It's like introducing a gay character and him saying "Hi everyone, I'm gay" and then never having a relationship at all..
Well I don't want to burst anyone's bubble here, but I think you'll find that's life. Having a relationship or sex is not the defining factor of a gay person/character.
People are deaf. People are gay. People are fat, thin, tall and short. Soap characters who happen to fall into one of these categories don't *have* to make reference to it constantly. You are suggesting that the writers *would*.
I'm sorry, I think you are wrong.
Well done Corrie for the Bafta. Its been on top form of late.
Well done Corrie for the Bafta. Its been on top form of late.
I agree, many congratulations to everyone at Corrie! Its been a great year and they deserve it!
TVF
TV Forum Team
I have to agree with many people on the idea that they are focusing too much on the fact that tood and karl are gay. That's life! There is no way that they would make such a big deal when Sarah and Todd got together and kissed, many, many times, because that was considered normal, wehereas when Todd and Karl kissed, it's considred a massive contoversy for the show, even though it's been done on Eastenders, Brookie and Emmerdale, and frankly, nobody cares! But because Corrie is doing this for the first time in 40 years, some people are outraged.
Last edited by TV Forum Team on 18 April 2004 10:24pm
About time it got some recognition - Eastenders hasnt deserved to win anything for a few years now and I am glad that it didnt even receive a nomination!
It's like introducing a gay character and him saying "Hi everyone, I'm gay" and then never having a relationship at all..
Well I don't want to burst anyone's bubble here, but I think you'll find that's life. Having a relationship or sex is not the defining factor of a gay person/character.
People are deaf. People are gay. People are fat, thin, tall and short. Soap characters who happen to fall into one of these categories don't *have* to make reference to it constantly. You are suggesting that the writers *would*.
You are right, but aren't characters in soaps supposed to 'represent' something as a whole - like charicatures for example?
About time it got some recognition - Eastenders hasnt deserved to win anything for a few years now and I am glad that it didnt even receive a nomination!
Lets hope Corrie wins Best Soap at the British Soap Awards which are being held in early May. They deserve it
You are right, but aren't characters in soaps supposed to 'represent' something as a whole - like charicatures for example?
Not in
good
soaps
Its certainly true that there are one dimentional short-term characters who come and go in soaps, and act as devices for plots to unfold for the regulars. That can be said of Karl to an extent, but they are doing their best to flesh-out his back story so we feel engaged with him. Presumably as he's due to be in the story long-term.
Suggesting they may cause technical problems or be reduced to "walking down the street with a white stick asking for help all the time" is absolute rubbish - and it's nothing to do with being "PC".
They've introduced a gay man to Corrie, and now the storylines are about him being gay and getting a boyfriend.
If a deaf person was introduced to Coronation Street, but still spoke to residents as any other person, and could also lip read, then why bother promoting the character as deaf? That character would be there purely so that they could say "We've got a deaf character".
It's like introducing a gay character and him saying "Hi everyone, I'm gay" and then never having a relationship at all and just sitting at the back of the Rovers without looking at a single bloke, maybe dating a few girls - he'd be there just to be PC.
On the other hand, if you brought in a deaf person and then had them crash their car, you'd complain that they were making it look like deaf people are ignorant, and if the deaf character was attacked by Richard Hillman you'd whinge that the Coronation Street scriptwriters were making a mockery of deaf people.
So they can't win either way.
Pootle5 posted:
There are plenty of deaf actors who can speak
I'm talking about fictional soap characters, not the actors who play them.
Pootle5 posted:
they could speak to other characters, and "hear" them by reading their lip patterns. If introduced as part of a family or a couple, there could be another person to sign with - and use speech alongside - and the actor could be shown in the background at the Rovers or cafe signing to a deaf friend.
I can see the tabloid headlines already.
SHOCKER: Todd kisses Karl!
FIRE! Will Janice Die?
AMAZING! Deaf person sits in background of Rovers signing to friend.
Of course a deaf character would, as deaf people in real life would, have some communication problems with fully hearing people, but it doesn't stop them having a million other storylines (as suggested by an earlier post) just as Todd has had other storylines, or Maud did - even Karl has had one about being battered by his partner (male or female - it didn't matter) - he didn't get hit
because
he was gay.
I wouldn't want them to "promote" the character as deaf - that's the whole point, they would be a character who happened to be deaf, and as part of the character's development, of course the difficulties and ignorance of other people would come out - I'm saying it should be character driven - like Todd has been - and not issue driven, it's about how it is written in (going back to the original point about introducing a new Black or Asian family with out being stereotypical).
Yes - many deaf actors can speak and lip read (getting around someone's argument that "everyone would have to use BSL and no one would understand") - therefore so could the deaf character - and so do many deaf people in the "real world" - go and find out.
And what would be wrong with having someone signing in the background? It would be just like seeing Jack and Vera talking at the bar while the action is on someone else - have you never seen a couple of people using BSL in a pub or other public place?
And who gives a toss about what the tabloids might say?
TVF
TV Forum Team
Evidently, ITV, as they've axed the scene where Todd and Karl are seen in bed together because of the Daily Star.
Click here and sign up - it only opened today, but I need some good members, and most of you lot on this thread are - especially seeing as its got a whole soap forum - so you can discuss Corrie to your leisure. Cheers, Joe
Evidently, ITV, as they've axed the scene where Todd and Karl are seen in bed together because of the Daily Star.
Yes, it is a very sorry state of affairs that the gutter tabloids have so much sway. ITV had nothing to lose by keeping the scene in.
TVF
TV Forum Team
I don't think this so-called 'axing' is true at all. Corrie bosses said they've filmed no such scene, therefore it couldn't be axed anyway - and certainly not on the word of some rag "newspaper" that would work better as toilet paper than reading material!
There's absolutely no way the Daily Star has this much influence over the storyline.
Just to return to the discussion about disabled characters... has everyone forgotten about Maud Grimes? She was in a wheel-chair, but her disability was never made into an 'issue'. She was also a great character IMO!
