Change as a Means, or Change as an End (College Paper #2. Written in early 2005)
Note: You will see asterisks at a few points, which are not part of the original paper, but alert you to updated information which you can find at the bottom.
Change as a Means, or Change as an End
Soap opera: the name alone carries with it so many assumptions about what the program offers, from. structure to melodrama. It is hard to imagine that this was once a new kind of program, setting a trend that has formed the criteria for daytime serials. The associations and audience expectations for soap opera are in part why the genre has changed so little since its inception, despite the changes in society and viewers. Soaps are by nature slow to progress. This paper will focus mainly on writing in the network soaps aired in the United States. How are writers constrained by viewer expectations? What are the challenges facing soap opera writers, and how do they meet those challenges? Does the audience even notice?
Dorothy Anger (Other Worlds, pg. 16) defines soap operas by the following criteria. Soap operas are programs:
a) consisting of multiple storylines which continue from episode to episode,
b) for which an eventual end is neither foreseen nor written toward,
c) which air more than once weekly, and
d) which derive their story content primarily from emotion and affairs of the heart.
I will begin with a brief recap of the history of soap operas, and how that history lends itself to current soap structure. This is because historical and societal background of soaps should be understood in order to fully appreciate what changes mean, and how they affect the genre.
Daytime serial was originally (and some might argue, still is) geared towards the housewife, home alone during the day. The oldest soap still running, Guiding Light, * began as a radio program, and was sponsored by Procter and Gamble, whose advertising consisted primarily of cleaning products - hence the name.
The repetitious format of soaps was formulated in response to the schedule of its viewers. Since the viewer (most likely a housewife) was theoretically engaged in many tasks throughout the day, soaps were developed to repeat or recap important developments, so that if the viewer had to miss a show, or some fraction thereof, they would easily be able to catch up. This format was also friendly for new viewers, as it frequently repeats any vital information to the plot, allowing the new viewer to quickly grasp the necessary information. It is due to this, as much to the fact that soaps air five times a week, that there is a constant recycling of storyline.
Writers must also keep in mind the three different types of viewers that watch at any given moment. There are the new viewers, who must be given information regarding the relationships and hierarchies of the show, as well as the current plot. They must have enough of a hook to interest the casual viewer (who we will loosely define as someone who watches approximately two or so episodes a week). Last, they must provide viewers who watch every day with enough plot advancement and subtext to make the story continually interesting to its most loyal fan base.
Since soap operas run for so long, there is a continual changeover in the writers and producers for any given program. While the newest soap, Passions*has had the same head writer since its inception three years ago, Guiding Light, which has had over 14,192* television episodes, has had over thirty Head Writers[1]alone. Each of these writers has had to learn the history of the show, and remain (at least somewhat) true to that history. Some of the challenges facing a new head writer: The writer, who is usually brought in to make changes for the better (whatever the criteria for that may be), must first conclude or adapt existing storylines in a timely fashion. For instance, they can’t wrap up a long running murder mystery by Saying, “it was Fred.” and sending him to jail on Wednesday, and introducing a new story on Thursday.
Writers must also do their best to learn the characters on a show, and, if they wish to remain popular with the fans, do their best to remain true to those characters. One of the most common complaints fans have about a new writer is that characters suddenly begin to act “out of character.” Studies show that it takes almost a year for fans to accept a new character or recast, so it is easy to see how they wouldn't take kindly to the sudden change in a character they have “known” for a long time. In a genre where actors can (and frequently do) portray characters for twenty years or more, the “relationship” between them and the viewer can be intimate. Cultivating this relationship with viewers is of paramount importance to a soap’s producers. Today, there are nine soaps on the air. Passions, the youngest soap on the air today, has approximately two million viewers. The Young and the Restless, which is consistently the highest rated soap, typically has an audience of 4.5 million viewers. While these numbers seem low, one must keep in mind the following:
Because the soap operas generate steady profits (as a result of continuous showings), they are far more valuable to the networks than the prime-time series... More of the daytime revenue is clear profit...because daytime programming is so much cheaper to produce. A half-hour prime-time show can cost $350,000. For the same money (or less), a full week of hour-long soap episodes can be produced. (Cantor and Pingree, 54-55). Obviously, the monetary figures are no longer precisely accurate, but they still serve to give us an idea about the relative cost of production. While soaps do not achieve high ratings, they do provide networks with a consistent profit and audience demographic. Furthermore, it is worth noting that while Guiding Light (GL) has an average of 2.5 million viewers, and General Hospital (GH) an average of 2.9 million, in almost every region, these shows air at the same time, meaning that in total, there are 5.4 million viewers tuning in to a soap opera. Readers should also be aware that since many viewers are known to record or TiVo their soaps and watch them later, it is hard to know exactly how accurate these ratings are.
What do ratings have to do with plot and format? While soaps are relatively popular, and unlikely to be cancelled by a network in the near future, it is a fact that soap ratings have been suffering a slow decline since the 1970s. Networks, and more directly, the producers and writers, are always looking for ways to boost these ratings. They want to stop the decline, and raise the ratings, as they do with any other program. This puts pressure on soaps to constantly look for new ways to attract more viewers. All My Children* (AMC) and One Life To Live* (OLTL), both on the ABC network, recently (April 2004) began a much hyped crossover storyline. |
Essentially, each plot, while self-contained within each show, involves characters from the other program. The network hopes to entice AMC viewers to watch OLTL, and vice versa, to get the entire story. OLTL has, in recent years, had several unusual episodes, among them a musical episode and an episode in which the actors played each other’s roles. Additionally, in May of 2002, OLTL shot a week of episodes live, in homage to soaps original format, and a ratings bid for sweeps (and probably a dose of exhileration).
Many soaps have done on location shooting, among them, the Young and the Restless (Y&R), theBold and the Beautiful (B&B), and Days of Our Lives (DOOL). During the summer, networks aim the storylines towards youth audiences. These examples comprise just some of the ways that soap operas try to bring in new viewers, but what they have in common is that they are all short-term endeavors. More compelling is what soaps do (and have done) on a grander, long-term scale.
It is important to examine the history underpinning soaps because without knowing what they were, it would be impossible to see what they now are. At this point, one might ask, what is it that is different in soap operas today? As part of the background for this paper, several polls were 4 released on to various soap message boards. Answers were voluntary, and while they are by no means a large enough sample to base hard data on, they none-the-less gave this author some idea of the general attitude found among viewers.
The polls showed very different opinions about the soaps, but there was a common theme in them all. Many viewers complained that soaps had become too plot driven. If this seems to be a contradiction, consider that soaps have always been characterized by the interpersonal relationships, the plots intrinsically attached to the actions taken by characters. To state that a soap has become plot driven is to say that the characters have become subject to the final destination of a plot point.
Delving even deeper into this complaint, a plot driven soap generally moves through storyline at a much higher rate of speed. Traditionally soaps are known for moving very slowly, for reasons we have already discussed. While compared to primetime programming, this remains true, some soaps now advance at a faster pace. This is because a plot driven soap is often conclusion oriented (insofar as a soap has a conclusion). Everything that happens is leading towards the big reveal, or the next a step. This is true for a character driven soap as well, but the difference is time. In the latter, every character must be involved somehow; every increment has an effect on everyone. Familial ties and enemies are scrutinized in depth, and every meaning examined. This means that the story last longer. When the interpersonal relationships become secondary, advances become more rapid. It is important to note that this observation does not apply to every soap, and that poll respondents had vastly differing opinions as to whether or not this constituted a positive change.
Another common complaint among viewers was a lack of continuity. A style of television almost diametrically opposite to sitcoms, soap operas depend absolutely on the lessons learned from day to day, week to week, year to year. While a character might end up in the same place, or make the same mistakes, they (and the audience) are fully aware of the history and the ways in which it affects the present. The result is the constant growth and change of a character (also in marked difference to sitcoms). If asked, longtime soap fans can likely chart the entire course of events that led up to a character decision, and, based on that knowledge, make educated guesses as to future actions. A production team that fails to defer to this continuity can undermine the entire structure (and royally piss off viewers).
While these two issues are most commented upon, they are not something that can be attributed to any specific writer, or production crew; nor are they new problems. Change is often subjective, so it is valuable to examine to soaps with clear changes, i.e. changes intentionally and deliberately undertaken by a crew to draw viewers.
Port Charles(PC), which aired from (1997-2003), started originally as a, spin-off of GH. It never achieved very high ratings, and perhaps because the soap had little to lose, the producers and writers approached that problem. with a fairly radical solution. Using Spanish Telenovelas[2]as a template, in October 2000, PCintroduced a new format. The soap would tell stories in an arc, each lasting 12 weeks. These ‘books’ would have a relatively defined beginning, middle and end. Each ‘book’ would feature a main cast of characters, drawn from the regular, contract cast, and new guest stars. Each book would segue into the next, but at the same time be roughly contained within itself. The idea being that it would be easier for viewers to grow hooked, as well as allowing for more contained story telling.
In addition to its telenovela format, PC began to diverge into an increasingly supernatural realm. Vampires became an accepted part of the PC world. This provided an interesting conundrum for the audience, as PC is technically set in the same town as GH, with many cast members having been on either soap, or with relatives who were apart of the other soaps cast of characters. As PC severed its ties to the “real” world, it became less and less connected to GH. Where once crossovers or references to concurrent plots had been common, they became non-existent. Neither the books nor the subject matter seemed to raise PC’s ratings, and the ABC network looked for more ways to cut cost.
In 2008, PC began shooting at an accelerated rate of speed. The show was in production for only six months, shooting episodes for the entire year, which is cheaper for the network. When it was eventually cancelled, some people speculated that it was partly because the show, pre-shot the way it was, lacked the ability to adapt storylines to audience response. However, it is hard to say how much influence the audience has, and it is something that will be discussed further down the line.
PC is an example of a show that tried to re-invent itself in several ways. However, PC was a very young soap, and it is interesting to examine an older soap which is in the process of very actively trying (and sometimes succeeding) to raise its ratings, DOOL. Under the direction of new head writer James E. Reilly, who also heads up Passions, DOOL began a much hyped, highly controversial plot line, in which an unknown killer has been killing off many of its long time players. When the killer was finally revealed, audiences were shocked to learn that it was long time, contract[3]character. It should be explained that on soaps, a contract character is rarely a cold-blooded killer, especially if they are a fan favorite, and not in “love to hate them” way. To make a lead character directly responsible for the deaths of so many other favorites is a risky move.
James E. Reilly, as was mentioned, is also the head writer at Passions. Debuting in 1999, Passionsexemplifies a new type of soap opera. Campy, but serious, it refuses to be categorized. Blending many different types of narratives and genres, it brings to mind the type of storytelling seen in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Crafted to appeal to a younger audience, Passionsis known for its outrageous plots. It has come under criticism for being particularly slow to resolve storylines. Some of the devices that were in place when the show started have yet to find resolution in 2004.
Another form of change presents itself in transition. Many times in soaps, getting a character from one place to another proves to be as much a suspense tactic as anything else. Time is expanded waiting for people to arrive. Things happen to prevent said arrival. As the World Turns* (ATWT) and GH are two soaps that have, in different ways, altered this pattern.
GH often cuts out much of its characters’ “travel time,”-both literally and figuratively. The soap features a character who possesses his own island, oft implied to be somewhere in the Caribbean. The character, and any others going back and forth, are sometimes shown on the journey, sitting in the plane. From time to time however (09/12/03, 08/82/04, are just two examples) if the writers have better use for them elsewhere, the characters will make an almost direct jump from the Caribbean to “Port Charles” (the soaps fictional home base, located in upstate New York), or vice versa. This tactic fell under criticism though, likely because the rapid displacement of characters was not presented in the fashion of a deliberate stylistic choice, but as a natural occurrence. Soap fans objected to being told that a character could fly from the Caribbean to New York in the same amount of time it took another character to drive across town.
ATWT has taken another approach. In almost every episode of ATWT, scene changes occur rapidly. If a character takes a while to move from one scene to the next, it is because there is some other focus, or information that needs to be imparted. One specific example of this new, rapid pace would be the ATWT episode airing on Jan. 12, 2004, in which a character is poisoned. The scene changes instantaneously from her passing out, to the group’s arrival at the hospital, to the doctor coming out and giving his diagnosis. All of this occurs in a space of two or so minutes. It is important to remember that this could be stretched out to encompass a half of, or even an entire episode. The writers made a conscious choice to focus on the mechanics of the scene (getting from here to there) rather than the emotional aspects of it (possible deathbed confessions, etc.). This type of storytelling can have consequences for the writers. As noted, travel time often serves as a time filler. While one character awaits another, they frequently recap what is going on, usually either talking to themselves or someone else. When the writer eliminates much of this, the storyline moves forward much faster, even in a soap that focuses on its personal dynamics.
But have these soaps really changed, or it just a new take on an old tale? DOOL’s controversial storyline has certainly garnered attention, both in the soap world, and the television industry at large. Soap Opera Digest has featured the twist and turns almost bi-weekly (05/11/04, 05/28/04) and the May 28, 2004 Entertainment Weeklyhad a three-page article on the subject (pg. 73-76). ATWTwon the 2004 Emmy™ award for Best Writing Team. ATWT’s head writer, Hogan Sheffer, and his team, have been nominated every year since 2000 (when he became head writer) and won also in 2000 and 2001. It is clear that audiences and media spectators see something happening.
All told, what do these changes mean for soaps in the long run? While DOOL(as well as Passionsand GL) has shown a rise in ratings, many in the industry worry that the sensational storyline ultimately devalues soap opera. Entertainment Weekly quotes Jack Smith (Exec. Producer and head writer at Y&R) as saying, “Jim’s (Reilly) stories fly right in the face of this form” (EW, p. 76). Brian Frons (ABC Daytime Television President) comments, “They’ve gotten the hype, but were they right? The danger with this type of storytelling is that you come for the girl in the piñata, and then you turn away and say ‘call me for the next installment of CSI” (EW, p. 76).
Furthermore, this entire examination begs the question: how much can soaps be changed before they no longer fulfill the audience definition and desire? American viewers generally consider more realistic soaps, like England’s Coronation Street, or East Enders, depressing. While some increase in pace adds flair, too much, and the writers run the risk of neglecting the small moments that are so much a part of the format. Upping production values means that the cost effectiveness of shows would be undermined, and their longevity would then be threatened.
As audience’s change, and ratings have fallen, soaps have tried to change accordingly, by adding sensational storylines, and faster plots. They have also worked to appeal to the newest coveted market, teenagers. In the quest to create stories that will entice more viewers, writers (and their soaps) have to be careful not erode the qualities that make soap opera such a hallmark of American television history.
Many poll respondents indicated that they watch (or record) their soap every day; the characters and towns within soap opera are a part of the daily lives of millions of viewers. All of these changes threaten what is arguably the most basic appeal of soaps. The people may be richer and prettier, but when it comes down to it, the characters in soap operas are no different than the viewer. They have the same problems: infidelity, addiction, parent-child issues, business dealings, illness, romantic rivalries, and death. In the end, these things are what the viewers relate to.
The programs may often be about tragedy and hardship, but they are also most commonly known for romance. The biggest problems on soap operas are always about love; who has it, who needs it, who lost it and who got it. As James E. Reilly puts it, “Remember, every fairytale ends with the phrase ‘And they lived happily ever after....’ But in order for that to have an impact, it meant that they had a horrible, god-awful time before they got there,” (EW, p. 72). Soaps today struggle with ratings, budget issues, competition, perception, cancellation threats, and fan loyalty. It will be interesting to see how, or if, this particular drama ends.
*Guiding Light was cancelled in 2009. It aired for 72 years, first on radio from 1937-1952, then on television from 1952-2009.
*Passions ran from 1999 to Sept. 2007 on NBC, from Sept. 2007 to Aug. 2008 on DirectTV's 101 Network.
*Guiding Light had a total of 15,700 episodes.
*All My Children aired for 41 years before being cancelled in 2011. It was briefly resurrected on The Online Network from April to September 2013.
*One Life to Live was 43 years old when it was cancelled in January of 2012. It too was briefly resurrected on The Online Network from April to August 2013.
*As the World Turns ran from April 1956- September 2010 (54 years).
[1]The head writer puts together a plan for what will happen over the next year (this amount varies, depending on the writer). The plan is broken down into months, and weeks. The head writer distributes the scenes among the team, who write much of the daily scenes and dialogue. He or she then puts all the elements back together. While the head writer is the main creative force behind the story, he or she is by no means the sole writer of a program.
[2]A telenovela is a format of soap similar to a mini-series, but often lasting months. They run for a finite amount of time before concluding.
[3]A “contract” character is a character played by an actor or actress who under contract with the soap opera. Soaps also usually have a group of recurring actors and actresses, who, while sometimes appearing frequently, are not considered a stable member of thecast. Recurring characters are far more likely to disappear or undergo dramatic personality reversals than someone who is on contract.