Archers thread #168: Near to the Maddening Crowd? 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 to hear more of Harrison's strange little moaning noises, 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.)

Thanks to @OverArmour for the title suggestion!

Over to you.

I'm waiting for Paul to be diagnosed with Lyme disease as a result of his 'insect bites' in the nether regions. It would be a long wait, though.

But wasn’t Josh cast as an entrepreneur-type who was trading in used farm machinery and got caught doing some dodgy dealing because he had been too busy to keep his records up to date? I also struggle to distinguish him from Ben.

Anyone else waiting with bated breath for the tree surgery scene to end with something akin to Nigel’s scream, followed by the sound of a (human) limb falling into the drop area? Oh, just me then.

They were definitely teasing it. I wonder how tall the trees in borchester are

I also struggle to distinguish him from Ben.

For some reason they’re wholly distinct to me - though I probably couldn’t say as much about them as about Lily / Freddie / Chelsea / even Ruairi.

I hadn’t recognised how unfairly treated Josh is by his parents until people mentioned it here - but I know him to be quite brash and thick skinned, refusing to be thrown off-course by parental discouragement at every turn. He was very single minded in rejecting the uni option and embarking on hen and farm machinery enterprises. He may sometimes seem self serving - but it’s only because his worthless parents never, ever back him with alacrity, so he has to look out for himself.

Ben, long ensconced in the cereal cupboard, has the luxury of being the family baby. He has a gentler nature - more appealing to the elderly in the household, so he’s indulged and nurtured, allowed to be sensitive, allowed to fail. And crucially is in less direct competition with The Brookfield Heiress - so David and Ruth don’t actively dislike him and see him as a threat to The Future of Brookfield.

As I recall, they can sometimes sound alike - but they have very different storylines, so that helps to tell them apart.

Josh is the unfortunate middle child of three, and so doomed to be overlooked/ignored by his (ghastly) parents. On the other hand, I have several sets of cousins with the same family dynamic and it's always been the middle one who was less selfish, happier and more successful than the others in adult life ... so suck on that, Pip and Ben!

There have been times over the years when I’ve wondered if David just really dislikes his middle child. He never seems to have a good word to say about him. Josh is the only one of the 3 siblings to have any kind of personality but he has become increasingly dull since moving in with Lily and Paul. All of the young characters are boring apart from Ruari.

All of the young characters are boring apart from Ruari.

But … Horrobins? Pargetters? George??

Johnny will be a proper adult by the time he returns - so maybe doesn’t count.

I do think wistfully of Mungo, from time to time …

And can’t imagine how Keira will make her mark in comparison to her parents and half-brother.

And can’t imagine how Keira will make her mark in comparison to her parents and half-brother.

George is both her half-brother and her cousin, don't forget! If that doesn't mess up your start in life, nothing much will. So I will be annoyed if she turns out to be a perfectly ordinary minor character with no issues at all.

I wouldn't mind more of Mungo, but only if he came to stay without his ghastly parents. He'll be 10 this summer, the perfect age to spend a week of the summer holiday with his grandparents (and their partners).

I find this kind of thing fascinating. I too have a set of three cousins who fit that description. In adult life they've all done OK but the middle one probably has the happiest personal life, although there are reasons outside anybody's control for that.

I am the elder one of two, as were both my parents, and we have two children - the dynamics of two-child families seem to be quite different.

As one of three myself, we all agreed that we wouldn't have three (this was years ago, I don't know how my siblings feel about now that they have actually married and started families): if we had more than two children then it would be at least four, so that there was more than one middle child.

David is the third of four children, with a pretty short gap between him and the twins. Elizabeth was much younger and hugely over-indulged as a child and young adult. David is the only one of the four who showed any interest in the farm but that brought him into direct conflict with Phil, especially once Ruth was working on the farm as well. I don't think David got much attention as a child (I wasn't listening back then so can't be sure about this, but it wouldn't surprise me) and possibly over-compensated with Pip as a result. Josh seems to be an also ran beside the sainted Pip. Ben gets the youngest child treatment.

Re Johnnie - I wouldn't be at all surprised if he never comes back. I'm sorry about this as I liked the character, but I suspect the current Editor is trying to streamline things, possibly because of budget constraints [sounds off of loud hammering as Gasp demolishes fourth wall again]. Just as Jamie Perks was implausibly written out instead of demanding his share of The Bull when Sid died, when Pat and Tony join the great majority, Johnnie will magnanimously turn down his share of Bridge Farm, or possibly there will be a brief reference to paying him off and then it (and he) will never be mentioned again.

That mention of The Bull reminds me that the SWs have form for assuming that a married or co-habiting couple must own a business jointly. We've never heard how it's come about that Kenton appears to co-own The Bull when it was Jolene who inherited from Sid and has never mentioned making over a share to Kenton.

Now that you mention Johnny, it's been ages since we heard from Tom & Natasha (except Emma & Fallon talking about her) or Helen. Maybe the whole Bridge Farm family are getting a slow fade and will drift into being minor background characters, which would be weird given how many ties they have to everyone else in the village, and the fact that they are actual Archers.

In the 40+ years I've been listening the key characters have mostly been Archers by blood or marriage, supplemented by a few who work for Archer family members and a number of non-Archers who had a lot of contact with the Archer tribe, e.g. the vicar, Lynda, the Grundy clan. It doesn't feel as if the family are so central now, which is a bit weird, given the programme is called The Archers, not Ambridge.

mutter mutter missed opportunity mutter mutter Jenny's children mutter mutter

Yes, I assume Adam was originally called Archer before he got himself adopted and (presumably deeming it more profitable) became Travers-Macy? I'm not sure what happened to the Travers- part. And then Debbie T-M did the same and became an Aldridge! Ruari has retained his mother's surname, though that hasn't helped the plight of the Archer name. This is what happens when you have too many daughters (Kate and Alice, despite being separated/divorced/whatever, haven't even reverted to Aldridge), not enough sons and rather a lot of putting-it-about-a-bit.

It would have been so easy for them all to change to Archer as a Jenny-supporting gesture when they found out about Brian's affair with Siobhan. Immediately The Archers would have been populated by about a dozen more Archers.

Oh, but @DeanElderberry - just think of all the admin involved, telling their banks and so on!

There's also Johnny (currently pretending to be a pirate), who could presumably call himself Archer, even though his half-sister Kylie is the spawn of Clive Horrobin!

I doubt Johnny would want to change his name - he gets on well with his mum and never knew his dad (and, although he's forgiven and forgotten, some of his dad's family were awful to his mum). Usually if children change from one parent's name to the other as adults is towards the one they get on with and away from the bad one.

I can understand Kate not changing back. Madikane is so much more interesting than Aldridge or Archer. And if the long-term plan is for Alice and Chris to end up back together, she might as well hang on to Carter (not to mention it being easier to have the same surname as your child, if and when she comes back to parenting). I think Adam and Debbie would have been the best bet for changing to Archer, but not much point with Debbie now that she's disappeared. I'd like to see Debbie back, actually, at least occasionally. It's implausible that she is so distant; she's only in blooming Hungary, not a gulag in Kyrgyzstan! They should recast her if Tamsin Grieg isn't available; it's been so long since she spoke that only die hard fans would even notice, probably. I certainly wouldn't bat an eyelid now if any actor who sounded about the right age, sex, and class turned up as Debbie.

Yes, they were hamming it right up. I was getting really exciting that Emma was about to decapitate herself and then fall on Ed and suffocate him in the process.

Hadn’t realised Pip was older than Josh. She always seems less mature

Pip is permanently about 13 years old.

Pip is The Future of Brookfield. Every so often she comes up with some farm saving scheme costing at least £100k, that involves tearing up everything invested in the last one. Her parents have a two minute meeting with her and tell her to go ahead.

If Josh needs £120, or a fingernail sized bit of land for his business - he gets a month of head shaking and passive aggressive comments from David, brisk dismissal from Ruth and, if he’s lucky, a lift into Borchester to discuss it with 12 accountants and a junior at the bank. And a list of conditions from his parents that will hamper him in every direction for the next 20 years …

I certainly wouldn't bat an eyelid now if any actor who sounded about the right age, sex, and class turned up as Debbie I absolutely would! Her voice is so distinctive - in the way all the best characters are. Josh/Ben/Rex/Toby all entirely interchangeable and therefore easily replaceable. Debbie - instantly recognisable with a ‘Hello you two!’ even after years of absence. So important for radio drama - conjuring up a snapshot of that person every time they speak to the point you are quite horrified when you see an actual cast photo. Nothing worse than constantly having to ask ‘Who’s speaking now?’ for killing the drama.

Was tonight's episode a bit meh or was it just me?

I'm getting a bit bored of Alice and the 'will George, won't George ?'. This can't go on for months or I'll stop listening.