this post is closed
Life in Ambridge : Just who is he...?
Life outside Ambridge
Popular posts from this blog
Life in Ambridge
THIS POST IS CLOSED "longer off topic comments' - Episode 8 Life Outside Ambridge Beach Chairs
To be honest I don't really care! Jim has never been a very nice person. If it turns out to be one of the more outlandish (and totally unpleasant) reasons being suggested elsewhere I shall really stop listening!
ReplyDeleteI just hope it is over and done with VERY soon. We've had the 'mystery' almost every night now for nearly three weeks. Enough already!!!!
BTW Very clever GG!😊
DeleteSpicycushion - I couldn’t agree more. A friend who is a statistician says 200% is mathematical nonsense, otherwise that would be how much I agree with you!
DeleteI agree Spicey. Jim hasn't been a very pleasant man to get to know at all has he? I am married to an academic, but I thank my lucky stars he doesn't wear his learning as heavily as Jim does. Maybe soon we'll get a rest from both him AND Jazzer. I'm starting to find Mr McCreary's voice a bit irritating now...
ReplyDeleteJim always sounds to me like someone who has mugged up his special subject for Mastermind, though that could be down to the actor rather than the character. No academics I know thrust their learning down the listener’s throat like he does. His learning lacks conviction, which to me hints at a dark secret in his past career rather than the more commonplace relationship-centred theories.
DeleteGreat pic Gary. I must be in the minority of being totally intrigued and desperate to get to the bottom of Jim’s behaviour. I’ve always quite liked him as a character. The village eccentric.
ReplyDeleteMe too.
DeleteAnd me, I’d hate to be left in the dark and hope that we’ll get to hear the whole unexpurgated
Deletestory. I also hope for a reconciliation between Jim and Alistair soon. I don’t want Alistair moving away from Ambridge because I think there could still be stories for him to be involved with and that is less likely if he’s not living in the village.
✔️🤞
DeletePtbY and parsley16 - Me too.
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm another.
DeleteFor all his faults, which I do recognise, he is an interesting character, and the acting enhances the interest.
In one post he was described as being an emotional fraud.
Well, so was my mother, who had a heavy steel wall surrounding her.
When she was diagnosed with a condition similar to Motor Neurone her steel wall collapsed and I saw the true person, terrified of the world and its inhabitants caused from her childhood abuse.
She had erected that wall to protect her from further hurt and damage.
I suspect Jims character as we perceive it, has been erected as a similar wall of protection.
I don't think he is a fraud at all, but rather a damaged individual who has coped
but is now desperately floundering.
I agree. I hope this story does not fade away without us getting to know what is behind Jim's extreme reaction to the MiW and his utter despair when talking to Shula.
ReplyDeleteI have enjoyed his scenes over the years - never boring, and beneath his sometimes objectionable outbursts he has a kind heart.
The 'not knowing', a few clues or red herrings, drip, drip over time is classic page turner stuff. Seductive for many, including me, but not all.
ReplyDeleteI don't have to like a character to find them or their story interesting, but they must be rounded, unlike Christie cardboard cut outs. Jim was one dimensional at first, but he's been developed from overbearing pompous Latin quoting windbag. We've seen competitiveness, cunning, versatility, compassion, perceptiveness & so on.
He certainlyas developed and become all the more interesting as a result.
DeleteI am with you too,P tbY
ReplyDeleteI like Jim.
He took Jazzer in.
Not many would have done that.
I think that Jazzer will be the one to sort things out not St Shula .
Image above reminds of Rear Window, so I fear the fall out will be no less spectacular.
ReplyDeleteAs I said I don't look forward to it but can't avoid now apart from cutting off.
I don't particularly like any of them, only at times. Just remembered: when Alistair told Jim about Shula's dalliance with him and Richard he was all agog and said that it made her more interesting.
Some people find it amusing as long as it doesn't concern them.
Rear Window - I just love that film. Sorry not TA. 😣
DeleteI have just listened again to last night’s episode trying to work out why Natasha seems to have accepted Pat’s idea of a post nup.
ReplyDeleteAll I can come up with is that because she knows how annoyed Tom was with the idea ,she will be able to persuade him that they should split from Bridge Farm completely and go it alone
That way they can bid for Peggy's money .
She will also tell Tom that because he is so opposed to the post nup idea she is prepared to go along with him.
Obviously there is no way she would really want a post nup but this way it will look as it was only Tom’s idea and Pat and Tony won’t blame her.
She will want Tom to share her debts .
As Basia has pointed out, a post nup agreement protects Natasha’s business as much as it protects Tom/Bridge Farm’s. So it’s in her interests to agree, as well as being a sensible thing to do anyway.
ReplyDeleteI also wrote that N. would see an advantage to herself in such an agreement. If she & Tom split up, it is only reasonable the post nup would include provision for whatever time & money she had contributed to Bridge Farm - either buy her out entirely or an agreed share of profit for whatever her input has been.
ReplyDelete.......but knowing how she likes to spend cash she doesn’t have I still think she does not really want to have such an agreement.
ReplyDeleteIf she and Tom did split up she would be much better off if she could count on Bridge Farm to bail her out
She hasn’t done a great deal for Bridge Farm has she.
What has she contributed?
Lanjan. Didn’t she help plant some fruit 🌲 trees after persuading Tom it was a good idea.
DeleteNatasha wouldn’t agree to something if there was nothing in it for her.
I think I have lost the plot Stasia.
DeleteWasn’t she wanting to plant fruit trees but have something , pigs or cabbages or something in between the rows?
Natasha has already contributed a lot to Bridge Farm in terms of hard labour and innovative ideas, eg. planting 100s of trees, developing BridgeFresh, and organising their highly successful Open Farm Sunday. As Carolyn says, a pre-nup agreement should compensate her for her unsalaried input to the Bridge Farm business in the event of a split, as well as protecting her own business from any undue claims by Tom. What is there for her not to like?
ReplyDeleteI called Jim an emotional fraud. He is rude, condescending and doesn’t respect the opinions of others. However, when faced with something or someone he doesn’t like reminding him of a hurt form the past, he crumples like a spoilt child.
ReplyDeleteHis pomposity is not a good indication of a clever person but rather that of an immature individual who uses being clever to control those around him. Yes he is kind with Jazzer. But Jazzer is not a threat, either intellectually or emotionally.
He is an old fashioned show off, and in my book that doesn’t make a nice person.
Lanjan. That is a conundrum, she claimed that the pigs could roam through the trees and that would be a means of managing the fallen fruit. Then dimwit Tom was persuaded to get rid of the pigs, but they keep turning up. The pigs would love a cabbage or three. Yum yum. Grunt, grunt.
ReplyDeleteI have already posted my reason for Jims problem, which is my first thought.
ReplyDeleteMy second (which I dallied a while ago) is that Jim's academic work, was not entirely his own. He was helped, but took the accolade, as to all his own research + work.
Some-one else has mentioned this idea earlier (sorry not sure who- Maryellen?).
I hope that the outcome is quite simple.
Jim either feels guilty or his pride is hurt.
Sadly due to time restraints, I have not been able to read all, what I am sure, are wonderful, and interesting posts.
DeleteCome off it,Maryellen.
ReplyDeleteNatasha skived off for several weeks.
Tom had to write the piece about Bridge Fresh.
Yes she had ideas about planting trees but what has she done about it?
Has she planted a load of saplings?
Unsalaried imput?
What imput?
Oh yes she organised Open Farm Sunday which must have cost a fortune .
We didn’t hear much about it though.
Are you actually saying that she would be better off with a post nup than without one?
Surely if she didn’t have a post nup she would be entitled to half Tom’s assets.
She wouldn’t get that with a post nup.
Yes, she personally planted 100s of saplings. She doesn’t draw a director’s salary. We don’t know what OFS cost but certainly not “a forttune” and sounds like money well spent in advertising Bridge Farm. We didn’t hear about it on the actual day because we heard about Brookfield instead. If she doesn’t want the risk of Tom making claims on her she is better off with a post-nup, especially if it also guarantees her compensation for her past input to the Bridge Farm business. Pat also skived off forweeks when she was a young wife, leaving Tony in the lurch.
DeletePlanting trees is very hard work so Natasha must be a worker. It surprised me a bit when she did pitch in like that and it made me wonder what way the scriptwriters were going with her character. I did wonder during that scene why, if it was being done on such a big scale, that they didn't use machinery to dig the holes.
DeleteI am not looking forward to what Jim has to say, whatever it may be.
ReplyDeleteWell, I am ! Call me prurient...
DeleteFair play, Shula surpassed herself tonight, & it looks as if it bear fruit.
That said, they were both unfair to Alistair. 'Wrapped up in his own world' What, when he got the party together, arranged the trip, tried his best to understand what upset Jim, when being repulsed in the most repulsive manner ?
Shula, not so bad, but 'hadn't realized' A. 'could be so kind & understanding' Married to him for so long, but condemned because he never understood her never expressed dissatisfaction with the marriage. She has regrets all right.
Yes Carolyn, I think Shula has serious regrets.
DeleteI agree Basia, whatever it is, we the listeners are unlikely to be pleased by it.
ReplyDeleteBut if as has been suggested, and I felt from this evenings episode might be quite likely, 'what's wrong' has to do with Alistairs paternity, what is the fallout going to be in the next few weeks. And how will Alistair deal with the revelation.
But of course it might be something entirely different.
Might Alistair ultimately end up feeling relieved that Jim isn't his real father? He could rationalise that Jim's emotional detachment, criticism and lack of love for him was not because of anything Alistair had any control of in any way whatsoever - in other words that it had nothing to do with Alistair as a person, it was his existence that made Jim act in the way he did.
ReplyDeleteWhich is maybe better to know than to go through life thinking that you were a "failure" and "not good enough" in your father's eyes? Obviously either way Jim has been a terrible parent to Alistair and absolutely nothing would absolve him of his awful treatment of a child!
I find the Jim S/L much more interesting and intriguing than the Natasha post nup one. Jim's an interesting, if annoying at times, character and I really want to find out what's behind his behaviour lately. I also hope that Alistair does not move out as he's a nice bloke which Shula is only now realizing she let slip away. Bad mistake Shula.
DeleteYes agree GG, it could be an absolute revelation to Alistair and set him up for the second half of his life.
DeleteIf I had been a new listener, tuning into TA for the first time this evening, I should never have believed the two squabbling lads in the opening scene were brothers - let alone that the serious one with the deep voice was the young brother, and the joking one with the high squeaky voice was the older one.
ReplyDeleteThose two parts have been badly cast and the actors should swop places. Josh sounded positively juvenile tonight, not at all like a young man in his early twenties with a business to run. Whilst Ben sounded a lot older than his part and much more responsible. How confusing for a new listener!
irritating in the extreme.
DeleteJust listened - it was excruciating! I hate it/secretly love it when I literally, actually, properly get embarrassed whilst listening to the Archers. And boy, was I cringing during those scenes tonight! It reminded me of the way they used to portray new fangled teenagers in those terrible British rock and roll movies in the late 50's - it was all "You diggin' that chick Ben?" & " Bert daddio, us hep cats are groovin' on a new sound!" all spoken in finest stage school posh. Awful!!!
DeleteTotally agree with all. Last night was the first time in several weeks (exam marking in the extreme!) that I managed to listen to a whole episode. Those 'boys' voices are completely the wrong way round, (although I suppose that could happen as a freak of nature, ) and it does seem that the S/Ws are following a pattern.
Delete"They are young/teenage siblings so they must be horrible to each other."
Have none of the S/Ws had teenage children? My three sons and one daughter never were nasty to each other. They teased, with a smile on their face, and moaned but not downright nasty.
I'm afraid Shula's earnestness is grating too. Is this deep passion for doing good to show us that she really should be a priest? She wasn't very friendly and considerate towards Alistair when she told him, out of the blue, that she didn't want their marriage to continue. That wasn't just 'finding herself,' it was just plain selfishness and totally inconsiderate of her husband of twenty odd years' feelings.
Just hope we get some resolution to the 'Jim' problem tonight!
Yes, you are right about Shula, Spicy. I think she was behaving completely out of character when she ‘ditched’ Alistair in such a selfish and uncaring way. I didn’t think that was like Shula at all. Her ‘earnestness’ as you call it, is much more the Shula I have come to know over the years and it can become irritating - I think she was once known as goody-goody Shula.
DeleteThe way she is dealing with Jim is much more Shula- like to me than the way she dealt with Alistair. I wonder if there is an element of trying to make up for her treatment Alistair by showing compassion to his father?
Or am I reading too much into the situation?
I’m with you Spicycushion. I suggest they replace Ben with an actor who can at least sound like a teenager!
DeleteSuddenly Jim caves into Shula’s whining pleas. Pull the other one. Another character changed to facilitate Shula’s need to minister to the residents of Ambridge.
Last night was 12 minutes of excruciating boredom.
I’m quite interested in finding out if Alistair is capable of independent living or whether the flat in Borchester is just an act of bravado like the first time he said he had his eye on a place. I wasn’t impressed by the way he rubbished Jakob’s hospitality. It made me think he is his father son.
DeleteI agree with Lanjan, Shula may have regrets that she probed Jim too far, apart from running out of her marriage. Yes Stasia, 'the whining pleas', I think it's 13 minutes - it will be tonight.
ReplyDeleteBasia. It was exactly 12.35 minutes too long.
DeleteStasia✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️
DeleteI am pleading 🥺 Please send Ben back to his bedroom. 🛏.
ReplyDelete.... and lock the door! Pleeeease!
Delete...and only let him out when he sounds a true 17yr old lad!
DeleteI looked at the website to read yesterday's synopsis and there's already an alert to contact action line if affected by this storyline...
ReplyDeleteI already called the action line - they just said "if you hate Ben & Josh that much, just stop listening..."
Delete🤣
DeleteOoh GG 🤭 🤩
DeleteGary - priceless!
DeleteYes Shula does go on a bit but I think she realizes, after seeing Jim trash his keyboard in a rage, that the man seriously needs counselling help. She seems genuinely concerned for his well-being and this is possibly linked to her guilt over the way she treated Alistair. She's seen how horribly she treated her ex and is trying to make herself feel better by helping someone who needs it.
ReplyDeleteJust as I thought, above, Anneveggie! Two minds thinking alike.
DeleteWow, is that your garden GG
ReplyDeleteThe little profile pic? Yes, it's last years back garden - I thought it looked super cute!
DeleteGoodness Gary, if that is lasts years garden, and you are upgrading it as you have described this year, how much more wonderful can it look ?
DeleteCongratulations !
What am I missing - Where is GG's garden, as I don't seem to see it..
DeleteAre you not getting the little profile photo to the left of GG’s name? Similar to where Mrs P’s photo is?
DeleteNo. I don't see any of these extras, just names and nothing more.
DeleteSome of you guessed right about Jim.
ReplyDeleteThere was too much talk of Joe for my liking.
Agreed about Joe. Guess it's the lead up to his departure
DeleteDidn't expect that !
ReplyDeleteWell I wasn’t expecting that and I have to say that Jim wasn’t the only one in tears.
ReplyDeleteHowever I wish that the editor hadn’t decided on this storyline.
We have heard a lot about abuse recently particularly within the Church ,Public Schools and Orphanages but the Archers is a programme I listen to for pleasure.
I am tired of the Continuity Announcer saying at the end of an episode that if we have been upset by anything we have heard on the programme we can telephone a particular number.
It will bring it all back to those who were abused as children .
I do hope that too much is not made of it.
Almost what I was going to say Lanjan.
DeleteIn my view, totally unnecessary and certainly distasteful. Not something for airing at 7.15pm .
Unnecessary because so much in real life has been in the press during the past five or sixit is hardly an 'issue' that needs advertising.
Also a very improbable s/l too.
Alistair is 57 years old so I would imagine that the recent birthday party was for Jim's 80th.
He was 8 and described Harold as a 'young man.'So a minimum of 10 years between them.
So this 90-ish man, in a wheelchair, travels uninvited over a hundred miles, stay overnight somewhere? to a birthday party for someone he hasn't seen in decades for what reason?
To apologise? To gloat?
Would anyone like to hazard a guess what other delights we have in store for the early evening slot? We've had rape and discussions of 'healthy' sperm, casual sex and smutty jokes. Are we to get beastiality or perhaps a sexually motivated murder?
Totally fed up!!!!!! 😠
And, for goodness sake, Alistair don't tell Shula!!!
3rd line "six years, it is..."
DeleteRe-reading it - Yes I know I'm a hard unfeeling person!!!!
No, I didn't even remotely feel like crying! Sorry my friends!
I do so agree Archerphile
DeleteAs soon as Jim started talking I realised what he was going to say.
I hated it all .
There was absolutely no need for it.
As you say ,Archerphile,why did Harold Jayson go to the party?
Is it not time we had something pleasant happen like Leonard proposing marriage to Jill ?
I am going to watch Gardeners world and try to forget what I heard almost an hour ago.
Sorry I meant Spicycushion not Archerphile.
DeleteJust to add ,Spicycushion ,you might have felt like crying had something similar happened to you.
DeleteThere will have been people listening who did not want to be reminded of that.
That was my first thought!
DeleteWhat would a victim think of their 'story/experience' being put out as 'entertainment ? '
The same could be said of Elizabeth’s mental health issues, but wasn’t....
DeleteIn answer to the question, 'Why did Harold Jayston go to the party?', I suspect that even now, he had no idea that Jim wouldn't be pleased to see him. Paedophiles (I believe) often think they're engaged in act of love with their victim (horrible as this sounds), sometimes they even think the victim is a willing, consensual participant. They often have a skewed sense of reality and very little empathy; this is why, after poor Jim rushed out of the party, Harold showed no concern but continued to entertain the gathering by playing the keyboard with Kiki.
DeleteMy only comment about tonight is - how brilliant the acting by all has been -
ReplyDeleteportraying so much emotion in a short time.
I needed a tissue...
I wonder if Alistair will still move out?
DeleteI think he should + needs to. He can still support Jim, as his son, but they need their own space.
Jim + Jazzer (+ Webster), will muddle along nicely together.
The Odd Couple - which works.
Have to agree with you Miriam. The acting was superb.
DeleteI agree Spicycushion and Lanjan but I fear that much will be made of it for days to come and Shula can pat herself on the back and go straight into priesthood, I'm sure she will find out.
ReplyDeleteIt was Lady R on the previous blog who thought it was physical abuse in the past.
ReplyDeleteAs Spicycushion says the time line is somewhat shaky.
Well done, Shula! This heralds the rapprochement between Alistair and his father that you faced rejection and humiliation in the hope of achieving. No doubt Alistair will remain at Greenacres, saving him from leaving both the enclave and our airwaves. Hopefully Jazzer the Crass will take Alistair’s hint and move off. Next storyline, please.....
ReplyDeleteHave I missed where Johnny and Hannah are living please? Just realised Carrie moving in means that they have moved out? Is Johnny back at Bridge Farm? Where did Hannah go?
ReplyDeleteI thought it was very well scripted and acted. It helps to explain Jim's antipathy to religion and church rituals. Also his coldness and the wall he built around himself.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely agree, Zoetrope, the abuse turned him into an emotional cripple.
DeleteThere is a piece on the BBC website about the devlopment of the storyline. They consulted people who work to help survivors of historic abuse. These storylines in drama can help other victims to disclose their own experiences. ( as with domestic abuse and the Helen / Rob storyline).
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely, Zoetrope - some survivors of domestic abuse came onto the BBC Archers blog during the Rob/Helen storyline to confirm how helpful it was and add their experiences. It was very powerful, and moving to read their posts.
DeleteVery well acted and explains a lot about Jim. It does occur though to wonder how he could recognise this old man in a wheelchair after all those years. Also join those who commented on why Harold came to the party. It will be helpful to some who have experienced this sort of abuse which to most is inexplicable.
ReplyDeleteI doubt someone would not recognize the face of their abuser, however many decades have passed.
DeleteThe answer turned out to be far more convincing than the soap cliche about concealed paternity that I, amongst others, fell for - feel quite ashamed ! Well scripted, sensitively performed, hats off to the SWs. The BBC is a public service broadcaster, enough said really, & I hope the story helps some middle aged & elderly people who've been grossly damaged in childhood, to open out. & have some relief from long endured pain.
ReplyDeleteI think Alistair will have to tell Shula something, that there was a serious reason for the upset. She would understand he can't say more but will be relieved that father & son are reconclied. Like Miriam, see no reason why A.shouldn't move out, time to move on, it's not far away & he can still support Jim.
I am sorry,Ev but I cannot agree with you.
ReplyDeleteI cannot see how hearing a story like we heard this evening can help any abused person.
As I said earlier ,it will only bring things back to them.
I am appalled that the BBC has decided to have a storyline like this.
Are there not enough real life horror stories on the news without bringing one into our programme?
The script writers haven’t done one yet about knife crime.
Will that be the next storyline?
I am very upset about it I have to say as you may have gathered.
I said it might help some as the realisation that you are not alone in this situation can encourage opening up to others where you have bottled it up for years as Jim has. We all need to face the reality that horrors like this exist whilst thanking God that it is outside our experience.
DeleteWell written, well acted, and not what I expected either.
ReplyDeleteVery moving.
When I was about twenty I was visiting my close friend who at the time was back living with her parents.
Friend and I were nurses in that fancy London and were telling friends mum about a child one of us was nursing, who we suspected was being abused. We didn't know what we should do about it.
Mum suddenly became very angry and told us that we ought to tell someone.
This then opened the floodgates and this elderly woman told us about the abuse she had suffered at the hands of her father, and explained how she had kept this secret all her life, and how she had continued to 'keep her father occupied' in order to protect her younger sister.
I believe my friend told all her siblings after their mother's death and they were then able to understand why their mother had been the tight lipped and sometimes very harsh mother.
None of us knows why a particular person may have strange and perhaps unpleasant behaviour.
It is rarely because they are simply unpleasant people.
Being emotionally crippled, results in a crippled personality.
I have just listened to tonight’s episode in bed, just before going to sleep, as usual . It was very hard listening, but in some ways, also a great relief that Jim has finally been able to voice his huge hidden secret that must have been plaguing him for years.
ReplyDeleteYes, it is a difficult story but, to me, not totally unexpected. I had already thought that there might have been bullying or abuse in Jim’s background because he sounded so frightened and haunted when speaking to Shula.
The acting was superb and I found myself feeling deeply moved by Jim’s plight. Alistair will be a great support for Jim and I hope he stays at Greenacres for a little while longer until Jim has regained his composure. I would like Jazzer to stay with Jim too , at least for the time being.
Finally I don’t feel at all outraged that the BBC decided on this storyline as it was so well handled and shows that such things can have happened to the most unlikely of people. Hopefully it might encourage other victims to open up to their families and thus receive help to overcome what might be years of repressed unhappiness.
Archerphile I agree with everything you said 100%. Wonderful acting and so sad.
DeleteYes I thought brilliant acting, sensitively handled. I listen to the Archers for light relief, and have not liked the heavier topics. I was in tears because it brought back to me the pain and distress of some of my clients from years ago, but tears can act as a release and be therapeutic. The ripples spread wide.
DeleteI agree with Archerphile, Mrs P., Janice and Anneveggie (apologies to anyone I've left out who also praised this SL and the way it was written and performed.) It was very moving, responsibly researched and avoided sensationalism. John Rowe gave an excellent performance---Jim has always been one of my favourite characters and I really didn't want this theme of childhood abuse to be the outcome of the SL, but now I've heard it, I think it was very compelling and could indeed encourage others who've suffered in RL to open up.
DeleteTotally agree with all that you said Archerphile
DeleteJim 😢💔 greatly moved, believable to me. brave BBC.
ReplyDeleteArcherphile, I also agree with you 100%! Fantastic acting and great courage in tackling a theme like abuse. Yes, it's deeply upsetting and I am sure some will find it impossible to listen to, but surely it is better to acknowledge that it exists and that more people are affected than we imagine. And isn't it something that continues because we don't speak out about it , because the victims feel so ashamed? The more that is known about it, the more victims, who are so often so young and vulnerable, will be able to live without such feelings of shame and fear, spoiling ther lives! Bravo, BBC!
ReplyDeleteTHE ARCHERS
ReplyDeleteSometimes :
Irritating
Annoying
Boring
Thought provoking
Silly
Funny
Objectional
Great Acting
Well written
Rubbish
Difficult to hear
Rings true
Upsetting
Unpleasant
Convincing
Unexpected
Entertaining........
And often true to life. As it should be.
Sadly my post at 10.26pm on June 26th on the old blog came to pass tonight. Such a current issue in society abuse from years back.
ReplyDeleteI have to say that “Jim” played the role most movingly and I felt his pain and Alistair and Jazzers appalled shock, so as irritating as I have been finding Shula I guess her constant pressure on Jim has done good in bringing father and son together and hopefully a closer relationship going forward.
Moving towards “Joe’s” passing now which I think will be at Grange Farm - pre move. Emma is a Jekyll and Hyde character, tonight the caring Emma- full of concern for Joe and how best to ensure the proposed move be as hassle free as possible for him!
All in all quite an episode (imo....)
Agree absolutely Lady R
DeleteI find it too much too late. As has been said this 'issue' has been well aired in the media for years now, with well known personalities coming forward with stories of their abuse by parents and close family friends. There have been a number of court cases and convictions with personalities behind bars. At least it is historic and hasn't happened in real time. Coercive control was only recently identified, so we saw it develop. Nic's death was informative too as many including myself were unaware of the effects of sepsis.
ReplyDeleteAs you say Basia, Personalities, Jim is an "ordinary man", his emotions kept under wraps for years and finally broken by sight of his perpetrator. These things weren't spoken of in Jim's days, or mine.
ReplyDeleteIf it helps one person, then in my view it has been well worth it, it may be unpleasant listening, but very true to life in my experience.
✔️✔️
DeleteI think last nights episode is already doing good, even though some listeners think it was an issue that shouldn’t be aired in The Archers.
ReplyDeleteOn my FB Ambridge Addicts group this morning there have been posts from at least two middle aged - elderly men who have felt able to say that they were also abused in their younger years and that it ruined their lives. For one, it was abuse by his adoptive father - a truly terrible thing for anyone to have to admit.
They both say that TA has done exactly the right thing (‘the greatest, bravest episode ever’, according to one of them)
If hearing that episode enables victims to voice their most deeply felt hurt, whether to family, friends or a therapist , it must surely have been a good thing.
The Helen/ Rob story promoted many to seek help, and much as I usually dislike and criticise this type of ‘latest issue’ type story, I do feel that the BBC were absolutely right - and brave - to pursue this particular topic.
✓✓✓ It's been proved that PTSD cones in different shapes & sizes & is very difficult to treat, perhaps especially the nightmares & flashback that some suffer, but the first crucial step is to talk about it, break the burden of silence, & be listened to.
Delete✔️✔️
Delete✔️✔️✔️
DeleteCowgirl, Carolyn and Archerphile, Mrs P and Parsley, I completely agree with you.
DeleteI found last night’s episode very moving and agree with those who think the story has been well written and very convincingly acted. It showed that this can happen to anyone and may have happened to someone we know but who has kept it to themselves.
ReplyDeleteIt is good to hear that there are people who are benefiting from having this issue aired. However I can completely understand that some people will find it too painful or unpleasant to hear. Those who choose to cope by remaining silent cannot by definition voice their wish not to hear such stories pervade our lives, and I feel for them.
It remains to be seen whether Jim and his family will feel better for this being voiced.
Spicy, you asked about Johnny and Hannah. Clarrie said last night it was good of them to let her go to the house before they move out. Emma commented on the mess and how they need to clean up before they move.
At the time Will gave notice Pat said Johnny could move back to Bridge Farm. Hannah told Will “it’s ok, it’s time for me to move on “. We haven’t heard her speak since. I know she was referring to her feelings for Tom but I thought it sounded prophetic. Probably just wishful thinking on my part as I don’t like her character.
If the victims themselves say it was accurately portrayed and has helped them then I bow to that.
ReplyDeleteI wasn't in tears but smiling during the final scene with Jim and Alistair and I'm glad it hasn't caused a rift between them. I hope that Jim recovers some of his joviality as I believe our characters are multilayered to cope with life's experiences.
It seems the current editor has taken a leaf out of Sean O’Connor’s book by introducing a painful and all too preavalent issue, as common to the countrysidee bothered as elsewhere. But his approach has been more timid than Sean O’Connor’s treatment of domestic abuse, dealing with historical abuse rather than real time, present day abuse involving a child victim and adult perpetrator familiar to listeners. Dramatically, the 3 weeks of keeping listeners guessing in a vacuum didn’t work for me because I had lost interest by the time the denouement came.
ReplyDeleteUnlike some others here, I enjoy dramatic exploration of age old issues, whatever the medium or time of day, and good on this Editor for trying - especially if it was helpful to “affected” listeners - but it didn’t compare with the earlier story.
Re Hannah - I also noted her comment about moving on, but unlike Seasider, hoped it wasn’T literal because I really like her character. I think her straightforwardness is very refreshing.
I am with you Maryellen on exploration of age old issues.
DeleteWe may live in a very different society now, but fundamental life experiences continue, and I believe we should continue to examine them.
However painful that may be.
As for me, I do not consider The Archers as entertainment.
Rather as an attempt to relate life's pleasures and vicissitudes from the point of view of a small rural community somewhere in the middle of our Golden Isle courtesy of our Public Broadcasting Service.
I agree.
Delete(I don't know how to do ticks)
✔️✔️ found them 🙂
DeleteMy thoughts are slightly different. There have been many high profile abuse stories in the media, over the past many years - resulting in others finally telling all, and convictions. Why should Ambridge, be different.
ReplyDeleteHow old is Harold - I cannot work it out.
I found that episode very moving, what with the acting, the S/L and script writing.
DeleteSuch poignant performances, for differing reasons, from Alistair, Jim, Jazzer. Also from Clarrie + Emma talking about Joe's chair (which must have been difficult for them), pretending Joe was still there.
✔️✔️
DeleteJohn Rowe’s acting was very moving.
ReplyDeleteHowever I may be out of sync with other listeners.
I wasn’t moved by the storyline, or Jim’s abreaction to the exposure of his unconscious experiences of being sexually abused as an 8 year old by a “young man” seventy years ago.
In my view when memories are unconsciously sublimated over a long time many individuals have difficulty recalling such experiences accurately.
I accept this S/L is another issue taken up by the BBC, but having an abuser/paedophile turn up at a party uninvited seemed unrealistic. Especially as Mr Jayson must be well over ninety, who also managed to spend the night entertaining everyone by playing the keyboard all night.
The issue of sexual abuse is a traumatic event in anyone’s life, but to inform us that the only way to deal with the experience is to subject an elderly man to a catharsis in order to change him and his attitude towards others, is too simplistic.
The episode would have been more palatable if we weren’t also subjected to Clarrie and Emma wittering on about Joe’s enormous chair, which she thinks will fit into her dinky house.
Abuse juxtaposed against the trivia of real life. I suppose.
Rant over.
Except that it wasn't even trivia, because Edward Kelsey has died and we listened to his last episode, so in this case we already know the outcome. Norman Painting's death was handled much better, Jill found him 'asleep' in his chair and we knew what was coming.
DeleteJoe's chair is not a problem for me, as surely it is obvious that this situation, will never happen.
DeleteThe writers cleverly wove two dramatic situations together - Jims trauma alongside Joes future, but imminent passing.
We know in real life the character who played Joe is dead. They don’t know that in Ambridge. We live in a parallel universe.🌎🌏
DeleteOff but on topic.
ReplyDeleteI will be listening to the omnibus tomorrow morning. I want to hear this weeks Jim, Alistair + Shula conversations and their interactions, as an entirity without breaks. I expect it will give an different outlook + perspective, on this weeks events, knowing the final outcome.
Ed + Emma move to Beechwood, Clarrie + Eddie move to No.1.
ReplyDeleteWhat about Hannah?
Easy. Kirsty + Philip are also moving to Beechwood leaving an empty room at Willow Farm - enter Hannah perhaps lodging with Roy.
Jennifer + Brian move into Grange Farm, leaving Willow Cottage vacant for Alistair or even Hannah+Johnny.
🤔 an interesting thought Miriam and plausible too. We shall see!!!!
DeleteMusical chairs!
DeleteHave just listened to the omnibus and am freshly impressed with the depth of acting skill. I admit to shedding a tear not just for Jim but for all children and adults who have endured this terrible abuse. I don’t feel there is much I can do but as a society we must be aware and children should no longer feel like Jim that there is no one they can tell.
ReplyDeleteI also listened to the Omnibus (as I usually do) totally uninterrupted. And as Miriam said earlier, it was all the more affecting for listening to the whole story in one go, rather than in short episodes.
DeleteStill feel that it was the right decision to air this subject and I suppose Jim was the perfect character to choose as the ‘victim’. I cannot imagine any of the other male characters in TA being able to stand, convincingly in this role. (I’m not saying any other actor wouldn’t be as convincing, just that none of the men seem to have a backstory into which this particular story could be inserted)
Now for the fall-out and hopefully reconciliation between Jim, Alistair and Jazzer.
I wonder if Alistair will tell Shula? Hopefully not, or she is almost bound to involve Alan, which Jim would absolutely hate.
The part of the omnibus which I appreciated so much (now knowing why) was Jim + Shula and the smashing of the key-board.
DeleteAlistair should let Shula know, that he and Jim have had a heart to heart, and he understands what upset Jim, but nothing more than that.
Spare a thought for Jim’s wife, who endured without understanding......
ReplyDeleteInteresting point Maryellen. I wonder if she ever suspected or guessed?
DeleteHow do we know that Jim's wife had to 'endure' anything? Nobody suspected anything until the day of the party. Mrs Lloyd married Jim as he was, and had always been, as an adult, so his character was acceptable to her when they married and had their children.
DeleteHe was obnoxious to Shula and dismissive of Alistair when he first arrived in Ambridge but not vicious as he has been the past three weeks. He certainly has shown he can be human and thoughtful of others in the past since settling in Ambridge.
Forgot to add. No-one other than Jim has any right to tell anyone about what he has revealed. Not Alistair orJazzer. It is private to Jim and if he wants, it is up to him whether to tell even Fiona.
DeleteTrue, she might have been happy being married to an “emotional cripple” (as Jim has been described by bloggers) until the day of her death, and it was only her children who suffered in the way Alistair has described. I guess we’ll never know!
DeleteSpicycushion - is that “right” legally enforceable or only an an ethical one? (Just asking!) I think Fiona has a “right” th share her brother’s knowledge and probably best if Alistair tells her rather than Jim has to re-live it again.
DeleteAlistair said Jim was withdrawn after his wife's death, naturally; when he and Fiona talked about the times their mother was alive there was no bitterness about childhood.
DeleteThank you Seasider for the info. I missed the first couple of minutes as someone (one of the family) asked me a question just as the programme had started.
ReplyDeleteSpicy, you are welcome. I also missed it but had chance to listen again so the details stuck in my mind.
DeleteI chose not to listen again to the omnibus. I haven’t done anyway for some time but I didn’t feel I wanted to hear this particular episode again.
I do hope it does more good than harm, that those who need to feel they are not alone and can speak about it. However I think it is important people don’t feel they must speak out if they are not comfortable with it, and acknowledging this is a way we can support those who choose to remain silent, as much as we can respect and support those who need to speak out.
It was a complete shock to Jim to face the childhood monster so, if it hadn't happened, he would have kept the secret till the end of his days, probably. Never the less, can't but think it was, or will be, beneficial to him in the long time that he has opened up to his son, & a friend. Alistair's split from Shula also caused him to open out emotionally, beyond his usual self allowance, as it were, so whether he seeks therapy or not, it has loosend the hold of that dangerous event (I like to think)
DeleteI rather hope he does apologise to Lynda. It's a loose end, he's not customarily rude as such, & it would clear the air between them. He needn't tell her the story, just that he'd had a bad shock on seeing someone from the past & wasn't himself. I reckon she'd accept that.
I agree.
DeleteJim is short with many he encounters, and they accept that this is how he is. But there is a difference in ' being short' and 'being rude' and he was rude and unkind to Lynda.
I do hope he apologises.
As Carolyn suggests he can use few words to do so.
It is generally felt that most people benefit from not bottling things up but being able to talk about traumatic or difficult experiences. However as Stasia said yesterday this can over simplify a situation like Jim’s where he has lived most of his life in silence and now finds it difficult to talk. Although I agree it is often very helpful to open up, I would not assume it’s always right. I don’t think one size fits all.
DeleteFirstly may I say that I agree with everybody who commented about the excellent acting on Friday evening.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I wasn’t going to comment again about the storyline involving Jim until I had heard the next episode at least ,having read what has been written I feel I have to do so.
Maryellen,are you implying that anyone who was abused as a child but who has not wished to say anything to anyone is an emotional cripple or were you just quoting from bloggers on another site?
If that is what you are saying I can assure you that it is not true and I am appalled that you should
think so.
Some people who were abused have managed to put it to the back of their minds and have led a perfectly normal life and it is not until they are confronted with it again that they feel the pain .
I apologise if I have got the wrong end of the stick.
Jim an "emotional cripple", I haven't seen it on this site, so I don't know where Maryellen read it. As for Jim's wife, we've not heard her and know nothing about her apart from the fact that she died when the children were young.
DeleteFiona has 'the right' to know if Jim chooses to tell her: himself or via Alistair.
Lanjan. Like you I am going to remain stum on the issue of Jim’s historical abuse, I like his crusty old academic, Latin quoting persona and hope he isn’t given a makeover. He is the clever village eccentric and to turn him into something else would be crass.
DeleteBasia - see Carolyn’s post below 4.50pm. As I said, we don’t know anything much about Jim’’s wife so can only speculate about their relationship if we want to. Fiona’s ‘right to know’ is clearly a matter of opinion,.
DeleteStasia and Miriam - I am sure Jim will remain as likeable or unlikeable, clever or not so clever, as he has always been. Ambridge still needs the stereotype crusty old professor without which no fictional English village is complete.
Yes, LanJan, you have got the wrong end of the stick and need not be appalled because I was not implying anything. As I understand it, from listening to the programme, reading comments here, and my very general knowledge of the subject, Jim’s experience of sexual abuse as a boy and subsequent bottling up affected his emotional development. This has been reflected in his stunted relationship with his children as described by his son. If and how it was reflected in his relationship with his wife, we do not know.
ReplyDeleteWe have been talking about this one particular fictional individual, and I am well aware that in real life not everyone reacts in the same way to the same adverse experience, so fictional Jim’s reactions may be typical of many real life victims but not necessarily all.
I accept your apology and would like to apologise myself to anyone reading this blog for whom my innocently quoted “emotional cripple” touched a nerve.
Thanks Maryellen.
DeleteI should have stuck to my guns and said nothing as I had planned to do.
Jim has always been himself whilst living in Ambridge. He is the eccenctric Prof. with a sharp tongue, and as Stasia has said- a crusty old academic.
ReplyDeleteThe tribute night, brought back memories from a distant past, which through his happy marriage with 2 children + his academia, he had "buried" (but never totally forgotten). On that night, floodgates were opened.
I am hoping, Jim as the Ambridge resident, we all know, will feel relieved he has had this emotional episode with Alistair + Jazzer, and returns to the original Jim.
I cannot envisage him as anything else, and nor should it be.
Normality needs to be resumed, ASAP.
Jim needs a new past-time, as he will never touch a keyboard again. I wonder what it will be??
DeleteMy thought is a Bridge School - I bet many would join - Leonard, Robert, Lynda, Jennifer etc. I hate the game personally, but many don't.
I used 'emotional cripple' in reference to Jim, & make no apology for it, because he has seemed to be that way, given Alistair's evidence about his & Fiona's childhood. Apparently he wasn't a cruel parent at all, but limited emotionally. It was easy to put it down to his career, some academics, especially of his vintage, are like this. The historic dimension adds another strand. He was, perhaps, wary of emotional engagement with his children. It may not have impinged on his wife at all.
ReplyDeleteIt's a moot point whether it was ultimately 'good' for him to have been confronted the way he was. I think it was beneficial to his relationship with his son, & perhaps more broadly. Brusque he may be, but he has shown himself able to relate people quite unlike himself already ( thinking Jazzer, Emma, even Shula when he delivered a few home truths to her a while back, most notably, of course, to his son, when he was broken & confused).
I had forgotten about Jim and Emma, with the parish council election.
DeleteThanks for that.
Also not many would let their lodger bring in a tarantula. 🕷
I believe that I too used the same or a similar term about Jim.
ReplyDeleteI am informed by my personal experience of both my parents, who were both 'emotionally crippled' by the abuse suffered in their childhood.
I suspect but do not know about sexual abuse, but was told of much emotional abuse and neglect.
My father, as a result was passionate about being kind towards children in general, but emotionally neglectful of his own. Both parents were cold and often harsh in their treatment of us. Physical affection in any form was Ridiculed, as was ' fun'. But we had no sense of not being loved and wanted, and on a practical level they were excellent parents.
I cannot speak for my sister, but as I have made my journey through life, and am now at an age to reflect on what has been, I can see the result of my parents emotional inabilities reflected in myself.
I too thought this of Jim, long before any hint of these unhappy experiences came to light. Of course part of his behaviour is to do with personality, but also, it seemed clear to me, Jim held a protective wall around him to protect him from any breach into his inner self. And can anyone deny, that such self preservation affects a personality as it develops ? I certainly cannot.
We are all ' the walking wounded ', whatever our journey through life.
I would also like to ask, what is a ' perfectly normal ' life, please ?
A normal life?
DeleteWhat an interesting question, to which I doubt their is an answer.
Everyone's experience of life is so different.
What one thinks as normal, might be abnormal to another.
Life is what you make it.
It is loving family, friends, enjoying work, hobbies + ones own home/garden...
..not forgetting, being addicted to TA.
...forgot, our household pets, be it cats or dogs. These are well loved + cherished, whom share our lives...
DeleteThe way a child is brought up is the norm to him or her.
ReplyDeleteI remember someone telling me that her mother would spend her days playing the harp and she thought that was normal until she was at a friend’s house and was amazed when her friend’s father came home from work and sat in a chair whilst her mother got the tea.
Have I missed something? I thought Ed had swore to Will that he would do no more work for Tim and Will swore to Ed that he would not take Poppy on any more night time patrols. (This was the night Adam and Ian were skinny dipping when the brothers’ vehicles crashed.) But Ed is clearly still doing Tim’s dirty work - and taken it to a new level. Oh dear!
ReplyDeleteNo Maryellen you haven't missed anything, like you I ' thought' Ed had said ' no more' and we had not heard anymore.
DeleteSo where did this conversation come from.
Out of the blue, I would suggest.
I have been thinking about the Jim story, I am most puzzled as to why Harold turned up. Was he hoping to apologise/ask forgiveness?
ReplyDeleteI am now going to go off at an angle and I hope no-one takes offence, I don’t in anyway condone child abuse, I find it I impossible to imagine why anyone would find pre-pubescent children sexually appealing. We are assuming that Jim is 80, he described Harold as a young man when he was 8, this could make the age gap as little as 6-8 years, remember teenagers were pretty much a post-war development. So Harold may have been a very confused teenager growing up in a time when homosexuality was illegal, it may have been a real romance to him, I can’t help wondering what his side of the story would be. Again I reiterate that his behaviour was totally wrong but I am curious as to his motive to see Jim.
A few years ago a teacher at my daughters prep school was jailed for historical abuse he committed in the 80’s when he was a very young teacher ( he worked at the same school all his career) there were no more recent cases, no mention of pornography or similar and he had married and had children. He had been a popular teacher with both parents and students and I just felt terribly sad for his wife. Obviously it was right that he was prosecuted as he had been in a position of trust but I still felt sorry for him.
KP, I have absolutely no concept of how you can feel sorry for someone that abused children. I find it alarming that you DON'T say that you felt sorry for his victims. Most unsettling to be honest.
DeleteThat's a very interesting scenario KP.
DeleteI had thought about the age difference.
Jim had described Harold as a young man, but as an eight year old seventy odd years ago a young man might have been a fourteen or fifteen year old, not what we might describe as a young man of say 19 or 20 now.
Your theory/ possibility is feasible for the time that this event took place, and is a different angle. And if I may say so is a compassionate way of looking at this.
I wonder if there will be more to this story ?
As for Jims age, we are all supposing him to be 80 but it is possible that he is rather 70. Which would change the time frame.
Gary, I think that your response is unfair.
DeleteKP said they felt sad for the mans wife, and sorry for him.
KP did not say that they did NOT feel sorry for the victims.
But rather left those victims out of what was said.
I do understand that leaving the victims aside could create an angry response, but perhaps too quickly, nevertheless.
I disagree entirely.
DeleteIt is horrific to state that you feel sorry for the abuser of a child. Why go out of your way to show empathy with a convicted paedophile but NOT their victims?
I suppose one can feel sorry for someone who is that sick, & trapped by a vile addiction, but it certainly is a stretch, a step too far for most of us.
DeleteAs for the man, I don't think he came for forgiveness, or even to gloat, but, in his twisted mind, to remind himself of what he found romantic, as kpnuts suggests. He may even have imagined Jim would be pleased to see him. Hardly credible, I know, but it could be like that.
Alistair is 57 (as Carolyn, I think, said earlier) so 80+ seems likely for Jim.
DeleteKP's post, to me, seemed to suggest that they felt sorry for the teacher as the abuse had taken place when he was "younger", had a wife and children and didn't watch porn. That any of those things are even remotely held up as a reason to feel sorry for him is beyond the pale.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Spicycushion wrote at 7.55 pm on Friday regarding Harold’s appearance.
ReplyDeleteI would also suggest that Jim's friends who had been contacted were probably School or University friends.
Harold lived next door when Jim was 8years of age.
Unless Fiona invited him and I don’t get the impression she did ,how did he learn about the party?