Brookside Brookside

[James from London]

I find Matty and Teresa quite frustrating as characters. I understand that they’re representative of those who are hard hit by unemployment and poverty under Thatcher’s Government, but because they’re peripheral characters I find them hard to take sometimes because they’re so quick to play victim. Teresa does a lot of hand-wringing and brow furrowing and “Oh She”ing and asking Sheila for money. Matty feels extremely volatile and almost bipolar and is always getting ruddy cheeked and bawling at Bobby and storming off before coming back with sloped shoulders to apologise under Teresa’s orders.Yes, it’s probably coming from a place of pride with Matty, but he’s still blaming everyone else for his situation when the the decision to work whilst signing on was ultimately his. Still, there’s no denying that the scenes are electric, and it’s no small feat that even as they frustrate, so good is the cast chemistry that I fully feel the depth of this long-term friendship and find myself rooting for them.

I vaguely remember Brookside receiving accusations of "selling out" for having Bobby land a cushy job after a relatively short period out of work instead of using the opportunity to depict the effects of long-term unemployment on a family, a situation being faced by millions of real life people at the time but sorely unrepresented on television. Boys from the Blackstuff had been searingly powerful in this regard, but had already come and gone, EastEnders had yet to appear, and Crossroads and Coronation Street both pretty much existed in cosy worlds of their own by this point (a notable exception being The Street's Bert Tilsley, who was shown struggling to get work and suffering because of it). Obviously, Brookside had solid dramatic reasons for putting Bobby back in the workplace, but it does illustrate the show's ongoing dilemma between meeting the demands of soap and social realism. I guess the solution/compromise was Matty who, as you say, served as a representation of a working-class man with no work who doesn't have the luxury of getting his own soap opera storylines, He isn't gifted with the same passion and articulacy as Bobby, just as Teresa doesn't fit the same soap-friendly lioness-fighting-for-her-cubs matriarch mould as Sheila and Marie. But they always felt like important and credible characters, and their story seemed valid and worth telling, if only once removed.

On paper, George getting beaten by McArdle in the gents’ toilets* is horrific: where else on the British soapscape of the time would one see this happen? The most surprising aspect of the scene for me is that in context the inevitability desensitised me from any sense of horror. The scene wasn’t about George taking a physical battering, but an emotional one. It wasn’t about the way McArdle sent his message, but about the message itself: George was on his own.

It’s a frightening situation in which to see a character placed. Frequently in soap there’s a slightly interactive element: thoughts might spring to mind about what choices a character might have made to prevent/alter/improve a situation. Here, though, there are closed doors in every direction and the audience - like George himself - has to fall back on the slim hope that the judicial system will be able to find the needle of truth in a haystack of damning circumstantial evidence.

Yes, I think it's George's isolation that is so striking. It's certainly the grimmest soap storyline I can recall up to that point. Corrie had always been fond of bumping people off in freak accidents, but at least such tragedies were sudden. Characters weren't shown enduring the same sort of clammy, stomach-churning fear and mounting dread that George goes through. You really get a sense of the physical toll it's taking on him -- there's a scene where he shamefully admits to Marie that he's soiled his trousers, which is just so horribly heartbreakingly real. Ordinarily, you assume justice will eventually be served, but not here. EastEnders, for all its reputation as the most relentlessly miserable programme on earth, rarely captures quite the same sense of bleakness. I think it's because the sense of family and community is so all-pervading, characters rarely seem truly alone. Maybe the first time it reached George-levels of despair was the second time Arthur Fowler went to prison for theft, when he'd been framed by his best mate and you knew he wasn't coming back because he was being written out of the show.

Over at Number Five, Karen has been found out. First Sheila read her like a book and challenged her about her trip to the Lake District. Then Bobby found photos of Karen with Andrew, rather than the friends she claimed were with her.

I found both their reactions great, but Sheila’s in particular felt surprising. Considering her strong Catholic faith, I thought she’d have come down on her like a ton of bricks, but there’s a strong sense of support. Part of me wonders how wise it is of her to trust Karen almost without reservation, but at the same time it’s really sweet. She’s also highlighted the double-standards Bobby has compared with attitudes towards his sons’ sexual behaviours, with Damon currently in London (presumably staying Walford way with Sharon Watts) and Bobby cackling at the prospect of him getting some sex education from visiting Soho.

I've never forgotten Sheila's line about Damon "being catapulted through puberty" on the streets of Soho. And yes, the show gets a lot of mileage out of Sheila and Bobby taking unexpected and opposing stances on moral issues. Sometimes she's the more rigid, conservative one; sometimes he is (usually when it involves Karen or Sheila herself).

 

[Ome]

Teresa doesn't fit the same soap-friendly lioness-fighting-for-her-cubs matriarch mould as Sheila and Marie.

I’ve been racking my brain trying to think of another example of a minor character having such a huge impact on me by the way they exited a soap and can’t think of anyone. Her death rocked me and still sends shivers down my spine when I think of it.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Obviously, Brookside had solid dramatic reasons for putting Bobby back in the workplace, but it does illustrate the show's ongoing dilemma between meeting the demands of soap and social realism.

Yes. If anything it's an example of the series being cornered by its own realism. If Bobby were to be out of work for a long period, how could they possibly explain the family continuing to live in the largest detached house on the Close?

Even though Bobby's relatively short period of unemployment might not have been the most realistic, I enjoyed the conflict that came out of it.

But they always felt like important and credible characters, and their story seemed valid and worth telling, if only once removed.

Yes. I also appreciate that they're still part of the fabric of the show as I start 1985. The friendship has felt very truthful and "lived in" right from the start.

Maybe the first time it reached George-levels of despair was the second time Arthur Fowler went to prison for theft, when he'd been framed by his best mate and you knew he wasn't coming back because he was being written out of the show.

Ooh - I'd forgotten about that one. Now I'm wondering if there are any other examples of the "innocent man imprisoned" stories in the soaps besides these two and Deirdre.

I’ve been racking my brain trying to think of another example of a minor character having such a huge impact on me by the way they exited a soap and can’t think of anyone. Her death rocked me and still sends shivers down my spine when I think of it.

I know what happens, but I can't remember too well how it plays out onscreen. There's an awful lot of Brookside that's very much a blank for me.

 

[James from London]

Now I'm wondering if there are any other examples of the "innocent man imprisoned" stories in the soaps besides these two and Deirdre.

I'm sure there are plenty of examples of characters who were sent to prison and later set free when their innocence was proved. That's what happened to Arthur eventually, even if he did drop down dead more or less straightaway due to injuries sustained behind bars. Cases like George's, where his innocence was never proved, are rarer. That said, there's currently a woman in EastEnders who framed her middle son for a crime her youngest son committed, and the middle son subsequently died in prison, and whose eldest son is currently serving a life sentence for a murder she committed (or at least thinks she committed - it's complicated).

Sunshineboyuk sent me this link to a recent-ish Zoom interview with Petra and Michelle (who I don't think I'd have recognised in a million years).

Alas, I find Zoom meetings as frustrating to watch as they are to partake in so I gave up after a couple of minutes, but sbuk has generously provided me with cliff notes:

the highlights... they both praise Anna who played Marie, she was a force if nature, Petra was a bit intimidated by her, Michelle shared a flat with her in real life while they did the show, Petra says it was a miracle she lasted a year in the show because she was " chaotic and unreliable " in real life at the time which led to her being written out of the show (!), Marie left because George left and then they told Michelle they couldn't have a house with just one character in it so she left, the other McGann brother( Joe?) was cast as Gavin but Equity wouldn't let him do it for some reason, the actor then left of his own accord after a few months and he was sorry about the effect it might have on Alexandra Pigg, they all got on apparently and it was a good place to work, lots of big personalities , Paul Collins/ Jim Wiggins a leftie socialist in real life (!!) and Annabel/ Doreen Sloane more right wing than Annabel in real life and although they didn't socialise or speak much except when they worked, they met everyday to do the crossword together which ppl observed was very moving and strangely intimate, Petra laughed that she and Barry had the same hair, Michelle talked about how her character was written as a real firecracker at the audition but as a wet lettuce in the early scripts, Petra talked about how many complaints they got over language and Redmond said " Right, we are de-fucking the scripts" .... she said that the show seems like lifetimes ago, so long ago and yes it is but I found that quite sad and melancholy , watching it now in vivid detail we can almost reach out and touch it.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Cases like George's, where his innocence was never proved, are rarer.

Yes. Thanks to conventional storytelling I suppose the audience just expects some kind of karmic closure on these things.

That said, there's currently a woman in EastEnders who framed her middle son for a crime her youngest son committed, and the middle son subsequently died in prison, and whose eldest son is currently serving a life sentence for a murder she committed (or at least thinks she committed - it's complicated).

Oh my. It sounds it!

Sunshineboyuk sent me this link to a recent-ish Zoom interview with Petra and Michelle (

This is great - I've just watched the whole thing.

Alas, I find Zoom meetings as frustrating to watch as they are to partake in so I gave up after a couple of minutes,

It's taken some perseverance as there were a lot of sound issues in this one.

the other McGann brother( Joe?) was cast as Gavin but Equity wouldn't let him do it for some reason

Such bizarre timing, but I was skimming through Phil Redmond's book just this morning, and landed on a page where I'm pretty sure he mentioned that Joe McGann was the original choice for Barry, but didn't have his Equity card whereas Paul Usher had his because he was a musician. I only glanced over it, so I might have it wrong (and I can't find the page now), but I could envisage Joe fitting into the Grant household quite well.

Another thing on this: apparently Phil Redmond got flak and a threatened boycott for only auditioning white actors for Barry, and had to push back and explain that this was the son of a white forty-something couple of Irish descent who were practicing Catholics, and casting a non-white actor would make it a bigger story than he was planning on telling.

Petra talked about how many complaints they got over language and Redmond said " Right, we are de-fucking the scripts" ....

This really made me smile. "De-fucking" is already a contender for my Word Of The Year.

Paul Collins/ Jim Wiggins a leftie socialist in real life (!!)

And a rebel by the sound of it. It was mentioned that he carried a bottle of scotch in his briefcase because Brookie was a dry set.

Smoking, too, was forbidden everywhere on the set except the green room.

they met everyday to do the crossword together which ppl observed was very moving and strangely intimate

And Tracey Batchelor says she used to do the crossword with Cliff Howells. She mentions she wasn't interested in politics at the time, but they used to observe people coming into the green room with strong (and sometimes opposing) views on headlines which she found fascinating.




It's nice that both Tracey and Alexandra work with young people: Tracey as a teacher and Alexandra in a clinical mental health setting.

 

[AndyB2008]

Episodes 231 - 240
14 January - 12 February 1985
​

The Free George Jackson campaign is giving Brookside a feeling of event at the moment. Locations for this storyline during these episodes have included the centre of Liverpool, the top of St John’s Beacon (as was, before it was named after a radio station), Speke Airport (as was, before it was named after a Beatle), a moving train and even Downing Street.

The direction has been as bold as the writing, with arty aerial shots from a moving helicopter (and, presumably, some which were taken from the beacon of Marie some 450 feet below.

In terms of scale, this is almost certainly Brookie’s biggest storyline to date. It’s certainly a far cry from the days when the biggest mission a character had was Roger’s quest to find out what newspaper his neighbours read. From time to time as I watch, I’ll suddenly remember that there was a cynical marketing campaign attached to this arc and feel a little sad. But the presentation still feels perfectly Brookside.

Fictional characters crusade to make the nation aware of key goings on in Brookside Close, and to make everyone understand why this should be important to them. In turn, this forms part of a real-life campaign for Phil Redmond and The Powers That Be to do the exact same thing. It’s not the first time a TV storyline had been capitalised (with Who Shot JR? the benchmark by which others were marked even then), but unlike other marketing campaigns, Free George Jackson feels like a rare early example of soap metafiction. It’s as though the characters have become aware of the viewer and are trying to reach out to them with prominent banners and daubed messages at real-life landmarks. Anyone with a sense of social or civic responsibility ignores these as their peril. And this is over three and a half decades before WandaVision.

For all its spectacle, though, the heart of the story remains Anna Keaveney’s Marie. She broods while chain smoking; she looks reflectively at her children (there was a terrific switch from fury at learning the boys had sold their bikes to broken hearted pride upon learning they’d done so to get money to fund the campaign); she hatches plots with Betty; she goes about her daily life; she bellows at the injustice and refuses to go unheard.

The last of these has drawn Tommy McArdle shaped trouble. After scaring off Betty’s sons, McArdle has shown up on Marie’s doorstep, inviting himself into the house where he intimidates Terry into making him hot chocolate in a pan while making threats to Marie about her children.

And he appears to have followed through with this: the latest episode even introduced (of a fashion) a Who Shot George? storyline when George Jr. was fired upon by an unseen assailant in the woods surrounding the house. The drama unfolding as he was taken in an ambulance contrasted perfectly with the unsuspecting Marie on the train home from London, relieved and filled with a quiet optimism having hand delivered the petition to Number Ten. It’s a moment that, sadly, would not work today since Marie and Betty’s mobiles would be lighting up as soon as it happened. Communication moving more slowly was a luxury in so many ways, and it’s played to perfection here.

Of course, I’m curious to know more about the logistics behind Marie’s visit to Number Ten. In many ways, the series feels as though it was born out of frustration at Thatcher’s Government. It’s spent almost two-and-a-half years shining a light on the impact of that Government’s stranglehold on Britain, with unemployment, disgruntlement, austerity and crime more visible and transparent than in any other series. It feels quite unlikely that the same Government would welcome the Brookside crew to their doorstep and provide a springboard for that series’ publicity.

Even though the barrier scene was clearly on the edge of Downing Street itself, we only saw the door of Number Ten in closeup when Marie appeared. I wonder if it was a different house standing in for the real Number Ten.

Still, even camera trickery and members of the public (in those days) being able to get within a reasonable proximity, it’s difficult to imagine the filming taking place without at least some permission involved. And it’s certainly to the series’ credit that I’m still unsure if it was the real house or not. Even more, the scene with Betty hurling critical comments (“Scargill fridges. Scargill cars. Perks o’ t’job”) at a silently scowling policeman on the other side of a barrier felt to me as though it could well have been done for real.

Betty and Marie make for a fascinating little team, and Betty can be enjoyably frustrating with expressing her views at the wrong time, such as the interview (pre-recorded, thankfully), where Betty was asked if she thought Thatcher would help them and replied with “No” before going on to list her track record with real wives and mothers. And sometimes Betty’s just plain enjoyable. One of the Liverpool centre scenes saw them stopped from demonstrating by a policeman (who Marie - in full glorious flight- called a “pimply little prat”). When the PC began leaning on one of Betty’s sons, Betty ordered him off, telling him that the only person to keep her sons in line is her… before turning round and proving her point by giving her son a casual backhanded wallop to the face.

continued​

To add ref the Downing St scenes with the Marie Jackson, the scenes of the Bangkok stopover in the Mike and Lindsey storyline were actually filmed in Liverpool. I don't think Mersey TV would have had the budget to send Claire Sweeney, Paul Byatt and Alexandra Fletcher to actual Thailand.

The Penny Crosbie storyline where she's interviewed on GMTV by Lorraine and Eamonn was probably filmed on the same set as GMTV, with Mary Tamm, John Burgess and Steve Pinder filming the scenes there.

 

[AndyB2008]

I'm sure there are plenty of examples of characters who were sent to prison and later set free when their innocence was proved. That's what happened to Arthur eventually, even if he did drop down dead more or less straightaway due to injuries sustained behind bars. Cases like George's, where his innocence was never proved, are rarer. That said, there's currently a woman in EastEnders who framed her middle son for a crime her youngest son committed, and the middle son subsequently died in prison, and whose eldest son is currently serving a life sentence for a murder she committed (or at least thinks she committed - it's complicated).

Sunshineboyuk sent me this link to a recent-ish Zoom interview with Petra and Michelle (who I don't think I'd have recognised in a million years).

Alas, I find Zoom meetings as frustrating to watch as they are to partake in so I gave up after a couple of minutes, but sbuk has generously provided me with cliff notes:

the highlights... they both praise Anna who played Marie, she was a force if nature, Petra was a bit intimidated by her, Michelle shared a flat with her in real life while they did the show, Petra says it was a miracle she lasted a year in the show because she was " chaotic and unreliable " in real life at the time which led to her being written out of the show (!), Marie left because George left and then they told Michelle they couldn't have a house with just one character in it so she left, the other McGann brother( Joe?) was cast as Gavin but Equity wouldn't let him do it for some reason, the actor then left of his own accord after a few months and he was sorry about the effect it might have on Alexandra Pigg, they all got on apparently and it was a good place to work, lots of big personalities , Paul Collins/ Jim Wiggins a leftie socialist in real life (!!) and Annabel/ Doreen Sloane more right wing than Annabel in real life and although they didn't socialise or speak much except when they worked, they met everyday to do the crossword together which ppl observed was very moving and strangely intimate, Petra laughed that she and Barry had the same hair, Michelle talked about how her character was written as a real firecracker at the audition but as a wet lettuce in the early scripts, Petra talked about how many complaints they got over language and Redmond said " Right, we are de-fucking the scripts" .... she said that the show seems like lifetimes ago, so long ago and yes it is but I found that quite sad and melancholy , watching it now in vivid detail we can almost reach out and touch it.

The Gavin role was recast with Danny Webb, who has done quite a few things since then.

He had roles in films Alien 3 with Sigourney Weaver, and Valkyrie with Tom Cruise, and has done quite a bit of TV work.

 

[James from London]

*** Was Pat’s inclusion in the ensemble a way of pipping EastEnders to the post, I find myself wondering? Yes, he arrived waaaaay ahead of that series, but I seem to remember Enders had a very long pre-production process during which there was a lot of buzz and media hype about the Beeb’s first such “proper” soap.

Interesting theory. The introduction of Pat -- a chirpy cockney with muscles and dimples -- always felt like it was in response to something external to the drama itself. Had it come a year or two later, it would have made sense that he was Brookside's answer to Wicksy on Enders or even the young hunks on Neighbours, but as it is the timelines obviously don't match. (I'd had a similar feeling a four or five years before, but had been far too young to articulate it, when Doctor Who recruited an Australian air hostess as a new TARDIS companion. It just felt gimmicky. Only decades later did I learn that it was a conscious effort on the part of the producer to encourage Australian interest in the show.)

In contrast to the rest of the regular characters, who have been so remarkably nuanced up to this point, Pat and Sandra seem largely defined by their accents and the stereotypes that accompany them. Pat's all cheekiness and ducking and diving; Sandra's a bolshy Glaswegian. At least that's how she's written. It feels like someone -- the producer, maybe the actress herself -- has decided to work against that stereotype and so she plays nearly all her scenes really cheerfully, even when it doesn't quite make sense. So you end up with the actress trying to really laugh at Pat's pathetically tiresome skeleton jokes, and it all feels horribly laboured and bland and empty. After a while, she gives up and starts playing the character as written: stroppy and bad-tempered.

Bottom line: I don't believe Pat and Sandra and Kate have ever lived together, or even spent much time together, before their first episode. There's none of the shared humour or references you get from real housemates, just a lot of clunky exposition trying to convince us of their shared past. On another soap, that wouldn't matter so much because the characters would be absorbed into the larger community, but in Brookside, where so much of the action takes place in the individual houses solely between the people who live together, it's crucial. If those relationships aren't believable, then nothing else can be. And if Brookside isn't believable, then it isn't really anything because it doesn't have the mythology of the other soaps, where the Square or the street or the village is bigger than any individual character, to fall back on.

That said, I think Kate still works as an individual. Partly, perhaps, because she's a better actor than the other two, and partly because of the way she's written. Aware of the way Black people are depicted in the media at the time (let alone drama where they're virtually nonexistent), the writers have seemingly been careful to buck any negative stereotypes in their portrayal of Kate. So she's a polite, friendly, quiet, middle-class, thoughtful, Spare Rib-reading feminist vegetarian. Perhaps what you end up with is a stereotype of another kind (not a million miles away from EastEnders first regular Black character the following year, the placid, easy-going, turn-the-other-cheek-even-when-confronted-with-direct-racism Tony Carpenter), but the very fact that she is so poised and self-contained means that Kate isn't left flailing around in search of a character the way Pat and Sandra are.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

the scenes of the Bangkok stopover in the Mike and Lindsey storyline were actually filmed in Liverpool.

While I don't remember the scenes, it's still disappointing as it feels like it's cheating the audience. Something I love about early Brookside is how we follow the characters to various locales from Spain to Ireland to Manchester to the Isle Of Man and London. And it always feels truly authentic because it is authentic. There's no sense at all of them cheating with location work. I'd guess if it was beyond the budget at the time, we simply didn't accompany the characters.

The introduction of Pat -- a chirpy cockney with muscles and dimples -- always felt like it was in response to something external to the drama itself.

(I'd had a similar feeling a four or five years before, but had been far too young to articulate it, when Doctor Who recruited an Australian air hostess as a new TARDIS companion. It just felt gimmicky. Only decades later did I learn that it was a conscious effort on the part of the producer to encourage Australian interest in the show.)

This gut feeling angle you raised made me feel even more strongly that there is some kind of motive behind Pat's introduction. Just like the location work, I suppose it comes down to whether or not it's authentic, and if it's not the audience just senses it.

In contrast to the rest of the regular characters, who have been so remarkably nuanced up to this point, Pat and Sandra seem largely defined by their accents and the stereotypes that accompany them.

Yes. I can't imagine them being written for anyone other than a Cockney and a Weegie, but it feels as though they've written the stereotypes and then sought out relatively inexperienced actors to play them.

Bottom line: I don't believe Pat and Sandra and Kate have ever lived together, or even spent much time together, before their first episode. There's none of the shared humour or references you get from real housemates, just a lot of clunky exposition trying to convince us of their shared past. On another soap, that wouldn't matter so much because the characters would be absorbed into the larger community, but in Brookside, where so much of the action takes place in the individual houses solely between the people who live together, it's crucial. If those relationships aren't believable, then nothing else can be.

Yes - this is it exactly.

I think Kate still works as an individual. Partly, perhaps, because she's a better actor than the other two, and partly because of the way she's written. Aware of the way Black people are depicted in the media at the time (let alone drama where they're virtually nonexistent), the writers have seemingly been careful to buck any negative stereotypes in their portrayal of Kate. So she's a polite, friendly, quiet, middle-class, thoughtful, Spare Rib-reading feminist vegetarian.

My fuzzy memory of Kate is of someone who was... nice. It's been a pleasant surprise to find there's a little more to her than this.

the very fact that she is so poised and self-contained means that Kate isn't left flailing around in search of a character the way Pat and Sandra are.

Ooh - it's fascinating to get this, because it's coming from a technical place that I wouldn't have picked up on, but it goes a long way to explain why Kate is working for me more (and irritating me far less) than her housemates.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Some Brookie-related news, of sorts.

Yesterday I dropped STV an email to ask if they had any plans to make Damon & Debbie and South available at their relevant points. Today I received this reply:

Hi there,

Thank you for your email.

The spin-off series' are not supplied as standard with the main programme. However, we have initiated discussions with the distributors and hope to be able to acquire them closer to the time.

We thank you for taking the time to get in touch.

Kind Regards,



STV Enquiries

It's much more promising than I could have hoped. I'd be chuffed if they're able to work it out. By my calculations we'll be well into 1987 by the end of the year, so it'll soon come round.

Damon & Debbie feels especially crucial to the Brookside viewing experience because of that ending and the impact it has on the main series. There is a video of atrocious quality on the world's favourite video-sharing platform, and I was expecting to attempt watching that one when we get there... if it hadn't been taken down by then.

South eluded me at the time, which I wasn't happy about. I've never had the opportunity to watch it, so it's been a long time coming.

Here's hoping.

 

[James from London]

Damon & Debbie feels especially crucial to the Brookside viewing experience because of that ending and the impact it has on the main series. There is a video of atrocious quality on the world's favourite video-sharing platform, and I was expecting to attempt watching that one when we get there... if it hadn't been taken down by then.

South eluded me at the time, which I wasn't happy about. I've never had the opportunity to watch it, so it's been a long time coming.

Here's hoping.

Excellent admin, Mel, and how impressive of STV to get back to you so quickly!

I watched Damon and Debbie at the time and remember feeling that it seemed weirdly divorced from the original show. It didn't have the sense of reality I'd come to expect (and even demand) from Brookside. I've never had the opportunity to watch it again, but can't say its absence ever really detracted from re-watching the main series. South, however, is a low-key gem and much more character-based. I'd love it see it again. I think it surfaces from time to time on YouTube.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

how impressive of STV to get back to you so quickly!

Wasn't it just? It was a lovely surprise.

I watched Damon and Debbie at the time and remember feeling that it seemed weirdly divorced from the original show. It didn't have the sense of reality I'd come to expect (and even demand) from Brookside.

Yes. I remember it having quite a different tone: more youthful and playful. Since it centred around Damon who was generally an optimist with big dreams, it worked for me on that level. It felt a little like seeing things through his eyes.

(And also, I was youthful and playful myself when I first watched it. So I suppose I was the right demographic).

I've never had the opportunity to watch it again, but can't say its absence ever really detracted from re-watching the main series.

It's interesting to see Damon's exit solely through the prism of the main series, because he just leaves and never comes back and we get news of him practically through hearsay. It's feels unresolved and unfinished which is, of course, very truthful for the situation and no doubt reflects how the Grants themselves would be experiencing it. It's also perfectly in-keeping with Brookside's way of doing things, from Petra to George Jackson and - later on - Bobby.

South, however, is a low-key gem and much more character-based. I'd love it see it again.

Ooh - this endorsement has just increased my hopeful anticipation.

 

[James from London]

The Free George Jackson campaign is in full swing, with Betty from Emmerdale supporting Marie so actively she’s driving Michelle up the wall (she's called Betty here as well, and I like to think it's somehow the same character before she moved across the border to Yorkshire. Michelle and Terry - despite the problems between them - are fleeing on holiday to Malta to get away from it all. Terry even smiled for the first time since 1983.

Betty’s nephew is writing a song - presumably the one that will end up being released In Real Life. But I’m too sad to think about this. George has lost 28 days probation because someone fought him and George ended up with the blame. And Marie is still thinking about moving to be closer. We’re heading towards the end of an era.

I love Betty. I have it in my head that, like Marie and Sheila, Marie and Betty were very close in real life as well. I never saw it, but I know that Marie later did a stint on Emmerdale -- possibly as a mate of Betty's, but that might just be wishful thinking on my part.

Betty's sons are also great. They don't do or say much, but you just believe in them without question. The one who writes the song is later reincarnated as a friend of Damon's. He's there at the wake.

In another nice touch, Bobby was in Paul’s office, debating policy with him when he got the call about Sheila’s labour. After their butting heads over company policy, Bobby’s awkward look when Paul extended his hand to wish him luck rang very true. Seeing them switching hats in the space of a few seconds was fascinating.

Yeah, that was a very nice switch around, kind of reminiscent of the moment where Marie, of all people, breaks the news to Sheila about Barry and Terry getting beaten up by McArdle, or even Krystle giving Alexis the good news that Steven isn't dead after all, he's just been recast.

Fictional characters crusade to make the nation aware of key goings on in Brookside Close, and to make everyone understand why this should be important to them. In turn, this forms part of a real-life campaign for Phil Redmond and The Powers That Be to do the exact same thing. It’s not the first time a TV storyline had been capitalised (with Who Shot JR? the benchmark by which others were marked even then), but unlike other marketing campaigns, Free George Jackson feels like a rare early example of soap metafiction. It’s as though the characters have become aware of the viewer and are trying to reach out to them with prominent banners and daubed messages at real-life landmarks. Anyone with a sense of social or civic responsibility ignores these as their peril. And this is over three and a half decades before WandaVision.

Apparently, one person who wasn't happy about the marketing campaign was the actor who played George. He argued that he'd left the show to avoid typecasting and now his image was being plastered everywhere accompanied by the name George Jackson (and presumably he wasn't even getting paid for it). I think he complained to Equity and, as a result, the posters with his face on were soon phased out.

When it comes to eye-rolling, though, Karen can do this for Liverpool.

Although one time she doesn't do it is when she's in the close talking to Harry, and Pat appears at his window in a pair of tiny briefs and gives her a wave. You can easily imagine her being deeply unimpressed by this display -- Pat and Karen have had no onscreen interaction prior to this -- and but as Pat is being presented unquestioningly as the show's loveable hunk, and as the punchline of the scene is for Harry to react like an old prude -- she is instead to require to giggle coquettishly. Not a big deal really -- Karen's reaction could go either way and it would still be believable -- but it's another instance of how everything around the nurses is kind of smoothed out and generalised.

Likewise, the first conversation between Sheila and Kate doesn't take place until a few months after the nurses have moved in and Sheila's already in the throes of depression when you see her confiding her feelings to Kate on quite a deep level. It's a great scene, entirely believable and faultlessly acted, but it's there to serve the plot -- a way for Sheila's thoughts to be conveyed to the audience. It's not about exploring the relationship between the two women for its own sake.

I can think of only two moments that dig a little deeper into Pat and Sandra's psyches and threaten to make them a bit more three-dimensional. One is when they're first moving in and Michelle asks Sandra if she can count on her nursing expertise when Terry comes out of the hospital after his beating, and Sandra matter-of-factly refuses. The second is an argument between Kate and Pat where she accuses him of trying really hard to be all things to all people. It seems to hit a nerve and for a split-second it looks as if we're going to get a glimpse of what lies beneath the cheeky chappy persona, but then it's gone, never to return.

Sheila, meanwhile, is dealing with post-natal depression. Because it’s Brookside and Sue Johnson it’s pitched perfectly, with my one complaint being that it seemed to just come from nowhere. We didn’t see Sheila for a good few episodes and then suddenly she’s feeling resentment towards her baby and full of paranoia about Bobby. But then, perhaps this is how it really happens. I’d guess the hormonal changes are pretty fast-moving.

I think this is the first storyline that feels like a vehicle for Sue Johnston, in the best possible way. Up until now, she's mainly been reactive, responding to what's happening to Bobby and/or her children. Even the feud with Marie arises out of her defending Barry. Now the focus is on her as an individual, and that never really goes away.

What struck me re-watching this period most recently is how open Sheila is about her mental health when talking to people outside of the family household. She is able to articulate her feelings rationally to Kate, Annabelle and Heather, but as soon as she's at home, the shutters come down again. On one level, it's a soap thing -- it's becoming gradually but increasingly commonplace for the neighbours to confide in one another more than would happen in real life -- on another, it's a fascinating reversal of the convention of keeping a mask on in public and only letting one's guard down in the privacy of one's own home.

It's also notable that Sheila and Bobby's baby isn't referred to by name for about four months, not until the christening in fact.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I never saw it, but I know that Marie later did a stint on Emmerdale -

Coo. I had no idea she'd done another continuing role like this. My curiosity is piqued.

Betty's sons are also great. They don't do or say much, but you just believe in them without question.

Yes - they were spot-on.

The one who writes the song is later reincarnated as a friend of Damon's. He's there at the wake.

Gosh. They do like bringing back those actors who work well, don't they? I've just watched a few 1985 episodes where Rosie Banks of Nineties Brookie is a bookie's assistant who goes rogue to help Harry and Edna collect some money they were owed (and the solicitor Harry goes to for advice is Alan Rothwell, but I'm not sure if he's meant to be Nicholas Black or another lawyer who looks uncannily similar).

Apparently, one person who wasn't happy about the marketing campaign was the actor who played George. He argued that he'd left the show to avoid typecasting and now his image was being plastered everywhere accompanied by the name George Jackson (and presumably he wasn't even getting paid for it). I think he complained to Equity and, as a result, the posters with his face on were soon phased out.

Yes, I remember reading about this being a bit of a spanner in the works with the planned campaign. It was mentioned in that Zoom with Petra and Michelle as well.

Speaking of typecasting, I have wondered if Cliff Howells ending up playing a fireman on London's Burning was in part because of that association with his Brookside character (even if it was half a decade on).

Although one time she doesn't do it is when she's in the close talking to Harry, and Pat appears at his window in a pair of tiny briefs and gives her a wave. You can easily imagine her being deeply unimpressed by this display -- Pat and Karen have had no onscreen interaction prior to this -- and but as Pat is being presented unquestioningly as the show's loveable hunk, and as the punchline of the scene is for Harry to react like an old prude -- she is instead to require to giggle coquettishly. Not a big deal really -- Karen's reaction could go either way and it would still be believable -- but it's another instance of how everything around the nurses is kind of smoothed out and generalised.

Good spot.

Likewise, the first conversation between Sheila and Kate doesn't take place until a few months after the nurses have moved in and Sheila's already in the throes of depression when you see her confiding her feelings to Kate on quite a deep level. It's a great scene, entirely believable and faultlessly acted, but it's there to serve the plot -- a way for Sheila's thoughts to be conveyed to the audience. It's not about exploring the relationship between the two women for its own sake.

I remember this conversation and must confess it didn't register with me that this was their first, so it's a credit to the actresses for convincing me.

One is when they're first moving in and Michelle asks Sandra if she can count on her nursing expertise when Terry comes out of the hospital after his beating, and Sandra matter-of-factly refuses.

Yes - that's a great scene. It's the same combination of assertiveness and self-interest I associate with Heather, who has perfected the art of saying "no" bluntly but with charm.

I think this is the first storyline that feels like a vehicle for Sue Johnston, in the best possible way. Up until now, she's mainly been reactive, responding to what's happening to Bobby and/or her children. Even the feud with Marie arises out of her defending Barry. Now the focus is on her as an individual, and that never really goes away.

Ooh yes. Again, I hadn't really noticed this and it's added so much more interest for me.

It's also notable that Sheila and Bobby's baby isn't referred to by name for about four months, not until the christening in fact.

It's funny, but because I know what the name is, I seem to have filled in the gap for my own sanity. In episodes from late January I thought it was curious that it hadn't been mentioned. By the time we got to April I was probably just imagining that I'd heard it said.

Sue Johnston

Damn it. I keep writing "Johnson".

The sacrilege.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Episodes 251 - 260
25 March - 23 April 1985
​

And so it’s happened… Marie has packed up a few things - including her sons - and left the Close. She’s left Michelle and Terry behind, which is small consolation to me as a viewer.

It’s all felt very quick and sudden, and it has been quite a flurry, really. No sooner had Marie found out that George had been moved to Leeds than the house was on the market and she was off.

Some of the ground covered in her last weeks as a resident has felt a little like a retread of her greatest hits: most notably the conflict with both Michelle and Sheila.

Given the circumstances, the fallout between Marie and Michelle felt entirely organic. Marie putting the house on the market effectively leaves Michelle and Terry homeless. As it had when Petra’s estate was settled, the subject of money becomes a cause for friction and even leverage in the sibling power struggle. Michelle reminds Marie of Terry’s current condition (and, to be fair, he does seem quite unwell at the moment, with blackouts and dizzy spells) and applies a certain amount of emotional pressure. Marie counters by reminding them that their move back into the house benefitted them at least as much as her. Michelle observes that Marie is better off than her because she has ended up with the house. Marie counters by flatly telling her that Michelle will come away with more money than the house is worth within a short time. And she has receipts: figures are spouted and Michelle is silenced.

Ultimately, behind the bad feeling is a sadness. Marie is still Michelle’s big sister and both have been through a lot together. Michelle, to her credit, admits she’s went too far in what she said. And Marie, being Marie, is quick to agree with her.

The situation with Sheila was somewhat more plot-driven - Claire had been injured when a kid with a toy gun scratched her face while Gary and Little George were responsible for her - but when the response within the plot is driven by a rich history it’s all good stuff. Sheila goes to confront Marie who defends her cubs, comparing this accusation with the one that imprisoned her husband. Voices are raised, nerves are frayed and Marie invokes the ghost of Barry, telling Sheila to think about how her own kids turned out, and that she hopes Sheila makes a better job with Claire or she feels sorry for the child.

Again, this is a perfectly natural path. Marie is naturally going to be reflecting on everything that’s happened in her time on the Close, and it’s going to come out sideways. And Sheila is far from cool-headed at the moment. It all makes sense and feels perfectly right.

There’s so much dramatic potential in this relationship. A lesser series (including Brookside itself some five or six years on) may have mined the fallout for the melodrama. Instead, we have an incredible amount of restraint. Sheila only utters a softly spoken line that Barry is “OK”, and doesn’t respond to the dig about Claire at all. She simply looks sadly at Marie and leaves.

The next time we see them is what would conventionally be a humble pie scene - be it played for laughs or drama. The twins have fessed up to Marie who, realising the requirement to straighten things out, seethes “that’s all I need”. We get a scene of Marie coming to number 5 and Sheila answering (the situation and setting to me evoked the sad, quiet denouement to their street fight a year earlier where Sheila had resolved to never speak to Marie again),but Marie simply says she’s not there to argue and just wants to talk.

The series takes the “tell, don’t show” approach when it comes to any apologies, and I found myself oddly moved by the quiet dignity given to these two women in keeping that moment entirely between the two of them. Possibly worth noting here is that the scenes in question are, rather unusually for the time, both written and directed by women (respectively, Susan Pleat and Eszter Nordin).

By the time we rejoin them in Sheila’s living room, the tea’s been poured and there’s an understanding between them, as they each reflect on their current situations, with Marie casting her eye sadly from the window:

Oh, it’s ‘ere. This close. I’ve got to hate it. Brought us nothin’ but trouble. [she looks Sheila in the eye, meaningfully] We were never made welcome, were we? Nah. We should o’ stopped on our old estate. Greed, I suppose. Me wantin’ a posh house. Wanting to better ourselves. God, that’s a laugh… Oh, it’s this close. It’s a bloody jinx.

Thought maybe I should just up an’ go there [to Leeds]. You know, set up there, somehow. Near to where [George] is. I’m not that close to Michelle. There’s only George… We were good as a family. Well, I think we were. I just wish I didn’t keep thinkin’ it was gone forever.

He’ll come out. You’ll start again.

Somewhere else, though. Yeah, we’ll move. I won’t be leavin’ many friends. Some people’ll heave a sigh of relief. Eh, Sheila?

Any Sheila/Marie scene is top tier Brookie for my money, and there’s so much to love about this one. What emanates from it strongly is the mutual respect between them. Sheila has more respect than to refute or deny the truth of what Marie is saying. There’s no pretence that the relationship is anything other than what it is, but neither is there any animosity. Marie’s pointed quip about people breathing a sigh of relief is carried by the eye contact where each fully understands the significance, and this only deepens their understanding. It’s as close as these two come to looking back and laughing (which, of course, they recently did more literally while huddled on Marie’s sofa after the brick through the window incident).

It’s telling that this feels like the scene where Marie’s resolve to move truly becomes concrete. A decision made in a moment of empathy and warmth. And so Sheila is the person to help Marie decide her future. It’s quite an achievement for the writing and performances to get across so much with so much economy. With these two, it’s all about the subtext and the history.

To me, the Sheila/Marie relationship epitomises the successful fruition of Phil Redmond’s desire to update Corrie for the Eighties. Every aspect of their relationship is very much evocative of those seen in Corrie’s incredibly strong matriarchs of the Sixties and Seventies.

Marie’s exit from the Close comes on Easter Sunday (and the day of Claire’s Christening). The symbolism of rebirth and new beginnings is not lost on Sheila at all.

During the Christening, Marie gets one of those classic soap “uninvited person with a mission hovers meaningfully at the back of the church” moments. The mission, in this case, is to bring some closure by passing on a locket that has sentimental value to Marie and that she feels has brought her luck. While she stops short of entering the church during the ceremony, she watches through the door and catches up with Sheila as the party leaves afterwards:

I won’t keep ya. It’s just that we’re leavin’ today. Me an’ the twins. We’re off to Leeds. Well, I think if we’re close to George, he won’t do anythin’ daft. Well, I hope not.

I’m sure he won’t, love. I ‘ope everything works out for you.

I’m gonna make sure it does. I wanted to give you this for the baby. I don’t know if the occasion’s right, but I wanted her to have it.

Marie, it’s beautiful. Thanks, love.

After all we’ve been through, I didn’t wanna leave… Well, you know. You know.

I know.

This is the moment where I was waiting - almost hopefully - for them to hug. Even an awkward hug. But it doesn’t come, which feels a little anti-climactic and almost disappointing. Tantalisingly so.

Marie turns and starts to walk away.

Marie. Good luck love.

Marie’s breaking voice as she threw a little “thanks” in Sheila’s direction got me good.

These two are really the series’ star-crossed platonic couple for me. Kept apart by fate and circumstances, but the ones whose chemistry is so incredibly tangible it's impossible for me to do anything but root for them to get it together. Even their scenes of connection have had a sense of physical distance and a recognition that they’ll never be BFFs, Elsewhere in the multiverse, perhaps, but here I’m simply left to marvel at everything we’ve been given.

continued​

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Episodes 251 - 260
25 March - 1985

continued
​

Meanwhile, back at the Church, light relief comes in the form of Karen and Damon attempting to keep their respective contusions hidden from everyone around them.

Karen has a hickey on her neck - a present from her latest boyfriend. Plus a fading bruise on her cheek - a present from the departing boyfriend. The scene of violence was interesting partly for being a triple slap (during a heated discussion where she laid some unpleasant home truths in a bid to drive Andrew away, he slapped her, she slapped him back and he slapped her once more), but mostly for the reactions. Bobby was furious and making threats, but later infuriating Karen by telling her she had it coming (or words to that effect).

For me, though, it unpeeled a fascinating layer of double standards, since we’ve seen Bobby strike his children numerous times by now, and usually with more force than Andrew used. Even in this run he’s threatened Damon with the back of his hand for making implications about Bobby’s relationship with his colleague Janet (something Karen, too, has been doing).

Damon, meanwhile, has two black eyes: the first from being punched by Lesley Anne Sharp for nicking his bin bag sale round, and the second from falling over a dining chair while trying to hide his first black eye from his parents. Simon O’Brien has clearly been up to the challenge when it comes to delivering effective physical comedy without a safety net or a stunt double in sight.

There’s a terrific visual moment in the church where the Father - as part of the service - praises what fine people they’ve grown into, and we see a two shot of Damon and Karen in their pew, shifting uncomfortably and adjusting their clothing to hide everything that might suggest otherwise.

Elsewhere, Damon has been roped into Pat’s new gorillagram service, but ended up with sore balls after trying to prank people. First Lesley Anne Sharp kneed him as he tried to exact revenge using the costume, then Harry Cross did the same as Damon tried to frighten him.

I’d (probably understandably) forgotten this storyline, and was here in blissful ignorance thinking Clive Gibbons had done it first, but this preceded this by almost a year (on Neighbours’ home turf. Probably two and a half years by UK transmission). The parallels between the two are a little uncanny, since Damon, like Danny Ramsay, is the younger son of the series’ key working class family.

Doubly tying this in with Eighties Neighbours, Pat’s service includes stripograms, but here it’s (again) politicised, with Kate and Sandra’s reproaches both coming from a feminist standpoint, but with different perspectives. Kate doesn’t approve, but makes the “naughty nurse” uniform for a colleague because, with Pat not profiting, the only beneficiary will be a woman. Sandra, meanwhile, takes a stance that what has happened fuels the objectification of women in general and female nurses in particular. Adding another dimension, the unapologetic female colleague who has taken the job rebuts Sandra’s arguments by saying that she has more in common with the men on her estate who - like her - are desperate for cash than she has with most women.

This segues into discussion of two equality strands - race and sex - when Sandra asks Kate if she’d have been so quick to help make a golliwog costume (this line, presumably, contributing heavily to this episode being the first I’ve noticed to carry a specific warning about “racial attitudes”), and Kate has a passionate spiel about being noticed and judged for her race first and foremost, and for her sex second. It’s a pleasingly meaty series of heated discussions that’s come out of an ostensibly silly “filler” storyline.

Heather is certainly playing the field at the moment. I’ve lost track of the various men in her life, and it seems she has to some extent: hiding a new lover in the kitchen as she dumped another more long term lover who’d shown up at her home. And that’s not counting the workplace dalliances, the sexual harassment at work and the car salesman whose wife turned up just as Heather invited him to mount the stairs for the first time.

There’s been the vindication of her return to work following her previous ignominious departure (the allegations towards her had been that she was a predator when, in fact, all she’d done was turn town a colleague’s advances). Upon her return, we saw her at her prickly best when she made life difficult for said colleague with unreasonable work demands, before basking in the moment of gloating with a look that spoke volumes as he left after being sacked.

Her psychology continues to fascinate. She’s so contradictory in so many ways and it’s been quite a journey.

Take the situation with the wife turning up. This led to an impassioned and emotional monologue from Heather about her experience of being the wife, knowing she’s speaking to the mistress but having to maintain a dignified exterior while she crumbles inside. She tells him that what he did to his wife, Roger has done to her.

It’s satisfying that the ghost of Roger continues to haunt Heather. She’s never fully managed to recover, or certainly never forgotten the experience that changed her. But as she tells Tom Curzon (currently in pole position as her man of choice), it’s not just marriage and divorce that’s changed her. It’s things that have happened before and since.

Almost bizarrely, Heather and Tom’s carefree spontaneous trip to Portugal has been characterised by a whole lot of rather self-indulgent navel gazing on Heather’s part. We’re currently getting almost bipolar mood swings and contrariness. She wants to be independent and liberated, but she’s pressing him to commit to her. She makes the moves and then regrets it and takes it out on him. She’s stressed that she values openness and honesty above all, and Tom has been very clear that he’s not interested in committing, but she keeps coming back to that and getting huffy about it. It’s almost as though she’s regressed emotionally, but at the same time it’s right in character because it also brings to the surface a side of Heather that is entitled and quite self-centred.

It’s interesting to see her with Tom in particular because, just like Heather, he’s essentially another Type-A who needs to be in control. They share many traits from being cool-headed and assertive to dynamic, go-getting and often brutally frank. But in this situation it’s leading to a power-struggle and currently Heather is losing. The less interested he seems, the harder she tries. The harder she tries, the less interested he becomes. I’m really interested to see where this goes, even though it’s bringing out some very unattractive colours in Heather and I’m sure it won’t end well.

Meanwhle, wreck-it Ralph continues to encourage Edna’s gambling, their latest bet almost winning them £10,000 which the bookie gets out of on a technicality. Susan Twist - later Rosie Banks in dire Nineties Brookie - is the bookie’s assistant who gets sacked for trying to help and is now doing all she can to assist Harry. It’s a small role, but she fits in well to this era. I find Susan endearing as she reminds me very much of the mum of a schoolfriend when I was young.

Meanwhile, the person giving Harry and Edna legal advice is Alan Rothwell. He’s unnamed in his first episode, but I’m hoping (since I know he comes along soon) that this is an early appearance for one Nicholas Black. Because then I’ll know I’m coming into the era where I first discovered Brookie.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Damon’s been on good form all round in this run of episodes. His practical April Fool joke on Neil - a phone call pretending to be someone representing BT - was highly entertaining, and brought tears of laughter in my eyes.

Not only is this vintage Damon, and so very in character, I enjoyed that even this lighthearted moment had a political edge to it. BT had been privatised just a few months earlier, which is no doubt part to the reason Neil was so easily fooled. Damon had led by saying they were cutting costs to save shareholders money. When Neil objected to losing so much cable, Damon pointed out that they [BT] now owned the cable and since Neil’s parents were not shareholders, BT was well within its rights. A brilliantly executed scene that gave genuinely comedic moments while continuing to make social commentary.

I haven't said very much about Neil, but he's a nice foil for Damon. It's clear that Ducksie and Gizzmo are out of the picture by now, but since Damon's left school that feels believable, and Neil fills that gap perfectly well.

 

[Ome]

The memory is such a bizarre thing. As I re-live my Brookie viewing, I’m constantly finding myself surprised by how so many minor scenes that feel ingrained in my head. Even down to so many of the guest characters. As I watch this week’s 5 episodes I spot another actor that was very familiar with me. Looking up the actor Iggy Navarro and wondering where I know him from. One film is LETTER TO BREZNEV and the other was probably another minor character from BOYS FROM THE BLACKSTUFF. Known as Shake Hands.

His April Fool’s practical joke on Neil -

That was brilliant and I’m sure I tried it out on a mate, only I don’t think it worked.

Gosh. They do like bringing back those actors who work well, don't they?

It seems to a common think amongst the soaps. As I continue with Classis Corrie and Emmerdale, I see quite a few actors popping up and it’s a big thing with The Bill. Once I’ve finished The Bill, I’m planning on going back through EastEnders, and will be interesting to see if that does the same.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

As I re-live my Brookie viewing, I’m constantly finding myself surprised by how so many minor scenes that feel ingrained in my head.

I'm wondering if I'll have this experience more in the episodes that lie ahead.

I think the very first episodes I watched were the Siege Of '85, but I probably didn't become a regular viewer until later that year or even the following. It's likely that episodes from this time onwards might have more familiar scenes.

As I watch this week’s 5 episodes I spot another actor that was very familiar with me. Looking up the actor Iggy Navarro and wondering where I know him from. One film is LETTER TO BREZNEV and the other was probably another minor character from BOYS FROM THE BLACKSTUFF. Known as Shake Hands.

Oh, I watched his first episode last night. Terry called him "Kojak", and I found myself thinking that "Uncle Fester" would have been funnier (for me, at least).

Speaking of familiar actors, the bloke who had lost his decorating job for Damon's YTS placement to be created was Ron Brownlow from Crossroads. Which, of course, would have completely passed me by if I hadn't watched The Noele Gordon Collection last year. Ian Liston's Brookie episode doesn't even rate a mention on IMDb, but his profile does mention that he was born in Merseyside, so his appearance seems a good fit.

I’m sure I tried it out on a mate, only I don’t think it worked.

Oh, that's great.

I think I'd have been tempted to try it myself if I'd seen this back in the day. It's one of those practical jokes that would probably be less likely to work now, partly because of technology (Caller ID, etc.), but also because an awful lot of people don't even have landlines anymore.

As I continue with Classis Corrie and Emmerdale, I see quite a few actors popping up and it’s a big thing with The Bill. Once I’ve finished The Bill, I’m planning on going back through EastEnders, and will be interesting to see if that does the same.

I'm sure you will spot quite a few. I've noticed with actors who've played well-known characters in a long-running soap that it's often the case they've played a number of smaller roles in earlier years. In Brookie alone we've had the likes of Billy Corkhill, Sinbad and David Crosbie showing up years earlier.

And that's not even touching on actors who've swapped soaps.

 

[Ome]

I'm wondering if I'll have this experience more in the episodes that lie ahead.

I hope so, then you will get what I’m experiencing and it’s lovely feeling.

was Ron Brownlow from Crossroads

While i have very little knowledge of Crossroads, I really enjoy learning about actors jumping across the UK soaps. Similar when I saw actors from PCBH appearing in Neighbours or Home & Away.