[ SECRET POST #4546 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4546 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 26 secrets from Secret Submission Post #651.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I haven't seen Twin Peaks, so I can't speak to that one. I definitely agree with you about the soap-ish quality of Shondaland shows. I just don't personally think that S1 of BLL hit those notes the way some shows, such as Shondaland shows, do.

It was a story that hung very strongly on the interpersonal dynamics between the characters, which is a quality that soaps also have, but I disagree that having that quality automatically makes a show soap opera-ish. IMO soapiness is more heavily determined by how things are written than by what is being written about.

IMO calling a show a soap opera implies it is overly dramatic, unrealistically dramatic, cavalierly dramatic. And that's ok--when the descriptor fits. But so much of the "drama" of S1 of BLL was just...women's lives. Their struggles with complex, sometimes trivial, sometimes brutal, but very real things. IMO S1 of BLL had far too much nuance and realism to feel soapy.

[(Anonymous)]

That's fair! I think my point really is just that "soap opera" doesn't necessarily have to be, and really shouldn't be, pejorative. Having heightened and unrealistic, un-naturalistic levels of drama is definitely one of the hallmarks of the genre. But there's nothing inherently wrong with having heightened, unrealistic drama.

(I would say that the other hallmark of the genre is the sturm and drang of it all - the fact that these heightened, unrealistic things are happening *constantly* and new things keep happening and all the rest of it (And fwiw, I haven't watched BLL S2 but the sense I get from seeing what other people are saying is that some of the S2 stuff lines up with that idea, and that's a large part of why people are calling it "soapy"))

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with your entire comment (including the part about S2 probably going in a "soapier" direction). I think, with the soap opera thing, I'm just coming at it from a place of, like, it is pejorative? Like, I agree with you that it shouldn't be automatically pejorative. But I think the VAST majority of the time, when people call something a soap opera, they are being pejorative - to the point where "shallow, sentimental, and melodramatic; not to be taken seriously" is so thoroughly connotatively attached to the term that it's almost become an assumed part of the definition.

And that's what makes me dislike the term being used for S1 of BLL. Because yes, the characters are mostly rich and mostly white, but their problems feel real to me (and also, often, quite gendered), to an extent that the show could sometimes be wrenching to watch. The convolutions of domestic abuse; the ugly tawdriness and guilt of adultery; never feeling capable and professional enough no matter how capable and professional you are; the exhausting, consuming, horribly banal fear that your kids don't like you.

If a person is calling it soapy without the dismissive connotations, that's cool. Because you're right, it does share certain core elements with soap operas.

Anyway, thanks for talking about this with me. You've been so nice to talk to. :)