Brookside Brookside

[James from London]

Oh and it’s nice to see Nick’s relationship with Heather blossoming at last. It looks like all that studying he did as a younger man is starting to pay off.

 

[PsychoDrama]

This period of Brookside, specifically what’s going on with the Grants, really reminds me of Knots Season 4. While the characters are still recognisably the same people we’ve been watching for the past few years, it’s like the heat’s been turned up under each of them

Oh yes. Yes. Now you've said that I can't not see it.

an enormous part of the pleasure of this era is seeing the writers and actors rise to the challenge of making these soapy contrivances not only plausible but compelling (again, just like Knots Season 4).

Absolutely. Between some of the Corkhills' material and some terrific moments from all concerned in the Grants', there's a feeling of grit which, as you observed, makes even the more conventionally soapy contrivances feel more meaningful and substantial.

Bobby’s conflict with George Williams is the first indication that his brand of socialism is gradually falling out of step with the times.

Meanwhile, Sheila involving herself in Sally Dinsdale’s and Matty’s marriages is the first time she’s really got worked up about anything that doesn’t directly affect her own family.

Yes, and both of these facts were acknowledged within the series. In particular, Sheila not putting her family first has created an incredible tension at Number Five, with Bobby furious about it. His rants at both George and Sheila made clear his loyalties were to "his" people (his immediate family, and the union members in his city), and so should theirs be.

It feels like Brookie’s political pencils have been re-sharpened recently

It certainly does, and I've been wondering why at this time in particular. I had wondered if there was a general election or something, but on looking the next one wouldn't be until the following year. But then again, the Eighties were a particularly volatile time politically and I'm sure there was plenty of material to take aim at.

How combustible might a Barry Grant/Katrin Cartlidge-era Lucy coupling have been!

This crossed my mind too. Well, kind of. I kept wondering how different it would be if Katrin had been portraying Lucy at this point, and trying to work out if I would buy it. She was always the rebel, so I'm sure it could have happened back when she was still around. Perhaps that would have been viewed as too conventional for early Eighties Brookie, though.

Whereas Petra’s (admittedly funny) scene was part of something darker and ultimately tragic, Lucy’s post-James behaviour has mostly just been a laugh.

I don't know if it was the memory of that Petra scene informing this one, but I actually felt quite concerned for Lucy's wellbeing when Sandra found her in the car. It was a nice moment for both. I (sometimes) like that Sandra has a short fuse, but I also think Sheila Grier shows empathy really well given the right screen partner, and this was one of them for me.

Even though the whole Lucy 2 story has been really satisfying and well-executed, I could never quite shake the feeling that Lucy 2’s personality and behaviour (while never less than plausible) was moulded to fit the storyline, whereas Lucy 1’s stories grew organically out of the character.

That's a fair observation, I'd say. I did appreciate that Maggie Saunders went ugly as far as Lucy's been concerned. I don't know if it was me adjusting to the different actress, but it felt like she took a while to get that edge to her. But she delivered in the end (a bit like Emma Samms in Dynasty's last season or so). And I never stopped thinking to myself that she did look very believable as Doreen Sloane's daughter (whereas Katrin's Lucy looked more like she'd inherited more of Paul's features).

Mrs James sees her as a stupid, deluded little girl — which essentially is what she is. This is in contrast to a similar storyline in EastEnders circa 1989-90 where Michelle Fowler likewise gets involved with a married man. As with Lucy, we aren’t introduced to the wronged wife until late in the story and again the marital set-up is very different to what the mistress has been led to believe by her man. When Michelle’s bloke’s wife finds out about her husband’s bit on the side, she casually concludes that Michelle must be a typical hairdressing airhead from the East End. Insofar as Michelle is a hairdresser at the time (and an East Ender), she’s right, but what she doesn’t know and the viewer at home does is that Michelle is about as far from an airhead as you can get. With Lucy, there isn’t that extra layer of complexity; she is exactly what James’s wife thinks she is. If she’d said it about Katrin Cartildige’s Lucy, however, it wouldn’t have been the full story.

This is really interesting. Weirdly, I don't remember that storyline with Michelle, even though I'm fairly sure I'd still have been watching EastEnders at that point.

Michelle’s most famous illicit liaison was, of course, as a barely legal teenager with a much older man in a position of authority over her (technically, Den was her employer at the time as she was shampooing the Vic carpets to earn some extra pocket money). And the audience didn’t find about their fling until after the fact. Same situation for Tracey and Mr Montague, of course, and both situations came to light at around the same time: late ’85-ish.

And I hadn't made that link between the two.

Fascinatingly, in both cases, the man’s predatory behaviour is pretty much glossed over in a way that would be inconceivable today.

Who knows — maybe in a decade or two, there’ll be yet a further layer of nuance to add.

Yes. It would be handled very differently indeed today. Hasn't Corrie done similar storylines more recently? I'd imagine the tone of those was different.

I'm sure young viewers watching this for the first time today would be horrified by the way this played out (what, no Old Testament retribution?). It's bizarre to think of mid-Eighties Brookie as a relic of the past. I wonder what that says about those of us who were watching it back then.

Paula's habit of delivering self-deprecating wisecracks while looking like a million dollars was one of the many things that made her so genuinely beguiling.

I feel I missed out by not being cool enough to watch The Tube back in the day.

What a joy it is to be able scroll through Pat’n’Sand’s scenes so cleanly and quickly. None of the over-fast-forwarding-then-having-to -rewind-again like in the old VCR days. Thank-you again, STV Player.

Glad you're enjoying the benefits of streaming.

Oh and it’s nice to see Nick’s relationship with Heather blossoming at last. It looks like all that studying he did as a younger man is starting to pay off.

Wonderful stuff.

 

[James from London]

Susan Twist - later Rosie Banks in dire Nineties Brookie - is the bookie’s assistant who gets sacked for trying to help and is now doing all she can to assist Harry. It’s a small role, but she fits in well to this era. I find Susan endearing as she reminds me very much of the mum of a schoolfriend when I was young.

I've been meaning to say that Rosie Banks/Bookie's Assistant has been causing quite a stir in the Whoniverse over the past couple of months, which I don't think anyone had on their bingo card for 2024.

'Doctor Who's Susan Twist mystery: Breaking down the clues and fan theories

From "Wild Blue Yonder" to "Dot and Bubble," we're on her trail!

mashable.com

 

[PsychoDrama]

I've been meaning to say that Rosie Banks/Bookie's Assistant has been causing quite a stir in the Whoniverse over the past couple of months, which I don't think anyone had on their bingo card for 2024.

Ooh - interesting. And very strange to read her called an "elderly English actress" since I think of her as eternally the age she was in Brookie.

Funny that the same actress cropping up in different roles has prompted such speculation. And perhaps warranted speculation, since I'm sure anyone casting roles today would expect the audience to pick up on things like this, so are less likely to follow the "same actor in numerous roles in the same series" tradition.

Who fans seem far more dedicated to this kind of thing, otherwise we'd have a lot more wildly speculative threads here trying to create a canonical explanation for some of those recurring faces in soaps over the years.

Anyway - lovely that Susan is having a moment.

 

[James from London]

Who fans seem far more dedicated to this kind of thing, otherwise we'd have a lot more wildly speculative threads here trying to create a canonical explanation for some of those recurring faces in soaps over the years.

In fact, if one were conspiracy-minded enough, one could probably draw a connection between one Brookie-Twist character working in a bookies and the other winning the pools. (At least, I think it was the pools they won.)

Anyway - lovely that Susan is having a moment.

Yes it really is.

 

[PsychoDrama]

Episodes 366 - 375
29 April - 2 June 1986​

Watching these episodes at a fairly leisurely pace means the earlier ones feel in many ways as though they’re but a dim memory while simultaneously (and contradictorily) feeling very much connected to the latest.

Billy began this run freshly laid off, and this disruption for the character has also given him a new kind of grounding and allowed him to relate to other characters in a new and fascinating way.

First comes his scene with Bobby in which Bobby is as sympathetic and supportive as he can be, despite their previous friction over Billy’s lack of support for the strike. There’s a sense that, even now, Bobby might do all he could to rectify the situation… if Billy would have only met him halfway.

Even more surprising ground is broken in Billy’s relationship with his other work-related neighbour, Paul Collins. First Paul is disarmingly relaxed about the eyesore on Billy’s drive - a massive pile of bricks that has appeared overnight to everyone’s surprise (including Billy and Doreen). Instead of criticism, Paul gives him a friendly warning about how hot the planning inspectors are in the area (pleasingly, Billy can’t resist seizing this opportunity to drop in that they weren’t too worried about the shutters which previously had Paul so worked up).

Their exchanges give us a scene that’s absolute gold, as Billy’s admission that he’s been given the push is met with laughter from Paul who confesses that he’s in the same boat ("snap") having been considered surplus to requirements by the new American high-ups. The two of them sitting on those bricks, comparing notes and adjusting to their new normal is a Brookside high. There’s even a nostalgic reference to the opening episode as Paul - almost whimsically - tells Billy that his previous experience with redundancy is what brought the Collinses to the Close in the first place.

This is one of several scenes that shows us a different side to Paul. Like Billy, his new situation presents opportunities for character. Shocked as he is to be given the push, there seems no danger of Paul descending into depression again. He seems somehow lighter, and this is perfectly reflected in his encounters with young Adam Black who gets a cricket lesson from Paul on how to bowl.

The threads at work here are great. Things are soapily interwoven a little more than usual. Firstly, it ties in with Paul’s relationship with Gordon, prompting him to reach out to his son with a letter. The Collinses also happen to be first on the scene when Adam is struck by a car away from the Close, which ties them further to Heather’s current storyline. They’d already had Heather and Nick to dinner where Paul and Annabelle became the first on the Close to learn of Heather and Nick’s engagement.

Aspects that could be contrived as soapy convenience are addressed by the writing. Heather and Nick, for example, both know this is happening very quickly after Heather was in a very similar situation with Tom. One of the more interesting aspects for me was the age gap between Heather and Nick being discussed, mainly because along the way it was said out loud that there’s also an age gap with Paul and Annabelle. I feel this must be about the first time it’s been said during the series, because I’ve don’t think I’ve ever consciously noticed there even was a gap (now I think about it, there might have been some kind of passing reference to it when Paul and Anna did their camping thing in the garden. But I couldn't be sure).

Slightly adding insult to injury for Paul, their snarky friends from the Wirral suggest the idea of becoming a magistrate, but push for Annabelle to do it when Paul is too old to qualify. And Annabelle jumps at it.

There’s more soapiness when Karen sees Matty and Mo together and debates whether or not to say anything to Sheila (not knowing that Sheila herself knows and found herself unable to continue to lie to Teresa when she asked outright what Sheila knew).

Karen and Guy’s relationship has been very watchable (Karen’s now lost her virginity when Karen had the house to herself). Guy’s a great addition to the cast, and I find myself wishing we had longer with him (from memory, I don’t think he’ll be around too much longer).

Meanwhile, there’s been fun and games with Edna giving Harry a driving lesson (this series has great fun with these. I’m smiling thinking back to Sheila’s)

Rod’s 18th felt completely authentic, with Billy moving furniture and knick-knacks upstairs to avoid them being damaged or desecrated while Doreen objected because people wouldn’t see her lovely stuff. Her sharp change of tune as soon as Billy reminded her of her own 21st (she gravely told them to strip the room) reminded me very much of that scene in Jaws where Ellen suddenly calls the boys in from the boat upon seeing a painting of a shark ramming a hull... moments after telling Martin he was worrying over nothing.

The music thumping over the house and the entire Close. The teens pairing off and finding bedrooms. The booze and spills and throwing up. It all perfectly captured a moment, thanks to Jimmy McGovern’s writing. The newly-liberated Billy is surprisingly cool-headed when he and Doreen walk in to the devastation and have to climb over a chair and a heap of horny kids to get to their own bedroom. Even Rod’s morning after heaving is met with Billy’s laughter and teasing:

Bet you any money there’s carrots.

 

[PsychoDrama]

Episodes 376 - 390
3 June - 22 July 1986
​

My early brushes with Brookside are a bit baffling… even to me. I’m fairly concrete that the 1985 siege was my induction and that it was then some time before I became a regular viewer, but as I watch on I’m realising that the gap between those two is longer than I’d remembered. Nick Black and Madge’s arcs were happening as I joined up, so most if not all of the pieces are in place. All the same, I’m certain I couldn’t have watched this particular run of episodes the first time round because… it’s not the kind of television that’s easily forgotten once seen.

Most of these episodes I’ll have just seen the once, around three decades ago when early Brookie was re-run on UK Living. Still, with much written and said about it, along with writing and performances this is a very familiar era.

It’s interesting (to me at least) to consider the degree to which awareness of what’s to come influences how an ongoing storyline is viewed, especially in terms of “pipe laying” ahead of time.

A year before this it felt the air was filled with portent that foreshadowed the siege This summer, too, the air has been thick for some weeks with an atmosphere suggesting that something is around the corner.

In less nebulous terms, it’s a well-crafted skein made up of numerous series-wide threads. Some of these have been fantastic one their own merits. Some haven’t. Together they prove the adage about the whole being greater than the sum of its parts.

James’s observation about the similarities with Knots Landing’s Fourth Season have stayed in my mind whilst watching and now that it’s out there I see it everywhere. And the reason it shouldn’t work is the exact reason it does: the characters are so fleshed out and established that we take the journey with them.

More than most, Brookie up to this point is a character-driven series. There doesn’t even need to be a plot for the characters to function and remain interesting. Looking at things with even a small degree of detachment, it’s hard to deny that characters aren’t being moved around like chess pieces to serve the plot. Since the beginning of the series there’s been a great deal of passion from the characters, but not quite in this way. The focus has shifted and that passion for independence*, or human rights or equality in the household is suddenly channelled into far soapier realms, soaring unrestrained to new heights.

Matty is willing to throw Teresa and his children, driven by his passion (or lust) for Mo, and is driven to repeated aggression towards Sheila for her interference. This has been quite a stretch for me given the Matty we know. But the series uses this to compound Sheila’s horror at his personality switch (and Bobby’s earlier disbelief when initially told of the affair with Mo). It may be out of character, but as a recurring character Matty is also peripheral enough for us to buy there could be more to him than we realise. His recurring status paired with the surprise of seeing him harassing Sheila also adds to the possibility - even to viewers who know the “rules” of whodunnits in serialised television - that Matty could very well be the guilty party. He’s already been a very credible suspect in the poison pen letter and the nuisance phone calls. Now he’s a desperate, furiously angry man. It’s difficult for him not to be at least a key suspect in the rape.

Something I appreciate is this storyline giving Tony Scoggo a little more screen time. The conflict coming from his affair with Mo. The confession to Bobby. The strained relationship between Matty and Sheila. And being a suspected attacker. All have given him the chance to flex his acting muscles more than we usually see. It’s gratifying to see him having a chance to shine, and I'm sure it helps that in the long term the series didn’t take the Jimmy Corkhill route of forcing the character more and more into the centre of things to the detriment of both character and series. This may well be the most we see of Matty, and I'll happily take it.

Pat, like Matty, is suddenly filled with testosterone, possessiveness and righteousness: a combination which follows the same pattern of increasingly violent outbursts coming to a head on the same July evening as Matty. The escalation of tension in the household has been given a little room to breathe, with it stemming from Sandra spending time with dishy doctor Tony in order to investigate a knife-happy surgeon, performing what they believe are unnecessary-but-profitable life-altering surgeries on privately-funded patients. It hasn’t been Brookie’s most compelling storyline, but I do like that it leans into the political aspect which has long given the series its USP.

Pat’s deteriorating relationship with Sandra leading to violence and the subsequent rape accusation come with the expected baggage associated with any increased airtime at Number Seven. Due to its abundance, for instance, I can no longer tune out a Pat-ism that I realise has actually been there for a while: the tendency to start most lines by sharply turning his head away from the person to whom he’s speaking, instead looking at the floor for half a line before looking back (the camera placement seems to inform this as the turn is usually in the direction of the camera). Pat’s drunk acting as he’s questioned in the police cell** has also harked back to the siege, with him dusting off that same petulant child tone as he becomes more self-pitiful.

With the anniversary of the siege, Kate’s death has been referenced more than once, albeit with Sandra commenting on it in the context of her current storyline in which Pat has become physically abusive and is one of a number of suspects in Sheila Grant’s rape. "it started in violence and it’s ending in violence” she grimly reflects about their relationship.

Despite playing out for a while, Pat’s switch to the dark side has still felt as convenient as his sudden friendship with Sheila. I willingly believe it because the overarching story is golden but the plot-driven angle feels more glaring at times here, probably because of its focus on characters with shallower roots.

Meanwhile, characters behave in ways that serve the plot. Alun Jones’s public “confession” to Matty about his and Sheila’s romantic intentions couldn’t have come at a less convenient time. It’s notable that Alun hasn’t been seen on-screen since the night of Sheila’s rape. It’s a nice double or triple bluff, because convention suggests that keeping a character out of sights could mean that they want us to forget about them while we’re assessing suspects. But we’re too clever for that so that makes him suspect #1. Unless that’s what the writers want us to think. And we’re too clever for that… And so the circle goes round.

By necessity, most of the suspects aren’t core characters. Again, this concession to the “rules” means that any one of them could be credible. But some of these characters feel purely functional. Sally Dinsdale is a cypher, and we know even less about her husband. I also have the disadvantage of knowing whodunit. But that matters not. It’s not about Sally or Alun or even Matty. It’s about how story informs character. And then it gets very real.

By Brookie standards, the strokes are a little broader at times, but we’re on board with it. We’re still in an era when going bigger actually meant something.






* It’s just occurred to me that Sheila’s drive for independence through education coincides with Heather - Brookie’s poster child for that very thing - finally tying the knot onscreen.

** One of the police officers in these episodes, incidentally, is played by an actor named Sebastian Aberini. Out of curiosity I did a little search which confirmed my suspicion that he's the brother of Daniel, who could be concurrently seen in Return To Eden, the latter episodes of which were first transmitted in the summer of 1986.

 

[PsychoDrama]

Episodes 376 - 390
3 June - 22 July 1986

continued
​

On paper, a rape whodunnit reads as highly tacky and salacious. I don’t know why this feels particularly taboo, since most whodunnits focus on serious crimes and could be viewed as trivialising murder or attempted murder or whatever. But taboo it feels.

The execution is another matter entirely. This feels groundbreaking not just in its subject matter, but in its focus. An episode summary or trailer showing soundbites of moments of heightened emotion could give the impression that this is sensationalism. But spending time in the Grants’ household after Sheila returns home, with Karen and Damon processing with the news that their mother has been assaulted and this is as intimate as it gets. It was actually Karen’s frozen horror that got to me more than anything as I watched.

This is a subject that has cropped up numerous times in dramatic television over the years but, even four decades on, it still feels refreshingly different to focus on the impact on the family as a whole and not just the victim or the victim and their partner.

There’s a great scene in the aftermath where Bobby and Sheila are in the bedroom while Karen and Damon are on the landing. She asks him to go down and make yet more tea, but Damon fumes that it's all wrong. Bobby is heard from the bedroom telling Damon to do as he’s told but Damon pushes back and rails that they should be doing something, before acquiescing and doing what is asked. This contrasts perfectly with him sobbing in the living room and Karen comforting him while Bobby looks on almost powerlessly. Nobody quite knows what to say or do and everyone goes through the motions, but there’s also a trust within the family that means everyone is somehow held.

Damon has been terrific since returning from Torquay. He’s grown up massively, and has become a voice of reason and of wisdom. But there’s also enough of the young innocent in him to make him vulnerable. He’s the one that’s pulled Bobby on not supporting Sheila enough when she was shaken over a run-in. He threw his Uncle Matty out of the house when he became aggressive with Sheila. But there’s a moment where he learns that Pat is charged with rape and meekly says “me Mam” that reminds the audience he’s still a young lad in many ways.

Another way these episodes strike exactly the right chord is adding balance with some much-needed lighter stories and even levity.

Harry Cross has been responsible for much of this. Ahead of this his antics have seen him locked out of his own house by his lodger (Ralph was annoyed that Harry had blabbed to Sheila about Guy spending the night with Karen and went the most passive-aggressive route by sending him to Coventry. Scenes that pushed my low Ralph tolerance beyond its limit).

Harry and Ralph have also been brought to the periphery of the current main storyline as observers and interested parties. Harry learning to drive tied in to this in an episode where we watched him pretending to drive from the comfort of his living room using two chairs with books as pedals. After Pat’s physical fight with Sandra, Harry and Ralph watch Pat race into the van and screech carelessly off at speed, prompting Harry to tut “I don’t think much of his clutch control”.

When the police are questioning neighbours, Harry gives them the rundown on the entire Close from the Corkhills (“council estate mentality”) to the Collinses (“too uppity”), naturally saying all the incriminating things about the Grants and his tenants. After describing every character but himself, he’s asked where he fits in. “I keep myself to myself”.

There’s also quite a chilling moment where Harry and Ralph read about a “mother of four” who has been raped, not knowing it’s their neighbour. Harry scoffing that she’d probably left her young kids at home then led on her boyfriend at the pub was a fascinating study of human cynicism and of media intrusion. Contrasting the dehumanised “story” with the reality of Sheila’s ordeal (and her distress upon seeing the story in print) is another thing I don’t recall seeing too often.

The storyline has seen an unusual east/west division in the Close, with the east side being almost entirely uninvolved. Barring Nick waving to an unseeing Sheila as she stumbled home and Billy asking Damon why the busies had visited Number Five, everyone’s been involved in their own storylines.

The excitement at Number Ten has come from Billy’s too-good-to-be-true job offer with large salary, company car and his own pager. Doreen celebrates by buying Tracy a hideous outfit, which she hastily exchanges for a migraine inducing number. Billy’s so happy he’s even made peace with Rod’s application to join the police force.

And Heather is now Mrs Nicholas Black (or, as she puts it on her wedding night, he is now Mr Heather Haversham). And now she’s contending with stroppy teens who don’t want a stepmother - especially one who likes peace and order. And she’s found large cash withdrawals from Nick’s account. More trouble can’t be far away, but seeing Heather keeping her patience in check while Nick is as insouciant as ever is enjoyable enough without any escalation.

I’m curious to know how much the audience knew ahead of time regarding Sheila’s rape. Like the siege, the events leading up to and the fallout from Sheila’s rape has a sense of event. It’s shocking, ugly and brutal, but it’s also compelling drama, brilliantly written and played. Just as the high drama of the siege or George Jackson’s false imprisonment was utilised to draw in new viewers, it’s difficult to imagine this not being utilised to promote or sell the series, particularly given the quality of the production at this point.

As we watched last night, someone asked if Brookie had received any awards or official recognition for this storyline. I wasn't actually 100% certain. I know it's extremely highly regarded even now, but suspect it wasn't the era where this kind of work was rewarded to the extent it deserved.

 

[James from London]

There’s more soapiness when Karen sees Matty and Mo together and debates whether or not to say anything to Sheila

This reminded me of the moment a few earlier when Petra and Barry "just happened" to see Roger and Diane McAllister together while they were out and about. Of course, this the kind of thing that occurs all the time in a regular soap, but because the characters in Brookside live in a version of the real world as opposed to a self-contained one, it paradoxically feels extra soapy when it happens here.

Rod’s 18th felt completely authentic, with Billy moving furniture and knick-knacks upstairs to avoid them being damaged or desecrated while Doreen objected because people wouldn’t see her lovely stuff. Her sharp change of tune as soon as Billy reminded her of her own 21st (she gravely told them to strip the room) reminded me very much of that scene in Jaws where Ellen suddenly calls the boys in from the boat upon seeing a painting of a shark ramming a hull... moments after telling Martin he was worrying over nothing.

The music thumping over the house and the entire Close. The teens pairing off and finding bedrooms. The booze and spills and throwing up. It all perfectly captured a moment, thanks to Jimmy McGovern’s writing. The newly-liberated Billy is surprisingly cool-headed when he and Doreen walk in to the devastation and have to climb over a chair and a heap of horny kids to get to their own bedroom.

One of my least favourite things in a soap (and Enders is especially guilty of this on occasion) is scenes involving a couple of central characters surrounded by a bunch of extras all acting "spontaneously", i.e., like a herd of mute sheep. It just sucks the energy of the whole thing. A party where almost none of the guests have a speaking part should be a prime example of this, but Brookside totally get away with it here by presenting a series of beautifully observed, almost-but-not-quite frozen tableaus of drunken teenage carnage and its aftermath for Billy and Doreen (not to mention poor little Tracey) to react to. (To my mind, this was a far better deployment of extras than the tiresomely comedic subplot a few episodes later involving Harry, Ralph, a disability badge and a mute traffic warden, which was like something Benny Hill might have done about ten years earlier.)

You can't imagine Bobby and Sheila letting Damon have an eighteenth birthday party in a million years. It's funny: outside of the family home, Damon has always been the far more confident of the two teenage boys -- the cocky leader of the gang, while Rod just made moon-eyes at Heather -- but behind closed doors, their personas are almost reversed. Damon is the family appointed tea-maker, repeatedly reminded of his place in the pecking order by the rest of them, while Rod answers back and is quite cheeky to his parents, especially Doreen. Perhaps it's significant that there seems to be less of an age gap between the Corkhills and their kids than there is between the Grants and theirs (Barry excepted).

I just watched a similar scenario to Rod's party in EastEnders in Jan 1991. Here it's Diane Butcher's 17th birthday do, and the concerns are the same: should Frank and Pat stay upstairs just in case things get out of hand and risk cramping the birthday girl's style or go out and leave her and brother Ricky to it? The outcome's not dissimilar to Brookie's, only the kids manage to conceal most of the mess from the grownups. There's some funny stuff at the party (Ricky drunkenly trying to find common ground with Diane's art school friends is probably the highlight), even if it lacks the authenticity of Rod's do. This being a more conventional soap, there's more emphasis on developing ongoing storylines involving the party guests than in presenting a totally realistic slice of teenage life.

 

[PsychoDrama]

Of course, this the kind of thing that occurs all the time in a regular soap, but because the characters in Brookside live in a version of the real world as opposed to a self-contained one, it paradoxically feels extra soapy when it happens here.

Yes. Watching recent episodes with all the overlapping between households I was reflecting that as much as I love (and in general probably favour) the angle of earlier episodes where every home was an island functioning in isolation from the one next to it, it's so nice to see that Brookie can still do sudsy in a way that is hugely satisfying.

A party where almost none of the guests have a speaking part should be a prime example of this, but Brookside totally get away with it here by presenting a series of beautifully observed, almost-but-not-quite frozen tableaus of drunken teenage carnage and its aftermath for Billy and Doreen (not to mention poor little Tracey) to react to.

Yes - it was great.

Another angle I loved was the noise pollution affecting unrelated scenes in other homes - especially Heather and Nick's heart to heart next door. It's incredibly refreshing compared with many other presentations of a party where nearby homes seem completely unaffected. Dealing with this kind of thing can be a fairly significant part of living in a community and hugely affect relationships, so I'm surprised there isn't more of this kind of stuff in soap.

(To my mind, this was a far better deployment of extras than the tiresomely comedic subplot a few episodes later involving Harry, Ralph, a disability badge and a mute traffic warden, which was like something Benny Hill might have done about ten years earlier.)

Tiresomely comedic is the perfect description for that sequence. It just didn't ring true at all, and was completely forgettable (in fact I already had forgotten it until you reminded me).

Perhaps it's significant that there seems to be less of an age gap between the Corkhills and their kids than there is between the Grants and theirs (Barry excepted).

Now you mention it, yes, I think there is. Gosh - this era is really bringing some age-related things up that I hadn't noticed before (like the difference in Paul and Annabelle's ages, which was implicitly mentioned again when Heather's slobby cousin put his foot in it by commenting to them on the age gap between Heather and Nick).

I just watched a similar scenario to Rod's party in EastEnders in Jan 1991. Here it's Diane Butcher's 17th birthday do, and the concerns are the same: should Frank and Pat stay upstairs just in case things get out of hand and risk cramping the birthday girl's style or go out and leave her and brother Ricky to it? The outcome's not dissimilar to Brookie's, only the kids manage to conceal most of the mess from the grownups. There's some funny stuff at the party (Ricky drunkenly trying to find common ground with Diane's art school friends is probably the highlight), even if it lacks the authenticity of Rod's do. This being a more conventional soap, there's more emphasis on developing ongoing storylines involving the party guests than in presenting a totally realistic slice of teenage life.

That's an interesting contrast. And bouncing between 1986 Brookie and 1991 'Enders sounds very attractive indeed.

 

[James from London]

A year before this it felt the air was filled with portent that foreshadowed the siege This summer, too, the air has been thick for some weeks with an atmosphere suggesting that something is around the corner.

Gosh, I remember the exact same point being made, if more critically, on Right to Reply, C4's edgier equivalent to Points of View which used to air immediately after the Brookie omnibus on Saturday afternoons. Before the rape aired, two women complained in the Video Box that exactly a year after a female (not to mention the show's only Black) character had been murdered, yet more female characters (Sheila, Sandra, Sally) were once again the targets of male violence, with the explicit references to Kate's death adding fuel to the fire. Brookside's response, as it usually was on Right to Reply, was, "Keep watching and it'll all become clear."

Matty is willing to throw Teresa and his children, driven by his passion (or lust) for Mo, and is driven to repeated aggression towards Sheila for her interference. This has been quite a stretch for me given the Matty we know. But the series uses this to compound Sheila’s horror at his personality switch (and Bobby’s earlier disbelief when initially told of the affair with Mo). It may be out of character, but as a recurring character Matty is also peripheral enough for us to buy there could be more to him than we realise.

What also helps explain Matty's behaviour for me, as well as Teresa's, is the backdrop of long-term unemployment. That, as much as his feelings for Mo, fuels his desperation to find an escape, if only into a romantic fantasy, which of course turns into anger and hatred towards Sheila once that fantasy is taken away. I thought the actress who played Mo (who reminded me of Julie Walters in one of her less comedic, more flinty-eyed roles) also did a brilliant job of bringing to life what was only hinted at in the script: her own reasons for needing to find love with Matty and then to end the affair once the bubble had burst. In a storyline chockfull of highlights, the final scene between her and Sheila was one of the best -- one of those cases of two enemies unexpectedly reaching an understanding, like in the final scenes between Sheila and Marie, Lou Beale and Pat Butcher, even Sue Ellen and Mandy Winger.

I can no longer tune out a Pat-ism that I realise has actually been there for a while: the tendency to start most lines by sharply turning his head away from the person to whom he’s speaking, instead looking at the floor for half a line before looking back (the camera placement seems to inform this as the turn is usually in the direction of the camera).

Oh interesting!

"it started in violence and it’s ending in violence” she grimly reflects

A far more evocative line than the relationship it describes.

Sally Dinsdale is a cypher, and we know even less about her husband.

It's kind of interesting how uninterested Brookside ultimately is in Sally. I think it's to the writers' credit that they don't make some simplistic attempt to get inside her head. Karen's shrugged-shouldered response when Damon asks what makes tick kind of says it all. Neither she nor the series are in a position to fully explain Sally's choices: this simply isn't her story. Perhaps one could say that, for better or worse, Mandy Jordache will be Sally Dinsdale Revisited: the same situation told from a different point of view.

It’s just occurred to me that Sheila’s drive for independence through education coincides with Heather - Brookie’s poster child for that very thing - finally tying the knot onscreen.

Oh yes, I hadn't thought of that. I do think it's fascinating that Heather's promotion at work, aka her victory, the goal she's been after since the series began, happens entirely off screen and is treated almost casually. The thing that has defined her character on screen all along -- her ambition, her determination to succeed on her own terms -- is no longer the thing that defines her character on screen. Now the character is defined by a marriage to a man both she, and we, are beginning to realise she doesn't really know. Somehow, somewhere along the line, we've strayed into Alfred Hitchcock territory.

One of the police officers in these episodes, incidentally, is played by an actor named Sebastian Aberini. Out of curiosity I did a little search which confirmed my suspicion that he's the brother of Daniel, who could be concurrently seen in Return To Eden, the latter episodes of which were first transmitted in the summer of 1986.

Wow ... that is next-level trivia!

On paper, a rape whodunnit reads as highly tacky and salacious. I don’t know why this feels particularly taboo, since most whodunnits focus on serious crimes and could be viewed as trivialising murder or attempted murder or whatever. But taboo it feels.

The execution is another matter entirely.

The way I've heard Jimmy McGovern describe it (and it was his idea, I believe), this was very much a calculated response to "Who got MIchelle pregnant?" on EastEnders. a way to get people talking about the series and to keep Sue Johnston interested in playing the part. If I recall correctly, Cracker also features a rape whodunnit which, again, could easily have been crass and cheap but instead is powerful and devastating.

I guess it's like pairing Sheila with Billy, or even Who Shot JR?: you come up with the big idea first, and then work backwards to make it credible and compelling.

spending time in the Grants’ household after Sheila returns home, with Karen and Damon processing with the news that their mother has been assaulted and this is as intimate as it gets. It was actually Karen’s frozen horror that got to me more than anything as I watched.

Yes, I think different moments have leapt out at me each time I've watched this ep. This time, it was Bobby frantically, desperately trying to make sense of what Sheila's just told him. It's almost unimaginable to know what it's like for the victim, so it's by experiencing it second or third hand, through someone else's eyes, that it starts to hit home. I re-watched the aftermath of Kathy's rape on Enders recently and for some strange reason it was the bewildered response of her brother-in-law Arthur, the third or fourth person to hear the news, that moved me the most.

Another parallel with the Enders story: in both cases, there is a clued-up younger woman, Karen on Brookie; Michelle on Enders, on hand while the victim is being interviewed by the police, who is ready to pounce on any hint of a suggestion that she has brought this on herself. It's probably the most "messagey" both storylines get, and both Karen and Michelle make very credible mouthpieces.

Harry and Ralph have also been brought to the periphery of the current main storyline as observers and interested parties. Harry learning to drive tied in to this in an episode where we watched him pretending to drive from the comfort of his living room using two chairs with books as pedals. After Pat’s physical fight with Sandra, Harry and Ralph watch Pat race into the van and screech carelessly off at speed, prompting Harry to tut “I don’t think much of his clutch control”.

I'm missing Madge in Harry and Ralph's scenes. (Happily I'm getting my fix of her in Making Out, which I'm watching before it falls off the iPlayer, where she cuts a much more glamorous figure than she does here.) Without her, I'm finding the geriatric Likely Lads a bit tedious.

When the police are questioning neighbours, Harry gives them the rundown on the entire Close from the Corkhills (“council estate mentality”) to the Collinses (“too uppity”), naturally saying all the incriminating things about the Grants and his tenants. After describing every character but himself, he’s asked where he fits in. “I keep myself to myself”.

Actually, that was a fun scene.

here’s also quite a chilling moment where Harry and Ralph read about a “mother of four” who has been raped, not knowing it’s their neighbour. Harry scoffing that she’d probably left her young kids at home then led on her boyfriend at the pub was a fascinating study of human cynicism and of media intrusion. Contrasting the dehumanised “story” with the reality of Sheila’s ordeal (and her distress upon seeing the story in print) is another thing I don’t recall seeing too often.

Yes, very strong. It feels a bit wrong to include it in the Soapy Headlines thread, but ultimately my need for completion overrides any sense of taste and decency.

I’m curious to know how much the audience knew ahead of time regarding Sheila’s rape.

I'm fairly certain we knew nothing. In fact, I didn't realise she had been raped, which might just be my own naivety, until the next episode. It didn't occur to me, although I remember my mum was pretty sure that's what had happened.

As we watched last night, someone asked if Brookie had received any awards or official recognition for this storyline. I wasn't actually 100% certain. I know it's extremely highly regarded even now, but suspect it wasn't the era where this kind of work was rewarded to the extent it deserved.

I think Sue Johnston won some obscure industry award at some point for Brookside, but of course this was all pre-soap or telly awards. It was so real, and soaps were so looked down on. you almost didn't think about the acting, which made it all the more powerful. You couldn't go on Twitter straight after and say "Bla Bla deserves a BAFTA", you just had to try and make sense of what you'd just seen in your own head.

Speaking of acting, I think possibly the most powerful scene of this bunch of instalments is the one a couple of episodes later where Sheila's in bed and Bobby's trying to question her about Alun Jones, and she ends up turning away from him. It's just so real, so claustrophobic, I almost have to make a mental effort to remind myself to that they're acting.

 

[PsychoDrama]

Before the rape aired, two women complained in the Video Box that exactly a year after a female (not to mention the show's only Black) character had been murdered, yet more female characters (Sheila, Sandra, Sally) were once again the targets of male violence, with the explicit references to Kate's death adding fuel to the fire.

It's always good to get the added context of responses from the era. These are actually very valid points, but then again...

Brookside's response, as it usually was on Right to Reply, was, "Keep watching and it'll all become clear."

So's this.

What also helps explain Matty's behaviour for me, as well as Teresa's, is the backdrop of long-term unemployment. That, as much as his feelings for Mo, fuels his desperation to find an escape, if only into a romantic fantasy, which of course turns into anger and hatred towards Sheila once that fantasy is taken away.

Yes. This was even touched upon in dialogue, and it really does help swing it. I think this is why Matty needed to be a secondary character, as well. It was important to realistically show the spiral of devastation from long-term unemployment but it could be just too bleak if this was happening to a series regular for this length of time. Paul, Bobby, Billy, Damon... we've taken that journey with each of them for periods of time, but Matty's feels the most profound due to its intensity.

I thought the actress who played Mo (who reminded me of Julie Walters in one of her less comedic, more flinty-eyed roles) also did a brilliant job of bringing to life what was only hinted at in the script: her own reasons for needing to find love with Matty and then to end the affair once the bubble had burst.

There were a few episodes where Mo started to make digs at Sheila and I was concerned the writing could easily head into a lack of nuance... making Mo the clear antagonist in order to redeem Matty and let him off the hook. But as I'm sure Brookside's official line would have been "keep watching and it'll all become clear" I can look back and say they were right.

I can completely see the Julie Walters tone now you mention it.

In a storyline chockfull of highlights, the final scene between her and Sheila was one of the best -- one of those cases of two enemies unexpectedly reaching an understanding, like in the final scenes between Sheila and Marie, Lou Beale and Pat Butcher, even Sue Ellen and Mandy Winger.

It was a wonderful scene, and I like it even more now you'd pointed out the similarities in those other screen relationships.

It's kind of interesting how uninterested Brookside ultimately is in Sally. I think it's to the writers' credit that they don't make some simplistic attempt to get inside her head.

Yes to both of these. She may be a functional character, but it all serves the surrounding story so well it works.

Perhaps one could say that, for better or worse, Mandy Jordache will be Sally Dinsdale Revisited: the same situation told from a different point of view.

Oh yes. She will.

I do think it's fascinating that Heather's promotion at work, aka her victory, the goal she's been after since the series began, happens entirely off screen and is treated almost casually. The thing that has defined her character on screen all along -- her ambition, her determination to succeed on her own terms -- is no longer the thing that defines her character on screen.

Even the news that she had Tench's job came in a throwaway line amid the pre-wedding hubbub. I don't think she even had a chance to share second hand details about her first day with Nick (and us) because of the disruption caused by his children. It's quite a turnaround as there have been lengthy periods where we barely set foot in Number Nine because Heather was permanently at the office.

The way I've heard Jimmy McGovern describe it (and it was his idea, I believe), this was very much a calculated response to "Who got MIchelle pregnant?" on EastEnders. a way to get people talking about the series and to keep Sue Johnston interested in playing the part.

Ooh. So the siege was a response to EastEnders itself, and this whodunnit was a response to a specific storyline on that series.

Fascinating that the series which essentially began life with the intent of being to the Eighties what Corrie was to the Sixties is now looking directly at its contemporary competition. It also shows what an impact EastEnders made from the beginning.

Funny you mentioned Jimmy Mac coming up with this storyline. Looking at this list of episodes from 1986 I noticed there's a gap of almost four months between episodes written by him, and it's from the beginning of June until the end of September. Since this period is when the rape story was happening I'd wondered if there was a reason for Jimmy's absence and come up with the dramatic thought that perhaps he disagreed with the storyline and stepped back on principle. Clearly (and thankfully) I was wrong.

If I recall correctly, Cracker also features a rape whodunnit which, again, could easily have been crass and cheap but instead is powerful and devastating.

Every titbit you drop about this show makes me more and more curious. It's going to have to happen one day.

Another parallel with the Enders story: in both cases, there is a clued-up younger woman, Karen on Brookie; Michelle on Enders, on hand while the victim is being interviewed by the police, who is ready to pounce on any hint of a suggestion that she has brought this on herself. It's probably the most "messagey" both storylines get, and both Karen and Michelle make very credible mouthpieces.

I completely get that parallel.

I found Karen and Damon's responses really interesting because their immediate outlooks were switched from my expectations. I love how protective they both were of Sheila, but I'd have envisioned Karen pushing to contact the police immediately (in fact as I watched I thought of Michelle stopping Kathy from taking a bath at the Fowlers because she knew it would wash away evidence), but it seems that Karen's distrust of the system overpowered her desire for justice and protecting Sheila from further intrusion was her priority, so she actually fought that option because she didn't feel Sheila was ready.

I also loved feisty Karen getting defensive with the questions

I'm missing Madge in Harry and Ralph's scenes.

Same here. I've assumed Shirley Stelfox was busy doing something else at this point. If it's not theatre, looking at IMDb the only screen work that might fit would be Personal Services (which would certainly make a change from taking Harry through his clutch control if it is the case).

It feels a bit wrong to include it in the Soapy Headlines thread, but ultimately my need for completion overrides any sense of taste and decency.

Thinking about it, it's actually quite meta. Anyone reading that thread who isn't familiar with the series or storyline would see just another headline - very much as Harry and Ralph did - and so it builds on the message of that scene, which very much got me thinking about how lack of detail can distort a story and almost dehumanise its subject.

I found it fascinating seeing it in that context. It's also funny you should say about it feeling wrong, because I wanted to give it a Winner rating for the reasons in the paragraph above... but I ended up giving too much consideration how that might look to someone seeing it without context.

I'm fairly certain we knew nothing. In fact, I didn't realise she had been raped, which might just be my own naivety, until the next episode. It didn't occur to me, although I remember my mum was pretty sure that's what had happened.

Gosh. I'm impressed that it wasn't public knowledge ahead of time. It was easier then to avoid spoilers, but I really thought the powers that be might have wanted to draw in viewers with some promotion ahead of it.

I can only imagine the shock of watching the story organically without any knowledge of it.

It was so real, and soaps were so looked down on. you almost didn't think about the acting, which made it all the more powerful. You couldn't go on Twitter straight after and say "Bla Bla deserves a BAFTA", you just had to try and make sense of what you'd just seen in your own head.

God yes. Back then there were so many things that wowed me that I ended up just sitting with or having it resonating in my head for days or weeks. Having the forum to decompress makes for a different experience, but I'm very glad I don't do social media and get zillions of interpretations of a scene within seconds of watching.

I think possibly the most powerful scene of this bunch of instalments is the one a couple of episodes later where Sheila's in bed and Bobby's trying to question her about Alun Jones, and she ends up turning away from him. It's just so real, so claustrophobic, I almost have to make a mental effort to remind myself to that they're acting.

It's bloody brilliant, but it also feels voyeuristic for exactly the reasons you've said. It's weird, but it feels almost a privilege to be part of such intimacy.

 

[James from London]

Funny you mentioned Jimmy Mac coming up with this storyline.

Or as this headline (in the Independent!) puts it so salaciously:

The man who raped Sheila Grant

`I'm not particularly fascist or racist or homophobic, you know - I try to lead a good life'

www.independent.co.uk

 

[PsychoDrama]

I've only scanned over this and will come back to it later, but I'm already very curious to know what other three ideas were mooted to keep Sue Johnston interested.

And the descriptions of Cracker, Priest, etc. have added to my hunger to seek out more McGovern material. Current thinking is I might line it up for whenever I check out of Brookside... if I can wait that long.

 

[James from London]

I'm already very curious to know what other three ideas were mooted to keep Sue Johnston interested.

I think one would have been some kind of love affair with a priest, which McGovern later adapted for Priest and then The Lakes, and which Brookside itself watered down and gave to the Farnhams' nanny Margaret and DD Dixon's brother, once J McG was out of the picture.

 

[PsychoDrama]

I think one would have been some kind of love affair with a priest, which McGovern later adapted for Priest and then The Lakes

This is one that I wondered about as well. I remember you mentioned it when Sheila was having regular interactions with a young priest. I think it was after Claire's birth, around the time of the Grants' dry spell and Bobby's vasectomy. After that, I'd kind of cemented it in my head as happening at that time, but it would make perfect sense that it was one of the four ideas. It's certainly up there with a "Who Raped Sheila?" mystery as a story that grabs the viewer by the throat.

 

[PsychoDrama]

Re-reading The Man Who Raped Sheila Grant, it really is great to find out more about Jimmy McGovern. It's intriguing that he comes from an educational background, in common with Jim Wiggins and Dean Sullivan (and perhaps others).

Reading what he's said about enjoying intrusive noises from walkie talkies or refuse collection lorries, I hope to keep an eye out for this kind of thing... if I can remember it by the time I get to his stuff.


Off the back of it, I've found myself creating a little spreadsheet of his work and where it's currently available to stream or buy.

I couldn't find any of his pre-Cracker work (Needle, Traitors, Gas and Candles) to stream or buy anywhere. There's also no sign of Hearts and Minds, Go Now, Heart or Common from his later work.

The vast majority of his work seems to have been for the BBC, but only one solitary project (Time) can currently be found on iPlayer. Even more curiously many of the BBC ones are available on rival streaming services (STV, My4, Prime, etc).

Meanwhile, the only way to watch Priest in full appears to be on the Netherlands DVD complete with Dutch subtitles. It seems Miramax cut around 8 minutes from the American print (not too surprising given the different countries' sensibilities), so I'd take subtitles over sanitisation any day.

I noticed some actors appearing in numerous projects: Christopher Eccleston, Ricky Tomlinson and Robert Carlyle seem popular with him.

Another curio: when I put Jimmy's name into Prime, it came up with two films, neither of which has his involvement to the best of my knowledge. But one of them - The Street - has a name in common with a McG series, while the other - Let Him Have It - stars Christopher Eccleston. Even more coincidentally, both of these have already been in my rather short Prime watchlist for some time.

I'm not sure when I'll get round to exploring more of Jimmy's work, but at least I'm starting to get an idea where to start with it all.





Back on Brookside, my partner - who doesn't know the outcome of the current storyline - has correctly deduced whodunnit (on the first guess, mind you). I attempted a poker face and refused to confirm or deny.

 

[PsychoDrama]

Episodes 391 - 400
28 July - 26 August 1986
​

As Nick Black, Alan Rothwell is doing a very nice job of being frustratingly vague. His insouciant apathy to his kids’ less sociable behaviour is giving them carte blanche to wind up their new stepmother and score points over her, and it’s almost agonising to watch. This kind of emotional warfare isn’t an easy thing to transmit to the viewer, but the micro-aggressions we see - while not always the subtlest - are just enough to put us firmly in Heather’s shoes.

Like Heather I live in a very calm household and would find it jarring to suddenly be confronted with noise and mess and intrusion, so watching her living this hell is a little anxiety-provoking. I’m impressed with, and at times surprised by, her poised responses. Heather has always been very direct and - when pushed - even combative. Here, though, she only asserts herself up to a point, surprising me with her choice to shrug some of these concerns off and try to take on some of Nick’s relaxed attitude. This feels almost out of character because Heather is not one for internalising her dissatisfaction. This is the woman who, just before becoming Mrs Black, had no trouble telling Harry Cross he wasn’t invited to her wedding when he tried to invite himself, and throwing him out of her house when he was ungracious in his response. But there are very few ties that bind her to her neighbour, and many which rule such assertiveness out as an option in her responses to her stepchildren.

It strikes me that this powder keg of a situation is an “at home” version of challenges with which Heather has previously had to deal in her professional life: biting her tongue and being amiable in the face of aggression because she knows to make waves in these fragile relationships at this crucial point could cause untold damage. Heather’s previously suppressed or turned something of a blind eye to unhealthy situations with Roger and Tom, but never before has her sanctuary been disrupted to this degree. The emphasis on a dysfunctional home life means this is in some ways her most conventionally soapy story but, because it’s happening to Heather, it feels we’re breaking some new ground.

On top of this, the series then takes the step of shifting the focus of scenes at Number Nine by sending Heather overseas as part of her new working role. For the latter episodes of this run, we see Nick, two of his children - Scott and Ruth - and Nick’s particularly sketchy acquaintance, Charlie.

For the latter part of this run, the change in dynamics and the lack of ties to earlier episodes in the household mean that - on the surface at least - it’s like watching a completely new household. At this point, it’s suggested that this is how Nick was living before he met Heather, but because they’ve been integrated organically there’s nothing jarring. It’s even quite familiar. And Heather is still the key player in this, because all tension comes from the concern that she will discover the skeleton in Nick’s cupboard.

The freedom brought by Heather’s absence, the passing references to the skeleton have increased. Speak about the burglary at the flat Nick still keeps, Nick and Charlie speak in a kind of telegraphese when Scott is present, meaningful looks and knowing emphases on important words mean that we are almost as much in the dark as Scott. When Nick is palpably relieved that his “video” is safe, it’s evident it’s not the video we’re talking about.

While I know where this is going, it’s still fun to see how each new clue can create speculation. The more we hear, the more possibilities there are. Ruth disapproves of Charlie’s presence and warns Nick that if Heather sees him “she’ll find out”. There’s a casual intimacy between the two men - who clearly know one another well. Charlie makes himself at home, looking meaningfully at Nick as he says he intends to stay the night. And the next morning, Nick phones work to take the week off in order to spend it lounging with Charlie. Charlie also moves into the flat to which Nick apparently plans to retreat.

It’s clear that Charlie is a bad influence, but it’s also heavily implied that he’s a threat to the status quo. Neither Scott nor Ruth likes Charlie and it’s apparent there’s history there.

Given the evidence (and onscreen energy at times) it would be perfectly logical to suspect that Nick’s big secret is homosexuality or bisexuality (and wasn’t this originally supposed to be the case?). How this might look in light of Nick’s ex-wife Barbara now happily living with her female lover is fascinating to consider. Either way, whether it's by design or because of an abandoned plot idea (I suspect the former), it's a very nice piece of misdirection.

continued…​

 

[PsychoDrama]

Episodes 391 - 400
28 July - 26 August 1986

continued
​

Coinciding with the almost-gay tension currently on display in Nick’s storyline, there’s actual gay tension with the return of the long-absent Gordon.

By original transmission, it’s been the best part of two years since Gordon was last physically on-screen, though his story has evolved hugely since he was last seen, frolicking at a Hallowe’en party with his girlfriend and a medical skeleton.

Another thing that intrigues me about the timing of Gordon’s return is that both Annabelle and Paul have plenty of material of their own going on of late. Annabelle has become a magistrate, despite of Paul’s brush with the law during his road safety campaign (or, in part, because of it, since it appeared in the paper on the day of Anna’s interview, with those conducting it suitably impressed by Paul’s passion for his crusade).

Neither one of them lacks interest in their own right at the moment. With Paul’s redundancy creating more opportunities than it closes. The change of life has actually breathed new life into him, and he’s more open and three-dimensional than he has been for some time. Annabelle, too, is passionate about what she’s doing, and they function individually in their own plots on and off Close as well as together. Some of it has been essentially frivolous - such as Paul trying to hide his inability to ride a bike not only from neighbours but also Annabelle - but it’s the kind of frivolity that adds balance and injects a sense of fun.

Because of this, it doesn’t feel as though Gordon is needed. But in the best possible way. There’s no sense that his return is a plot device or anything less than organic. Certain seeds have been sown, with Paul’s avuncular attitude towards Adam Black especially seeming to pave the way. This, I think, is the second significant recast… the first being Gordon’s sibling. And there’s a certain consistency in the way the new face is revealed to the audience: once again, we see a photograph of the new-look Collins before the actor appears on-screen. Did Lucy also arrive back in a cab? I forget.

The writing revels in some ambiguity when it comes to the question of whether Gordon is or he isn’t, with the audience given much the same information as Paul and Annabelle. Neither they nor we know the gender of the “friend” Gordon is bringing until we see Cecile get out of the taxi with him (to Paul and Annabelle’s huge relief). We’re not told, at first, the nature of Gordon and Cecile’s relationship. They happily shared a bedroom, we learn, when they stayed with Lucy and Barry. But there wasn’t the space and they prefer separate rooms here. Gordon gives Cecile a kiss on both cheeks when heading to bed, but then he does the same to Annabelle (this is followed by a wonderfully comical moment when Gordon leans in and gives Paul a kiss on the head. Paul’s eyes widen and he makes a little sound of surprise before observing awkwardly that it’s “very French”).

The current state of play with Gordon’s sexuality is finally confirmed at the end of the 400th episode when Cecile, thinking it already known, tells the shocked Annabelle that Gordon and her brother Pierre were in love but have recently split up.

There’s just enough here to create conflict. Paul and Annabelle have both moved towards a degree of acceptance in Gordon’s absence - something we understood to be reinforced by an apparently pleasant visit to France in which there was a degree of reconciliation. Still, their scenes in private as Gordon’s return was imminent made clear that there’s still work to be done in terms of their comfort and acceptance. Social propriety is just too important to them, and both are too conservative - in both senses of the word - for this to be anything other than a slightly rocky road.

continued…​

 

[PsychoDrama]

Episodes 391 - 400
28 July - 26 August 1986

continued…
​

The shockwaves from Sheila’s rape have continued to resonate and impact. All the same, as I watch the latter part of these episodes I’ve found myself marvelling that there’s been so much focus on other households. The rape storyline hasn’t been in the background exactly, but others are being given space to continue and develop alongside it. Thinking about it, this is probably something that sets Brookie apart from more conventional soaps where characters are in one another’s pockets.

Don’t get me wrong, word did eventually get round much of the Close, but for most it has little resonance and most are fairly unaffected. One who has offered Sheila support has been Doreen Corkhill which has worked well because of the on-off tension between the characters. Somehow, that seems to give a distance that Sheila needs at the moment, and I suppose if it had been eighteen months earlier it would have been Marie who was initially brushed off then welcomed instead of Doreen.

The Corkhills have remained great fun to watch, by the way. Doreen’s Lady MacBeth bit has continued with her manipulating Billy to go to the dentist by outright lying, telling Tracy that lying is sometimes necessary for someone’s own good. Meanwhile, while Doreen was selling end-of-line clothing, and Julia was adding whisky to the terrible wine she’d bought to serve, Billy offered Bobby some company at Number Five. The big disappointment of this run is that we didn’t get to see their conversation (I wonder if it was filmed and deleted).

By the time of Doreen’s clothes party, Sheila is even feeling she can cope with an evening at the Corkhills - the goodwill stemming from her relief at losing the baby which was an unwanted outcome of the rape Incidentally, I’m a little surprised at relief being about the only emotion Sheila displayed at the loss. I’d have expected more mixed feelings since it’s her strong belief that life begins at conception. But I suppose that same belief would help her make sense of it as God’s will. Sheila also had the added catharsis of sending Alun Jones on his way with a flea in his ear.

And before the pregnancy drama, had come the reveal of whodunnit, but too late for poor Teresa, so depressed at her belief that Matty had been charged with the rape she went against her own strong beliefs to take her own life. The pointlessness of it all makes it absolutely heartbreaking to watch it play out, with the viewer drawn into both Matty and Teresa’s states of mind. Matty - having been put through the wringer during questioning - elated that he is vindicated and now a free man. Teresa, unaware of the development and in a fugue state, spiralling downwards.

The dialogue that plays around Teresa’s head feels both disorientating and subjective. The viewer is right in there with Teresa, sharing her memories good and bad and, possibly, real and imaginary (I couldn’t rightly remember whether some of the happier dialogue came from moments we’d previously seen. If not, I only had Teresa’s version of those memories which makes them somewhat unreliable given her state of mind), which makes the outcome hit much harder.

The writers have really put this couple through it, right from the start. It’s bleak, cruel and compelling.

Meanwhile, a visit from a reporter has been a nice way of shining a light on a number of soapy secrets in the series by having an intruder show interest. The scramble to conceal certain facts from the journalist involved several households. Ostensibly he was there to help Sandra pursue her case, but it turned out he was there to get an angle on the first anniversary of the siege and an update on the romance that developed between Sandra and Pat (now officially over, and Pat’s hurried on to the married wife of the manager of the football club he and Terry are suddenly very keen on. Sadly-but-inevitably, neither development has improved his watchability). Then the journo tried to find out who had been raped but was given false leads (not least from Damon, protective as ever of his family). Tracy - wanting this week to launch a modelling career - gave him a false name lest he discover she’s related to the Billy Corkhill who’s been in court recently. Coincidentally (and presumably not intentionally) she used the surname “Jones” - the family name of the three key female former occupants of Number Ten.

the only way to watch Priest in full appears to be on the Netherlands DVD complete with Dutch subtitles.

I've taken the plunge and ordered this. This is the earliest Jimmy Mac film available in any format, so it's likely to be my starting point whenever I dive into his stuff beyond Brookside. I'll probably begin with the films and save series like Cracker for later.