(no subject)
Nov. 1st, 2006 05:06 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I've been catching up on the Archers (you've got to do SOMETHING to enliven sewing buttons back on), and thought that the scene between Usha and Ruth was quite well done, particularly Usha's side of it.
Except. When Usha began a sentence of remonstrance with the fatal words "Surely, surely" I thought - Good Lord, she's only been involved with t'Vicar five minutes, and she's channelling Mrs Proudie...
Except. When Usha began a sentence of remonstrance with the fatal words "Surely, surely" I thought - Good Lord, she's only been involved with t'Vicar five minutes, and she's channelling Mrs Proudie...
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-01 05:17 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-01 05:23 pm (UTC)She did, however, point out that a 'wonderful, kind man'† who makes a move on you when you are upset and suffering from low self-esteem is, looked at from an outsider's perspective, taking advantage of the vulnerable and confused.
† Her very words. No wonder Usha didn't guess it was Sam!
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-02 09:27 am (UTC)I was pleased Usha said that - in part because I've been shouting it at the radio myself. However I did rather feel that if she wanted to be of real use, instead of bleating "you've got the perfect marriage" which from an outsider's perspective says nothing (and probably gets said to lots of women who objectively have unpleasant marriages to vicious men) she ought to have focussed on the practical. "You mean, you'd leave the farm? And Ambridge? And your children? And what is actually so bad you want to leave for?" I can't imagine anything more likely to get Ruth's back up than saving her marriage becoming a local project. But then I'm rubbish at the sympathy and prefer the practical myself, so I expect I'm biased.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-02 09:41 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-02 09:46 am (UTC)You're probably right. I wonder also whether Ruth and David's troubles are making her look back at her own relationships - especially with Richard - and wonder what would hae happened had they not failed at that state.
But Ruth was certainly simply wanting her to say "follow your heart" - and from her hesitency in telling her, possibly suspecting even beforehand that she wasn't going to.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-02 12:34 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-02 11:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-02 01:27 pm (UTC)Not surprised she didn't associate it with Sam. What a creep that man is. My current theory is that he's one of Freddie and Lily's early (unsuccessful) undead creations - do you suppose Ruth's checked him for a pulse?
I bet he's horrible to the cows when no-one's looking too.
As you've probably already guess, I can't wait for this story to burn itself out. The only possible good side effect is that it might provide more fuel for "The Terror that Walks in Darkness"...
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-02 11:09 pm (UTC)I don't know what it is, but this is probably just as well. I'm still relatively innocent and unscarred.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-01 05:34 pm (UTC)May I enquire as to whether they've been caught yet? I daren't listen, much as I'm enjoying Lynda and the Dwarves. Is Usha in on it? Has she told Ruth to get a grip? (I had hoped she'd weaken in the face of Pip.)
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-01 05:48 pm (UTC)The Vicar now also knows, because Usha was so upset by the conversation that she blurted it out to him, but he has promised to keep it to himself.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-01 06:27 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-02 09:38 am (UTC)