I have decided to do write-ups on All My Afternoons by Annie Gilbert. The book is copyright 1979 and has some very interesting information. This entry will be on the first part of the introductory chapter.
The first factoid was at the time nearly one out of every ten Americans would watch a soap opera on any particular weekday. It is also estimated that soaps pulled in between 55 and 75 percent of all that the network earns. Until earlier in the 1970’s soaps were ignored, they didn’t even get recognition by the Emmys until 1972, and the Daytime Emmys themselves were started in 1974. In 1975, the New York Times did an article about daytime, and the ball began to roll.
Back in 1976, college students started petitioning their universities to schedule classes so people could watch their programs. Before they were protesting war, now they just wanted to be able to watch television, how strange though back then VCRs weren't widely available. It also was said, that “soaps have a closer and more intimate communication with their audience than any other form of television programming.” The reasons behind that comment are not discussed, but my theory is partially is due to the regularity we see characters over the years.
When it comes to the discussion of fan mail Paul Rauch (who at the time was at Another World) is quoted that if the viewer interest is split down the middle, then the show has a good story. While that is true, a show may alienate half or even all of the audience depending the way a plot is written.
Back then a half hour show was 22 minutes. In the example given at Days of Our Lives, it cost $170,000 to produce a week of the program, but they got $120,000 worth of ad revenue a day. At their ratings peak they were getting $60,000 per minute of advertising.
The book then discusses how Proctor & Gamble handled their soaps back then. They mention the ad agencies that run the shows for P&G, but they had story control. Robert Short who headed up the soap opera division since the beginning. The book states how they look for long arc stories that takes years to tell, that the stories do not confuse or offend the viewers either. That’s why stories about homosexuality and the Vietnam War were not allowed. An example of one of Irna Phillips’ stories that was declined was about a man who leaves his wife for another woman, she wanted him to be happy with the other woman. P&G said he couldn’t be happy, so Irna did as they asked and killed the character.
How some believed soaps were hurting women was also mentioned. There was a psychiatrist named Dr. I. Berg, who believed it led to mental and physical symptoms like “vertigo and tachycardia to emotional instability.” That kind of is bizarre, but it gets worse. This Dr. also believed that widespread soap opera watching was giving the Axis Powers an edge during World War II. What??? So if the Allies lost WWII, it would have been the fault of soaps…that’s crazy talk.
Another person in the mental health field is quoted Anne KIlguss, chief psychiatric social worker in a hospital in Massachusetts. She used the programs to reach out to patients in group therapy. That is an interesting idea.
According to this book, most people prefer to watch soaps alone. Though viewers do like to discuss them with others, and references the “soap game”, which sounds a lot like what we do online. We compare predictions and writer’s style. We follow the careers of actors, and watch with an eagle eye.
One actor is mentioned though not by name saying that to their chagrin most viewers don’t know real names. A soap director is quoted that “there are some people out there—not lots of them, but a certain proportion—who think this is documentary television. They think we’ve really got a camera set up in someone’s living room.” Those are things I can’t relate to personally, but I would not be surprised to read that some feel that way.
In the olden days, the characters were immigrants or poor. As the years went by, characters had better careers like doctors or lawyers, and even later they run corporations. Also how soaps have characters suffer a lot more than in real life. The other item was that while soaps were written for women more men began to watch. Even so, soaps have complex female characters, which are lacking in other genres. They have highly successful careers, but have problems in their personal life, which reinforces traditional values at least according to the author. Soaps are seen as a stepchild in television, but the characters come to life in an uncanny way.
That’s my summary of the first part of the introduction. Soap operas over 30 years ago seem to be a world away from now. Hopefully in reading the rest of this book will help inform me better of how it used to be.
No comments:
Post a Comment