Archers thread #159: Sad news as 2023 draws to a close - RIP Ian Pepperell (Roy Tucker). Discuss The Archers here.

[Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g]

Thank you, @PseudoBadger, for kicking off this long, long series of Archers threads.

All views on The Archers welcome here! New blood welcomed, and of course we are always delighted to welcome back former or occasional listeners/posters. We don't all agree on all points, although we do mostly try to be civil about it. Most of us are posting tongue in cheek a lot of the time, so don't worry about revealing that you'd like more of Gagriculture, 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/4636789-the-archers-spoilers-thread-7-cant-wait-for-702pm-join-us-here, 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.)

We start this thread with the very sad news that Ian Pepperell, who played Roy Tucker from 1995 without a break, has died at the age of 53. There's a lovely tribute to him in this article from Jeremy Howe, the current Editor. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2023/dec/23/the-archers-actor-ian-pepperell-dies-aged-53-roy-archer-eastenders

Graham Blockey, who played Robert Snell, died just over a year ago, also far too young (66). https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/much-loved-surrey-gp-archers-25524449 As yet, Robert survives in Ambridge.

I do hope they don't re-cast Robert, but it might work for Roy, I suppose, after a suitable interval. They've re-cast Tony, Tom, Kate, Pip, Clarrie and Emma, mostly successfully. I still wish Tom and Pip hadn't been re-cast. New Tom is a good actor but so was Old Tom.

Meanwhile, several very elderly members of the cast survive, and long may that continue, although not necessarily on air. I think most of us would say that the time has come for Jill to become a silent character, following the precedent of Peggy and Christine.

So! Christmas next week - will it be the best Christmas ever at either Brookfield or The Stables, or both? Then it's 2024. What does the New Year hold for The Archers? Over to you!

Wow, they are testing us to the limit now. What an insanely tedious episode informing us of the merits of therapy and counselling. They will NEVER pick up new listeners.

His school life though, not his whole life.

The first rule of disclosure in school is never to say " I can keep this a secret", which is not the same as talking about it to all and sundry a propos of nothing.

Oh Old Harry’s Game and The Museum of Everything - them was the days.

What an insanely tedious episode informing us of the merits of therapy and counselling - I disagree. I think the point of that episode was to give us a glimpse into Henry's inner thoughts. All stuff which we've kind of suspected - how it feels not to know who your dad is, at least Jack has a dad even if he is a psychopath, why didn't his mum 'have him with someone'? How much he misses Lee and and how he doesn't want to have to be the man of the house anymore. As previously speculated - Jack's inheritance is the least of it as far as Henry is concerned. I'm not sure how the SWs could have clearly signalled this in any other way. Now we know for sure.

Agree re Henry. Helen has always relied on him too much and having Lee there must have been a great relief.

but - I’m pretty sick of this sl now and would appreciate not hearing from the bridge farm archers for a couple of months.

I'm just coming back to reiterate my post of January 8: Henry is forever destined to be the fatherless child (however much Tony tries to compensate and however terrible Knob may have been as a father). I feel this storyline is also foreshadowing the other things Jack might have inherited from the father he never met.

I’m pretty sick of this sl now - I don't think the issue of Henry's paternity has ever really been explored - except in terms of Tony's outrage when Helen announced her decision. Henry is now of an age when he is starting to understand what this means for him and subsequent events have meant it is even more or an issue than it might have been. He has only recently become a proper character - thinking back to the "Awright" years (voiced by Jill or Shula or whoever it was used to do the children's voices).

I meant any SL involving Helen and Henry tbh!!

happy to explore this more in a few months but can we have a bit of a break and have more from others.

Am not regretting my decision to stop listening

Please please please can we have a topical insert from Susan telling someone what she thinks about the Post Office/Horizon scandal being all over the news.

We could have her telling us how crap the system was but thank goodness she never had any shortfalls herself because she knows what prison is like, and they’d never have believed her with her record. Obviously Susan will have been following this for years and years and will be delighted it’s now firmly in the mainstream consciousness.

She might have had difficulty following it properly given how steadfastly so much of the media was ignoring it for the first twenty years during which it happened. I haven't got her down as a Computer Weekly or a Private Eye reader!

And of course the PO helpline was telling anyone who rang them that nobody else was having any trouble with the system so it must be that individual's fault. Mass gaslighting.

Well said @KingsleyBorder and @AskingQuestionsAllTheTime

I don't think there should be a topical insert. The story has been around for a long time but was largely ignored by the media.
What happened was beyond appalling, but what we are now having is response to it after a tv drama.

It would be very out of character for Susan not to be talking about it right now. I mean, she is literally a postmistress who has been to prison! I didn’t mean “topical insert” to educate listeners, I meant topical insert to address how odd the drama sounds when it ignores huge current events.

(and I’ve followed it myself for years actually, did you mean to sound so patronising?)

@KingsleyBorder , what did you find patronising about my post?

That you felt the need to inform me the story had been around for years and was only gaining attention now due to the drama.

I wasn't addressing you personally, and the story has been around for a long time.

The story is getting a lot of attention now because of the TV series.

We don't hear much from Susan these days, and she might not wanted to comment on it because she spent time in prison.

I can't see that I posted anything that warranted a personal attack.

My whole point was that the topical thing is the impact of the drama, not the scandal per se. As I said

Obviously Susan will have been following this for years and years and will be delighted it’s now firmly in the mainstream consciousness.

I read your comment as taking a swipe at people who have only come to this late because of the drama.

We can't possibly listen in on every single conversation that the folk of Ambridge have! But we can presume the PO scandal is being discussed in Ambridge, just not in the 12 minutes of conversations we get to hear each day.
.

Sure, I just thought it might be an interesting one to hear given Susan’s very close affinity with it. Perhaps I should have phrased it as”I bet Susan has a lot to say about Horizon at the moment, oh to be a fly on that wall!”

@SequentialAnalyst , I doubt it because they don't seem to watch telly other than films, nobody seems to listen to the radio, and other than Jim no one reads a newspaper.

@KingsleyBorder , I read your comment as taking a swipe at people who have only come to this late because of the drama.
The mass coverage of it now, perhaps. That obviously did not mean you, because you were already aware of it.

Exactly. I didn't read Mere's comment as taking a swipe at anyone. As we have discussed on this thread before, topical inserts are rare and in recent times limited to massive news stories like the Queen's death. I imagine they're expensive and quite a headache to sort out. I would expect at most that the SWs might put in a very guarded neutral comment about the PO scandal the next time Susan is due to be in the cast.

The last time this subject came up, a few weeks ago, I said I thought it was remarkable that the PO had appointed Susan as a subpostmaster, given her criminal record. Asking had chapter and verse on this, naturally, and remembered, as I didn't, that this was explicitly acknowledged at the time and wouldn't have stood in her way because the conviction was spent.

You didn’t know I was already aware of it. I only told you that afterwards. I said in my post that SUSAN would already have been aware of it. You said I was suggesting topical insert for something that was not, in fact, topical.

I'm with you there! But I expect we can all pretty well imagine what Susan has to say without the SWs writing it

OTOH there are a lot of Ambridge folk who I would like to hear from/about, but the SWs aren't telling us atm.

You know what? I'd hazard a guess that until the TV drama, Susan's reaction to that particular scandal (if she heard about it, which i am unsure she would have done, as I said above) would have been that since she had never had any trouble with her computer, it must have been the fault of the people who had the shortfalls, and they deserved to go to prison for trying to cheat the post office.

That would have been very much in keeping with what we have heard of her over the years.