Archers thread #180: Burgeoning backstories! Continuity, what’s that? 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 think it's a great idea for Helen and the boys to lodge with Tom, Natasha, Seren and Dippity*, 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/5244480-the-archers-spoilers-thread-10-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.)

*Can't remember who coined this, but it's genius.

I was strongly tempted to use one or both of the posts suggested for the title of this thread on the last thread, but went for something a bit briefer. However, they're brilliant and will kickstart this thread very nicely, so here they are:

@Sidebeforeself: Beavers, bridge, bunny boilers and busybodies - it's all a load of bollocks!

(I couldn't agree more!)

@DeanElderberry: I don't usually speculate much on the appearance of characters, but do wonder what it is about Miranda that is bringing out the chest-thumping silverback in Brian and Justin? One little bridge game and the course of Ambridge rewilding is set. The face that launched a thousand beavers.

Over to you!

They don't have the recordings of episodes from the fifties and sixties. And if they did they wouldn't air them because of the various copyright issues and payment for the actors issues (less for then than for five years ago, but they are still a factor).

And they certainly wouldn't want us to hear the ones from 1973 in which Neil's background was mentioned!

Although premature given the archers has only had both legs and armed chopped off so it’s only a flesh wound

or would it be better to refer to the plague victim ‘I’m not dead yet’ with the radio 4 controller as the man with the club?

I didn’t listen last night so just read the synopsis and it’s like they can’t even be bothered to try and make it interesting!

@Bruisername does everyone hear listen to radio 4 a lot? We could have a general R4 thread to get the diversions started ...

We most certainly could! For example, I've just missed TA because I was listening to an interesting little gem from 2016 about the history of NHS GP services.

So Vince is auditioning as Fairy Godmother?

Well maybe that’s the answer - if the archers sinks we can all jump ship to a generic R4 chat!

If there were old synopses, we could start from there.

or we could work our way through all the Academic Archers lectures on youtube

There are Lowfields for the whole century, I think, with a short gap in 2020 when Lowfield was published on Peet's board and only those of us who were very fly (and got their permission) copied them into our own computers.

Maybe someone could post the Lowfields since 1996, one per day, and we could all comment on one day at a time!

Surely with a week's notice we could act them all? Actually, less than a week since we wouldn't need costumes or scenery.

🤣

I'm not great at any Midlands accents so I volunteer to be seamstress. I did a bang up job altering the hem on DD's dress last week. It took 3 hours so you'd better not need the costumes in a hurry! I can step in as a cameo when there's one of my limited accents needed. If you ever need a visiting French woman, I'm right there.

Surely this is more realistic than whatever Vince is planning for the set design. Did I miss something, or does KC have any significance for Cinderella? I get the Casey link, but within the play is it supposed to mean anything?

I'm mainly (though not very) interested in how they're expected to learn their lines in less than a week.

I’m confused by Tony wanting to be a panto dame.

When I was explaining to DH while I was quitting the archers I said there's a stupid storyline about a panto and a weird argument between 2 sisters; one of whom was lost a shoe

It dawned on me there's probably some weird link between the 2

I mean - who loses one shoe? Just Cinderella and Susan Carter.

Maybe the Dame will hobble on stage wearing odd shoes, one of which is Tracy's?

So Vince, having sabotaged the pantomime, is now rescuing it?

Righty-ho. Makes about as much sense as anything else in TA these days.

And a fair few people round our area if the accumulation of single shoes on roadside verges and fence posts are anything to go by.

Well I'm still enjoying it.

I feel like tomorrow might well need to stretch over at least two episodes - like they did with The Great Flood....

Isn't that some kind of sign of where you can buy drugs, I vaguely remember my then teenage children telling me something about that about 15 years ago?

It’s like they had two ideas, a Christmas carol epiphany allegory for Justin and a whole cast panto pastiche. They couldn’t agree which recent graduate script editor was going to win out so thought: fuck it, we will do both! Who cares it’s supposed to be drama! Who cares it’s late January and no one does pantos now! Who cares that the characters the listeners have cared about, grown up with and invested in have to shed backstory and personality to fit this stupid metaphor! WE ARE GONNA PUT ON A SHOW!

Shark vacuum cleaners are certainly NOT sub-standard, they are the best I have ever used!

It's even more baffling, given that we had a recent spell of really good drama with the George thing (in my opinion anyway). And now we have this nonsense. Bizarre.

I’ve never heard that! Although wouldn’t be surprised. What about knickers? Fewer of those but not uncommon.