Spoiler (???) Sex in the shower brings disgrace to 'The Archers'
Robin Somes
front page of today's Sunday Teleg., written by one David Harrison;
text procured despite the idiosyncracies of my OCR software (2 of which
are evident below..)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
THE BBC radio soap opera The Archers will be plunged into controversy
this week when it broadcasts an explicit sex scene involving a married
pub landlord and his girlfriend in the shower. The editor of the Radio 4
series, Vanessa Whitbum, said the programme would be "the steamiest
edition ever".
The two characters in the shower sex scene are Sid Perks, the married-
but-bored pub landlord, and Jolene, the line-dancing local temptress.
Last week devotees of the 49-year-old series heard the pair indulge in
pillow talk and kissing. But Miss Whitburn said that was "child's play"
compared with what will happen on Thursday. "This week's liaison in the
shower will be quite explicit, further than we have ever gone before,"
she said.
Dangerous liaisons in the shower are a long way from potato crops,
cricket teas and the other rituals of village life more commonly served
up. But Ms Whitbum insisted that the sex scene was not merely a cheap
stunt to push up the ratings by suggesting that life in rural Ambridge
is more about passion than pig-farming.
"It's a very interesting story line," she said. "Sid is bored with his
life and with Cathy, his wife of 13 years, and is facing the pressures
of middle age. "He wants to revisit his youth. First he started going
to the gym, now he's going into try other things and Jolene is just the
one to help him along."
Ms Whitburn was confident that the shower scene would not shock the many
fans who tune in to The Archers as a gentle respite from the sex and
violence that dominates so many other programmes on radio and
television.
"We have had sex scenes before and we haven't had many, complaints.
Everyone likes passion and Archers fans are no i exception. I find it
amusing that some people never allow The Archers to grow up.
"The programme is about farming, but it is also about romance, and
sexual relations are bound to come into that."
But last night the decision to include an explicit sex scene provoked
anger from pressure groups and Tory MPs. Julian Brazier, Conservative
,MP for Canterbury, said: "People still look to the BBC as a bastion of
standards in public broadcasting and it's very sad to see one more part
of the organisation clambering on the bandwagon of the cheapest kind of
populism. "People started to get a bit suspicious of the programme's
agenda when one of the characters went to a Gay Pride rally."
Valerie Riches, head of Family and Youth Concern, said: "It's a shame
they have to resort to things like this. 1 thought The Archers was
supposed to be a programme about family life in the countryside. It
sounds like they are trying to make it a bit hotter to push up the
ratings. But it could well turn out to be counter-productive."
The Archers has featured illicit liaisons before - most recently when
Shula had an affair with the doctor Richard Lockhart - but details have
been left to the listener's imagination.
Last week there was a hint of the new developments when, in Jolene's
flat, Sid was heard to groan with pleasure as the Ambridge siren urged
him to "flex his muscles".
Sid: "What are you doing?"
Jolene: "Nothing."
Sid : "Call that nothing. Ooh Jolene, you shouldn't be doing that.
You'll be the death of me..."
cheers,
robin
--
www.badminston.demon.co.uk
www.robinsomes.co.uk/guitar.html
"One should try everything once, except incest and folk dancing"
- Sir Arnold Bax
Kate Lambert
<ro...@badminston.demon.co.uk> writes
>Ms Whitburn was confident that the shower scene would not shock the many
>fans who tune in to The Archers as a gentle respite from the sex and
>violence that dominates so many other programmes on radio and
>television.
>
>"We have had sex scenes before and we haven't had many, complaints.
>Everyone likes passion and Archers fans are no i exception.
Well yes but if they're determined to do steamy sex scenes couldn't they
have done just a little bit more audience research and chosen some
characters we might actually find sexy rather than vomit-making?
Hands up, does anyone find Sid remotely fanciable?
--
Kate Lambert
Robin Stevens
> Hands up, does anyone find Sid remotely fanciable?
Well, Jolene evidently...
--
------------------ Robin Stevens <robin....@oucs.ox.ac.uk> ---------------
Oxford University Computing Services http://www-astro.physics.ox.ac.uk/~rejs/
As I said before, I NEVER repeat myself
Danny Thompson
> Hands up, does anyone find Sid remotely fanciable?
The *seediness* ruined our Sunday morning lie-in. Both of us were
gagging, and even getting up to take a shower seemed tainted by it. But
it was realistic (well, I *imagine* it was anyway :-) , and that makes
it better than the sanitised beautiful-people-bonking on the tele.
Very Archers - very FOTWD...
And no more steamy than Jennifer and Rrrrrrrroger a few years back I
fancy...
Danny
--
Danny Thompson
w: a...@thefriend.org / http://www.harrietbarber.co.uk
Niles
|.
|.
|.
|.
|.
|.
|.
|.
|.
|.
|.
|.
|.
|.
|.
| But Ms Whitbum insisted that the sex scene was not merely a cheap
|stunt to push up the ratings by suggesting that life in rural Ambridge
|is more about passion than pig-farming.
|
Oh, no. What a cheap thought! The very idea of seeking publicity by
having articles published in the Telegraph before the episodes are
broadcast is plainly rediculous! (But going as far as to adopt a racier
name to promote one's programme is edging on the absurd)
|
|But last night the decision to include an explicit sex scene provoked
|anger from pressure groups and Tory MPs.
Those two bastions of Britishness!
|Julian Brazier, Valerie Riches, head of Family and Youth Concern,
Oh dear. Those two.
--
| Niles, Nottingham
"I have no millennium message | ICQ UIN 12724766
to give to the f*cking world" |
- Harold Pinter | www.niles.org.uk
Iain Archer
>|
>|But last night the decision to include an explicit sex scene provoked
>|anger from pressure groups and Tory MPs.
>
>Those two bastions of Britishness!
You never get protests from laid-back groups, do you?
--
Iain Archer
Iain Archer
>THE BBC radio soap opera The Archers will be plunged into controversy
>this week when it broadcasts an explicit sex scene involving a married
>pub landlord and his girlfriend in the shower. The editor of the Radio 4
>series, Vanessa Whitbum, said the programme would be "the steamiest
>edition ever".
I'm a bit worried about this. Is 'steamy' really correct? I was once
told that steam was the phase water entered at whatever the local
boiling point was, and that anything else was just 'water vapour'. But
to be honest, I can't find anything else in my head telling me how to
distinguish the two.
--
Iain Archer
Fenny
ka...@semaphore.demon.co.uk says...
> Hands up, does anyone find Sid remotely fanciable?
>
mind.
Fenny
--
'65 F Y+++ L+ U- KQ+ C c+ B-- p+ Sh+
Fenny
ro...@badminston.demon.co.uk says...
> "We have had sex scenes before and we haven't had many, complaints.
> amusing that some people never allow The Archers to grow up.
> "The programme is about farming, but it is also about romance, and
> sexual relations are bound to come into that."
>
>
they don't happen. I feel like passing on, word for word, the ear
bashing I can already feel wafting my way from my ma.
It was bad enough when Emmerdale Farm changed from being about a family,
a farm and a rural village in Yorkshire to being all about sex and
murderers, or when Shula started seeing Richard & Alistair at the same
time.
I do tell her it's not my fault, and if she doesn't like it she should
tell the programme makers, but I'm just her daughter, so what do I know?
Peter Hesketh
<i...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
> I was once
>told that steam was the phase water entered at whatever the local
>boiling point was, and that anything else was just 'water vapour'. But
>to be honest, I can't find anything else in my head telling me how to
>distinguish the two.
Real steam scalds when it hits your skin. But the word "steam" is used
for water vapour colloquially.
--
Regards - Peter Hesketh, Mynyddbach, Mon.
Thirty reasons why we men have good reason to be proud of ourselves: number 10
If someone forgets to invite us to something, they can still be our
friend.
Al Menzies
dashed across the keyboard to create this message:
>For the benefit of non-Telegraph readers, the following appears on the
>front page of today's Sunday Teleg., written by one David Harrison;
>text procured despite the idiosyncracies of my OCR software (2 of which
>are evident below..)
>
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
<snip>
>The Archers has featured illicit liaisons before - most recently when
>Shula had an affair with the doctor Richard Lockhart - but details have
>been left to the listener's imagination.
So she was playing HTS with *two* doctors then? When did this Lockhart
chap appear on the scene? ;)
al
Heather Knowles
<ro...@badminston.demon.co.uk> writes
>For the benefit of non-Telegraph readers, the following appears on the
>front page of today's Sunday Teleg., written by one David Harrison;
>text procured despite the idiosyncracies of my OCR software (2 of which
>are evident below..)
>
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
<snip>
>shower will be quite explicit, further than we have ever gone before,"
>she said.
Oh, pu-*leeeeze*.....
Note to self - eat tea well in advance of episode. Appetite will be
severly disturbed afterwards.....
>"We have had sex scenes before and we haven't had many, complaints.
>Everyone likes passion and Archers fans are no i exception.
But *Sid*!!! No. I can't face it.
>Last week there was a hint of the new developments when, in Jolene's
>flat, Sid was heard to groan with pleasure as the Ambridge siren urged
>him to "flex his muscles".
And that was bad enough. goodness knows what the shower scene will be
like.
Anyone fancy dressing up as Sid's mother and approaching with a large
knife? ;)
--
luv Chuckler, the umra slapper
Keen member of HAHA
http://www.fanged.demon.co.uk
Brenda Selwyn
>The two characters in the shower sex scene are Sid Perks, the married-
>but-bored pub landlord, and Jolene, the line-dancing local temptress.
>Last week devotees of the 49-year-old series heard the pair indulge in
>pillow talk and kissing. But Miss Whitburn said that was "child's play"
>compared with what will happen on Thursday. "This week's liaison in the
>shower will be quite explicit, further than we have ever gone before,"
Oh God. I feel sick already. Could this be the first time in 5 years
I _deliberately_ miss an episode? It's not that I object to sex on
TA, but Sid!!!! If we must have steamy sex scenes, can't it be Hayley
& Roy, or Debbie & Simon?
>"It's a very interesting story line," she said. "Sid is bored with his
>life and with Cathy,
I take it they mean Kathy.
>his wife of 13 years, and is facing the pressures
>of middle age. "He wants to revisit his youth. First he started going
>to the gym, now he's going into try other things and Jolene is just the
>one to help him along."
Yes, but what I can't understand is what Jolene is getting out of
this. I just can't imagine Sid as sexually attractive. I can see why
Kathy might have been attracted to him for other reasons (reliable,
dependable, good company, etc), but as the relationship with Jolene
seems to be based entirely on sex, I can't see the reason for it. In
another thread
>mholcroft <mhol...@peoplesrepublic.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>ISTM that the Tottie is hell-bent on wrecking the Perks' marriage, and
>will be doing her damnedest to rub Kathy's nose in the sordid facts.
but what could possibly be her motive for this?
>But last night the decision to include an explicit sex scene provoked
>anger from pressure groups and Tory MPs. Julian Brazier, Conservative
>,MP for Canterbury,
and
>Valerie Riches, head of Family and Youth Concern,
...both took the opportunity to get their names in the Telegraph.
(yes, I realise that comment could be aimed at The Beetle as well).
>said: "People still look to the BBC as a bastion of
>standards in public broadcasting and it's very sad to see one more part
>of the organisation clambering on the bandwagon of the cheapest kind of
>populism. "People started to get a bit suspicious of the programme's
>agenda when one of the characters went to a Gay Pride rally."
And I get a bit suspicious of people who mention this incident
particularly.
>The Archers has featured illicit liaisons before - most recently when
>Shula had an affair with the doctor Richard Lockhart
Who?
Don't worry about your OCR software Robin; it's more accurate than the
Telegraph:-)
Brenda
--
***************************************************************
Brenda M Selwyn
Nr Bath, North East Somerset
bre...@matson.demon.co.uk
http://www.matson.demon.co.uk/brenda.htm
Niles
|>Telegraph said
|>populism. "People started to get a bit suspicious of the programme's
|>agenda when one of the characters went to a Gay Pride rally."
|
|And I get a bit suspicious of people who mention this incident
|particularly.
:) Glad it's not just me.
Valerie Riches has a particular bee in her bonnet about that, and it's
one of Family and Youth Concern's concerns. She crops up all over the
place, and I think she seems to be a nasty piece of work; a brief
internet search shows her, eg objecting to sex education in the classroom
saying it leads young people to experiment. Better they don't know
anything at all, because of course sex is so bad that experimenting would
be *wrong*.
Kirsten Procter
>internet search shows her, eg objecting to sex education in the classroom
>saying it leads young people to experiment. Better they don't know
>anything at all, because of course sex is so bad that experimenting would
>be *wrong*.
>
But of course. This is one of the reasons why parents are not allowed to
be naked near their children, or indeed indulge in any sex education
before; parents don't automatically point out that all experimentation in
the field of sexual relations is wrong.
Sex is bad and wrong, and I blame the parents for insinuating otherwise.
Kirsten
--
Kirsten Procter ghoti
"that's what I think, but I don't suppose I'm right"
Eeyore and Foreign Secretary, Pembroke College Winnie-the-Pooh Society
Robin Fairbairns
> Sex is bad and wrong, and I blame the parents for insinuating otherwise.
everything would be far better if they just stopped having it. then
there wouldn't _be_ any children to be led astray.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Roundhead
"Kate Lambert" <ka...@semaphore.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:n1wATPA9...@semaphore.demon.co.uk...
> Well yes but if they're determined to do steamy sex scenes couldn't they
> have done just a little bit more audience research and chosen some
> characters we might actually find sexy rather than vomit-making?
Er...Like who exactly?
Pat Hanby
<ST article snipped>
Does this mean we are getting *another* Sid 'n Jolene scene this week, or
was the ST a week late with its article? Incidentally it wasn't just a
discreet (?) little article hidden away inside, but right across the top
of the front page. I normally expect the word "Archer" in such a prominent
position to refer to Jeffrey rather than TA!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Pat Hanby Acquisitions Manager Reading University Library
PO Box 223 Whiteknights READING RG6 6AE UK
P.M....@reading.ac.uk Tel. 0118 9318777 Fax 0118 9316636
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Andrew John Wineberg
> For the benefit of non-Telegraph readers, the following appears on the
> front page of today's Sunday Teleg.,
[snipped]
For the sake of completeness, the following article was culled from page
3 of today's /METRO London/:
[All typos and errors sic --- AJW]
| *A shower scene steams up The Archers*
| ARCHERS fans anticipating the usual slice of genteel rural life are in
| for a shock this week.
| BBC chiefs have promised the steamiest episode in the radio soap's
| 49-year history on Thursday when pub landlord Sid Perks and singer
| Jolene Rogers have a fling in the shower. Editor vanessa Whitburn said
| it would be 'quite explicit; further than we've ever gone before'.
[*]
| She defended the decision, saying: 'The programme is about farming,
| but it's also about romance, and sexual relations are bound to come
| into that. Sex scenes had been part of The Archers since the early
| 1970s, she added, when the character Shula was involved in a
| passionate cornfield scene with her boyfriend. 'These are real,
| passionate, involving storylines and regular listeners love them,' she
| said.
| But morality campaigners warned she was risking a backlash from
| listeners. Valerie Riches, of Family and Youth Concern, said: 'It's
| very sad. I've always regarded it as a nice programme for all members
| of the family. You always felt safe with it but that's no longer the
| case.'
| The Archrs is the longest-running daily drama in the world. It was
| first broadcast in 1950 as a way to educate farmers in modernising
| production after World War II.
The article is accompanied by a cartoon depicting a man sitting in an
armchair with a bemused frown on his face. He is violently spilling his
mug of coffee as he listens to the adjacent wireless blaring out, "THE
ARCHERS -- AN EVERY DAY STORY OF SEX-CRAZED COUNTRY FOLK -- dum, de,
dum, de, dum, de, dum..." [Sorry for the shouting --- AJW].
AJW adds: I have to wonder just who these "regular listeners" might be
who "love" steamy explicit sex scenes involving Sid and Jolene --- I'm
certainly not one of them. I must confess to being deeply disappointed
in the Beetle -- not only for this attempt to soil TA's character with
this (IMO) unnecessary attempt to stir up controversy, but also for this
accidental-I-don't-think-so leak to the press.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm more than happy to hear a bit of explicit sex
on the radio or to see "adult" scenes on the goggle-box, *provided* that
it is truly relevant and necessary to the plot (or, of course, if it is
the raison-d'étre but I don't normally watch that kind of film) and not
just some gratuitous act in the name of careers and ratings.
[*] I can not tell whether or not METRO have a paragraph break here.
I've decided that they probably did.
--
AJW in Stanmore. umra-METRO-monitor-free-from-stations-every-weekday
http://www.whitewine.freeserve.co.uk/
Jamie Armstrong
Andrew John Wineberg wrote:
>
> On 23 Jan, Robin Somes <ro...@badminston.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > For the benefit of non-Telegraph readers, the following appears on the
> > front page of today's Sunday Teleg.,
> [snipped]
>
> For the sake of completeness, the following article was culled from page
> 3 of today's /METRO London/:
> [All typos and errors sic --- AJW]
>
BTW, am I the only one to have missed the the shower scene (or shouild
that be The Shower Scene?)?
I was so busy doing work, I completely missed the start of the episode,
although I did catch the bit just after, when the two love-birds were
grying off ("grying" being an typo for "drying" which I quite like). And
I missed the repeat and the omni.
(Pathetic aren't I)
As a result I don't see what then fuss is.
Jamie
Andrew John Wineberg
> BTW, am I the only one to have missed the the shower scene (or shouild
> that be The Shower Scene?)?
Fret not, Jamie. You may have missed the shower scene which was
broadcast last week, but you haven't yet missed *The* Shower Scene which
will be broadcast later this week.
--
AJW in Stanmore.
http://www.whitewine.freeserve.co.uk/
Robin Somes
<Jamie.A...@durham.ac.uk> writes
>
>
>Andrew John Wineberg wrote:
>>
>> On 23 Jan, Robin Somes <ro...@badminston.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > For the benefit of non-Telegraph readers, the following appears on the
>> > front page of today's Sunday Teleg.,
>> [snipped]
>>
>> For the sake of completeness, the following article was culled from page
>> 3 of today's /METRO London/:
>> [All typos and errors sic --- AJW]
>>
>that be The Shower Scene?)?
No. I missed it too (albeit by the simple expedient of not listening to
TA at all). But shhhh! Don't tell anyone...
Emma McGlade
"Peter Hesketh" <p...@phesk.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6tWH9UAo...@phesk.demon.co.uk...
> In article <a6W73QAf...@montaigne.demon.co.uk>, Iain Archer
> <i...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>
> > I was once
> >told that steam was the phase water entered at whatever the local
> >boiling point was, and that anything else was just 'water vapour'. But
> >to be honest, I can't find anything else in my head telling me how to
> >distinguish the two.
>
> Real steam scalds when it hits your skin. But the word "steam" is used
> for water vapour colloquially.
It gets very steamy when I have a shower..... but that's only because the
fan's broken and there's no window in the bathroom..... (mostly :-)
Emma
http://www.bigfoot.com/~emma.mcglade
Robin Fairbairns
>"Kate Lambert" <ka...@semaphore.demon.co.uk> wrote ...
>> Well yes but if they're determined to do steamy sex scenes couldn't they
>> have done just a little bit more audience research and chosen some
>> characters we might actually find sexy rather than vomit-making?
>
>Er...Like who exactly?
someone young, i pesume she means. as opposed to one of us disgusting
oldies who should have forgotten about *sex* long ago.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Kate Lambert
<r...@betsy.cl.cam.ac.uk> writes
>Roundhead <roun...@callnetuk.com> wrote:
>>
>>Er...Like who exactly?
>
>someone young, i pesume she means. as opposed to one of us disgusting
>oldies who should have forgotten about *sex* long ago.
That was not what I meant at all. Actually Guy was quite sexy, pity his
heart gave out.
Anyway I don't think of Sid as old, just disgusting.
--
Kate Lambert
Penny Mayes
>
>someone young, i pesume she means. as opposed to one of us disgusting
>oldies who should have forgotten about *sex* long ago.
Who says?
I refuse to play by those rules!
Penny
It IS as bad as you think, and they ARE out to get you.
umra Nicknames & Abbreviations http://www.bigwig.net/umra/nicks.html
W.J.T.Proudfoot
suspicion that these sorts of scenes do not really transfer very
effectivly to radio.
I was also too busy wondering why Sid is so stupid as to do this sort of
thing at all - He must know that there is going to be a great SCENE
between him and Kathy at some stage soon.
Chris J Dixon
>In article <86iqqk$82i$1...@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>, Robin Fairbairns
><r...@betsy.cl.cam.ac.uk> writes
>>Roundhead <roun...@callnetuk.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Er...Like who exactly?
>>
>>someone young, i pesume she means. as opposed to one of us disgusting
>>oldies who should have forgotten about *sex* long ago.
>
>That was not what I meant at all. Actually Guy was quite sexy, pity his
>heart gave out.
>
>Anyway I don't think of Sid as old, just disgusting.
According to grouch Marx, "A man is only as old as the woman he
feels." I reckon there is actually more than a bit of truth in
that. (compare & contrast with "You've made a happy man feel
very old.")
There seems to have been a concentration on Sid's appeal, or lack
of it. Am I alone in finding Jolene totally unattractive. My
image of her, complete with roots in need of a touch-up (stop
that, Sid) is not such that I really want to extend it to include
the shower scene.
Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham
'48/51/23 M B+ G+ A L(-) I S-- CH-(--) Ar++ T+ H0 ?Q Sh+
chris...@easynet.co.uk
Have dancing shoes, will ceilidh.
Robin Fairbairns
>Anyway I don't think of Sid as old, just disgusting.
i really don't understand this. it's quite clear that jolene is going
for his body, on which he's worked quite hard, to the point that all
the women of ambridge are remarking on it.
he's plainly a fool, but he's no more disgusting (to my way of
thinking) than all the other unfaithful men we've encountered in
ambridge, or encounter in our own lives.
and i guess i regard that activity as disgusting because i struggled
for four years after my wife had finally thrown me out before i could
even think about a renewed love-life. which i think makes me a bit
odd, in today's society.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >Robin Somes <ro...@badminston.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> TA, but Sid!!!! If we must have steamy sex scenes, can't it be Hayley
> & Roy, or Debbie & Simon?
>
keeps chasing her.
>
> Yes, but what I can't understand is what Jolene is getting out of
> this. I just can't imagine Sid as sexually attractive.
>
gym.
>
> >But last night the decision to include an explicit sex scene provoked
> >anger from pressure groups and Tory MPs. Julian Brazier, Conservative
> >,MP for Canterbury,
>
>
> >The Archers has featured illicit liaisons before - most recently when
> >Shula had an affair with the doctor Richard Lockhart
>
> Who?
>
Sincerely, Chris
--
Mrs. Chris McMillan. Tel. 0118 926 5450. e-mail:
ch...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk http://www.mikesounds.demon.co.uk/
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:fe...@rickmansworth.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <XQ$aCDAbV...@badminston.demon.co.uk>,
> ro...@badminston.demon.co.uk says...
> > amusing that some people never allow The Archers to grow up.
> > sexual relations are bound to come into that."
> >
> >
> they don't happen. I feel like passing on, word for word, the ear
> bashing I can already feel wafting my way from my ma.
>
us?) Can't remember now whether she was sitting with us last Thurs. or not.
(She doesn't always appear for TA but she may well have it on her own
radio).
Kirsten Procter
>for four years after my wife had finally thrown me out before i could
>even think about a renewed love-life. which i think makes me a bit
>odd, in today's society.
exclusion of all others for as long as they both shall live.
No, it actually is. Why does no-one seem to consider that important?
But yes, there does seem to be a trend now to think that anyone who takes
romantic commitment at all seriously is completely mad. Sigh.
Kirsten
--
Tony Gardner
W.J.T.Proudfoot <W.J.T.P...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:388DE5E7...@durham.ac.uk...
<snip>
> I was also too busy wondering why Sid is so stupid as to do this sort of
> thing at all - He must know that there is going to be a great SCENE
> between him and Kathy at some stage soon.
Well, at the moment he's thinking with his di^W not his brain.
A few moments thought would tell him that Kathy *will* find out [1]
She will then storm out, taking Jamie with her. I very much doubt whether
Sid could run the Bull without Kathy's hard work and catering ability, even
if he installed Jolene in an attempt to replace her.
So, he loses wife, son and pub at one fell swoop.
Good thinking, Sid.
[1] Things that never happen in the Archers, #19:
A character has an affair, and manages to keep it secret from his/her
partner.
Tony Gardner
Robin Fairbairns
>In article <86l6nv$lf7$1...@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>, Robin Fairbairns wrote:
>>for four years after my wife had finally thrown me out before i could
>>even think about a renewed love-life. which i think makes me a bit
>>odd, in today's society.
>
> Marriage under British law is the union of one man with one woman to the
>exclusion of all others for as long as they both shall live.
when we got married, my uncle joked that it was far more worrying than
a church wedding -- ours being the first registry office one he'd been
to, i presume.[*] he pointed out that in a church, they bang on about
how god wants you to stay together for life, while in the registry
office they say it's the law of the land. and god, he said, is
famously forgiving.
> But yes, there does seem to be a trend now to think that anyone who takes
>romantic commitment at all seriously is completely mad. Sigh.
well, quite.
[*] no. that can't be right: my grandmother's second marriage (after
she was widowed in the 30s) was in a registry office, and i have an
account of how drunk he got that day.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
Kate Lambert
>Kate Lambert <ka...@semaphore.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>Anyway I don't think of Sid as old, just disgusting.
>
>i really don't understand this. it's quite clear that jolene is going
>for his body, on which he's worked quite hard, to the point that all
>the women of ambridge are remarking on it.
>
>he's plainly a fool, but he's no more disgusting (to my way of
>thinking) than all the other unfaithful men we've encountered in
>ambridge, or encounter in our own lives.
Well the disgusting bit came from your "disgusting old men" (I think it
was). I was only trying to say I don't think Sid qualifies. Having said
that, I can't imagine him being physically attractive however much
working out he's been doing, whatever the women of Ambridge may say, as
someone else said the other day, my brain sees him more like Sid James.
--
Kate Lambert
Jane Vernon
pool when Robin Fairbairns thankfully interrupted me to say:
>Kate Lambert <ka...@semaphore.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>Anyway I don't think of Sid as old, just disgusting.
>
>i really don't understand this. it's quite clear that jolene is going
>for his body, on which he's worked quite hard, to the point that all
>the women of ambridge are remarking on it.
is not only of second or third importance behind the personality and the
face, but really much less important even than that. In Sid's case it's
his _personality_ and face (as I see it) that are so off-putting.
>
>he's plainly a fool, but he's no more disgusting (to my way of
>thinking) than all the other unfaithful men we've encountered in
>ambridge, or encounter in our own lives.
>
>and i guess i regard that activity as disgusting because i struggled
>for four years after my wife had finally thrown me out before i could
>even think about a renewed love-life. which i think makes me a bit
>odd, in today's society.
No, it probably just makes you more committed. FWIW I think I might
have felt the same way. Death, however, releases one differently.
Jane
The potter in the purple socks
Jamie Armstrong
Tony Gardner wrote:
>
> W.J.T.Proudfoot <W.J.T.P...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:388DE5E7...@durham.ac.uk...
> <snip>
> > I was also too busy wondering why Sid is so stupid as to do this sort of
> > thing at all - He must know that there is going to be a great SCENE
> > between him and Kathy at some stage soon.
>
> Well, at the moment he's thinking with his di^W not his brain.
>
You mean he has one?
I'd never noticed before!
> A few moments thought would tell him that Kathy *will* find out [1]
>
> She will then storm out, taking Jamie with her.
ME?
Couldn't she wait until after I've finished my exams?
Oh, you mean the other Jamie.
Damn...
> I very much doubt whether
> Sid could run the Bull without Kathy's hard work and catering ability, even
> if he installed Jolene in an attempt to replace her.
>
And might he not also lose custom? Will everyone in the village be happy
with a philandering publican?
> So, he loses wife, son and pub at one fell swoop.
>
And no doubt he'll blame Jolene, for leading him on...
> Good thinking, Sid.
>
Quite!
Jamie
Mike Ellwood
: Well the disgusting bit came from your "disgusting old men" (I think it
: was). I was only trying to say I don't think Sid qualifies. Having said
: that, I can't imagine him being physically attractive however much
: working out he's been doing, whatever the women of Ambridge may say, as
: someone else said the other day, my brain sees him more like Sid James.
I am not a particular fan of Sid these days, but I can remember him
in earlier days, when he was married to Polly. He and Polly were
quite a nice couple, and Sid was generally a much jollier chap.
The tragic death of Polly probably contributed to his becoming
a bit of an old grump, and then his various problems with
Lucy, and then when Kathy had her affair with Sergeant Barry,
this seemed to render Sid quite awful. Then there were the
scenes with Sean.
He does not come over as a particularly nice person now,
but it was not always thus. "Character development",
I suppose.
--
Mike.E...@rl.ac.uk
W.J.T.Proudfoot
Jamie Armstrong wrote:
>
> Tony Gardner wrote:
> >
> > W.J.T.Proudfoot <W.J.T.P...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
> > news:388DE5E7...@durham.ac.uk...
> > <snip>
> > > I was also too busy wondering why Sid is so stupid as to do this sort of
> > >
> You mean he has one?
> I'd never noticed before!
>
>
> ME?
> Couldn't she wait until after I've finished my exams?
> Oh, you mean the other Jamie.
> Damn...
>
> And might he not also lose custom? Will everyone in the village be happy
> with a philandering publican?
we will start to here more of that den of iniquity the Cat and Fiddle if
this happens....
Jamie Armstrong
Robin Fairbairns wrote:
>
> Kate Lambert <ka...@semaphore.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >Anyway I don't think of Sid as old, just disgusting.
>
> i really don't understand this. it's quite clear that jolene is going
> for his body, on which he's worked quite hard, to the point that all
> the women of ambridge are remarking on it.
>
> he's plainly a fool, but he's no more disgusting (to my way of
> thinking) than all the other unfaithful men we've encountered in
> ambridge, or encounter in our own lives.
>
And unfaithful women!
Lets be fair here - equality of the sexes and all!
Jamie
Charles F Hankel
Farm, "Tony Gardner" <to...@gardner214.freeserve.co.uk> said:
>
> W.J.T.Proudfoot <W.J.T.P...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:388DE5E7...@durham.ac.uk...
> <snip>
> > I was also too busy wondering why Sid is so stupid as to do this sort of
> > thing at all - He must know that there is going to be a great SCENE
> > between him and Kathy at some stage soon.
>
> Well, at the moment he's thinking with his di^W not his brain.
>
> A few moments thought would tell him that Kathy *will* find out [1]
>
> She will then storm out, taking Jamie with her. I very much doubt whether
> Sid could run the Bull without Kathy's hard work and catering ability, even
> if he installed Jolene in an attempt to replace her.
>
> So, he loses wife, son and pub at one fell swoop.
>
> Good thinking, Sid.
Whoa! Every cloud has a silver lining. If Kathy storms off to the
Ambridge Women's Refuge (Nightingale Farm?), this leaves an opening
for someone full-time at the Bull and who better than Clarrielurve,
possibly on better that the National Minimum Wage? This knocks on to
Bridge Farm who lose Clarrielurve and Tony helps Pat out in the dairy
and puts more work Eddie's way. Of course I could wide of the merk by
a country 1,609.34 metres.
--
Charles F Hankel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hapless FAQer on the Wirral peninsula
Member: Strombone 2000
Chris J Dixon
>
>Whoa! Every cloud has a silver lining. If Kathy storms off to the
>Ambridge Women's Refuge (Nightingale Farm?), this leaves an opening
>for someone full-time at the Bull and who better than Clarrielurve,
>possibly on better that the National Minimum Wage? This knocks on to
>Bridge Farm who lose Clarrielurve and Tony helps Pat out in the dairy
>and puts more work Eddie's way. Of course I could wide of the merk by
>a country 1,609.34 metres.
There was a scene last week with Cathy sympathising with Clarrie
and musing about what it would like to be suddenly without a
home. I reckon that was done for a purpose.
K Richard W
McMillan had told umra:
>In article <9g9o8scrt636kv339...@4ax.com>, Brenda Selwyn
><URL:mailto:bre...@matson.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> >Robin Somes <ro...@badminston.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> TA, but Sid!!!! If we must have steamy sex scenes, can't it be Hayley
>> & Roy, or Debbie & Simon?
>>
>Dobbie and Simon would certainly have been in character from the way he
>keeps chasing her.
Just to upset all these dogooders who appeared in the paper can I
suggest Christophurr and Alice getting it together?
--
Kosmo Richard W
LSS super-numerary
W.J.T.Proudfoot
>
> Whoa! Every cloud has a silver lining. If Kathy storms off to the
> Ambridge Women's Refuge (Nightingale Farm?), this leaves an opening
> for someone full-time at the Bull and who better than Clarrielurve,
> possibly on better that the National Minimum Wage? This knocks on to
> Bridge Farm who lose Clarrielurve and Tony helps Pat out in the dairy
> and puts more work Eddie's way. Of course I could wide of the merk by
> a country 1,609.34 metres.
>
Charles F Hankel
> And might he not also lose custom? Will everyone in the village be happy
> with a philandering publican?
Well, not _everyone_ but it depends on how good he is at it as to how
popular he'll be.
Kirsten Procter
>
>
>Jamie Armstrong wrote:
>>
>> Tony Gardner wrote:
>> >
>we will start to here more of that den of iniquity the Cat and Fiddle if
>this happens....
Den iof iniquity? The Cat&Fiddle? Oh, yes, I expect people consume
dangerous drugs there, don' they, seeing as it is a puublic hostelry and
alcahol and tobacco are usual in such places, I'm told. Unless it's a
smoke-free pub?
Kirsten
--
Kirsten Procter ghoti
W.J.T.Proudfoot
baggy and snatch
badriya
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
That was dire. I had a vivid image of Sid in the nude. Unfortunately
I had not eaten. Actually thinking of Jolene naked is not much
better.
Peter Hesketh
<gh...@aibs.freeserve.co.uk> writes
> Marriage under British law is the union of one man with one woman to the
>exclusion of all others for as long as they both shall live.
> No, it actually is. Why does no-one seem to consider that important?
I know one who does - me.
--
Regards - Peter Hesketh, Mynyddbach, Mon.
Thirty reasons why we men have good reason to be proud of ourselves: number 10
If someone forgets to invite us to something, they can still be our
friend.
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:Jamie.A...@durham.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Tony Gardner wrote:
> >
> > W.J.T.Proudfoot <W.J.T.P...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
> > news:388DE5E7...@durham.ac.uk...
> > <snip>
> > > I was also too busy wondering why Sid is so stupid as to do this sort of
> > > thing at all - He must know that there is going to be a great SCENE
> > > between him and Kathy at some stage soon.
> >
>
> > Sid could run the Bull without Kathy's hard work and catering ability, even
> > if he installed Jolene in an attempt to replace her.
> >
> with a philandering publican?
>
> >
>
> > Good thinking, Sid.
> >
> Quite!
>
and to Mrs. Woolley his past pub owner. (I did put landlady but decided this
wasn't quite the right word in its present day context). Mrs. W. always held
Sid in high esteem which is why she was willing to let him have his head in
the running of the Bull.
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:W.J.T.P...@durham.ac.uk> wrote:
> I did hear it, but it did not really seem terribly exciting. I have a
> suspicion that these sorts of scenes do not really transfer very
> effectivly to radio.
> thing at all - He must know that there is going to be a great SCENE
> between him and Kathy at some stage soon.
>
des. res?
K Richard W
Procter had told umra:
>In article <388F5B56...@durham.ac.uk>, W.J.T.Proudfoot wrote:
>>
>>
>>Jamie Armstrong wrote:
>>>
>>> Tony Gardner wrote:
>>> >
>>we will start to here more of that den of iniquity the Cat and Fiddle if
>>this happens....
>
>Den iof iniquity? The Cat&Fiddle? Oh, yes, I expect people consume
>dangerous drugs there, don' they, seeing as it is a puublic hostelry and
>alcahol and tobacco are usual in such places, I'm told. Unless it's a
>smoke-free pub?
>
>
Sean and his colleague cleaned up the C&F when they took it over. I
rather think that Snatch and Baggy drink elsewhere these days. After
all he took the chef from the Bull.
Tony Gardner
Peter Hesketh <p...@phesk.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ohxDOxAv...@phesk.demon.co.uk...
> In article <slrn88sb3m...@gin.ucam.org>, Kirsten Procter
> <gh...@aibs.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>
> > Marriage under British law is the union of one man with one woman to the
> >exclusion of all others for as long as they both shall live.
> > No, it actually is. Why does no-one seem to consider that important?
>
> I know one who does - me.
> --
Tony Gardner
Niles
|On 24 Jan, Jamie Armstrong <Jamie.A...@durham.ac.uk> wrote:
|
|> BTW, am I the only one to have missed the the shower scene (or shouild
|> that be The Shower Scene?)?
|
|Fret not, Jamie. You may have missed the shower scene which was
|broadcast last week, but you haven't yet missed *The* Shower Scene which
|will be broadcast later this week.
And what a disappointment it was! No-one got hacked to death! no
squeaking music, no blood trickling down the plughole (you can tell: it
gurgles differently.)
--
| Niles, Nottingham
"I have no millennium message | ICQ UIN 12724766
to give to the f*cking world" |
- Harold Pinter | www.niles.org.uk
Kim Andrews
<p...@phesk.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <slrn88sb3m...@gin.ucam.org>, Kirsten Procter
><gh...@aibs.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>
>> Marriage under British law is the union of one man with one woman to the
>>exclusion of all others for as long as they both shall live.
>> No, it actually is. Why does no-one seem to consider that important?
>
>I know one who does - me.
Oh me too...
...it's why I'm single. ;o)
Kimbo
--
The umra Grange Farm fighting fund at
http://www.foca.co.uk/umrafund.html
HAHA / LSS LO & Founding FONT
Strumpet Extraordinaire
http://www.foca.co.uk
Helen Brace
Chris McMillan <Ch...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ant27203...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk...
> In article <388F47E9...@durham.ac.uk>, Jamie Armstrong
> <URL:mailto:Jamie.A...@durham.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Tony Gardner wrote:
> > >
> > > W.J.T.Proudfoot <W.J.T.P...@durham.ac.uk> wrote in message
> > > news:388DE5E7...@durham.ac.uk...
> > > <snip>
sort of
> > > > thing at all - He must know that there is going to be a great SCENE
> > > > between him and Kathy at some stage soon.
> > >
> >
> > > Sid could run the Bull without Kathy's hard work and catering ability,
even
> > > if he installed Jolene in an attempt to replace her.
> > >
> > And might he not also lose custom? Will everyone in the village be happy
> > with a philandering publican?
> >
> > > So, he loses wife, son and pub at one fell swoop.
> > >
> > And no doubt he'll blame Jolene, for leading him on...
> >
> > > Good thinking, Sid.
> > >
> > Quite!
> >
> He'll also have to explain himself to Caroline who has shares in the Bull
> and to Mrs. Woolley his past pub owner. (I did put landlady but decided
this
> wasn't quite the right word in its present day context). Mrs. W. always
held
> Sid in high esteem which is why she was willing to let him have his head
in
> the running of the Bull.
>
I think Piggy might be more forgiving of Sid. She strikes me as the sort of
person that is slow to forgive and forget and will, in part, 'blame' Kathy.
The reason being that Kathy had a fling with Dave Barry, and this obviously
means that she is a 'bad woman' who deserves all she gets.
Helen B
Sarah Kerrison
"W.J.T.Proudfoot" wrote:
> I was refering more to the dodgy deals involving people like fat Paul,
> baggy and snatch
When were Baggy and Snatch ;ast seen in the Cat and Fiddle? In recent years it
seems to have been the haunt more of 'Orrible 'Elen, and the other
Brat-packers. I got the impression that Sean and Peter had cleaned up its
image somewhat.
Sarah
Jamie Armstrong
Helen Brace wrote:
>
> Chris McMillan <Ch...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:ant27203...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk...
> > He'll also have to explain himself to Caroline who has shares in the Bull
> > and to Mrs. Woolley his past pub owner. (I did put landlady but decided
> this
> > wasn't quite the right word in its present day context). Mrs. W. always
> held
> > Sid in high esteem which is why she was willing to let him have his head
> in
> > the running of the Bull.
> >
>
> I think Piggy might be more forgiving of Sid. She strikes me as the sort of
> person that is slow to forgive and forget and will, in part, 'blame' Kathy.
> The reason being that Kathy had a fling with Dave Barry, and this obviously
> means that she is a 'bad woman' who deserves all she gets.
> Helen B
Hmmm...
Wishful thinking there - I think Peggy is bound to condemn both of them.
Kathy of course brought it on herself by her 'licentiousness' (albeit
how many years ago???), but Sid should never have allowed himself to be
'led astray'. No doubt the Bull will be off Peggy's list of top groovin'
joints!
Will there be anywhere left for Peggy to go to in the village, with St
Stevens already off limits?
Jamie
Mike Ellwood
: When were Baggy and Snatch ;ast seen in the Cat and Fiddle? In recent years it
: seems to have been the haunt more of 'Orrible 'Elen, and the other
: Brat-packers. I got the impression that Sean and Peter had cleaned up its
: image somewhat.
I think they turned it into a "yoof" pub (now Sid would have something
to say about that I think). Do they have big beefy bouncers outside
now? Sid would probably also have something to say about that...
--
Mike.E...@rl.ac.uk
btms
<m...@unixfe.cc.rl.ac.uk> leans upon the bar of Bull, draws in their breath
and says:
>I think they turned it into a "yoof" pub (now Sid would have something
>to say about that I think). Do they have big beefy bouncers outside
>now? Sid would probably also have something to say about that...
So now we know that Sid's real problem is envy?
--
btms
btms
<Jamie.A...@durham.ac.uk> leans upon the bar of Bull, draws in
their breath and says:
>Wishful thinking there - I think Peggy is bound to condemn both of them.
Yes - she's got to put the feelings attached to her experience of gin-
soaked Lilian and similar experiences of son-in-law and elder daughter
somewhere - poor soul. You wouldn't expect Piggy to see any similarities.
--
btms
Chris J Dixon
>
>I think they turned it into a "yoof" pub (now Sid would have something
>to say about that I think). Do they have big beefy bouncers outside
>now? Sid would probably also have something to say about that...
I think Sid has his hands full with a different pair of bouncers
nowadays.
Andrew John Wineberg
> Andrew John Wineberg <A.Win...@Whitewine.Freeserve.co.UK> wrote:
> |Fret not, Jamie. You may have missed the shower scene which was
> |broadcast last week, but you haven't yet missed *The* Shower Scene which
> |will be broadcast later this week.
> And what a disappointment it was!
I don't know. Whilst countless umrats and other TA listeners at large
were getting steamed up at the shower scene, AJW and Nick Leverton were,
with other like-minded individuals, somewhere between Kennington and
Morden on a 1959 stock train. I shall have to wait until the omnibus to
judge for myself.
Is its possible that a more hard-core scene was originally recorded and
substituted at the last moment by a less steamy version in the midst of
all the protests?
> No-one got hacked to death!
No? Aww, shame.
> no
> squeaking music,
No? Aww, shame.
> no blood trickling down the plughole (you can tell: it
> gurgles differently.)
Uh-huh.
I'll get your coat.
--
AJW in Stanmore.
http://www.whitewine.freeserve.co.uk/
Brenda Selwyn
>And where's Mary Whitehouse?
ICBW but AIUI she is getting on a bit and is no longer in the best of
health, and so is unable to devote as much energy to her "moral
crusades" as she did previously. ISTR seeing her being interviewed at
home for some programme or other a few months ago, and she looked very
frail.
Brenda
--
***************************************************************
Brenda M Selwyn
Nr Bath, North East Somerset
bre...@matson.demon.co.uk
http://www.matson.demon.co.uk/brenda.htm
Charles F Hankel
>
> >
> > Whoa! Every cloud has a silver lining. If Kathy storms off to the
> > Ambridge Women's Refuge (Nightingale Farm?), this leaves an opening
> > for someone full-time at the Bull and who better than Clarrielurve,
> > possibly on better that the National Minimum Wage? This knocks on to
> > Bridge Farm who lose Clarrielurve and Tony helps Pat out in the dairy
> > and puts more work Eddie's way. Of course I could wide of the merk by
> > a country 1,609.34 metres.
> >
> I keep wondering how long it is going to be before Clarrieluv starts
> hepling Beddy in the shop. I think your idea works better though.
I think that there are several earning opportunities coming up, none
of them spectacular, and it's only a matter of time as to which one(s)
Clarrielurve will end up with, though I think if extra pub work was on
the cards, it would be the more logical choice.
Logical? Given that Clarrielurve has bumpy bits, you're probably
right about the shop.
Chris McMillan
Sincerely, Chris (anyone want a pair of frostbitten feet? wot one goes
through to hear a talented wunderkind sing in a huge RC abbey of an
evening. no wonder monks is tough).
Stephen
>"W.J.T.Proudfoot" wrote:
>> I was refering more to the dodgy deals involving people like fat Paul,
>> baggy and snatch
>seems to have been the haunt more of 'Orrible 'Elen, and the other
>Brat-packers. I got the impression that Sean and Peter had cleaned up its
>image somewhat.
I am probably a fully-fledged pavlova by now, but wasn't there a fancy
dress occasion at the Cat and Fiddle within the last couple of years
at which one drunken reveller was reported as complimenting Baggy on
his costume, only for it to be revealed as his normal wear (David
saying "but he wasn't in costume!")... I think that Sean is probably
capable of running a pub in a way that attracts a young, trendy and,
lets face it, profitable crowd without alienating regulars of long
standing.
--
Stephen
Animops Digital Rostrum - Ken Morse
Kim Andrews
<cha...@hankel.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>I think that there are several earning opportunities coming up, none
>of them spectacular, and it's only a matter of time as to which one(s)
>Clarrielurve will end up with, though I think if extra pub work was on
>the cards, it would be the more logical choice.
The cafe in the orangery isn't going to run itself, nor is the gift
the gift shop.
>
>Logical? Given that Clarrielurve has bumpy bits, you're probably
>right about the shop.
W.J.T.Proudfoot
Kim Andrews wrote:
>
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2000 16:23:06 +0000, Charles F Hankel
> <cha...@hankel.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >I think that there are several earning opportunities coming up, none
> >of them spectacular, and it's only a matter of time as to which one(s)
> >Clarrielurve will end up with, though I think if extra pub work was on
> >the cards, it would be the more logical choice.
>
> The cafe in the orangery isn't going to run itself, nor is the gift
> the gift shop.
>
Yes, but do you think any of these are likely to produce earnings much
above the minimum wage?
Kim Andrews
<W.J.T.P...@durham.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
>Kim Andrews wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 29 Jan 2000 16:23:06 +0000, Charles F Hankel
>> <cha...@hankel.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >I think that there are several earning opportunities coming up, none
>> >of them spectacular, and it's only a matter of time as to which one(s)
>> >Clarrielurve will end up with, though I think if extra pub work was on
>> >the cards, it would be the more logical choice.
>>
>> The cafe in the orangery isn't going to run itself, nor is the gift
>> the gift shop.
>>
>Yes, but do you think any of these are likely to produce earnings much
>above the minimum wage?
I should jolly well hope that *running* the cafe or shop would pay
reasonably well, and it surely isn't beyond Clarrielurv's
capabilities.
>> >
>> >Logical? Given that Clarrielurve has bumpy bits, you're probably
>> >right about the shop.
Kimbo
--
FOCA2000 crawls out of the woodwork at...
http://www.foca.co.uk
k...@foca.co.uk
Steven Holden
> >of them spectacular, and it's only a matter of time as to which one(s)
> >Clarrielurve will end up with, though I think if extra pub work was on
> >the cards, it would be the more logical choice.
>
> The cafe in the orangery isn't going to run itself, nor is the gift
> the gift shop.
>
> >
> >right about the shop.
other week? So maybe the Grundys will end up living there and being
rustically menial on the Pargeters' behalf for the next 20 years...how
depressing...
--
Bearded Hippie Silversmith goods in Spanish from
http://jewellery.economiza.com p.s. Nigel please note for when buying stock
for the estate gift shop.
Jonathan
<chris...@easynet.co.uk> wrote:
>Mike Ellwood wrote:
>>
>>I think they turned it into a "yoof" pub (now Sid would have something
>>to say about that I think). Do they have big beefy bouncers outside
>>now? Sid would probably also have something to say about that...
>
>I think Sid has his hands full with a different pair of bouncers
>nowadays.
>
>Chris
<splutter> Please, I was trying to eat.
--
Jonathan
"When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout."
W.J.T.Proudfoot
Kim Andrews wrote:
>
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2000 14:44:01 +0000, "W.J.T.Proudfoot"
> <W.J.T.P...@durham.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Kim Andrews wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, 29 Jan 2000 16:23:06 +0000, Charles F Hankel
> >> <cha...@hankel.mersinet.co.uk> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >I think that there are several earning opportunities coming up, none
> >> >of them spectacular, and it's only a matter of time as to which one(s)
> >> >Clarrielurve will end up with, though I think if extra pub work was on
> >> >the cards, it would be the more logical choice.
> >>
> >> The cafe in the orangery isn't going to run itself, nor is the gift
> >> the gift shop.
> >>
> >Yes, but do you think any of these are likely to produce earnings much
> >above the minimum wage?
>
> I should jolly well hope that *running* the cafe or shop would pay
> reasonably well, and it surely isn't beyond Clarrielurv's
> capabilities.
> >> >
The visitors would probably like her rustic voice and friendlyness.
> >> >Logical? Given that Clarrielurve has bumpy bits, you're probably
> >> >right about the shop.
Niles
|> no blood trickling down the plughole (you can tell: it
|> gurgles differently.)
|
|Uh-huh.
|
|I'll get your coat.
That's kind of you, Andrew. Mind the chainsaw in the left pocket, it
starts at the drop of a hat.
Oh. Dear.
Right then.
I'll put the hat back on the hook if someone else will dissolve the body
in acid for me...
Niles
|On Fri, 28 Jan 2000 21:34:43 +0000, Chris J Dixon
|<chris...@easynet.co.uk> wrote:
|
|>Mike Ellwood wrote:
|>>
|>>I think they turned it into a "yoof" pub (now Sid would have something
|>>to say about that I think). Do they have big beefy bouncers outside
|>>now? Sid would probably also have something to say about that...
|>
|>I think Sid has his hands full with a different pair of bouncers
|>nowadays.
|>
|>Chris
|<splutter> Please, I was trying to eat.
I think Sid was, too.
Kirsten Procter
>> No, it actually is. Why does no-one seem to consider that important?
>
>I know one who does - me.
Bad Kirsten
--
--
Kirsten Procter ghoti
Jamie Armstrong
Chris J Dixon wrote:
>
> There seems to have been a concentration on Sid's appeal, or lack
> of it. Am I alone in finding Jolene totally unattractive. My
> image of her, complete with roots in need of a touch-up (stop
> that, Sid) is not such that I really want to extend it to include
> the shower scene.
No you aren't!
I totally and utterly agree - she sounds hideous to me too.
Jamie
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
afy...@nottingham.ac.uk (Niles) wrote:
> Jonathan <jona...@tait41.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> |On Fri, 28 Jan 2000 21:34:43 +0000, Chris J Dixon
> |<chris...@easynet.co.uk> wrote:
> |
> |>Mike Ellwood wrote:
> |>>
> |>>I think they turned it into a "yoof" pub (now Sid would
>have something to say about that I think). Do they have big
>beefy bouncers outside now? Sid would probably also have
>something to say about that...
> |>
> |>I think Sid has his hands full with a different pair of
>bouncers nowadays.
> |>
> |>Chris
> |<splutter> Please, I was trying to eat.
>
> I think Sid was, too.
BTN! BTN!
I bet it's mere vulgarity, tho. I can never tell the
difference. :(
Mary
Jamie Armstrong
Andrew John Wineberg wrote:
>
> On 28 Jan, Niles <afy...@nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> > Andrew John Wineberg <A.Win...@Whitewine.Freeserve.co.UK> wrote:
>
> > |Fret not, Jamie. You may have missed the shower scene which was
> > |broadcast last week, but you haven't yet missed *The* Shower Scene which
> > |will be broadcast later this week.
>
Ah.
Right.
That seems to have confused me.
Having two shower scenes.
Personally, I thought what I heard of the first one was more disturbing
than the whole of the second one!
Jamie
Jane Vernon
pool when Chris McMillan thankfully interrupted me to say:
>In article <MJGrROAe...@reflect.demon.co.uk>, btms
><URL:mailto:Ref...@reflect.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article <3891626F...@durham.ac.uk>, Jamie Armstrong
>> <Jamie.A...@durham.ac.uk> leans upon the bar of Bull, draws in
>> their breath and says:
>> >Wishful thinking there - I think Peggy is bound to condemn both of them.
>>
>>
>> Yes - she's got to put the feelings attached to her experience of gin-
>> soaked Lilian and similar experiences of son-in-law and elder daughter
>> somewhere - poor soul. You wouldn't expect Piggy to see any similarities.
>>
>and Jack the Oneth.
>
>Sincerely, Chris (anyone want a pair of frostbitten feet?
>wot one goes
>through to hear a talented wunderkind sing in a huge RC abbey of an
>evening. no wonder monks is tough).
>
Jane
The potter in the purple socks
Robin Parkinson
Ch...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk says...
> no wonder monks is tough).
You're probably not boiling them for long enough. You could always try
marinading them first as well.
- Robin.
Elizabeth Blades
>Sincerely, Chris (anyone want a pair of frostbitten feet? wot one goes
>through to hear a talented wunderkind sing in a huge RC abbey of an
>evening. no wonder monks is tough).
It's all that Benedictine they drink wot keeps 'em warm.
Lizbuff
Nick Leverton
<mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
>
>BTN! BTN!
>
>I bet it's mere vulgarity, tho. I can never tell the
>difference. :(
I think if it makes you shudder or feel nauseous as you chuckle, it's
Bad Taste, but if you merely laugh like a drain it's vulgarity.
Nick
Charles F Hankel
> BTN! BTN!
>
> I bet it's mere vulgarity, tho. I can never tell the
> difference. :(
That's why we have a BTM even if she is apparently slacking a bit at
the moment.
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
lev...@warren.demon.co.uk (Nick Leverton) wrote:
> In article <874qk1$q0p$1...@plutonium.compulink.co.uk>,
> <mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >BTN! BTN!
> >
> >I bet it's mere vulgarity, tho. I can never tell the
> >difference. :(
>
> I think if it makes you shudder or feel nauseous as you
>chuckle, it's Bad Taste, but if you merely laugh like a
>drain it's vulgarity.
That's helpful. But.... how do I know my shudder is at the
same point on the scale as someone else's shudder?
I suppose that's what we have the Monitor for. <g>
Mary
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
lev...@warren.demon.co.uk (Nick Leverton) wrote:
> In article <876jb7$dr1$1...@plutonium.compulink.co.uk>,
> I suppose you would have to assume close contact and
>shudder in sympathy, in order to gauge the intensity.
Okay, this is sounding promising.
>In fact, there's probably quite a good vacancy there just
>waiting for the right Shudder Test Reproducer Uniting
> Monitor, Passively Ensuring Taste.
<grr>
>
> >I suppose that's what we have the Monitor for. <g>
>
> You took it right out of my mouth.
Oh, do excuse me! Have it back at once!
Mary
Elizabeth Blades
>I suppose you would have to assume close contact and shudder in sympathy,
>in order to gauge the intensity. In fact, there's probably quite a good
>vacancy there just waiting for the right Shudder Test Reproducer Uniting
>Monitor, Passively Ensuring Taste.
Oooh look, John Ross you've got a rival
>>I suppose that's what we have the Monitor for. <g>
>You took it right out of my mouth.
No I daren't even respond to that< splutter> and just after I cleaned
the screen.
Lizbuff
John Ross
>lev...@warren.demon.co.uk (Nick Leverton) wrote:
>>vacancy there just waiting for the right Shudder Test Reproducer
Uniting
>>Monitor, Passively Ensuring Taste.
>
>Oooh look, John Ross you've got a rival
Thank gawd for that. Can I retire now to practice my ornithology?
--
John Ross
Southampton
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:ro...@troutmag.org> wrote:
> In article <ant29225...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk>,
> Ch...@mikesounds.demon.co.uk says...
>
> marinading them first as well.
>
monks I shall forever be thinking of this quip. We occasionally get work
from the abbey, but it is a well known local venue for concerts now and no
doubt Hazel will be returning there regularly in the next 2 years.
Sincerely, Chris
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:ja...@otbo.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> I was attempting to rescue a baby squirrel from the Grey Gables swimming
> pool when Chris McMillan thankfully interrupted me to say:
> >In article <MJGrROAe...@reflect.demon.co.uk>, btms
> ><URL:mailto:Ref...@reflect.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >> In article <3891626F...@durham.ac.uk>, Jamie Armstrong
> >> <Jamie.A...@durham.ac.uk> leans upon the bar of Bull, draws in
> >> their breath and says:
> >> >Wishful thinking there - I think Peggy is bound to condemn both of them.
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes - she's got to put the feelings attached to her experience of gin-
> >> soaked Lilian and similar experiences of son-in-law and elder daughter
> >> somewhere - poor soul. You wouldn't expect Piggy to see any similarities.
> >>
> >and Jack the Oneth.
> >
>
haven't I. I *think* 8.5 inches. Of course if I could find my braille tape
measure it would have helped (acquired for demostration purposes hence why I
can't find it off hand) since I would have used my toes to count the metal
studs. I had to put my hand down and pick up the measure to my nose. Think
size 3 shoe, those of you who are.
Anonymous
>Hands up, does anyone find Sid remotely fanciable?
I don't, in the slightest, but it's a bit odd that his loving
(if one time philandering) wife is not in the least bit impressed
by his new lean, muscled body and just laughed off his mid-life
crisis without finding *anything* to praise in his impressive
efforts (in my book, life's too short for diets and such like, but
I am always impressed by people who actually make use of their
gym membership).
And the old thing about beauty being in the eye of the beholder
is SO true. I often see couples wandering around with kids,
or passionatley embracing, and think 'how can he/she
possibly fancy him/her' (please note that this combination of
pronouns allows for straight and gay relationships).
Hélène Wilkinson
--------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
-----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
Jane Vernon
.
>And the old thing about beauty being in the eye of the beholder
>is SO true. I often see couples wandering around with kids,
>or passionatley embracing, and think 'how can he/she
>possibly fancy him/her'
I had some friends like that. I used to think, "He's a lovely bloke,
but why does she _fancy_ him? Then their marriage broke up, he and I
fell in love and got married and I thought he was the sexiest man I'd
ever met! :)
Jamie Armstrong
Jane Vernon wrote:
>
> I was attempting to rescue a baby squirrel from the Grey Gables swimming
> pool when Anonymous thankfully interrupted me to say:
> .
> >And the old thing about beauty being in the eye of the beholder
> >is SO true. I often see couples wandering around with kids,
> >or passionatley embracing, and think 'how can he/she
> >possibly fancy him/her'
>
> I had some friends like that. I used to think, "He's a lovely bloke,
> but why does she _fancy_ him? Then their marriage broke up, he and I
> fell in love and got married and I thought he was the sexiest man I'd
> ever met! :)
Cor!
I thought that sort of thing only happened in novels!
Jamie
Sarah Kerrison
Jane Vernon wrote:
> Jane
> The potter in the purple socks
>
> http://www.otbo.demon.co.uk
Awwww, how nice. Lucky you.
Sarah
Chris McMillan
<URL:mailto:ja...@otbo.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> I was attempting to rescue a baby squirrel from the Grey Gables swimming
> pool when Anonymous thankfully interrupted me to say:
> .
> >And the old thing about beauty being in the eye of the beholder
> >is SO true.
Noooooooo! Quote from an article on 'beauty' in the National Geographic.
Beauty is not so much in the eye of the beholder, as in the brain circuitry
of the beholder. And in the same article 'Perhaps we are truly human when
we come to believe that beauty is not so much in the eye as in the heart of
the beholder'.
Min Lacey
<S.L.Ke...@durham.ac.uk> used the electronic medium to say....
>> >And the old thing about beauty being in the eye of the beholder
>> >or passionatley embracing, and think 'how can he/she
>> >possibly fancy him/her'
>>
>> I had some friends like that. I used to think, "He's a lovely bloke,
>> but why does she _fancy_ him? Then their marriage broke up, he and I
>> fell in love and got married and I thought he was the sexiest man I'd
>> ever met! :)
*really* ugly. Months later a girl asked me whether I'd seen 'that
gorgeous hunk' lately - it took a *lot* of questioning before I realised
she was talking about Dave......
--
Min
H H Munro was a wry swine