3.-a I do not believe that Ed would have lied over the black eye (at
least to Emma) - as a one off he might have accepted the fall down
the stairs although I think Ed would have wanted to pursue it with
Emma sooner.
4.-a We know Neil and Eddie were reconciled but (presumably due to
limit on character numbers) have not heard them discuss George.-a More
importantly any soap is driven by strong women - so where are Clarrie
and Susan?-a Susan never had that apology from Amber and I feel
Clarrie / Amber / Susan should have been sat in a room to talk about it. >>>
5.-a Emma has completely indulged and spoilt the child.-a Only Nick saw >>> him for what he was - was that why she died?
6.-a We are promised contemporary drama in a rural setting.-a A wrong
'un adjusting to life after prison is not a rural story and it is
hardly contemporary as it has been the case for centuries.
Meanwhile what are all the Archers doing?-a Why did Pat not grasp the
nettle of Tony and get George work once he returned?-a Bridge Farm are
two men down - Tony is far too old to be milking the Montbelliards
for all the time since Johnny left and they have apparently coped
since Adam downed tools.-a Yet Tony still has time to decorate the
Fergie (which I am convinced he did not replace after selling it,
investing in his MG Midget instead).
So frankly yes I listen - but the plot holes are so immense I wonder
if a black hole exists in Birmingham and is sucking all the good
stuff into another universe.
The recent "bubble" week written by Keri was so obviously poor and
lacking in continuity it really was not worth 73 minutes.
the safety of the system plus the knowledge of being 'protected' by
one of the other inmates.-a George has suffered from insufficient
boundaries all his life.
I think it's all just that everyone, especially George, underestimated
how hard it is to re-adjust after prison.-a Susan's experiences were
different.-a It's not surprising that the people who were affected by
the events of the crash are suffering trauma from it all still.
I find it absolutely believeable that Ed would try to give George
chances, just as Oliver did for him.
It is interesting, and hopefully no coincidence, that the two people who have shown most sympathy for George, Ed and Alice, have both had
positive experiences of therapeutic interventions.
john
I agree that there is something nasty about George, however I also feel
that he has been unable to manage how he feels for a very long time and needed intervention way, way earlier.
On 2.1.26 12:29, Jane Vernon wrote:
I agree that there is something nasty about George, however I also
feel that he has been unable to manage how he feels for a very long
time and needed intervention way, way earlier.
Which underlines my point that if he cannot control his temper he would
not have have managed 12 months inside without losing it.-a So the
character continuity is just not there.
On 30/12/2025 10:18, Kosmo wrote:
On 30.12.25 09:50, Jane Vernon wrote:I don't find George's behaviour out of character. In prison he had the safety of the system plus the knowledge of being 'protected' by one of
I know it will just be me, but the whole George storyline is
depressing me.-a It's probably because in my working life I saw
youngsters who were misunderstood and needed more help but because of
their behaviour weren't getting it. As a teacher, I was mostly
completely helpless. That's what's difficult to hear, when you know
what's needed but can't provide it.
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think.-a The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do.-a That's >>> what's depressing.-a (What will happen when Ed hears of the latest row? >>> Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since probably
about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a child of ten in
1964.-a But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
I find the story objectionable for a number of reasons.
1.-a He is not an Archer.-a Prime storylines need to revolve around the
family.-a Too many episodes do not feature an Archer and even when they
do (tractor run) it is tangentially.
2.-a It is completely unrealistic in character development.-a He manages
nearly a year in prison without losing his temper.-a He emerges and has a >> supportive family and a fiancee and suddenly starts hitting relations.
If he was really an angry git then there would have been fisticuffs in
prison.
3.-a I do not believe that Ed would have lied over the black eye (at
least to Emma) - as a one off he might have accepted the fall down the
stairs although I think Ed would have wanted to pursue it with Emma sooner. >>
4.-a We know Neil and Eddie were reconciled but (presumably due to limit
on character numbers) have not heard them discuss George.-a More
importantly any soap is driven by strong women - so where are Clarrie
and Susan?-a Susan never had that apology from Amber and I feel Clarrie / >> Amber / Susan should have been sat in a room to talk about it.
5.-a Emma has completely indulged and spoilt the child.-a Only Nick saw
him for what he was - was that why she died?
6.-a We are promised contemporary drama in a rural setting.-a A wrong 'un >> adjusting to life after prison is not a rural story and it is hardly
contemporary as it has been the case for centuries.
Meanwhile what are all the Archers doing?-a Why did Pat not grasp the
nettle of Tony and get George work once he returned?-a Bridge Farm are
two men down - Tony is far too old to be milking the Montbelliards for
all the time since Johnny left and they have apparently coped since Adam
downed tools.-a Yet Tony still has time to decorate the Fergie (which I
am convinced he did not replace after selling it, investing in his MG
Midget instead).
So frankly yes I listen - but the plot holes are so immense I wonder if
a black hole exists in Birmingham and is sucking all the good stuff into
another universe.
The recent "bubble" week written by Keri was so obviously poor and
lacking in continuity it really was not worth 73 minutes.
the other inmates. George has suffered from insufficient boundaries all
his life.
I think it's all just that everyone, especially George, underestimated
how hard it is to re-adjust after prison. Susan's experiences were different. It's not surprising that the people who were affected by the events of the crash are suffering trauma from it all still.
I find it absolutely believeable that Ed would try to give George
chances, just as Oliver did for him.
On 30/12/2025 15:40, BrritSki wrote:
On 30/12/2025 10:18, Kosmo wrote:
On 30.12.25 09:50, Jane Vernon wrote:Up to a point Lord Copper.
I know it will just be me, but the whole George storyline is
depressing me.-a It's probably because in my working life I saw
youngsters who were misunderstood and needed more help but because of >>>> their behaviour weren't getting it. As a teacher, I was mostly
completely helpless. That's what's difficult to hear, when you know
what's needed but can't provide it.
The scriptwriters are doing their best I think.-a The other people
involved with George are behaving as many people would and do.
That's what's depressing.-a (What will happen when Ed hears of the
latest row? Will he stick up for George?)
I still listen faithfully and haven't missed an episode since
probably about 1980, though I listened on and off since I was a child >>>> of ten in 1964.-a But this storyline is so difficult to hear.
Poor George.
I find the story objectionable for a number of reasons.
1.-a He is not an Archer.-a Prime storylines need to revolve around the >>> family.-a Too many episodes do not feature an Archer and even when they >>> do (tractor run) it is tangentially.
2.-a It is completely unrealistic in character development.-a He manages >>> nearly a year in prison without losing his temper.-a He emerges and has >>> a supportive family and a fiancee and suddenly starts hitting
relations. If he was really an angry git then there would have been
fisticuffs in prison.
3.-a I do not believe that Ed would have lied over the black eye (at
least to Emma) - as a one off he might have accepted the fall down the
stairs although I think Ed would have wanted to pursue it with Emma
sooner.
4.-a We know Neil and Eddie were reconciled but (presumably due to
limit on character numbers) have not heard them discuss George.-a More
importantly any soap is driven by strong women - so where are Clarrie
and Susan?-a Susan never had that apology from Amber and I feel
Clarrie / Amber / Susan should have been sat in a room to talk about it. >>>
5.-a Emma has completely indulged and spoilt the child.-a Only Nick saw >>> him for what he was - was that why she died?
6.-a We are promised contemporary drama in a rural setting.-a A wrong
'un adjusting to life after prison is not a rural story and it is
hardly contemporary as it has been the case for centuries.
Meanwhile what are all the Archers doing?-a Why did Pat not grasp the
nettle of Tony and get George work once he returned?-a Bridge Farm are
two men down - Tony is far too old to be milking the Montbelliards for
all the time since Johnny left and they have apparently coped since
Adam downed tools.-a Yet Tony still has time to decorate the Fergie
(which I am convinced he did not replace after selling it, investing
in his MG Midget instead).
So frankly yes I listen - but the plot holes are so immense I wonder
if a black hole exists in Birmingham and is sucking all the good stuff
into another universe.
The recent "bubble" week written by Keri was so obviously poor and
lacking in continuity it really was not worth 73 minutes.
I don't really care too much about whether Archers are in it or not.
We don't really know whether he controlled his temper in chokey or not -
much easier to control if you know the consequences will be severe which
they would not be with Ed.
Ed would not have lied if asked outright, but I can believe him not
coming out with it at first to make it easier. I think he has the most
sympathy with George because of what happened to him, and I don't think
the conversation would have ended with G. being kicked out if Ed was there. >>
OTOH I do think there is something fundamentally nasty about G. He's had
some rough breaks and made some bad choices and maybe could have
overcome them in different circs but underneath it all he's a Grundy and
an 'orrobin.
I agree with most of the rest - there are huge holes in plots and huge
suspensions of disbelief required, like why a seemingly intelligent if
somewhat woooly-headed girl like Amber would have been attracted in the
1st place.
I agree that there is something nasty about George, however I also feel
that he has been unable to manage how he feels for a very long time and needed intervention way, way earlier.
now itrCOs a possible cast of 70.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 54 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 01:50:10 |
| Calls: | 743 |
| Files: | 1,218 |
| Messages: | 187,735 |