Archers thread #179: Beavers, livestock, ferrets, but nododo! 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 be happy sharing a hot tub with Mucky Mick, 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.)

The title started life with @JanglyBeads, whose autocorrect turned 'Oh no, nor do I!' into 'Oh no, nododo I!' on the last thread. For reasons of cowardice/prudence/lack of inspiration and the character limit, I haven't included @BeaLola's even more mysterious autocorrect - her phone had her asking Abdul if he'd always wanted children instead of Neil. Perhaps one of the mooted beavers can be Abdul.

For the first time ever I've added a poll to the OP. Over to you!

Especially when there was no known birth family to sever ties with!

The truly unlikely thing is the story that he was moved from care home to care home in different administrative districts: Southport to Liverpool and Birmingham to Worcester, nine different homes in five years. I am fairly sure that wouldn't happen, simply because of funding: each administrative area had its own orphans/children needing care, and without a seriously good reason would not want to take in random kids from elsewhere.

If anyone knows otherwise I would be interested, but it sounded to me like a cock-and-bull nonsense.

It's complete nonsense. As was the touching bit about Miss Bun turning up at the orphange to deliver baked goods. Well I suppose she might but in the unlikely event of Neil still being there neither Miss Bun nor Neil would know he was the child.

I hadn't actually thought about that one, but yes; touching that she pursued him from Southport to Liverpool and then to Birmingham and then to Worcester, but I double don't believe it even if she had been told which baby he was which she wouldn't have been, and even if he had been old enough to know who she was with her eccles cakes.

I'm not sure that Neil is old enough to have had a pregnant Irish mother who chose to flee to England to avoid the prospect of going to the nuns at a "mother and baby home". The Liverpool aspect makes that a possibility, I suppose.

Pregnant Irish women and girls were still coming to UK to give birth and place their babies for adoption well into the 1970s. They lost their babies, but did not face incarceration in the Magdalen laundries - the last of which closed in 1996. At 67, Neil could in theory been part of that saga. But those girls would probably have been “welcomed” by the RC Adoption Societies (“Rescue Societies”) and any babies were placed for adoption with Catholic families.

This incidentally is oone of the aspects of the Irish adoption industry which has still not been examined in detail.

Nasty streak from Joy surfaces finally

Glad Mick stalked out. Saying that a childless person doesn't understand, because they gave no children, is the absolute pit of bitchiness. One of the few times I have seen DH angry was when his sister came out with that line.

There’s posters on tubes and buses asking people to contact them (Irish gov) if they are impacted by the adoption scandal

Joy sees things from her own perspective only with respect to the kids and Rochelle. Glad Mick didn’t just agree with her. Deep down she’s not a nice person and she’s starting to show it…

(so she turned up on Xmas day on public transport?)

why a kids loyalty scheme? Why not a generic one? And why does Henry need so much help with his homework that a page of links is needed. Is he going to be as entitled as his mum? The whole attitude towards that house is bizarre

with his homework that a page of links is needed. Is he going to be as entitled as his mum? The whole attitude towards that house is bizarre why didn't somepoint out it wasn't actually Helen's house it was Kirsty's?

Not necessarily the ‘pit of bitchiness’, although from those who feel their childed status confers some moral authority it can be, I suppose. But sometimes it’s even true. (Not that there’s anything clever about reproducing: I’ve known some really thick hamsters who managed it just fine.)

So, Mick is another bloke in Ambridge who really wanted baybees? How very fucking boring.

why a kids loyalty scheme? Yes- for what? The tea room? Ice cream? yogurt? vegetables?

Kale- does anyone like kale? It's ok, but a little goes a long way.

So far as Joy/Rochelle/Mick- that was nasty and we're still no futher forward.

Oh I thought we were quite a long way forward!

Joy is a man pleaser and had a full breakdown when the man left. Rochelle effectively became her carer and had a pretty awful time. Moved on and then Joy decided to turn her life round and become mother teresa

Rochelle struggles to put down roots and wasn’t ready for her ‘bairns’ and has been a bit of a hopeless mother. Joy is constantly on her case to be more of a mother to them when Rochelle feels she has zero idea what being a mother is

note she told Rex she is vulnerable because she thinks she should be putting her time into the kids - not because she thinks Rochelle is vulnerable. It’s selfish because she wants to play grandma and it’s nothing to do with Rochelle

Great summary. It's clear that Joy was and is an extremely selfish woman and was just as bad a mother as she's berating Rochelle for being. It sounds like Rochelle had a really shitty childhood.
Joy bleating on about how much she loves Rochelle means nothing, I've met some bloody terrible parents who insisted they loved their children. Sometimes loving your children isn't enough, you actually have to care for them and behave like a parent.

I got an error 404 saying they’ve lost it!!

Here's another link. https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/radio_addicts/5254618-archers-thread-180-burgeoning-backstories-continuity-whats-that-discuss-the-archers-here?reply=141442162

ThoroughlyModernNotMillie
It sounds like Rochelle had a really shitty childhood.

Except that Rochelle herself told Kirsty that her childhood was idyllic and Joy was a great mother. Not sure how that chimes with her claim that Joy was never there for her and was a terrible mother; Rochelle's story seems to change as it suits her.

I must have missed that bit. I thought Joy saying she was here for Rochelle now was an acknowledgement that she hadn't been in the past, but who knows. I just hope they don't drag this storyline out much longer.

Rochelle's comment was embittered sarcasm!

@BeaLola just sneaking in here to say how lucky your ds is to have you supporting him.

Thanks for the new thread @Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/radio_addicts/5254618-archers-thread-180-burgeoning-backstories-continuity-whats-that-discuss-the-archers-here?reply=141442162

My thoughts are that we definitely haven't heard all about Joy and Roach-hell.

I'm quite looking forward to the noise coming from Slavemaster's House.
No doubt, there will be foot stamping and heel clicking when Natasha rearranges Helen's kitchen and Helen's bathroom cabinet.

As for the prodigal daughter turning up unannounced on Christmas Day, not knowing her mother was even there, well, why should that matter when the village can put people up in their homes or a barn.

I have put forward Roach-hell for the Archers Nicknames page.

Oops, lost the quote. Edited to add I was responding to @LillianGish . I agree with all of this. It’s losing a sense of place and stability too. It feels a bit sad that quite a few of the big locations seem to have just been written out too. I think new characters have to be a very small part of the whole to balance and ground them. And they’ve become almost the whole thing. And the biggest storylines are just depressing, like Emma being permanently depressed, Brad, failing at university, Fallon and Harrison’s slow decline. And now Joy and OurRochelle when we don’t even care about OurRochelle. In fact, the lack of her was about the only intriguing storyline and now she’s turned up who even cares.

There are a few on there attributed to me
Thanks, @AskingQuestionsAllTheTime .
Are Sarin and Novichok on there? (not one of mine)