The opening bars of the Eastenders theme tune used to have a quite startling effect of our kids when they were younger. They would both yell “Rubbish!” and there would be a mad dash for the remote to switch over to another channel, anything that wasn’t Eastenders.

They had never seen the show and knew nothing about it, but they had picked up this Pavlovian response to this long-running soap from their parents’ reaction. We both hated it.

I remember when the show was launched in 1985 and was billed as an “edgy drama”. We all knew, of course, that it was another attempt by the BBC to find a rival for Coronation Street. Try as I might to like the show, I couldn’t because it was just too depressing.

It was the fault of the characters or the storylines alone. The whole production had this deeply melancholy air about it, a Leonard Cohen  record set in mythical Walford, right down to the permanent backing tracking of muffled ghetto blasters that pervaded every scene. We gave up watching before 1986 had dawned.

All this is is to illustrate that I am supremely unqualified to comment on the programme, its characters and storylines, but even I couldn’t help but have an opinion on the latest “furore” to surround the BBC.

From what I can gather, one of the characters has a stillborn baby and in a moment of madness swaps it for the live baby that one of her neighbours has given birth to on the same day. I’m not sure how that worked out, but I’m sure the scriptwriters had a plausible plot.

This has upset an awful lot of people who say that the message is that all women who go through such a personal tragedy become somehow unhinged and are likely to behave equally irrationally.

I can understand that they might empathise with the events, but this was never likely to be a sympathetic or accurate portrayal of loss and grief and they would have been best advised not to watch. But they did and got cross enough to prompt radio phone-ins and reams of newspaper coverage.

Soaps can be very powerful when it comes to everyday issues, but the mundane doesn’t make for good television, so they have to over-dramatise them.

The best example was when Alma in Coronation Street died of cervical cancer after missing a smear test that prompted thousands of worried-well women to rush off to their doctor. They were scared by the rapid onset of the illness and the characters sudden demise, even though this would have taken years in real life.

The producer and writers pat themselves on the back for a social issue covered sensitively and with compassion when what they’re really proud of is the increased ratings. Apologies for being so cynical.

But back to the Eastenders storyline, I heard the Head of Drama being interviewed about it and he rationalised the plot by saying that the character’s reaction had been “atypical”. The people who watch soaps and believe it is their lives being played out on screen, atypical means typical.

Which is just typical.

Nobody’s prefect. If you find any spelling mistakes or other errors in this post, please let me know by highlighting the text and pressing Ctrl+Enter.

2 comments… Add yours
  • Yorkshire Pudding 9th January 2011

    Unlike you, I have always loved “EastEnders” and have never found it Cohenesque. There are and have always been sprinklings of humour and silliness in the show which in my view has produced some truly memorable pieces of drama – including the recent storyline that you referred to. By the way, Ronnie Mitchell’s baby was not stillborn. He died the day after his birth as Ronnie slept on her couch. Whereas several thousand stupid idiots have complained to the BBC about the storyline, I have sent a letter commending the “EastEnders” team for their brilliance.

  • Mr Parrot 10th January 2011

    Thanks for correcting my “stillborn” inaccuracy — as I said, I’m uniquely unqualified to talk about Eastenders! I just had to suffer the fallout in the media. I’m with you at being at a loss to understand how people can confuse soaps with reality. Mind you, didn’t Bill Tarmey get whacked about the head by a little old lady in a supermarket for the way he — Jack Duckworth — treated Vera?


Your email will not be published on this site, but note that this and any other personal data you choose to share is stored here. Please see the Privacy Policy for more information.

Spelling error report

The following text will be sent to our editors: