Chapter eight

---

Soap operas at work

Dorothy Hobson

 

---

It's like Gail in Coronation Street. I only watch Coronation Street so I can only talk about it – it's almost as if you know her so I think “I wonder what she'll do about this baby” – almost like someone you work with in the office.

Soap operas, British, American, Australian, are part of the everyday lives of their audience. They depict everyday happenings and they also form part of the cultural exchanges which go on in both the home and the workplace. A large part of the enjoyment which is derived from watching soap operas is talking about them with other people. Television may be viewed in the home and research has examined this aspect of the viewing experience but the talk about television also happens some time after the program has been viewed. Often this takes place outside the home with friends, at school, at work, or at leisure. This is also true for other television programs and the completion of the process of communication is extended to the pleasure which is derived from exchanging views and opinions with friends and colleagues about the programs which have been seen.

Talking about soap operas forms part of the everyday work culture of both men and women. It is fitted in around their working time or in lunch breaks. The process takes the form of storytelling, commenting on the stories, relating the incidents and assessing them for realism, and moving from the drama to discussing the incidents which are happening in the “real world,” as reported in the media.

The process of watching soap operas is in no way a passive operation and it continues after the viewing time and is extended into other areas of everyday life. This chapter begins to look at the way that serials are incorporated into the lives of viewers outside the home, at their workplace. It also explores the way that fiction is interwoven with events in the “real” world – both those directly experienced by the viewers and those which they have heard reported in the media.

“Let's meet at Tressines” – methodology”

This chapter is based specifically on research which was conducted during the week February 2–7, 1987. It was designed to find how much soap operas in general fitted into the everyday cultural environment of work. The research method involved an interview and “just talking” about the serials. The research is based on an interview with a group of six women, all of whom work for Birmingham City Council in one of the departments responsible for running the city's public education system.

Contact was made through a friend of mine who works in the same office and had told me that the “girls” (sic) in her office talked about soap operas at work. I told her that I needed to talk to some women about soap operas and she then asked them if they would talk to me. They agreed to meet me, and sent a message – “We'll meet you in Tressines.” We arranged a mutually convenient time. This was during their lunch hour and since they worked “flexitime” there was the possibility that they could stay longer, although this would actually be costing them money. The lunch hour also gave them the opportunity to leave after the first hour if they wanted. Four of them stayed for over two hours and the other two had to return to relieve those still back in the office. It was not possible or desirable to meet at their office – partly because this would have only been feasible with local authority approval but also because an informal setting is more conducive to free conversation. I met them at Tressines, a city center night-club a few minutes' walk from their office. A conventional club disco at night, Tressines opens at midday – between 12 and 3 – for drinks and lunches. It was an interesting location in which to conduct the interviews. Dimly lit, with restrained flashing disco lighting and music, food and wine – generally relaxed and informal. We sat around on low sofas with a table between and they ate their lunch and drank wine.

I recorded the interviews and my secretary came with me to take notes, particularly on who was speaking to ease identification when transcribing the tape. What I found surprising was that there were many more women there than men; and, amazingly, there were young women with babies in buggies visiting their friends, or just simply stopping for a lunchtime break. They knew the night-club as an evening venue and had extended it to being a predominantly female meeting place at lunchtime.

“The group”

The women I interviewed were all employed in various positions in the local authority office. Their job involved the staffing of schools in the public education system in the City of Birmingham. They advertised for teachers, auxiliary workers, laboratory technicians, and secretarial staff. Working in clerical jobs, they were responsible for the hiring and administration of all school employees. Their qualifications ranged from O levels to, in one case, a university degree. However, the degree reflected not the needs of the job but the fact that in a decreasing job market many people are over-qualified for their jobs. They were not of equal status: Diane and Wendy were Section Leaders – designated staffing officers – and all the others were clerical assistants. Their ages ranged from 23 to 35. Their personal details are shown in Figure 8.1:

Key to programs:

(DS) drama series (LE) light entertainment (Q) quiz show (SC) situation comedy

Bland facts or statistics give only a limited picture of any group of people. Additional descriptive material adds to the information and builds up a picture of the group. As well as working together, the women do spend some of their social time together. They would go out for meals in the evenings, visit each other, and occasionally go together to visit the theater to see a play or a show. They are a work group who have a bond of friendship formed through their work; their ease with each other was reflected in the way they talked freely about the television programs and their own feelings about television, and the relation of those thoughts and feelings to their own lives. Their work situation is unstructured and they can plan their work processes and fit them in around their social intercourse.

Any researcher entering a group in order to study it and its opinions is unaware of the group dynamics which already exist within it and the way that its normal ways of operating will affect how the members talk to a researcher. My belief has always been that the group dynamics which have already been established will continue to operate in any group discussion. Of course, there are exceptions, as when someone in the group has greater knowledge about a subject than the others. In this discussion it became evident when Vijya was talking about Asian culture as represented in EastEnders that her superior knowledge meant that she took the leading role. During the rest of the discussion she was relatively quiet.

Since my knowledge of the group was limited to the meeting which I had with them, I used my contact, who was not at the discussion (since she did not watch soap operas), to find out more about the women, to validate or contradict the impression which I had of them. I asked a simple question, “Of the group of women who would you have expected would have said the most or led the discussion?” Her answer confirmed the exact way that the interview and discussion had gone, even though she had no knowledge of what they had said.

“Well, Wendy and Diane would have plenty to say and they are definitely more intelligent than the others. Diane is the one who is the most intelligent and what she says is usually worth listening to. Mary says a lot, but sometimes she rambles on and gets off the point, but she would also have plenty to say. Gill is much quieter and although she would have opinions she tends to say less or is less forceful. However, that may be because she is not so much part of the group as the others. Vijya's quite quiet as well but she is an Indian girl who had an arranged marriage which didn't work out and she now lives with her parents and is much more westernized and goes out with the girls. We all spend a certain amount of time together outside work and apart from Sue, who is rather younger than the others, they would go out for meals, to each other's houses and to the theater. Everyone is happy in each other's company.”

The closeness of the group of women had an effect not only on the free way that they spoke about the television programs which they viewed and these programs' relation to their own lives, but also on the actual mode of discourse in which they operated. They interrupted each other, finished each other's sentences, and presented the same word in unison to respond to something which someone had said. An example was when Gill was talking about Brookside. “There are certain ones in there that get on your nerves….” “The Corkhills!” she was interrupted in unison by all the women. They were so aware of what they all thought that their responses were simultaneous. Their comments came quickly on the heels of each other. They were often talking amongst themselves rather than answering questions which I had asked. I might ask the first question but they would move on to other topics as they took the discussion to areas which they would discuss naturally amongst themselves.

A brief guide to soaps on British television

As the British soap operas which are discussed in this article may be unfamiliar to some readers, I have given a very brief introduction to the characteristics of the series which are mentioned.

Coronation Street, first transmitted December 1960, ITV. Set in the north of England in a working class area with terraced houses, a local pub ‘The Rover's Return,’ and a corner shop, all of which feature in the series. Reflects the northern working-class values and way of life. The mother of British soaps and the one to which all others paid deference. Wide range of strong, interesting women characters spanning all ages.

Crossroads, first transmitted November 1964, ITV. Set in the Midlands around Birmingham. Originally set in a motel to reflect the growth of motorways and motels in the 1960s. One of the top-rated series for many years but also the butt of all the jokes about soap operas and bad acting, etc. Much changed from its original form with an almost complete change of cast. Now axed and last episode transmitted in spring 1988.

Brookside, first transmitted 1982, Channel 4. The serial that extended the genre. Set on a real housing estate in Liverpool. Features the lives of the people who live in the houses. Families represent all social classes in Britain. Acclaimed for its realism of production methods and inclusion of contemporary social issues, although often criticized for the latter.

EastEnders, 1985, BBC. Set in Albert Square in the East End of London (actually at Elstree Studios). The BBC's blockbuster series – massive support and publicity from BBC. Life of families in the 1980s in the East End of London – working class, ethnic, different social classes including invading Yuppies. Top of ratings – innovative in content, form, and scheduling.

Sons and Daughters, ITV. Imported Australian soap.

Chateauvallon, Channel 4. French soap shown in French language version and English subtitles, also in dubbed version.

Why do we watch soap operas?

The first question, which puzzles critics and fans of soap operas alike, is why do people watch? They watch for the stories, the characters, the entertainment value, and because the program-makers structure the series in such a way that everyone wants to know what happens next.

The following comments perhaps sum up the reasons for the popularity of soap operas:

In this interview the women refer to British and American serials, but clearly differentiate between the two examples of the genre.

This exchange begins to differentiate between the British and American soap operas. The first distinction is definitely in terms of categorizing British soaps as “down to earth” and the Americans as “fantasy,” “on a different planet really!” Their saving grace is the pleasure derived from the clothes and the nice houses. What British viewers never know is whether Dallas and Dynasty are fantasy for American viewers as well. Fantasy or reality – it is the characters who really hold the appeal for viewers. The women interviewed were unanimous when they said in unison that it was the women who were the most interesting characters in the American soaps. However, after being unanimous in supporting the women the group then went on to discuss the devilish attraction of J. R. and the magnetism of power, the physical attractions of Bobby and Jack Ewing, Geoff Colby, and Dex's body. Sue Ellen is categorized as a cry-baby and no other women get mentioned!

This extract summarizes J. R.'s attraction. He is a good character within a soap opera but certainly not one to be desired in real life. Similarly the other men are admired by some for their attractive or just plain sexy qualities but neither are they fantasies which anyone would like to bring over into everyday life. The lives of soap opera men at work are boring and the blessing of a recording means youcan fast forward past the work bits!

Even the glamor of living in an American soap holds little appeal for the women. I broached with them the subject of whether they were affected by watching too much glamor – did it make them envious?

The prospect of living at Southfork does not appear to be the fantasy of British soap viewers, at least not if they would have to live with their in-laws. There is no envy and certainly no wish to have a similar life-style. Clearly, the Englishwoman's home is still her castle, especially if she doesn't have to share it with her family or her mother-in-law.

Even the American soap “queens” come in for criticism.

Again, the actresses may be beautiful but the audience is still critical. “What has she done to her hair?” they ask – and the “cruelty of youth” is clear when 23-year-old Vijya describes them as “quite ancient.”

British realism

If American soaps represent fantasy, then British soaps are definitely judged for their realism. The subject is one about which the audience is very knowledgeable and they make judgments to decide how well the production has represented the fiction and its characters. The characters in the British soap opera EastEnders are either conventional East End working class or the ever-emerging Yuppies who now star as the fantasy of the British television and advertising executive. Most of the rest of the population have only seen or heard of the species through the media! The recognition that it is the women characters who are the strongest in the series is one which is common to audience reactions to British soaps. The women characters who are seen as the most popular are those who have to struggle against the vicissitudes of life. It is their ability to “cope” which is seen as admirable and women's behavior was not expected to be “wimpish.” Even within the fantasy of American soaps, these women saw Sue Ellen as a “cry-baby.” If the characters are seen as keeping on top of their own lives that is judged as admirable and only in extreme cases does the audience excuse lapses in strength from the women in the soap operas.

When I went to get more wine the conversation continued and when I returned they brought me up to date. The discussion had moved to the physical appearance of the characters and a clear distinction is made between the actress and the character she plays. Since the BBC has a tendency to promote EastEnders through other programs, its stars regularly appear as themselves on chat shows and in charity events and major variety programs. In fact, many of the stars now appear regularly on television. There is no confusion for viewers who know, for example, that Wendy Richards is playing a “role” when she appears looking “old and awful” in EastEnders.

Not only characters are judged for realism, the events in their everyday life also have to conform to an expectation which the audience has about the way that they would behave. However, as Mary says, it is how she would “imagine” that part of London to be. The only person who can really judge the realism of a soap are those in the region in which the soap is set.

The expectations of realism are not confined to the level of cups of tea and having a chat. These women expected a level of realism which incorporated the basic necessities of everyday living.

These comments reveal not only the level of realism which the women would expect in a serial, but also the way in which they widen the conversation to include other program genres. They oscillate between a criticism of the lack of reality when toilets are not included and then criticize their appearance in other series. Interestingly, none of the police film series which they cite is included in their favorite television programs. In the earlier extract when they comment on the fact that “Dr Legg's always in the pub and visiting homes,” they are making a comparison with their own experience of “reality” when doctors are not known to socialize with patients and they certainly do not sit in local pubs.

Pleasure at work

One of the areas of particular interest to me was the way in which soap operas and, indeed, television in general is discussed by women at their workplace and the way that they bring the interests of the private sphere into the public domain. Indeed it is the fusion of the two areas which characterized much of the discussion which we had.

This extract indicates the way that these women are able to discuss what happened the previous evening and carry on with their work. They do not talk while they are working, but rather they carry on the general conversations about the soaps in between their work. The storytelling carries on with breaks while they take and make telephone calls.

They also told how people who have not seen an episode and have recorded it are “protected” from hearing what has happened. How do they all know how much of a story they can tell?

The group respects the wishes of the person who has missed an episode and if she has recorded it, waits until it has been watched before talking about it in the office. But not all missed episodes are recorded and it is then that “catching up on the stories” happens at work. It is clear that the soap producers are served exceptionally well by their viewers because they act as the bridge between episodes. This is beneficial to the producers and the television company because it helps to ensure that the viewers do not lose interest and stop watching a series because they have missed what is going on.

Soap operas depend on the audience following the stories and need their audience to be loyal and watch regularly. Built into the structure of the programs are devices which enable the viewers to keep up to date. If viewers miss an episode such devices help them to catch up and to be ready to see the next episode. The storytelling within the serials is reproduced outside when the stories are retold for friends and colleagues. In one sense retelling soap opera stories gives everyone, the opportunity to be a storyteller without the necessity to be able to create their own storylines. In some instances it is the talking about soap operas at work or among families and friends that determines whether someone begins watching the series in the first place. When a storyline is so strong that it is a main topic of conversation it is reason enough to get someone watching so as not to be left out of the conversation which takes place at work.

The famous storyline in EastEnders of the Michelle-Lofty, will-she-won't-she, on-off marriage became such a talking point that it made Mary start watching the program.

The myth of the passive viewer

One of the most fallacious myths to have grown up about watching television is that of the passive viewer. According to the theory, widely held by newspaper television critics and interviewers on television current affairs shows, the viewer is a cultural and economic hermaphrodite of indeterminate age, who watches all television programs from a slumped position, having switched off their brain before they fell into the chair. Viewers lose all critical faculties, including the ability to distinguish between fact and fiction, to know whether they are being preached at or manipulated and to make intelligent judgments about the programs which they are watching.

The only people I ever met who have been confused about the difference between fact and fiction on television have been television critics. In fact, they are not confused themselves but they fear for the rest of the audience. Their fears are misguided. Criticism of the soap operas takes place while people are watching them and when they talk about them afterwards.

As well as telling the story of the missed episodes the conversation which takes place at work is critical of the programs. Exchanges take place which indicate that far from accepting everything that is shown, viewers heavily criticize the soaps. The following is a selection of criticisms from the women to whom I spoke. Each serial comes in for light-hearted attack.

American Soaps:

And on to Crossroads:

Chateauvallon:

Brookside:

EastEnders:

All the soaps came in for criticism. The comments speak for themselves but do indicate that viewers are not sitting passively watching in an uncritical manner. They are always making judgments on the serials both within the truth of the fiction and by comparing the serials with “real” life.

Another way in which the mingling of fiction and reality goes on in the telling of the stories is when viewers discuss the way that a storyline has been developed and decided. They make assessments of the validity of what happens in the soap opera and compare it with what they believe the character would do; but they also comment on what they would do if they were in the same position.

During the week of the interviews the main talking point about soaps with the women I interviewed was the story of Gail and her baby. This story in Coronation Street had been running since the previous summer when Gail Tilsley, a young working-class wife and mother, had been experiencing difficulties with her marriage. Her husband Brian, who had been a local Romeo both before and since his marriage, had become completely engrossed in his own car repair business and had taken to spending too much time with his business colleagues and neglecting his wife. Gail repeatedly tried to regain his attention, to no avail, and at the low point in the marriage, Brian's cousin Ian arrives from Australia on a visit and becomes very attracted to her, and she becomes attracted to him. A relationship develops and, against her better judgment, Gail sleeps with Ian while Brian is away. In due course, Gail finds that she is pregnant and, much against the wise advice of her mother, she tells Brian that the baby might not be his. Her marriage breaks up and eventually Ian returns to England and asks her to go back to Australia with him. Ian has a blood test at the hospital which proves that the baby is not his and so supposedly is Brian's after all. Gail asks him not to tell anyone what he has found out as she does not want Brian to come back to her for the reason that he is the father. During the interview week this was where the story had reached and was the main talking point in all discussions about soap storylines for that week. The women talked about the way that Gail was handling the situation. I asked them what was the secret of soap operas.

It is clear from this extract that the women have a strong affinity with the character and have made no moralistic judgments about her behavior. They even see the character as having a stronger will than they might have had in the circumstances. They are also making critical judgments of the program in terms of reality and what they see as true to the character. It shows the complex interpretations which are at work in the watching of soaps and indicates how far from correct are those who see soap audiences as passive sponges for the messages of drama. The comments show an interweaving of fact and fiction in the commentary upon the television program and events in everyday life. However, there is no confusion of fact and fantasy and each area is kept separate in the discourse. There is a complex linguistic movement between subjects and there is no need to signal that people are talking about different topics. Because the subject matter of the soap operas is so familiar to the viewers there can be a free exchange of information.

A special knowledge – Asian culture

One of the women in the group, Vijya, was Asian and she had a specific knowledge of the culture which was represented in the series EastEnders. The fiction did not satisfy her ideas of the way that her people should be portrayed.

As the discussion progressed the other women began asking Vijya what she thought of the storyline which is currently running. The character Naima did not get on with her husband from the arranged marriage and she stayed on in England while he returned to Bangladesh. Her family have kept a check on her and they have now sent her cousin to take control of the shop and ultimately to marry her.

Vijya's knowledge of the culture was far greater than anything which the other women knew and they asked her about the reality of the storyline. Her analysis was that it was not realistic but when I talked to my friend after the interviews she said that Vijya had had an arranged marriage herself the previous August and it had not worked out and her husband had returned to Bangladesh while she had returned to live with her parents. Her assessment was based on her knowledge of the culture and of her own experiences: a nice example of the way that the knowledge of the audience is always at work when they are making readings of television texts. It was also a subtle way for the other women to find out about the situation in which Vijya found herself.

Conclusion

This chapter has attempted to discuss the way that talking about soap operas and television has fitted into the working life of one group of women. Most of what they say will be familiar to anyone who has done research about audiences and particularly to those involved with research into soap operas. The findings are not invalidated by this similarity to earlier findings; rather, they confirm that whenever and wherever audiences discuss programs they come up with similar conclusions.

They discuss the events on television in relation to the fiction, the accuracy of the fictional representation, and also in relation to criteria within the “real world.” There is no confusion, only an interweaving. They compare events in soaps with events which have happened in their own experiences and those of people they know. The findings add to the body of research which is now accumulating on this genre and also belies the myth that soap opera viewers are passive.

Soap opera is a genre where the viewer is always in a superior position to the producers, because the topic is the everyday life of the characters. If the producer makes a mistake or the actor or actress behaves differently from how viewers think he or she should behave, then they have the superior feeling that they know best. They can excuse the mistakes because of the innocence or the ignorance of the production, and their own views are discussed and revised with their colleagues and friends when they talk about the soaps at work or at home the next day.

The process of television communication is recognized as not being complete until it is perceived and understood by the viewer. A program is made by its production team, exists as a physical entity on tape or film – but only exists as a means of communication or cultural form when it is transmitted and received by the viewers. But the way that audiences talk about the viewing of soap operas and other forms of popular television programs indicates that a further stage of communication takes place when they talk about the programs in a context completely removed from the viewing situation. It is the talk about television programs and often the relating of those programs to the everyday life of the viewers that move television into a further dimension from that which ends with the viewing moment. Indeed, talking about television programs and what has happened in them is essential to making a program popular and part of the cultural capital of general discourse.