Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Socialist Realism on the Soaps

0 views
Skip to first unread message

James

unread,
Aug 29, 2002, 9:44:41 PM8/29/02
to
In watching various soaps over the years I have always been intrigued
as to why the wealthy characters on the soaps are allways portrayed in
a negative light ( Except MAC CORY Another World) while the poorer
ones are always the heroes ( Cliff Barnes on Dallas being a gigantic
exception). Another observation is if a character make a fortune or
even hints at being ambitious he or she turned into a demon from
hell, or if villian looses his / her fortune they turn into Pussy
cats.


Socialist Realism, an ideology enforced by the Soviet state as the
official standard for art, literature etc., was defined in 1934 at the
First All-Union Congress of Soviet writers. It was based on the
principle that the arts should glorify political and social ideals of
communism. Every artist had to join the "Union of Soviet Artists",
which was controlled by the state. The paintings had to be
idealisations of political leaders and communist ideas.


General Hospital, back in Gloria Monty's hey-day was ripe with this
type of storyline writing. If you see many old Soviet films the girl
would not fall in love with the hero in the story because he was kind
or handsome but because he could milk the most cows on the collective
farm or could make for steel than the other person and so forth.

How did this style of writing become so domminant on the soaps ?. Did
Liliian Hellman and many of the other communist writers that ran amok
in Hollywood from 1934-1948 have anything to do with it?. I would
appreciate any comments from any Screenwriters or TV writers on this
subject.

soprano

unread,
Aug 29, 2002, 11:54:58 PM8/29/02
to
> In watching various soaps over the years I have always been intrigued
> as to why the wealthy characters on the soaps are allways portrayed in
> a negative light ( Except MAC CORY Another World) while the poorer
> ones are always the heroes ( Cliff Barnes on Dallas being a gigantic
> exception). Another observation is if a character make a fortune or
> even hints at being ambitious he or she turned into a demon from
> hell, or if villian looses his / her fortune they turn into Pussy
> cats.

I have to disagree. Jax is a good guy and is filthy rich (most of the
time). Lila is rich and is beyond reproach. As for the working stiffs,
look at sleazy guy. Most of the people on soaps are filthy rich, and
they come in all flavors of good and bad.

> General Hospital, back in Gloria Monty's hey-day was ripe with this
> type of storyline writing. If you see many old Soviet films the girl
> would not fall in love with the hero in the story because he was kind
> or handsome but because he could milk the most cows on the collective
> farm or could make for steel than the other person and so forth.

On GH they seem to fall in love with the one who is most physically
attractive to them (how else can we explain some of the pairings?).



> How did this style of writing become so domminant on the soaps ?. Did
> Liliian Hellman and many of the other communist writers that ran amok
> in Hollywood from 1934-1948 have anything to do with it?. I would
> appreciate any comments from any Screenwriters or TV writers on this
> subject.

I think you are a couple of decades out of step (Gloria Monty hasn't
been working on GH for a very long time).

soprano

Seadragon

unread,
Aug 30, 2002, 10:52:50 AM8/30/02
to
"James" <atlan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5f754003.02082...@posting.google.com...

Now HERE is an original post!

--
Seadragon

Save the Coral Reefs - go to www.coral.org to find out how!

0 new messages