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!

I can't frankly see them ever attracting a younger audience to this sort of radio soap, either appointment radio or podcast. All they're doing is driving away the existing listeners before we actually all die out become an unsustainably low number.

Yep - I think a lot of listeners are exposed to the archers when they are young and then start listening when older. I didn’t listen through my twenties but once I was home in the evenings I would have the radio on and picked it up again

They are definitely using fewer characters each week. Despite the denials, I think that must be due to budget constraints because it certainly isn't being driven by artistic requirements.

I wonder how much the podcast is costing and whether there is any evidence that it is pulling in new listeners.

I have said before that I think there are some things people naturally become interested in as they get older - like gardening and family history - and that it is a waste of time and energy to think you will ever get the majority of young people interested when they have so many better things too do. I think TA falls into that group. (I was unusual among my peers in that, although I had grown up with TA, I really got into listening to it independently at university.)

Plus, my DC (in their 30s) are probably the last generation who grew up with Radio 4 (or 3) on at home all the time. And they would never dream of listening to TA (or Radio 4 at all really). I am still hoping they will see the light in their 40s ...

My kids have grown up with the archers. My teen ds is not a fan - whenever he has heard an episode it has unfortunately been one of the absurd ones! He heard one with zainab who is similar age to him and thought it was ridiculous

anyone on here listening to the podcast? Is it any good? I find Emma Freud unbearably smug so can’t bring myself to listen

What is Rochelle's secret..

She knows the eleven herbs and spices in KFC

The problem with Rochelle's secret is that no-one really cares. She is a blow in and so is her mum (although admittedly she blew in a bit earlier). The kind of secrets that are interesting are the ones that the audience knows, but another character doesn't - Brian and Siobhan for instance, Knob and Helen, George's involvement in the crash. Characters we are properly invested in, characters with some provenance - not the ones the SWs are making up as they go along.

Whatever happened to Tom and Natasha's Bridge Farm app; that must have had some sort of loyalty/spend-tracker in it!

The beaver plotline is plain odd (though it would be fun for Peggy to close the rewilding for illegal activity from her deathbed-surely she deserves a funeral shortly).

We have beavers in the Avon, just outside Bath, apparently. I suspect they arrived by van, rather than by swimming up/down river, but the local eco-warriors are optimistic that they will stop a new Lidl from being built.

I listened to the podcast once, but Emme Freud is really very dull. I feel the same about that over-enthusiastic thing on YouTube (whose name escapes me). I gave that three goes before losing patience/the will to live. I wonder, actually, whether them plugging it is making me less likely to listen to TA. Maybe that's the plan! 🤔

I think I've said this before (and/or others have too). When a bus or train operator wants to get rid of a route, they often change the frequency of the service or cut out stops or do something else that makes the route a lot less attractive to travellers. They then announce that this service is no longer economic and has to be axed. I've wondered for some time (in my paranoid way) if we're experiencing something similar in relation to TA. Surely they could be doing better than this even with a lower budget? They have so much to draw on. The inconsistency is frustrating. The episodes with George last year were far better than the average. So much of the rest has been absolute dross.

I am unable to make myself care 😞

@LillianGish Completely agree . Same applies to the “ young people” storylines. They need to be slow burn and/or the development of characters we are hearing grow up.

DeanElderberry
I always thought stretching it to six episodes occupying 15-minute slots was a mistake, the old five episodes occupying 20-minute slots model worked much better - that extra few minutes allowed more continuity in character and plot development. I can live without 'live' TA on Sunday evenings.

As far as I know episodes of TA have never run for twenty minutes; the five episodes it used to be, just like the six now, were each twelve and a half minutes long, fifteen only by courtesy.

The episodes I have from 2011 are about13 minutes including introduction and theme tune at each end, and the Radio Times for Monday 24th December 1984 (a random issue from the Genome) offers
13:40 The Archers
13:55 Listening Corner: Father Christmas and Pickle the Polar Bear: Pickle and the Christmas Decorations
and
19:05 The Archers
19:20 Christmas Punch

https://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/schedules/service_bbc_radio_fourfm/1984-12-24

Looks like a fifteen minute slot to me.

When did Uncle Tom stop doing his introductory comments?

I have no idea: I was never an omnibus listener. Presumably when the actor died/retired?

Except Bob Arnold was still alive and recording the character in 1997, but someone in the house informs me firmly that the introductions were long gone by then.

That was my impression. I think they decided it was a waste of valuable air time. It often felt like those Thought for the Day contributions where they shoehorn God in at the last minute.

I guess, eventually, there’ll be none of us left who remember listening to ascertain, during the omnibus, which insignificant bits of change counting from the weekday episodes had been excised on the Sunday morning. It was such innocent fun.

Took me about a decade to accustom myself to not hearing Tom’s little introductory homilies.

@Godestobe Thought for the Day was always a handy reminder to turn off the radio, get my shoes and coat on and head for the station. If I had lost patience with some pontificating politician and switched over to Capital Radio, I was often late for work.

I fear you're on to something with the bus route strategy Gaspode.

I wish, like most others, the producers would concentrate on enriching the core characters and imbuing a sense of place. TA is what it is and frantically adding new young or metro characters won't magic up a new audience.

But I think they need to grasp the nettle and deal with moribund, inconsistent and poorly written / performed characters. Also make sensible decisions like re-voicing Debbie (and Neil? I'm horrified they sleepwalked into this)

Kill List

Pip
Jill
Justin
Ian
Peggy
Eddy
Brian (regretfully but inevitably)
Kenton and Jolene

Nurture List

Bridge Farm (bring Johnny back)
Home Farm and related Archers and Aldridges)
Horrobins and Carters
Grundies (grieving Eddy)
Lower Loxley
Brookfield but cull some.

And create more realistic farming and business situations.

Why on earth would Rex and Kirsty do something so reckless and so dangerous to their whole project and livelihoods? What’s so great about beavers that the project is worth risking so much? Maybe Peggy and/or Justin will sue them for misuse of their funding.

I like Khalil, and Henry. So there!

Neil’s story was bananas. The actor did a good job with a rubbish script. I love Neil. I don’t want him to be dedded yet.

Hannah did well to brush Chris off. He has form for ONSs (not that there’s anything wrong with that) and is so boring! He and Alice deserve each other. Martha sounds cool though!

@BinaryDot Brookfield but cull some.

I see you've already done that, right at the top of your Kill List. 😂I'd like more Josh, but he is sensible, competent and industrious and therefore apparently boring.

Script writers obviously don't read the 'elderly' board in here.

On which planet is it thought a great idea to move a random elderly man into your home when you are all busy with farming stuff? Permanently. I could just about take it when Leonard got moved in after breaking wrist .

Khalil is horrible. Stupid, lazy, rude. I'm struggling to see what any of you see in him.

Why on earth would ole Pirate and idiot Kenton not immediately think of Fallon?

Why didn't Tracy? Bunch of idiots.