Deaths in dramas

"I have no axe to grind but I was very, very sad, and quietly horrified, to be written out," Seed says. "It was a very upsetting thing. I was notified three weeks before I recorded my [dying] scream. I said, 'Why don't we make him a paraplegic?' It might have been an interesting storyline to have him in a wheelchair. The reason my editor gave me for writing him out was that it would introduce wonderful new storylines – to kill off a popular character – and I suppose in a way the uproar did exactly as the editor wanted. It was a big story, very 'soap'."



Poor Graham Seed, I do so sympathise with him .

"Wonderful new story lines " where are they ? All I can make out from reading the MBs is Elizabeth getting more unhinged and shrill , and Dopey David sinking into a gloom.

You could have had just as good new story lines if Nigel had been in a wheel chair !



I'm so glad I don't listen any more, you've ruined the Archers Keri Davies!

Says Keri. Hasn't worked so far has it? TA bogged down whilst writers are distracted by the risible Ambridge Lite.

"the death of Nigel Pargetter was an opportunity for narrative creativity which energised the drama."



oops the quote didn't appear.

Interesting article, thanks for flagging it up Keri. I didn't like the storyline, & was sad to lose Nigel, but I can cope with it and don't feel that I 'own' the narrative any more than I have a say in what Jane Austen or Agatha Christie or Jilly Cooper do with their characters. And of course I want to see what happenes next.



I suppose with drama there is an added complication when writing decisions affect someone's livelihood, which can't be easy, & I hope Graham Seed's career continues to flourish as it is doing now. But the last line of the article is right, in the end the decisions are the "long-held prerogatives of the mercurial writer".

Keri



You may call it 'narrative creativity' I call it cheap, sloppy writing!

An interesting article. I agree with what Keri says about it being a bit like a bereavement (obviously there is a real difference with actually losing someone, but the parallel is there).



As to whether is will energise and lead to good new storylines, only time will tell. So far it hasn't - I can only stand David being gloomy in very, very small doses.

I am surprised to read that listener figures are up, when I am only one among many who have switched off since SATTC. Every time I have a 'test listen' I hear shouting or screeching or something else depressing or boring. It's not The Archers I've been listening to for thirty years. It's no longer an 'everyday story', effectively.

Nigel's fatal plunge is a fine example of "if it ain't broke don't fix it". I've been in a host of tv series story meetings, and I know how easy it is for writers and story editors to lose sight of what they have, what's good, what the show is all about, because they're too close to it and liable to forget that their job is to maintain as well as innovate. I can imagine the sages ooh-ing about the idea of killing off Nigel. Somehow, the obviously worst idea they ever had turned into a star turn, a "real inspiration" as Jenny says about her book club choice. So far, all the "new story lines" (Roy to Lower Loxley, gloomy David and his dreadful secret, family woes) have been most underwhelming and totally predictable. Nigel was a mainstay, a source of humour, drama, sensitivity, silliness, and all around fine acting. HE was the source of great new and truly inspirational story lines. The wheelchair was the way to go, and it would have allowed all the same new storylines and then some. But the fatal mistake prevailed. A shame. In my humble opinion. To quote Elizabeth-- "Nigel can't defend himself anymore, but I can and I will!" Others will clearly feel otherwise. That's show biz.

Surely Graham Seed was employed by the BBC, so how come a lowly script writer can sack him by writing him out of the series.

Does this mean that if any of the Archers cast upset the script writers that their heads could be on the block?

I agree with what mp says above: "The wheelchair was the way to go, and it would have allowed all the same new storylines and then some."



Absolutely. Just compare the present situation - Elizabeth furious with David, D glooming, Ruth, Jill, Kenton and Elizabeth helpless and rubbing their hands in despair, but everything so static and boring - with how it would have been if Nigel had survived, paralysed. He would have been there to speak for himself. I think it could have gone like this:



- immediately after the accident, E. is grateful it wasn't worse

- then she gets angry with N. How could he? N defends himself, but doesn't reveal D's part in it.

- D still feels guilty, and eventually confesses

- E angry, as now, with D but storms round to Nigel to apologise for blaming him

- N is about to undergo critical surgery. In his hospital bed, he defends David. He, Nigel, is an adult and responsible for his own actions. When E. married him, she knew what he was like. Would she have wanted him any different?

- and so on.



All more dynamic, dramatic. As it is we're stuck with a feud that will sour things for years.



I guessed as soon as it happened that this is the direction things would take, but I hoped that, given the reaction, it might have been tweaked to something a bit more interesting - David keeps his secret and wrestles with his guilt, so things ostensibly improve but there are outbreaks of David's guilt (not too much at once, thank). Then you could get the interplay between E's gratitude and D's guilt. Interesting drama.



Instead, we get the "Eastenders" version, with lots of shouting.



Why, for once, can't we have a drama where the body under the patio isn't dug up - but lurks there, affecting the actions of the characters for year and years?

Shula. Kenton and SHULA.

Killing off Nigel Pargetter was the worst storyline decision since I have been listening to Archers, over 20 years.



I used to look forwards to listening, since his 'death' the storyline has been monotonously fixed to this event.



The Archers was fundamentally feelgood radio, not any more. The new storylines have yet to materialise and whereas I used to listen religiously, I am finding my listening gradually waning.



The web site has also been ruined in the last year or 2 (as has BBC news and most other Beeb sites). As an ex pat, my use of the BBC in general is waning at a similar rate.

Agreed. The wheelchair was the real 'story' generator. What VW's real reasons for this decision were, we may never know, but she totally botched it.

I think the Archers just gets better and better. I hugely admire how the writers are working through the consequences of Nigel's death, as well as the strength of the acting in the responses, from Jill's mature strength, to Elizabeth's guilty desperation to avoid blaming Nigel, to David's masculine retreat into depression. Hats off to the BBC Archers team!

Maybe, deipnosophista (and hello - I assume from your comment being in premod that you're newish here?) but it still makes for depressing listening and I think that the "wheelchair scenario" would have made for many more varied, engaging and long lasting storylines.



VH

I'm very glad to hear that Graham Seed's post-Nigel career is going well.



I don't feel that the death of Nigel has resulted in any wonderfully creative storytelling, but as I only catch the show very occasionally now I can hardly judge. I'm very surprised to hear that listening is up and will be curious to see if that is sustained.

"Surely Graham Seed was employed by the BBC, so how come a lowly script writer can sack him by writing him out of the series."



All the actors are on short-term contracts, they're not full-time employees of the BBC.

Dear Mr Davies



It is very brave of you to re-visit this issue again - and as a result we have the comments from mp : "I know how easy it is for writers and story editors to lose sight of what they have, what's good, what the show is all about, because they're too close to it and liable to forget that their job is to maintain as well as innovate." Please take note of this - this is exactly what has happened here not only to The Archers team but also, now according to you, to 'radio drama' and 'Radio 4 management' who all had a part in this dreadful mistake. You lost sight of what was so good about Nigel as played by Graham Seed, and how rich a result you would have had if you had gone down the 'wheelchair' scenario - see Vicarshusband if you are in any doubt about that. In fact, it might be a good idea to recruit Vicarshusband to the growing band of people who seem to have a part in agreeing storylines!



What I find most perplexing of all is the refusal of anyone from 'a lowly scriptwriter' to 'Radio 4 management' to acknowledge this major misjudgement. Please do not patronise those of us who disagree with you by using the term bereavement in reference to our expressions of dismay at the 'soaping' of the Archers through such sensationalist storylines.

Just came back to the blog to have a read. I echo the thoughts of #1. I never listen at all and haven't since the event. I do not miss it in the slightest and have discovered other listening pleasures far better than dreary EastEnders in the countryside.... I find the supposed increase in listening figures hard to understand as everyone I know of who used to listen to TA has either stopped or now dives in and out. Perhaps unnecessary deaths and sensational story lines are what people want and if so the 5m or so are very welcome to TA and the direction it has taken. I have listened for decades and remember the fine story lines and characters who actually had character........Tom Forrest, George Barford, Nelson Gabriel etc etc who have been replaced by the likes of Jazzer and Jamie....gawd help us!

Its rather like an old friend who I have known for many years. I have good memories of very happy times together however for the last few years they have become unwell, unable to cope and as a result dreadfully unhappy. They have now passed on never to return.