Corrie’s Karl is a Keeper

Watching last night’s Corrie, I decided that I really like Karl. This has been coming on for some time now, but last night cemented it.

We don’t know much about Karl, granted, but what we have seen is pretty much all good from where I’m sitting. He’s a bit of a lazy so-and-so, to be sure, but he also appears to be a really lovely, warm-hearted bloke who is deeply devoted to his missus. He also appears to be a natural father, despite not having any kids of his own.

The revelation that Stella is Leanne’s mum came as just as big a shock to Karl as everyone else and it clearly hurt to realise that Stella had kept such a huge secret from him – yet he proved a tower of strength for her throughout that crisis, as well as providing a shoulder to cry on for Eva and expanding his worldview to accommodate Leanne as his partner’s new daughter. Then last night, in the wake of Stella’s accident, even in the midst of his own emotional turmoil and distress, he was fantastic with both Eva and Leanne, supporting them both and keeping the peace between them, for Stella’s sake.

Yeah, I’ve decided that I like Karl rather a lot – and would love to know more about him! Here’s hoping the show starts to give him a bit more development now that he’s been established.

I’m also thoroughly enjoying the tense dynamics being explored within the Barlow-Price extended family unit – contrived though the circumstances of Stella’s accident were, it nonetheless provides an opportunity for this set of characters who are connected but don’t know one another properly to bounce off each other in new ways, exploring the issues that both link and divide them. I’m looking forward to seeing how the storyline continues to play out!

The Rehabilitation of Owen

Corrie has been doing something rather dastardly with that Owen Armstrong just lately. They've been making me like him. Only grudgingly, so far, but still...the starting to like is definitely there.

I feel rather strange about this. I have loathed Owen since he first showed up. For months now, almost a year in fact, he has been presented as a bully with no redeeming features whatsoever, and I was quite happy to loathe him with a fiery passion accordingly. But all of a sudden we are starting to see other, softer sides to the character, the peeling back of layers, which makes it appear that maybe he does have redeeming features after all.

The rehabilitation of Owen Armstrong has been coming on for a while now. It's been hinted at in odd scenes, suggested via spoilers. But I never really believed that how I felt about the character might change, the loathing was too deep-seated, the damage already done...

Except that apparently I'm easy to manipulate after all. Despite all those months of loathing and determination not to give it up, I can feel myself beginning to bend. After all Owen's furious opposition to young Katy's pregnancy - which, if I'm honest, I really can't blame him for - now that he's accepted it, he's starting to become supportive, even proving himself useful both in a practical and advice-giving sense, albeit in his own gruff way. Got to respect the man for that. And after all his hostility toward young Chesney since he took up with Katy, over the last few weeks he has really taken the lad under his wing just when he needed support the most. Again, got to respect the man for that.

Anna seems to like him, too, and I do love Anna, so maybe her liking of him is swaying me a little as well.

Fair play to you, Corrie. You've got me. Your tactics are working. Even though I've been aware the whole time of how deliberate the rehabilitation strategy has been, I have been unable to remain immune.

The question is, though, will the very grudging starting to like ever make it all the way to a full blown I really like this character now? Only time will tell.

Corrie quotes

Sylvia: "It's an aloe vera plant. I bought it as a present for Hayley."
Roy: "Why? It's not particularly attractive."
Sylvia: "Well, neither are you, but she's still smitten."

~ Coronation Street, 20 June 2011

Mum's the word for Stella and Leanne!

Well, we’re only two days into Stella’s reign at the Rovers, and already we’ve seen the first signs of the storyline that will apparently see her revealed as Leanne Barlow’s long-lost mother – probably sooner rather than later, at this rate. It was nicely done, the way she quite subtly pumped Ken and Deirdre for information under the guise of idle chitchat, oh-so casually dropping into the conversation that she remembered reading about Peter and Leanne’s hospital wedding back in December. Oh-so casual, except that no one would have remembered all the details, such as Peter’s name, from a random newspaper article they read six months ago – not unless they had a damn good reason to make a careful note of those details, because it mattered to them. And of course it matters a great deal to Stella, because that newspaper article is evidently how she found out where her long-lost daughter is now living, which makes total sense, and is therefore the reason she has moved to Weatherfield now.

It’s taken her six months to come looking for Leanne, however – she’s clearly been biding her time and it makes sense that she’d have reservations and might be nervous of how she’ll be received by the daughter she lost contact with so long ago, long enough ago that Leanne won’t even recognise her when they finally meet. Maybe she’s been dithering for all those months over whether to come looking for Leanne or not, and then seeing Steve’s advert for a bar manager gave her the push she needed to go for it.

Now that the story is underway, I think it is a real shame that Janice isn’t around anymore. Like her or loathe her, Janice is the only mother-figure Leanne has ever known, and her presence would add a fascinating dynamic to the storyline. Even without her, though, the storyline is bursting with potential. Leanne needs connections outside of the Barlows - she's been pretty isolated since Janice left and her bust-ups with Carla and Cheryl. This storyline is an opportunity to explore her background a little more - to find out why she ended up being raised by her dad, why her mum left her, and how she really feels about it. She almost never talks about her mum - is that because she doesn't care, or because she has buried those feelings of abandonment as deep as possible? Is that sense of having been abandoned by her own mother perhaps part of the reason she latched onto motherless little Simon so very strongly? Plus, by creating this connection between Leanne and Stella, the new family are given instant links to established characters on the show, which should help them bed in.

I’m really fascinated to see how the story unfolds from here.

John Stape: getting away with murder

John Stape

So, John Stape. He’s an interesting character, right – and viewers’ reactions to him are even more interesting still!

Let’s look at the facts. John was a schoolteacher who cheated on his girlfriend with a 17-year-old student. In order to prevent said student revealing their affair, he abducted her and locked her away in an attic for five weeks – and she was eventually released not because he realised the enormity of what he’d done and let her go, but because a) she fought hard to escape, and b) his girlfriend became suspicious, investigated and found the poor girl. John claimed repentance, went to prison and served his time. His soft-hearted girlfriend Fiz eventually forgave him and even married him while he was still banged up. Between them, they persuaded the rest of the community that he had learned his lesson. He was given a second chance that he scarcely deserved and had the opportunity to build a new life.

John with long-suffering wife Fiz

But what did he do with that opportunity? He decided that it wasn’t good enough, that he deserved more – that the profession he had quite deservedly been banned from was his by right. So he stole another man’s identity and fraudulently resumed teaching under that false name. This led to further difficulties when first his barking mad former colleague Charlotte and then Colin Fishwick himself, the man whose identity he had assumed, found out what he had done. And then Colin Fishwick dropped dead right in front of him and once again John found himself at a crossroads. He could choose to do the right thing and face the music for his crime, or he could dig himself an even deeper hole by concealing the corpse and trying to hide what he had done. He chose the latter, denying Colin a proper burial and Colin’s mother the peace of mind that would have come from knowing what had become of him. With the barking mad Charlotte sharing his sordid little secret, the lies he was telling his now pregnant wife started to spiral out of control. Then when Charlotte threatened to reveal what he had done, he killed her – and took advantage of a convenient local disaster to cover up his crime. He allowed her grieving parents to lean on him for comfort, lying to them about the nature of his relationship with Charlotte. He continued to lie to his wife. When Colin Fishwick’s mother Joy came looking for him, he lied to her, too, to hide the truth of what had happened to Colin, despite knowing that the frail old woman was deeply distressed about her son’s disappearance and desperate to make her peace with him before she died. Then when his lies tripped him up in front of Joy and she suffered an angina attack brought on by the devastating truth she had learned, he first withheld her medication and then placed a hand over her face to prevent her calling out for help, thus directly causing her death. At length the strain of living with his lies and guilt got the better of him and he suffered a nervous breakdown, leaving his already stressed wife alone to care for their premature baby while he was in hospital. Then on leaving hospital, he discovered that Fiz had claimed Joy Fishwick’s estate, in Colin’s name, in an attempt to avoid exposing John’s initial fraud. He snapped again. Unravelling fast, his lies started to trip him up. First Charlotte’s grieving parents began to realise he was not who he claimed to be – and he reacted by tying them up in their cellar to prevent them raising the alarm. Then his young brother-in-law Chesney, always mistrustful of him, became suspicious and started to investigate. With two prisoners already stashed away, John plotted and carried out an elaborate deception to lure Chesney into a position where he could also be locked away before raising the alarm – and he did that knowing full well the distress the boy’s disappearance would cause both to his pregnant girlfriend and John’s own wife.

Laid out in black and white like that, John’s crimes are revealed for what they are: the heinous and unforgiveable actions of a narcissistic and self-absorbed man who has lost touch with any concept of right and wrong and will go to almost any lengths to protect himself, heedless of the distress this might cause to others, including those he professes to love. John is a pathological liar and almost certainly criminally insane, it is clear. He commits all his acts based on self-preservation, self-promotion, self-gratification, greed, control, and dishonesty. The viewers, one might expect, would be on the edge of their seats waiting for him to get his come-uppance.

Instead, the majority of viewers are in fact cheering John on and willing him to get away with his crimes, seemingly prepared to excuse and justify anything he does. ‘But he feels really bad about it’, they say, ‘and all he wants is to be left in peace to look after his baby, he should be allowed to put the past behind him and move on,’ as if a guilty conscience and a newborn infant should absolve him of what he has done.

John

John is an enormously likeable character. He’s pleasant, polite and bookish, mild-mannered and self-effacing, somewhat bumbling…the Frank Spencer of serial killers, one might say. There is something enormously appealing about his haplessness and general air of slight confusion, there can be no denying that. Graeme Hawley’s acting is a joy to watch and John’s story has been a real thrill ride as it has unfolded over the months. John always seems as if he is trying to do the right thing, only to be thwarted by circumstance, and there is no doubt that he does feel bad about his crimes after he has committed them, and has suffered terribly as a result of his guilty conscience.

But there is also no evidence that he has ever learned or changed as a result of what he has done, while feeling guilty about one crime never stops him committing another. He has never taken responsibility for his actions, although knew exactly what he was doing every step of the way. Pleasant and likeable though he is, he is also dangerously unstable and capable of just about anything – it has been demonstrated more than once that he will go to almost any lengths to protect himself, regardless of who gets hurt in the process. John is a classic case of a potential sociopathic serial murderer who believes he is cleverer than his peer group and can bluff his way out of any situation. He must be held accountable for his crimes. Justice must be served. And this likeable but dangerous man must be removed from society.

External to the fiction, John is a brilliant character much beloved by the fans and it will be a real shame to see him go.

Internal to the fiction, John is a seriously unbalanced individual who is a danger both to himself and others and needs to be taken off the streets as quickly as possible, before someone else dies.

I can’t wait to find out how the story ends.

Corrie quotes

Carla: "You're missing your party."
Peter: "There’ll be others."
Carla: "And you won’t be able to drink at any of them."
Peter: "Now there’s a sobering thought."
Carla: "Oh, you’re a punny little alcy, but I like you."

Corrie, Friday 12 November 2010

Corrie, MST3K-style: Fathers and sons, part the second

The following sketch summarises the interaction between Ken Barlow and his family during September 2010.

Ken Barlow

Ken: Hey, look what I’ve found behind this dresser that hasn’t been moved in 50 years – it’s a letter from Susan Cunningham, a girl I went out with for a few months way back in 1960. We met at university, and she was ever so intelligent and educated and middle class, she was everything I ever aspired to be. It was way embarrassing to have to introduce her to my working class family. If only this letter hadn’t got lost all those years ago, I might have married her and my life would have been completely different. I’m going to try to make contact and make up for all those lost years.

Deirdre: Don’t let me stop you. I’m only your wife, even if I don’t so much as pretend to be highly educated or middle class.

Ken: I’m so sad. It turns out that Susan died some years ago. But she has a son named Lawrence and he’s agreed to meet me. Try not to show me up while he’s here, he’s an academic and ever so middle class, I don’t want to be embarrassed by my working class roots and ill-educated family all over again.

Deirdre: Pah.

Lawrence: I resemble Ken so strongly I could almost be his clone. I never met my father or even knew his name. I was born in August 1961.

Ken: I split up with Susan in January 1961 and no one else was involved. I believe you are my long-lost son!

Lawrence: Wow, I wish we’d known about this sooner, our whole lives might have been different.

Ken: Splitting up with your mother is the biggest regret of my life – I regret it even more than I regret missing out on seeing any of my children grow up, or being estranged from my daughter when she died. I’m so proud to be able to call you my son, since you are a successful academic who shares my intellectual interests, which is the only thing I need to know about you to believe that you represent everything I ever wanted in a son.

James, Ken and Lawrence

Lawrence: I am very proud of my daughter Chloe, as she is a post-graduate student and her fiancé is a high-flying lawyer. I’m not so proud of my son James, though, so I won’t say much about him.

Ken: I’d rather not talk about my son Peter at all, as I don’t want to have to admit to my shiny new intellectual son that my other son dropped out of school at 15 to join the Navy and now runs a betting shop and is an alcoholic and is street smart instead of book smart, which doesn’t count. It would be just as embarrassing to let Susan’s son meet my son as it was to let Susan meet my working class family all those years ago, so let’s just pretend that Peter doesn’t exist. Instead I want to bask in the reflected glory of Lawrence’s intellectualism and social status – and further stake my paternal claim by intervening to help ease the tension I have noticed between him and his son James. The pub would be the perfect venue for a mediation session.

James: I am a struggling musician who works in a charity shop, which my father doesn’t like to tell anyone as it doesn’t sound very impressive compared with his and my sister’s academic success. Mostly, though, the reason he doesn’t like me is because I am gay and he is a homophobe.

Ken: Oh dear, is there no way the two of you can manage to reconcile your differences? Let me help, I want to be part of your lives now that I know you, because you both represent everything I ever wanted to be but didn’t have the guts to pursue.

Lawrence: What’s the point? He is always going to be gay and I am always going to hate him for it.

James: What’s the point? I am always going to be gay and he is always going to hate me for it.

Peter, Lawrence, James and Ken

Peter: Don’t let me interrupt this moving family reunion. I know how much you enjoy them, Dad.

Ken: Oh, now this is embarrassing. Peter, this is my successful academic son, Lawrence. Lawrence, this is my other son, Peter.

Peter: Deirdre already told me everything, since you hadn’t bothered. Don’t mind me, I can see that I’m second best and not really wanted, so I’m just gonna stand here and watch.

Ken: Lawrence, James, I’m sure you can put your differences behind you if you could only manage to talk to each other openly – communication is so important in a family.

Peter: That’s a bit rich, coming from a serial philanderer!

James: Heh, my dad’s a serial philanderer, too!

Ken: Do you mind? I’m trying to be pompous and fatherly, here.

Peter: Playing the perfect father? Has he told you how he abandoned me and my twin sister when our mother died when we were only six years old? He sent us hundreds of miles away and hardly ever bothered to visit – that’s how interested he is in being a father. You aren’t his only long-lost son, you know, he also has a 15-year-old called Daniel but he never bothers to see him, either. He likes to have children and wants to be proud of them, but doesn’t like to put in the hard work and actually raise any of them.

Ken: How dare you embarrass me by highlighting my flaws when I am trying to demonstrate what a good father I can be in the right circumstances! Quick, let me get Lawrence and James back home and away from Peter’s subversive influence before he completely ruins the good impression I am trying to make.

Peter: Whatever. I’m more interested in finding out what’s wrong with my son Simon anyway; he’s not been himself lately.

Ken: Let me apologise for Peter’s attitude, which was very embarrassing.

James: Not at all, I thoroughly enjoyed the show. I have a sense of humour and so does Peter, we’d probably get along well, given half a chance.

Lawrence: I have no sense of humour whatsoever and don’t even know what I’m doing here any more. Convention is very important to me and since my son is determined to be unconventional I want nothing to do with him.

Ken: Surely you and James can find a way to meet in the middle?

Lawrence: Perhaps you should sort out your own problems before you start interfering in mine.

Leanne: Peter and I are really worried about Simon, he really isn’t himself lately, but he won’t tell us what’s wrong.

Ken: Why don’t you bring him around for his tea and let me try talking to him? However, I won’t be here when you arrive, as I am so preoccupied with Lawrence and James that I barely even remember Peter and Simon exist. Trying to get Lawrence reconciled with James, so that I can prove my worth as a father and stake my claim on their lives which appear to otherwise be perfect and everything I ever dreamed of, is far more important to me than the imperfect family I already have. So whatever Simon’s problem is, you are on your own with it.

Lawrence: I’m getting really tired of your constant interference, Ken. James and I are quite happy to go on hating each other for the rest of our lives, why can’t you accept that?

Ken: I just want us to be one big happy family and your hatred of James’s sexuality is spoiling it. What’s wrong with him being gay? Can’t you just accept him for who he is and love him anyway?

Lawrence: No. I am a homophobe and I am not ashamed of it. My son’s sexuality is unacceptable to me, end of.

Ken: Kids don’t always turn out the way you want them to, but hey, that’s life. My son Peter is an alcoholic and a high school drop-out, and in fact is pretty much the polar opposite of what I wanted for him, but I love him anyway, even if I don’t ever actually tell him that. I didn’t want to admit to you before how flawed he is, but now I’m almost glad as it makes a handy example I can use to encourage you to love your son unconditionally, like I do mine even though he doesn’t know it because I never tell him and instead constantly criticise. I hope he knows I only do it because I care.

Lawrence: Alcoholic? That’s nothing. If he was gay you’d reject him like I’ve rejected James.

Ken: I so would not! In fact, I would probably prefer gay to alcoholic.

Lawrence: More fool you. I’m sure you have a trigger, a line you won’t cross, just like me. Maybe it isn’t sexuality, but I bet you’d reject Peter if he were a drug dealer or a murderer or something.

Ken: Actually, my adopted daughter Tracy is in prison for murder, but I haven’t rejected her even for that, although she does frustrate me immensely. I won't mention that to you, though, since you’re on a roll and we’re talking about sons, not daughters. No, I wouldn’t reject Peter no matter what he did and no matter what he was (although I now realise it’s a bit of a shame he doesn’t know that, especially since I’ve been ignoring him all week because I didn't think he measured up to Lawrence, who now no longer looks so perfect). Lawrence, you have found my trigger – it is you and your homophobia. I reject you utterly, the way you have rejected your own son, get out of my house.

Lawrence: So you’re rejecting me because you don’t like my views just like I’ve rejected James because I don’t like his views. We aren’t so different after all.

Peter and Simon

Peter: Simon, I’m really worried about you. I need you to tell me what’s wrong.

Simon: I’m scared because I think I’m in big trouble. I was playing with my friend Aadi the other day when he fell and banged his head. I thought he was all right, but then he ended up in hospital and now the police and social services think his mum and dad did it, when really it was my fault. Will I have to go to jail?

Peter: My poor little boy. They don’t put seven-year-olds in jail, but you do have a lot of apologising to do. I’m very proud of you for being brave enough to own up and I need you to be brave again when we tell the police and social services and Aadi’s mum and dad what happened.

Dev: I’m furious with Peter because his son hurt my son and got me into trouble.

Peter: I apologise on Simon’s behalf and take full responsibility for him, but support him 100%, he’s only seven and it was an accident.

Ashley: I’m furious with Peter because my wife Claire was also suspected of hurting Aadi when really it was Simon. He should have owned up sooner.

Peter: I apologise on Simon’s behalf and take full responsibility for him, but support him 100%, he’s only seven and it was an accident.

Ken: I don’t understand how Lawrence turned out to be such a small-minded bigot. He seemed so perfect when we first met! Maybe if I’d married his mother and been part of his life when he was growing up, I could have influenced him to be a better person.

Deirdre: Hey, but if that had happened you would never have had Peter and Susan (and by the way, isn’t it a bit weird that you gave your daughter the same name as your ex-girlfriend?) and you’d never have married me and adopted my daughter. Maybe you should focus more on appreciating what you’ve got instead of fretting about what might have been.

James: And hey, you might not have managed to build a relationship with my stupid dad, but at least you’ve gained a new grandson. I would love to be part of your family, being estranged from my own.

Ken: I think I should spend some time with Peter, because I suddenly feel bad about ignoring him all week and feeling embarrassed of him for no good reason, as I now realise what a hypocrite I’ve been. So what if he isn’t perfect, it turns out that neither is Lawrence. Peter is the only one of my children that I have an actual relationship with, and I am suddenly aware that I take that for granted and don’t appreciate him enough; I’m always too focused on what he isn’t to feel proud of who he is.

Peter and Ken

Peter: Dad, I’ve had a hell of a day.

Ken: Well, I’m here to demonstrate my love and acceptance of you, imperfect though you are, through my actions, by spending some time with you, since I can never quite bring myself to say it out loud. Why don’t I put the kettle on while you tell me all about it?

Corrie, MST3K-style: Fathers and sons, part the first

The following sketch summarises the interaction between Ken Barlow and his son Peter during November 2008.

Peter and Simon

Peter: Hi, Dad. My ex-wife Lucy has recently died leaving our five year old son Simon to my care, even though she hadn’t let me have any contact with him since he was a baby so I’m a complete stranger to him, the poor mite. Being a proper father to Simon is what I’ve always wanted, more than anything, but now that I’ve got him I’m absolutely terrified and don’t know what to do. Please will you help me?

Ken: Sure, the two of you can stay with me and Deirdre for a few days while you get used to being a dad.

Peter: A few days? I was hoping for something a bit more fundamental than that. Dad, I’m scared. I’ve made a mess of everything I’ve ever tried to do in my life, you know that better than anyone, you’re always rubbing it in. But Simon is too important to risk screwing up. How can I raise him on my own if all I ever do is fail? Can’t you and Deirdre help? You’re his grandparents, after all, and when my mum died and you were left alone with me and Susan, you sent us all the way to Scotland to live with our grandparents. You reckoned you couldn’t cope with us on your own and we needed two parents who knew what they were doing, and you’ve always said it was the best decision you could have made for us, whether we agreed or not. So wouldn’t your input, as grandparents, also be the best thing for Simon, under the circumstances?

Ken

Ken: Oh, no. Even though I sent you hundreds of miles away when your mother died so that you could be raised by your grandparents while I lived the life of a bachelor and had loads of girlfriends before settling down again, and even though I have never regretted that decision and still maintain that it was the best choice I could have made both for you and me, I’m not going to let you do anything remotely similar. You’re going to have to take responsibility for your child and raise him yourself as a single parent, the way everyone does who isn’t me. Deirdre and I will babysit now and then while you’re in town, but not too often as that would only encourage you to be lazy, and besides, we have lives of our own, you know. Anyway, you can’t stay with us indefinitely. You live in Portsmouth, so once you and Simon go back home, you’re on your own. Best of luck with that – and before you ask, no, you can’t leave him here with us while you head home alone, no way. By the way, I think you're drinking too much; you want to watch that now you have a child to care for.

Peter: So it was okay for you to abandon your children with their grandparents and say it was in their best interests, but it isn’t okay for me to ask you, as Simon’s grandfather, to help look after him, even though I’m way less capable than you?

Ken: That’s right. When I did it, it was totally the right thing to do, but if you do it, it would be irresponsible and neglectful. Because I’m always right and you’re always wrong, I thought you knew that. He’s your son, so you have to take responsibility for him whether you can handle it or not; where you go, he goes, end of. Also, you are still drinking too much; you really do have to stop that now you have a child to care for, you can't look after him properly when you're drunk and I'm not doing it for you.

Peter: But drinking is the only thing that makes me feel better. I know that it really only makes things worse, but at least when I'm drunk I don't care. I just don’t see how I can raise this child on my own, not without screwing him up completely – my life’s a mess. I don’t want to mess him up, too, he’s too precious. If you can’t help, then I think maybe I should give him up for adoption. After all, I’m just as much a stranger to him as his new parents would be, and I want him to have a better life than I can give him. He deserves so much better than me. Since you think I’m such a rubbish parent anyway, and since you’re too busy to help with childcare, surely you agree that this would be his best option?

Ken: Absolutely not, no way. Even though I wasn’t prepared to raise you as a single parent myself and will defend that decision to my dying day although I agree that I am way more capable than you, and even though I’m not prepared to offer you more than occasional babysitting and constant criticism by way of support, and even though I totally agree that everything you do turns out wrong, I am not letting you give that child up to a stranger. I will take him in myself rather than let that happen, just so I can lay a guilt-trip on you every single day until you give in and take him back. When I sent you away, it was because I believed it was best for you, but if you send Simon away, that would be shirking your responsibilities, and I won’t let you do that. He’ll end up resenting you the way you resent me…and by the way I still think you are wrong to feel that way (at least, that is what I am always, always going to say, because I can’t bring myself to admit that I might have been wrong), but it would be justified for Simon (and telling you that is the closest I am ever, ever going to get to admitting that maybe you do have a right to resent me, after all). Simon is your responsibility, so you have to look after him and provide for him by yourself. Even though you are a drunk and a failure who isn’t capable of achieving anything…and I say that as your father who loves you.

Peter: Okay. Well, it turns out that Lucy has left me quite a large sum of money, on the understanding that I use it to provide for Simon. And I think that’ll be a big help and solve a few practical problems I was facing. So I’ve decided to cut my losses in Portsmouth and move back here to Weatherfield, where my family is, so I can take you up on that offer of occasional babysitting, since that’s better than nothing. I’ve used the money to buy the bookies. It’s a good business and I’ve run it before, so I know it inside out, plus it comes complete with a two bedroom flat, so it will provide me and Si with a home as well as a steady income. I’m going to try to do my best for my son, even though I’m still scared stiff of getting it wrong, and I would really appreciate your support while we get used to each other and settle down to a routine.

Ken: You’ve bought the bookies? What were you thinking? You only want Simon now there’s money attached and you’ve gone and wasted the lot already! Right, that’s it. I withdraw my offer of occasional babysitting. You don’t deserve it.

Ken and Peter

Peter: So when I didn’t want him, I was a ratbag, and now that I do want him, that’s just as bad? I haven’t wasted the money – I’ve invested it for his future, what’s wrong with that?

Ken: How can you raise a child and run a business at the same time? You’ll go bust and then the two of you will be on the streets and then what will you do?

Peter: You really do see me as a complete loser, don’t you? You think the business is going to fail just because I’m running it?

Ken: Yes. Sadly I think that’s true, but don’t worry, I still love you and I will always be here to remind you of your inevitable failure, no matter what you do.

Peter: Thanks for nothing, Dad.

Speaks volumes about the thorny relationship between father and son, no?

Corrie quotes

Rosie and Sophie Webster

Rosie: "Do you actually know how many calories there are in a teaspoon of butter?"

Sophie: "Well, don't eat it with a teaspoon, then!"

~ Coronation Street, 15 November 2010

Corrie quotes

“Aadi says that his dad says that you’re a bigamist. But you’re not big at all.”

—	Coronation Street, 1 December 2010, Simon Barlow to his dad, Peter

Corrie Quotes

Young cousins Amy and Simon, aged six and seven, try to work out what the grown-ups are talking about – with a bit of help from Amy’s mum Tracy.
Amy: “What’s a bender?”
Simon: “It’s an exercise to make your legs strong.”
Tracy: “And your arms.”

~ Corrie, 4/2/2011

Corrie's Parent Wars

Let the competitive mothering commence! Monday’s episodes saw the opening salvos in what could turn out to be quite the feud between sometime mates Leanne and Cheryl over the fates and fortunes of their respective offspring. The new ‘super-head’ at Bessie Street reckons Simon is a disruptive influence in class, whereas Russ has been labelled gifted and is set to receive special coaching. Whatever the rights or wrongs of those assessments, for now at least, Cheryl is cock-a-hoop, Leanne’s nose is well and truly out of joint, and their friendship has taken on a frosty feel. So will this escalate into all-out war, or simply fizzle out like a damp squib? I daresay we’ll find out soon enough.

This is the kind of low-key, background storyline where everyone’s mileage is going to vary. Some viewers will love it. Others will hate it. More still will be completely indifferent. Me, I reckon there’s a fair amount of potential in the concept, although it’s very early days yet to see where the show intends to take it and a lot will depend on the tone and execution. It is, at the very least, the kind of mundane, everyday storyline that should always outnumber the high-octane dramas soaps are so fond of. After all, trams don’t derail every day, but parents bickering over the exploits of their little darlings? That’s something most folk can relate to, and it’s not as if Cheryl and Leanne don’t have form in this area – they’ve fallen out over the boys before, and there has always been a slight edge to their friendship, so this latest development is definitely in character for them both.

We don’t really know Cheryl that well yet, even after almost a year on the show, so maybe this will be our chance to get to know her a bit better, since it looks as if she is going to be sticking around as a regular character. We have already seen hints that she has more than a touch of the Sally Webster about her: a woman with ambitions and aspirations she has rarely had the opportunity to indulge. This storyline definitely looks set to tap into that aspect of her personality, her desire to better herself, as well as her fierce devotion to her son. Depending on how things go, it might also cast some light on her fairly whirlwind relationship with Lloyd, which seems to have developed mostly in the background of other peoples’ stories. After all, they are looking to buy a house together, which is a pretty huge commitment to be rushing into, yet I can’t see Cheryl allowing Lloyd to interfere too much where Russ is concerned, so watching them negotiate those boundaries should, in theory, be interesting…especially if Chris starts sticking his oar in as well.

As for the Junior Barlows, a low-key storyline like this is definitely what the doctor ordered after all their recent dramas. For Leanne, as a stepmother whose place in Simon’s life has so recently been threatened, it makes sense that she would overcompensate for her insecurities by throwing her full weight behind him in this way. Plus, since Peter is usually the volatile one with Leanne having to rein him in, it is good to have a bit of role reversal now and then to remind us that Leanne can fly off the handle, too, at times, and that Peter is also capable of being the voice of reason.

If nothing else, I am looking forward to the inevitable scenes of Peter and Lloyd rolling their eyes at one another in resigned exasperation while Leanne and Cheryl argue the toss!


Cross-posted to The Coronation Street Blog on 30 March 2011

Corrie's in-laws and outlaws

So, Liz McDonald is back in town – and boy has she made her presence felt. In the space of a mere week, the brassy barmaid has kicked the ever-escalating crisis that is Steve and Becky’s marriage into hyperdrive, after their storyline had been limping along at a snail’s pace for what seems like forever. As a fiercely devoted (and occasionally disappointed) mother to Steve and ever-mistrustful mother-in-law to Becky, with a very personal stake in their story, she is uniquely positioned to do so. The people who installed one another’s buttons, after all, simply cannot resist pushing them, especially when under stress.

Liz’s return, short-lived though it promises to be, coming in the same fortnight as the impending departure of Janice Battersby, has got me thinking about the role these two characters – and others like them – play in their respective families. Neither one is a favourite character of mine and neither one would be considered a central character on the show these days, yet they both add a lot of weight and depth to their extended (and inter-connected) family units. How different might Steve and Becky’s situation be now if Liz had stuck around for the duration instead of swanning off to Spain for months on end, leaving them alone to buy little Max and destroy the family they already had in the process? As much as Liz and Deirdre love having a mutual granddaughter to dote over, how much easier would their friendship be to maintain if not for Steve and Tracy's custody disputes? How differently might Leanne’s recent marital crisis have played out if she hadn’t had Janice’s unconditional support to lean on when she had nowhere else to go? Or if she hadn’t had Ken and Deirdre adding their two penn’orth to the mix from the opposite direction? Would Ken’s life really have been more peaceful and content if he hadn’t had a disapproving mother-in-law living in his front room for years? He certainly thought so at the time, yet now that Blanche is gone he’d be the first to admit how much he misses that interfering, sharp-tongued presence…as do we all. Just imagine what she’d have found to say about the goings on this past year or so! The tension involved in all those relationships is what puts the meat on the bones of ongoing storylines.

Extended family has an important role to play on Corrie, always has. Couples who exist in isolation often have a lot less going for them than those who have a whole gamut of family connections to bounce off. Alone, a couple only have their own conflicting opinions to reconcile. Add an in-law or two to the mix, whether approving or disapproving, and the mess of personalities and points of view in play becomes dynamite – just look at any family gathering at the Barlows as an example! Whoever would have dreamt that Ken Barlow and Janice Battersby would one day be tied together by the union of their children? Yet the fact that they are now connected, polar opposites as they are, enriches the dynamics of that extended family unit immensely, here united and there divided by the rollercoaster ride of recent months. When Janice leaves, Leanne will no longer have to worry about trying to balance her obligations to a stepmother and husband who don’t always get along, but she will also be left with no one in her corner when things go wrong, and her character, and indeed their family, will be poorer for it. As for the rapidly disintegrating McDonald clan…well, only time will tell whether any of the relationships involved survive the strain of current events, including and maybe especially that between mother and son.

Janice leaves the street this week. Liz won’t be far behind her. Neither one is a favourite character of mine and neither one is a central character on the show, yet both will leave big holes in the families they leave behind.


Cross-posted to The Coronation Street Blog on 23 March 2011

Kevin and Sally - reunited or divided?

Corrie has gone a bit quiet these last few weeks, has it not? There’ve been a number of minor plotlines pootling along still, but most of the current major storylines seem to have either reached their conclusion or slid into the backseat for a time, allowing the cast members involved some much needed time off while others take their place on centre stage. As this week plays out, however, it looks as if the divided Webster clan are going to be stepping back into the limelight once more, as warring couple Kevin and Sally are brought back into one another’s orbit and forced to reopen lines of communication following Sophie’s accident.

Reading about this has got me thinking about the effect Kevin and Sally’s split has had on them as individuals. I don’t know what long-term plans the showrunners have for them, but I’m very interested to find out, as their fortunes have differed so enormously since their separation…with Sally faring considerably better than her embattled husband. It’s all about connections, and Sally has them in spades whereas Kevin, quite simply, doesn’t. Sally lives on the street. She also works on the street – and, more importantly, works in a bustling factory, which gives her a lot of individuals to interact with. She connects to Eileen’s household via Rosie’s relationship with Jason. She has her friendship with Gail, finally resurrected now that the writers have remembered it. She also has surrogate mother-figure Rita in the background, although they’ve not had many scenes together lately. And on top of all that, she has a shiny new boyfriend in tow. All in all, Sally has blossomed since her separation from Kevin, as her character has so many alternative angles to play on and so many other characters to interact with.

Kevin, in stark contrast, has become an increasingly isolated figure since the breakdown of his marriage. He no longer lives on the street – and his childcare provision for Jack is elsewhere, as well. He doesn't seem to have much contact with his daughters now that he no longer lives with them, especially after Rosie’s disastrous attempt at babysitting. He works on the street, but in a very small, two-man business, just Kevin and Tyrone…once the best of friends but now sworn enemies who seem to work in pointed silence, for the most part. In fact, since doing the dirty on Tyrone, it has become increasingly obvious that Kevin really doesn’t have any friends at all, does he? He falls into the same age bracket as Dev, Peter and Lloyd, but has never formed part of their little circle of friends, which also includes Steve, Ciaran when he’s around and Ashley when he was alive – you can take almost any combination of that group of characters and think of scenes where they’ve been seen hanging out together as mates. But Kevin? Nope. Zip, zilch, nada – he really is Billy No Mates, and the aftermath of his affair with Molly has seen him universally vilified as a home-wrecker on two counts. Even his dad doesn’t seem to have much to do with him anymore. Only Rita, bless her, seems willing to give him so much as the time of day. And the problem of having no one to interact with is that it really doesn't leave the character all that much to do, other than scowl.

The point of all this musing? I’m not sure. I’m just very interested to see what long-term plans the show has for Kevin and Sally, because as things stand it seems that while Sally’s future without Kevin looks bright, Kevin’s future without Sally doesn’t look nearly so rosy.


Cross-posted to The Coronation Street Blog on 8 March 2011