Discuss The Archers  permalink

She Who Must Be Obeyed

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 51 - 91 of 91
  • Message 51

    , in reply to message 40.

    Posted by Feral_Ralph (U2333894) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    Hello, CWBS. Have you been away?

    Report message1

  • Message 52

    , in reply to message 50.

    Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    In reply to Helen:

    I have thought about this if my son died and I had a glimmer of a child by him being around I think I would move heaven and earth to find out if it was my grandchild...I have never lost a child but can imagine you would grasp at any link. 


    Agreed

    Report message2

  • Message 53

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by irene (U14262395) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    after pats ref to helens ' wracking sobs filling the house' or similar the other night, and helen unable to sleep, i really dont see why she doesnt just move out again, her being so independent and all. obviously rhys has had the nerve to rent her old flat, but i imagine she could turn the waterworks on to peggy and get him turfed out. (mind you i suppose she'll have to ask aloner first, being as how aloner has arranged for peggy to fall over and sprain her ankle, by placing bill or ben in her way.. just the tip of that particular iceberg i reckon. the lodge is becoming more like downton abbey every day.

    Report message3

  • Message 54

    , in reply to message 50.

    Posted by anna kist (U2314477) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    but at the expense of that child's security and happiness - which is the risk she is taking especially given her attituse? Do you think you would be as obsessed as Pat is about this child being a clone of John?

    Report message4

  • Message 55

    , in reply to message 54.

    Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    but at the expense of that child's security and happiness - which is the risk she is taking especially given her attitude? Do you think you would be as obsessed as Pat is about this child being a clone of John? 


    I would not be so obsessed because I am male and therefore more rational. (just teasing)

    But there is very little risk in simply contacting Sharon.

    And I would certainly do that.

    Report message5

  • Message 56

    , in reply to message 54.

    Posted by Feral_Ralph (U2333894) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    Anna, I'm all too ready to concede a grandparent would be taken up short, disturbed and anxious about finding they have a grandchild they didn't know. This SL doesn't work because of: 1 Pat's former and current attitude to Sharon, 2 Pat's expectation she could have a relationsip with the child given that Sharon (rightly), brought him independently of the Crew, 3 Old Pat would have have been more circumspect and agonised over the consequences to her own family, Rich and his family, 4 Helen is rewriting history and 5 the whole thing is extremely annoying and mad.

    Report message6

  • Message 57

    , in reply to message 55.

    Posted by Feral_Ralph (U2333894) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    Very little risk in contacting Sharon? Well the law is well developed in this regard to deal with those who think there is little risk and do.

    Report message7

  • Message 58

    , in reply to message 56.

    Posted by SteveKills (U14949122) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    I think they should call him Dick, well at least Tone and the Weiner Baron should, to express their true feelings. Having rejoiced at the departure of Shazza it is now ridiculous to behave in the way Pat is on the off chance that Dick is illegitimate spawn of Guesss the weight of the tractor Jarn?

    Report message8

  • Message 59

    , in reply to message 56.

    Posted by anna kist (U2314477) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    agreed, Ralph. I think the old Pat would definitely have thought before she leapt.

    Why doesn't anyone think of an intermediary agency?

    Report message9

  • Message 60

    , in reply to message 59.

    Posted by Buntysdaughter (U7084475) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    One of the best aspects of this daft SL is seeing TownieJane posting, in her usual splendiferous rant mode. So many shrewd analyses of the situation on this thread, and lotsa laughs too. They are a grim lot at BF, aren't they.

    Report message10

  • Message 61

    , in reply to message 57.

    Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    In reply to Feral_Ralph:

    Very little risk in contacting Sharon? Well the law is well developed in this regard to deal with those who think there is little risk and do. 


    What are you talking about?

    There are no laws that stop Pat approaching Rich directly at the school gate; let alone discreetly phoning Sharon.

    Report message11

  • Message 62

    , in reply to message 50.

    Posted by Marmalade Drizzle (U2239190) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    I have thought about this if my son died and I had a glimmer of a child by him being around I think I would move heaven and earth to find out if it was my grandchild...I have never lost a child but can imagine you would grasp at any link. 
    Agreed. I can completely understand where Pat is coming from and if it were me I would want to *know* for sure. Which is why I was puzzled for a while that Pats daughter who had recently become a mother herself hadn't any empathy with the situation. It then. I remembered it was Helen we were talking about!

    Marms

    Report message12

  • Message 63

    , in reply to message 60.

    Posted by anna kist (U2314477) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    Agreed Bunty. Jane is sorely missed when she isn't around. Her rants are always gems.

    Report message13

  • Message 64

    , in reply to message 61.

    Posted by Feral_Ralph (U2333894) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    In reply to Feral_Ralph:

    Very little risk in contacting Sharon? Well the law is well developed in this regard to deal with those who think there is little risk and do. 


    What are you talking about?

    There are no laws that stop Pat approaching Rich directly at the school gate; let alone discreetly phoning Sharon.  
    Sigh. I shall say this only once. The law places Rich's interest as paramount. If Pat is so foolish to think she can make contact without "risk" (risk being the premise here) and does so Sharon can turn her away and obtain the necessary orders or if Pat even thinks about a direct approach to Rich without first having obtained his parents consent, well that's a very big oh dear, risk wise. Pat can act, but the consequences in law can be significant. Forgive me if I don't bother with further postings on the matter.

    Report message14

  • Message 65

    , in reply to message 64.

    Posted by DracoM1 (U14252039) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    Spot on, ralphers. An praise for your forbearance too.

    Report message15

  • Message 66

    , in reply to message 64.

    Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    Sigh. I shall say this only once. The law places Rich's interest as paramount. If Pat is so foolish to think she can make contact without "risk" (risk being the premise here) and does so Sharon can turn her away and obtain the necessary orders or if Pat even thinks about a direct approach to Rich without first having obtained his parents consent, well that's a very big oh dear, risk wise. Pat can act, but the consequences in law can be significant. Forgive me if I don't bother with further postings on the matter. 

    If you can't enter into calm discussion it is indeed best not to post any more.

    But you seem to be confusing laws - which require or prohibit certain actions - with legal principles used to decide cases brought before the family court.

    The law does NOT require Pat to instruct herself on the likely views of the family court before approaching Rich if she is stupid and inconsiderate enough to want to.

    Which she is not. The problem will arise if/when Sharon denies parenthood and/or refuses access.

    Report message16

  • Message 67

    , in reply to message 66.

    Posted by JudithL (U14272244) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    Rich is a teenager, so on the grounds of common sense alone, Pat shouldn't make a direct approach to him.
    I can understand her wanting to find out, though, so she could telephone Sharon and simply ask for information. It's Sharon's responsibility to decide whether she wants Rich to meet his grandparents or not -always supposing he is John's son.
    But is Pat able to deal tactfully with Sharon? I doubt it, as tact is not, in any circumstances, her strong suit.

    Report message17

  • Message 68

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by Lakey_Hill (U14391672) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    Tony doesn't think that contacting Rich is a good idea.

    Pat and Tony asked the children for their views, so they can hardly complain if they don't get the answer that Pat, at least, wanted.

    Report message18

  • Message 69

    , in reply to message 51.

    Posted by chinesewhitebedsock (U5822019) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    Hello, CWBS. Have you been away?  Hello backatcha, Ralph. Boredom with the SLs, feeling aggrieved after the unnecessary and ludicrous demise of Nige, and exasperation at the TC's volte face after the birth of Ye Magickale Babe has kept me away from these boards for many a long month, nay year. I awoke from my torpor as the fury started to rise at the unsatisfactory Bridge Farm e coli SL (it's all been said so I won't bother) and this latest turn of events regarding Son of the Wondrous John (who was a cad, I seem to recollect.) The sooner New Model Pat and TC get carried off to Prestatyn the better.

    Report message19

  • Message 70

    , in reply to message 68.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    Lakers, in spite of his not thinking it a good idea, it seems to me entirely possible that Tony will ring in order to relieve Pat's mind of its agonies, because *he* hasn't promised Helen that he won't! All he promised the wretched femoid was that he wouldn't talk about it to her any more.

    Report message20

  • Message 71

    , in reply to message 70.

    Posted by anna kist (U2314477) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    well spotted, Chris. Tony has a get out clause and will probably use it.

    Report message21

  • Message 72

    , in reply to message 70.

    Posted by Marmalade Drizzle (U2239190) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    Yes I wondered this too. At least Tony would be more likely to take a 'no' for an answer.

    I half expect Pat to be on the train to Leeds ready to ambush Rich outside the school gate with a huge Christmas present shouting "it's me... Your granny"

    Marms

    Report message22

  • Message 73

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Fi of little faith (U14298768) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011

    I do love a TownieJane rant. Nail on head, as per

    Report message23

  • Message 74

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by judy (U15061078) on Tuesday, 13th December 2011

    I completely agree with you about Helen,but I also think that Tom is just as selfish.Who would want children like them.
    When Tom's business collapsed before, he had no guilt letting his parents mortgage themselves to the hilt. He badgered them to raise the money,not thinking of their age.Now that it has gone bellyup for Pat because of the e.coli business,he has had no qualms in backing away from the brand and keeps telling his parents to buck up. Selfish,selfish, selfish.

    Report message24

  • Message 75

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Richard Crawley (U15061089) on Tuesday, 13th December 2011

    I cannot agree more. The whole family depresses me so much. The story line would have been cut very short if Pat had carried out "return to work" procedure which is required for everyone coming back from illness.
    Jennifer should tell Tony to wind his neck in when he was asking for handouts because of their fault (who signs a contract with a £10,000 clause in it?). If times are hard why not sell the fantastic sports car he got a few years ago and never seems to drive it nowadays.
    Don't me get me started with the pig football or Henry or when is Kirsty going get fed up with working in the shop all day with no help and Jacks at night
    Cheers Rich C

    Report message25

  • Message 76

    , in reply to message 74.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Tuesday, 13th December 2011

    Lord, I do dislike feeling I must be fair to Tom!

    Tom's business and the farm mortgage were unconnected: the mortgage is on the farm, which Pat and Tony bought, not on money to bail out Tom's business, which Pat and Tony did not provide. For money to bail out his business Tom went to his grandmother, on two occasions some years apart. (She also made John a loan to set up *his* business, which I somehow doubt was ever repaid, but that is beside the immediate point.)

    Tom and Helen wanted Pat and Tony to buy the farm so that they would no longer have Matt Crawford (aka Borchester Land) as a landlord; Pat and Tony too wanted this. Tom and Helen also wanted it to be left to them; neither seems to have noticed that it is one farm and they are two people, and that it might be that they won't agree about how it is to be run or who is to have the farmhouse to live in.

    Report message26

  • Message 77

    , in reply to message 76.

    Posted by StargazerwithOscar (U14668197) on Tuesday, 13th December 2011

    Helen will have it, of course. Otherwise she'll thkweam and thkweam and thkweam until she's thick.

    Report message27

  • Message 78

    , in reply to message 75.

    Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Tuesday, 13th December 2011

    Jennifer should tell Tony to wind his neck in when he was asking for handouts because of their fault (who signs a contract with a £10,000 clause in it?). If times are hard why not sell the fantastic sports car he got a few years ago and never seems to drive it nowadays. 

    Someone with no business if they refuse.

    Report message28

  • Message 79

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by JacksParakeetBeingDe-Nested (U2979858) on Tuesday, 13th December 2011

    Very many thanks, and welcome back belatedly, to OP. And thanks too for the shedloads of common sense upthread. In RL no-one would be unaffected as this SL plays out, and so the SWs should not contemplate an ending where everyone is best friends, etc etc; or just park the SL for a few months, unresolved .

    jp

    Report message29

  • Message 80

    , in reply to message 70.

    Posted by Daisymegs (U14542112) on Tuesday, 13th December 2011

    'femoid' - what a splendid word, one for the lexicon definitely. As a mother of sons and a grandmother, I have to agree that I would really want to know about a prospective grandchild. But it's all in the handling of the situation, isn't it?

    Report message30

  • Message 81

    , in reply to message 80.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Tuesday, 13th December 2011

    Oh dear: femoid isn't a real word. I picked it up from a science fiction book many years ago, in which it was the name for a "feminine" robotic construct.

    A female-featured android just seemed somehow so *right* for Helen.

    Report message31

  • Message 82

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by Clarrie55 (U15063148) on Thursday, 15th December 2011


    On many photos, I look like Maggie Thatcher, for heavens sake, and I KNOW we're not related!
     



    (Best Maggie voice) Just REJOICE at that NEWS!




    As for the real Pat, she disappeared many years ago, about the time her Auntie Gwyneth died I should think.. I bet she can't remember a word of Welsh and couldn't tell you who the leader of Plaid Cymru is nowadays. She sounds more English than the Queen. 
    Pat is Welsh! Are you sure? I think there must be some mistake - I've been listening to the Archers for 28 years, and I swear she hasn't been back home once...

    Report message32

  • Message 83

    , in reply to message 82.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Thursday, 15th December 2011

    Clarrie55, hello 'cos I don't think we have met before, and Welcome if you are new.

    There is a place called "Lowfield", which is to be found under "Useful Links" in "About" and is called "The Archers Plot Summaries" on that page of the website. Going there I found that she has once been to Wales, though specifically not "home":

    Sunday 16th May, 1999
    * Pat's upped and gone, quite suddenly to Wales, not to visit family but to spend some time in a "retreat" recomended by Janet.

    Thursday 20th May, 1999
    * Pat returns - she awoke this morning and decided she needed to be home. She certainly seems to have perked up a lot and Tony's glad to see her back.

    It may have been the shortest recovery from a breakdown ever, and it is the origin of the Nuns of Prestatyn running gag on this board.

    Report message33

  • Message 84

    , in reply to message 83.

    Posted by Clarrie55 (U15063148) on Thursday, 15th December 2011

    Hello - yes I am new - many thanks for this expert reply. I must have missed Pat's visit to Prestatyn 12 years ago. May 1999, eh? I was breastfeeding at the time - possibly this caused a lapse of concentration although, with hindsight, I am proud to say my baby never had a single stressful morning.

    Where was I? Oh yes, and are therre any other grounds for thinking Pat might be Welsh?

    Report message34

  • Message 85

    , in reply to message 84.

    Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Thursday, 15th December 2011

    are there any other grounds for thinking Pat might be Welsh? 

    Her full name "Pat Angharad Myfanwy Gwladus" is perhaps a clue?

    Or her place of Birth: "Rhosllanerchrugog Morganweg"?

    Report message35

  • Message 86

    , in reply to message 84.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Thursday, 15th December 2011

    Well, when she arrived in the early seventies with the surname Lewis it was from Wales, according to The Book of the Archers. She was the niece of Tony's farming partner Haydn Evans, that's how she came to Ambridge.

    Back in Wales she used to have a pedigree herd of Wlelsh Black cattle in her charge, so clearly she was the right sort of person to be a farmer in Ambridge.

    Report message36

  • Message 87

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by LadyMuck2 (U15063494) on Thursday, 15th December 2011

    Utterly pathetic of Tony to be so cowed by that creature and the sausage king - thank heavens for Pat - and I dont say that too often - she will ignore the uppity pair of them and do exactly as she always intended to do !!
     
    I am with you 100%. I find the whole lot of them intolerable - except for poor Pat. It seems they are incapable of having a balanced, sensible discussion without someone getting up in arms about something or other, or sticking their nose into someone's else's business, or objecting to someone else's moral conduct... argggghhh!! Sanctimonious gits. They almost make Linda seem likeable!

    Report message37

  • Message 88

    , in reply to message 84.

    Posted by shesings (U2666459) on Thursday, 15th December 2011

    Hello - yes I am new - many thanks for this expert reply. I must have missed Pat's visit to Prestatyn 12 years ago. May 1999, eh? I was breastfeeding at the time - possibly this caused a lapse of concentration although, with hindsight, I am proud to say my baby never had a single stressful morning.

    Where was I? Oh yes, and are therre any other grounds for thinking Pat might be Welsh?

     


    She decked the house with daffodils and put on a tape of a Welsh choir on the infant John's first St David's Day. "It's important to us!" said Pat. "Oh you and Haydn?" said Tony, in one of his dim moments. "Me and my son!" roared Pat, clutching the two month old moppet to her.

    I think that was the last time Wales was mentioned until the Prestatyn episode!

    Report message38

  • Message 89

    , in reply to message 88.

    Posted by GreenBrownBear (U14258765) on Friday, 16th December 2011

    This was long before I started listening as an adult. Wonder if a couple of new scripties joined and Pat's Welshness was forgotten or was considered too much trouble to carry on.

    Report message39

  • Message 90

    , in reply to message 89.

    Posted by StargazerwithOscar (U14668197) on Friday, 16th December 2011

    Or they've just decided that the further excesses of Pat's regionality would have been toned down by many years of living elsewhere and having other influences on her language use. You know, like they did with Ruth? Oh, hang on a minute....

    Report message40

  • Message 91

    , in reply to message 90.

    Posted by JustJanie - Fairweather Strider (U10822512) on Friday, 16th December 2011

    Yes, it made sense for Pat's accent to tone down as the actor is not from Wales and she might have found it hard to keep up. Shame she lost it so entirely, though.

    << You know, like they did with Ruth? Oh, hang on a minute.... >>

    They really missed an opportunity there, didn't they? All Felicity Finch had to do was gradually revert to her natural, slight, very pleasant north-eastern accent which if not from quite the right part (Teeside, isn't it, rather than Tyneside?) would I am sure pass muster as it is so muted. And would be a great deal easier on the ear than what we actually hear.

    I am not blaming her, but the direction she is evidently given.

    Report message41

Back to top

About this Board

Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

This messageboard is now closed.

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.