Archers thread #172: Come on, Clive! Spill the beans and put us all out of our misery. 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 Clive sounds deeply misunderstood, 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 https://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.)

Fete over, cricket season over - can the Flower and Produce show be far behind? I don't think I've heard a mention of it this year. Have I not been paying attention?

In any real village, preparations for the Christmas show would already be under way, but not in Ambridge, of course. I am probably in a minority of one in regretting this.

With any luck, though, by Christmas this incredibly protracted tale of Alice, George and the crash will be behind us at last. Do we think Clive's really gone? I don't believe it. We won't be rid of him that easily. Will he go to the police himself? Will he attempt to blackmail his family or extort money from the Aldridges in return for information that would secure Alice's acquittal? Do we care? I find I don't really, unfortunately. I did enjoy hearing Clive for those few brief exchanges but I've had enough now. Unrelieved nastiness is not really what I want from TA.

Over to you!

Naturally …

In the case of George all three of his parents are equally to blame for teaching him from his earliest years that he could do no wrong.

Except Emma, who put a fair bit of effort into trying to teach him that stealing is wrong, that is. And Will, who did his best to inculcate the idea that stealing someone else's livestock is stealing and wrong. I can't off-hand remember any incident in which Ed told George something he'd done was wrong, but I'm sure he must have done as well as blaming Will for everything George ever did that Ed didn't like.

And of course in this particular instance Ed is entirely blameless, because he knew nothing whatever about it.

On the other hand, Brian might feel that Will should have felt a greater sense of obligation towards him when his daughter was in serious trouble which Will could have put an end to two or three weeks ago.

I think Brian could forgive many things but not the fact that George, Will and Emma's actions harmed Alice.

I really can't see how Emma and Ed will cope with the fallout from all of this. She will surely feel she has to leave the tearoom (Harrison will make her life hell) so they will lose a source of income that keeps them afloat. It looks as if Ed and his brother will be at war again with all the implications that has for the tree surgery business.

I suppose they at least live rent free in the static home..?

Only heard the last few minutes but why do they always say they never want to see the other person again when they know it’s not possible given they live in a tiny village

glad Alice is being kind about it all - perhaps the rehab worked this time

Why ON EARTH did Neil not tell Chris that Emma actually shopped her own son ???

Well, I did say she'd be nice about it. I think she'll be keen to just put the whole thing behind her and focus on Martha.

Chris on the other hand...

Why didn't Susan tell Alice? I can see why trying to talk calmly to Chris was a bit of a non-starter, but Susan and Alice were having a far more rational conversation.

I suppose they at least live rent free in the static home..?

The one without planning permission? How long before someone shops them to the council as an act of revenge?

I quite agree, I can’t see how any of them could stay in the village after this but it’s an awfully large tranche of characters to write out in one go.

And we still haven’t heard Eddie and Clarrie in all this, much as the latter will be warbling away and the former will be minimising like mad/trying to blame it on The Grundy Curse (“Always got it in fer the likes o’us…”). Surely they know what’s going on?

Listening now

impressed her solicitor is working Sunday

bit odd they didn’t tell Chris and Alice earlier.

I'm also surprised Chris has no Uncle type feelings towards George. I know he’s angry but I would be quite hurt that he dismissed his nephew as a waste of space so easily

the conversations seem much more like they’re not related somehow. Poor Neil.

The fact that Susan was just chatting away breezily when Chris and Alice arrived to pick up Martha was completely bizarre. I assumed she would have visited the pair of them to tell them everything the moment George was arrested.

Maybe they don’t want the wider family to know. I can well imagine Eddie’s opinion on the matter!

Yep. I said Alice would be the most reasonable. I think Chris will understand a little more from Emma's point of view in time. I don't think he'll forgive George even though he's quite young. I actually wouldn't. (And I'm quite forgiving) - it's the fact that all of it was avoidable.

I suspect they were hoping to put off the moment when their world imploded for just a little while longer, while they came to terms with it themselves. They may also have been told not to say anything to Alice, or felt that they didn’t want to give her false hope about charges being dropped until the CPS made it formal.

But why would Susan not want Alice to know that the charges against her being dropped was because of Emma having done the right thing?

Another thing I don't really understand is how everyone instantly seems aware that Emma must have known for weeks, rather than it being the case that she found out and immediately made sure the police were told. I don't think that's an assumption I would automatically make. (George was specific that he hadn't told the police that she knew, so it wouldn't get out by that route.)

We don't know exactly what was said. Emma seems to have told Chris everything, so she presumably included that info.

I feel that maybe Neil and Susan didn't say it because they might not have wanted to reveal how long Emma had known for. She brought that on herself by letting on that she'd known before Clive's arrival. The same way that Ed found out she already knew. In the night she had to herself with George at the police station and Ed and Will away, she really could have done with creating a version of the recent past that didn't outright lie but painted her in a better light. No use covering for George anymore, the truth will out with him, but she could have saved herself and Will from being dragged down with him. What's the use of a top grade English literature GCSE if you can't use it to write your own story?!

And I think they probably thought they had a bit of breathing space because it was Sunday and nothing would be happening on the case. As Alice’s solicitor is a criminal is. I guess she may work on Sundays sometimes to cover duty solicitor rotas, but it was clearly all just accelerated for dramatic purposes.

I hadn't thought about insurance for litter-picking groups I saw a copy of our local Council’s risk assessment for litter picking. If I remember correctly it ran to more than 6 pages.

I don't think he'll forgive George even though he's quite young. I actually wouldn't. I might forgive George for moving Alice in the heat of the moment. But not for the continued cover up once he’d got over the immediate shock.

Well done to whoever it was that predicted Chris would remember how Emma suddenly offered to be a character witness for Alice and figured out that she already knew by then (actually not sure if it was on this thread or in a conversation with my mum).

Well, that was kind of the major flaw in Emma's version of events.

Me me me👋👋👋

It was bizarre because it was almost like they hadn’t foreseen they would have to have that conversation

who was Emma cutting trees with?

We don’t know that Susan didn’t tell Alice as part of the conversation we didn’t hear.

Also, Emma has done a pretty good job of dropping herself in it by mentioning Cloyve, meaning that she had to have known for at least a couple of weeks (much as we know it’s longer). And, bearing in mind the crash was months ago, I think my first question would be “How long have you known?”

Alice and Susan bonding. Well...!

Alice comes across as wildly variable. There's drunken Alice who says and does appalling things - lobbing bricks at the shop, being utterly vile to Ruaridh (or however he's spelt) - and sober Alice who is repentant and thoughtful and forgiving (or else manipulative and selfish).

There's longstanding folk wisdom that people don't say or do things when they're drunk that they don't already think of saying or doing when they're sober; it's just that sobriety acts as a brake and alcohol is disinhibiting.

So is this the script TA SWs are using?

Who is the true Alice? Do we think SWs are being subtle, or simplistic? Is it unreasonable to expect any degree of consistency?

(That last one is obvs a rhetorical question.)