Discuss The Archers #108: Has Ed & Emma’s ship sailed? Will Alice stick her oar into Kate's love life? Can Shula walk on water? Come and discuss whatever floats your boat in The Archers.

[Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g]

Thank you, @PseudoBadger, for kicking off this long, long series of Archers threads and @DadDadDad for being our resident statistician and keeping the ball rolling when Pseudo stepped back a bit.

All views on The Archers welcome here! New blood welcomed. We don't all agree on all points and most of us are posting tongue in cheek a lot of the time, so don't worry about revealing that you'd like to be Susan's best friend or other unusual views.

Spoilers: not on this thread, please. We don't wait for the omnibus to discuss the weeknight episodes, but we do try our best to avoid cross-contamination from www.mumsnet.com/Talk/radio_addicts/3439443-keep-it-to-yourself-the-archers-spoilers-thread-4, where spoilers are positively welcomed!

For newer listeners, lurkers or those who just have no idea what we're talking about, DadDadDad has created this useful thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/radio_addicts/3557323-For-Archers-fans-a-guide-to-acronyms-on-the-long-running-discussion-threads-and-any-other-meta-thread-questions-you-may-have BOOP point for him! (See thread for explanation.)

Thanks to @QuaterMiss for the title of this thread. For reasons of space had to cut out the bit speculating about Oliver and Tracy pairing off. Surely not!

Off now to give blood, something nobody in Ambridge ever does. See you all later.

Will isn't just an ex either, he's her brother in law and the widower of her close friend. His behaviour was mad.

I think George shouldn't have had an option about going, but that's a separate issue.

Really? He's 14. When my dc are 14, if they don't want contact with their non-resident parent, I won't be forcing it. They'll be old enough to know when someone doesn't prioritise them and react accordingly.

It's a quote from the Bible, Asking, and in fact this passage from Proverbs 26 starts with an archer reference...

Like an archer who wounds at random
is one who hires a fool or any passer-by.
11 As a dog returns to its vomit,
so fools repeat their folly.
12 Do you see a person wise in their own eyes?
There is more hope for a fool than for them.

I’m not really interested in who was to blame or who was most misunderstood, my problem is it was just all too predictable. The SW have been signposting Emma thawing towards Will (I can’t really understand why since if anyone was to blame for them losing the house - apart from Ed himself - it is Will who spitefully dobbed his brother in). I feel we have been forced to listen to the tedious build up to last night in no doubt as to which way the wind was blowing - actually it would have been more surprising (and dare I say possibly even more interesting) if they had had a rapprochement. I suppose one good thing is that at least that’s out of the way and now we can get back to ramping up the animosity between them all. Yawn.

Will wasn't spiteful re dobbing Ed. He didn't think it through but it wasn't done out of spite.

I only caught the last few minutes of tonight's episode- was the rest as bad?

The ghost of Grey Gables is tedious beyond words and why is Tracey being cast as the gullible village idiot?

And as for Kate and Jakob's rom com....

C8I don’t think he necessarily wanted to have sex with her though? Just read the signals wrong and leaned in for a kiss? She put him in his place. Job done.

The BBC spoiler for last night said "Will gets the wrong impression" and The BBC synopsis said "Reminiscing and laughing, they agree they don’t regret marrying one another. Will misreads the signals and tries to kiss Emma. She recoils and he accuses her of leading him on. Horrified, she retorts that she’d just felt sorry for him; none of the children want to spend any time with him. He tells her to get out."

Why "horrified", I wonder? It's not as if she had never been kissed, or never been kissed by him, after all; and she never had any qualms about screwing her brother-in-law before.... And the signals were definitely there for him to misread; I have just re-listened and she was being friendly and giggly with him as she agreed that she didn't regret having married him.

In any case, by the time she reached thirty-five she surely ought to have learned how to say no to a very minor sexual advance without shrieking or pretending outrage or finding it necessary to be vilely unpleasant to the man whom she is rebuffing? Will would certainly have taken a simple "no" without her having to say "and everyone hates you and George didn't want to see you!" as well.

Thanks for the info, DDD. I knew it was somewhere! And yes, what a fool to have anything to do with Emma if he doesn't have to.

MargueritaBlue
Will wasn't spiteful re dobbing Ed. He didn't think it through but it wasn't done out of spite.
He didn't know that Ed's boss was there; Adam had gone off to do something or other and left Ed on his own. I strongly suspect that if Adam had been with Ed when Will arrived, Will would have left it at "I need to talk to you, as soon as you're off work" and gone away again, still furious.

She put him in his place. Job done. But she didn't just stop him - she said some awful things to him. Just like she did with Ed.

I actually find myself rooting foe Emma - I like her spirit and drive. I think her nastiness comes from frustration.

and why is Tracey being cast as the gullible village idiot? Because she's working class, therefore, comic relief.

Shula's not off to a good start with her vicaring training. Even if she thought Tracey and Susan were mucking about with her, she should have stayed professional and just left it at telling Tracey that the church doesn't do exorcisms.

And Kate and Jakob, just bleurgh. But if they're going to carry on down that road, perhaps we can hope that Jakob sorts her out.

I'm very much surprised at all this support for Will. I know Emma is far from popular but still.

I don't think Emma would have said half the things she did had Will not turned around and blamed her. Making a pass at her was bad enough, but calling her a tease was shameful. She's been stressing about the George situation all week, so it's not surprising it came all came out in a rush of rage. She's only just separated from his brother. She's so pathetically stressed and low. If Will doesn't understand how inappropriate that was he needs shouting at.

She definitely could have handled it much better but I'd be livid. It was very selfish of Will, he didn't consider George, Ed or Emma's potentially vulnerable state of mind.

That said, I do feel sorry for him. Emma was foolish not to confront the George situation, it was an unsustained lie.

I think Will using the word tease was to underline what an unpleasant man Will is

Looking at how she cheated on William with his brother just before their wedding, why does Emma get all the sympathy and William the odium? She's been revolting to him, I'm surprised that he let her through the door, she's looking for someone to buy her a house.

she's looking for someone to buy her a house
Emma's worked her tits off to buy a house! Even on the begging spree she was offering good interest on requested loans.

She is as offering good interest that she couldn’t possibly pay, given that the mortgage was a stretch. How did she plan to pay back short term loans of thousands with interest?

Was offering

I am also surprised (and slightly depressed; welcome back to the 1970s) by all the support for Will. I dislike Emma's character but I think she was looking for friendship from Will, not seduction. Making a move on her in her current vulnerable state was just horrible. Calling her "a tease" even worse. Not to mention that he is meant to be broken by grief for his late wife. His behaviour was hideous!

And yes what she said about George & co was unpleasant but there was a lot of truth in it which she was trying to protect him from before he insulted her.

I also thought Shula was unnecessarily snobbish and unpleasant to Tracy . I'm RC and asked a priest to come and bless my old house owing to its rather strange "ambiance". Not an exorcism exactly (but the words were quite full on!) so I don't think it was such a far-fetched request, unless things are very different in the C of E.

I also thought Shula was very nasty. I know I’m obsessed with her, but why is her ordination the only plot line that is constantly updated? Everything else lies dormant for months before suddenly becoming prominent again - as in Lexi’s sudden, unheralded reappearance.
I’m probably alone in this but I quite enjoy Kate and the new vet, and it’s nice to hear Brian and Jenny, even if they’re not being given much to work with.

she should have stayed professional and just left it at telling Tracey that the church doesn't do exorcisms.

I didn't hear this but so I don't know exactly what was said but the CofE does do exorcisms. Each diocese will have a Deliverance Minister (used to be called an exorcist), but it's not really publicised so perhaps Shula doesn't know about it.

I think these days they usually work alongside mental health professionals and take a team approach to anything particularly wild, but a house blessing such as pp described probably isn't that unusual.

Shula was awful. It was so vain of her to assume Tracey was only doing this to mock her.

Shula said they don't do exorcisms, so I was just going on that. We know how cavalier the SW are with accuracy.

I almost missed the mention of Lexi coming back next week, it was such a brief mention. So, unless something happens between now and then, it looks like our question about where she's having the baby, has been answered. I wonder if Ian and/or Adam will be at the birth?

I wonder if Ian and/or Adam will be at the birth?

I daresay the SWs are planning for them both to be there. Although no doubt the route to the hospital will be strewn with unforeseen hurdles.

Oh I missed that mention too Motoko!

And yes Chemenger why are we kept updated about Shula's life when so many other more interesting characters are ignored for months at a time? Is it my imagination, or did episodes a year or so ago feature a wider cast of characters in each one? Perhaps there has been a change in the actors' employment contracts?

I remember my CofE vicar mentioning exorcisms in my confirmation classes (I am guessing I was about 12). Decades later it is one of the few things I do remember from my confirmation classes. Surely Shula should encourage Tracey and Susan to talk to Alan (she isn't even a trainee vicar yet).

With Lexi returning wouldn't it be great if she could tie up some of those loose ends:
"Hi Phoebe, I've been wondering how you got on at Uni?"
"Lily, are you looking forward to going back to Manchester?"
"Kenton, where is Jolene these days?" etc etc

Surely Shula should encourage Tracey and Susan to talk to Alan (she isn't even a trainee vicar yet)
She (Shula) did! That's probably why she thought it was a pisstake; why ask someone just starting down the route rather than the one who has actually been doing the job since 2003?

Why can't they keep us up to date with the regular characters, instead of bringing in one-offs that add nothing that we couldn't have learned second hand.
We had the religious character grilling Shula, it was like a public information on "how to become a vicar" which we'd already heard from Alan and is probably factually incorrect anyway.
We had Lizzie's psychotherapist, (ok it was good to hear Lizzie's stream of consciousness), we had the bailiff(s)... etc. etc.
Yet real people disappear for months/years, and reappear with a new character voice and accent.