Before I lose my cool and chastise vaslav37 and his homeboy Tom_Willis about their singular desire to latch their lips around each of Ann Mitchell's respective nipples, let's look at the "Matriarch" system as it's existed in the Square.
First, there have been - my count - five matriarchal figures in Walford's history: two main matriarchs and three minor ones. All but one grew and evolved into the role, and three were only "localised" matriarchal figures, exerting influence only within the confines of their own family unit.
Those women were Lou Beale, Pat Evans, Pauline Fowler, Peggy Mitchell and Dot Branning. Lou and Pat were the real matriarchs of the Square. The rest wielded their influence within their family domain.
From the beginning of the show, it was established that Lou Beale commanded a position of respect within the Walford community. She had been born and bred on the Square, married another resident, ran a business and raised her family there. She'd established firm friendships and treated all the residents as part of her extended family. Lou was instantaneously recognised as the "go-to" woman of Walford. She didn't mince words, and her advice was often harsh. She may not have liked certain people (Pat, for example), but she respected them. She was approachable, and beneath her brusque no-nonsense exterior, she had a full and loving heart.
I actually think TPTB thought to develop Pauline into the role of inherited matriarch, after Lou's death, but somehow, that didn't pan out. Pauline lacked the natural all-encompassing warmth and compassion for the whole of humanity that Lou had. Pauline's focus was centred on her family - Arthur, Mark, Michelle, Martin and Vicky, with special concern for Pete, Ian, David Wicks and, whilst she was married to Pete, Kathy. Everyone else on the Square simply didn't measure up. She treasured Ethel, but only because Ethel had been Lou's friend; but for years, she treated Dot with tolerant disdain and found her company taxing. All other residents of the Square were never as good as the Fowlers or Beales. Pauline's influence didn't extend past her kids, who often and blithely defied her wishes.
Pat was the character who stepped into the matriarch breach, and she is still, today, the absolute best example of character development ever in the show's history. She arrived on the Square a blowsy, loud-mouthed and - frankly - common fortysomething slapper. An ex-prostitute, an ageing party girl, who'd been an unfaithful wife and an abysmal mother. She'd been married to Pete Beale. Whilst married to him, she'd slept with his brother Kenny, Brian Wicks and (possibly) Den Watts.
When Angie gave her work behind the Vic's bar, no one was pleased. When she was brutally attacked, many people suspected Pete Beale. Pat didn't begin to round out as a character until she married Frank Butcher, settled down and began to raise his children. Whatever maternal qualities she lacked with her own sons, she made up with the Butcher children, especially Ricky, and - after she bonded with Kathy on Pete's death - Ian Beale.
She matured into a surrogate mother for both Ricky and Ian, both of whom treated Pat better than her own boys, although they, at times, let her down as well. It was significant that both Ricky and Ian, as well as David Wicks, were with Pat when she died.
Pat had certainly lived a life; and for the most part, she'd learned from her mistakes. She was the least judgemental character on the Square. When asked, she gave advice, although it may not be the advice people wanted to hear, but she was a firm friend. She never gave up on people either, even though they might have thrown her support right back in her face. Those whom she loved, she defended unto the death. She was the one person in Walford, outside of his own family, whom Phil Mitchell respected.
Was she a saint? No. Her Achilles heel was Frank Butcher, and she betrayed her fourth husband and her best friend when she had a last fling with Frank. She also betrayed Yolande Truman, when she enticed Patrick into an affair. But from the Nineties onward, Pat had the undeniable position of wise woman of Walford.
Her best friend, Peggy, was more like Pauline - a woman totally invested in her family and in protecting them, up to a point. Peggy knew when a Mitchell should step up to the plate and take responsibility for something that was his fault. She harped on Phil about this, and it was she who actually made sure Ben went to juvy for attacking Jordan Johnson. Yet when she felt her brood were being unfairly victimised, she advised flight - Sam, after Den's death, for example.
However, as Pauline was Fowler-Beale centric, Peggy was Mitchell-centric. No one mattered but the Mitchells, and whilst Peggy would fight to the death for one of her own, she didn't give a rat's arse for anyone outside the family unit.
Dot was a late-bloomer. Until she married Jim, she was a figure of hypocrisy and ridicule on the Square. Overtly Christian and spouting Bible verses, she'd raised a hellacious son, whom no one liked but whom Dot repeatedly worshipped. Once, Nick revealed that her means of punishment when he was a child was locking him in the understairs cupboard,whilst she prayed for his sins outside.
Dot was the cartoon hypocrite - the drinker who only had sweet sherry for medicinal purposes, the gossip who was never one to gossip, the Christian who sat in judgement. It's only been in the past decade that she's bonded well enough with her step-family to afford her the epithet "matriarch" and that's only been with various Brannings. Once Jim left the Square, she seems to have divested herself of all things Branning, so one wonders.
I am sorry to annoy any and all Cora-lovers, but Cora is no matriarch. I have a feeling younger viewers are putting her on the pedestal by virtue of her brashness and her ability to down a drink. And I also think that TPTB are rushing to have her fill Pat's shoes by crashing her through a Pat-like short-course development within a year - trying to turn her in twelve months into what it took Pat a decade to achieve.
It ain't gonna happen.
At least not before Cora addresses her alcohol dependence. She's a closet alkie who's got a permanent buzz tempered by the perpetual cigarette hanging from her lips. Notice that Tanya makes Max go outside to smoke, but Cora lights up anytime she's at the Brannings, and that cigarette usually accompanies her sucking on a drink. Her very first scenes involved her being pukeworthily drunk, rude, loud and practically obscene. It's no wonder that both her daughters and her granddaughter have drink issues.
Cora not only threatens a pregnant woman, she harrasses her when she's in the early stages of labour. She's dishonest, conniving and totally hypocritical. The fact that they're using another pejorative character brought in and advertised as the next Stacey Slater (Lola Pearce-Mitchell-Whatever) in order to show Cora's supposedly soft side is a double-whammey of trying to salvage both characters.
Finally, for the last god-damned time, Sharon is not Cora's fucking long-lost daughter. Lorraine Newman's been with the show for 20 years. She knows Sharon's backstory like the back of her hand. The appearance, only a few times, of Carol (not Cora) Hanley was not insignificant. Her rejection strengthened Sharon as a character and reinforced her as someone who finally accepts that she is, first and foremost, a true member of the family who adopted and raised her, the Watts family. Even Vicky referenced that in 2004 when she remarked that the only one of Den's children to bear his surname was his adopted daughter, who was more of a Watts than she or Dennis would ever be.
If Newman even attempts to retcon this story, it would be the grossest sort of insult bot to Letitia Dean and to the history of the show. There is no way an original cast member and truly iconic character like Sharon should be used either to enhance Cora's profile or to validate her position on the Square. If she's even tempted to throw caution to the wind and proceed with this fantasy, she should resign immediately, because she clearly isn't up to the job at hand.
And to the know-it-all asshole on Digital Spy who calculated dates and ages for Sharon and Cora, calculate THIS - and you can check it out on Wikipedia: Sharon was born in 1969. She is 43. Cora's character was born in 1946 (although the actress is really 73). Carol Stretton Hanley was born in 1950, which would have made her nineteen when she gave birth to Sharon. Besides, according to Cora's backstory, she married Bill Cross in the late Sixties, and he was a younger man. Since Sharon wasn't born until October 1969, that would have left precious little time in the late Sixties for Cora to have met and married Bill Cross. Chances are, Cora was married to Bill when Carol Hanley had Sharon ... and that means that Cora's daughter would have been born significantly before 1969 and before she met and married Bill.
Now if Cora's daughter is close-at-hand, there's someone on the Square who was born in 1963, the height of the Swinging Sixties when a seventeen year-old Cora Cross might have been putting it about Soho and Carnaby Street ... Shirley Carter.
Far more sense for Shirley, if anyone, to be revealed as Ava Anderton than Sharon. That would give Shirley a familial connection in the Square. She's as hard-faced and as abrasive as Cora, smokes like a chimney and drinks like a fish. Can't you see the resemblance?
That would also give Tanya her leaving line - she'd leave in shame.
Think about it.
First, there have been - my count - five matriarchal figures in Walford's history: two main matriarchs and three minor ones. All but one grew and evolved into the role, and three were only "localised" matriarchal figures, exerting influence only within the confines of their own family unit.
Those women were Lou Beale, Pat Evans, Pauline Fowler, Peggy Mitchell and Dot Branning. Lou and Pat were the real matriarchs of the Square. The rest wielded their influence within their family domain.
From the beginning of the show, it was established that Lou Beale commanded a position of respect within the Walford community. She had been born and bred on the Square, married another resident, ran a business and raised her family there. She'd established firm friendships and treated all the residents as part of her extended family. Lou was instantaneously recognised as the "go-to" woman of Walford. She didn't mince words, and her advice was often harsh. She may not have liked certain people (Pat, for example), but she respected them. She was approachable, and beneath her brusque no-nonsense exterior, she had a full and loving heart.
I actually think TPTB thought to develop Pauline into the role of inherited matriarch, after Lou's death, but somehow, that didn't pan out. Pauline lacked the natural all-encompassing warmth and compassion for the whole of humanity that Lou had. Pauline's focus was centred on her family - Arthur, Mark, Michelle, Martin and Vicky, with special concern for Pete, Ian, David Wicks and, whilst she was married to Pete, Kathy. Everyone else on the Square simply didn't measure up. She treasured Ethel, but only because Ethel had been Lou's friend; but for years, she treated Dot with tolerant disdain and found her company taxing. All other residents of the Square were never as good as the Fowlers or Beales. Pauline's influence didn't extend past her kids, who often and blithely defied her wishes.
Pat was the character who stepped into the matriarch breach, and she is still, today, the absolute best example of character development ever in the show's history. She arrived on the Square a blowsy, loud-mouthed and - frankly - common fortysomething slapper. An ex-prostitute, an ageing party girl, who'd been an unfaithful wife and an abysmal mother. She'd been married to Pete Beale. Whilst married to him, she'd slept with his brother Kenny, Brian Wicks and (possibly) Den Watts.
When Angie gave her work behind the Vic's bar, no one was pleased. When she was brutally attacked, many people suspected Pete Beale. Pat didn't begin to round out as a character until she married Frank Butcher, settled down and began to raise his children. Whatever maternal qualities she lacked with her own sons, she made up with the Butcher children, especially Ricky, and - after she bonded with Kathy on Pete's death - Ian Beale.
She matured into a surrogate mother for both Ricky and Ian, both of whom treated Pat better than her own boys, although they, at times, let her down as well. It was significant that both Ricky and Ian, as well as David Wicks, were with Pat when she died.
Pat had certainly lived a life; and for the most part, she'd learned from her mistakes. She was the least judgemental character on the Square. When asked, she gave advice, although it may not be the advice people wanted to hear, but she was a firm friend. She never gave up on people either, even though they might have thrown her support right back in her face. Those whom she loved, she defended unto the death. She was the one person in Walford, outside of his own family, whom Phil Mitchell respected.
Was she a saint? No. Her Achilles heel was Frank Butcher, and she betrayed her fourth husband and her best friend when she had a last fling with Frank. She also betrayed Yolande Truman, when she enticed Patrick into an affair. But from the Nineties onward, Pat had the undeniable position of wise woman of Walford.
Her best friend, Peggy, was more like Pauline - a woman totally invested in her family and in protecting them, up to a point. Peggy knew when a Mitchell should step up to the plate and take responsibility for something that was his fault. She harped on Phil about this, and it was she who actually made sure Ben went to juvy for attacking Jordan Johnson. Yet when she felt her brood were being unfairly victimised, she advised flight - Sam, after Den's death, for example.
However, as Pauline was Fowler-Beale centric, Peggy was Mitchell-centric. No one mattered but the Mitchells, and whilst Peggy would fight to the death for one of her own, she didn't give a rat's arse for anyone outside the family unit.
Dot was a late-bloomer. Until she married Jim, she was a figure of hypocrisy and ridicule on the Square. Overtly Christian and spouting Bible verses, she'd raised a hellacious son, whom no one liked but whom Dot repeatedly worshipped. Once, Nick revealed that her means of punishment when he was a child was locking him in the understairs cupboard,whilst she prayed for his sins outside.
Dot was the cartoon hypocrite - the drinker who only had sweet sherry for medicinal purposes, the gossip who was never one to gossip, the Christian who sat in judgement. It's only been in the past decade that she's bonded well enough with her step-family to afford her the epithet "matriarch" and that's only been with various Brannings. Once Jim left the Square, she seems to have divested herself of all things Branning, so one wonders.
I am sorry to annoy any and all Cora-lovers, but Cora is no matriarch. I have a feeling younger viewers are putting her on the pedestal by virtue of her brashness and her ability to down a drink. And I also think that TPTB are rushing to have her fill Pat's shoes by crashing her through a Pat-like short-course development within a year - trying to turn her in twelve months into what it took Pat a decade to achieve.
It ain't gonna happen.
At least not before Cora addresses her alcohol dependence. She's a closet alkie who's got a permanent buzz tempered by the perpetual cigarette hanging from her lips. Notice that Tanya makes Max go outside to smoke, but Cora lights up anytime she's at the Brannings, and that cigarette usually accompanies her sucking on a drink. Her very first scenes involved her being pukeworthily drunk, rude, loud and practically obscene. It's no wonder that both her daughters and her granddaughter have drink issues.
Cora not only threatens a pregnant woman, she harrasses her when she's in the early stages of labour. She's dishonest, conniving and totally hypocritical. The fact that they're using another pejorative character brought in and advertised as the next Stacey Slater (Lola Pearce-Mitchell-Whatever) in order to show Cora's supposedly soft side is a double-whammey of trying to salvage both characters.
Finally, for the last god-damned time, Sharon is not Cora's fucking long-lost daughter. Lorraine Newman's been with the show for 20 years. She knows Sharon's backstory like the back of her hand. The appearance, only a few times, of Carol (not Cora) Hanley was not insignificant. Her rejection strengthened Sharon as a character and reinforced her as someone who finally accepts that she is, first and foremost, a true member of the family who adopted and raised her, the Watts family. Even Vicky referenced that in 2004 when she remarked that the only one of Den's children to bear his surname was his adopted daughter, who was more of a Watts than she or Dennis would ever be.
If Newman even attempts to retcon this story, it would be the grossest sort of insult bot to Letitia Dean and to the history of the show. There is no way an original cast member and truly iconic character like Sharon should be used either to enhance Cora's profile or to validate her position on the Square. If she's even tempted to throw caution to the wind and proceed with this fantasy, she should resign immediately, because she clearly isn't up to the job at hand.
And to the know-it-all asshole on Digital Spy who calculated dates and ages for Sharon and Cora, calculate THIS - and you can check it out on Wikipedia: Sharon was born in 1969. She is 43. Cora's character was born in 1946 (although the actress is really 73). Carol Stretton Hanley was born in 1950, which would have made her nineteen when she gave birth to Sharon. Besides, according to Cora's backstory, she married Bill Cross in the late Sixties, and he was a younger man. Since Sharon wasn't born until October 1969, that would have left precious little time in the late Sixties for Cora to have met and married Bill Cross. Chances are, Cora was married to Bill when Carol Hanley had Sharon ... and that means that Cora's daughter would have been born significantly before 1969 and before she met and married Bill.
Now if Cora's daughter is close-at-hand, there's someone on the Square who was born in 1963, the height of the Swinging Sixties when a seventeen year-old Cora Cross might have been putting it about Soho and Carnaby Street ... Shirley Carter.
Far more sense for Shirley, if anyone, to be revealed as Ava Anderton than Sharon. That would give Shirley a familial connection in the Square. She's as hard-faced and as abrasive as Cora, smokes like a chimney and drinks like a fish. Can't you see the resemblance?
That would also give Tanya her leaving line - she'd leave in shame.
Think about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment