laura stockbridge collins?!

[michael c]

i'm sure i'm going to get majorly spoilered across this topic but there has been a development that has put me in quite a quandry.

i'm currently watching the 1897 storyline(specifically dvd set 14)which deals with laura collins.upon meeting her in 1897 barnabas recalls another laura collins(in an orange riding habit!)that he knew as a child in the 1700's(who is also of course the same laura collins who showed up in 1966 to claim david).

then he goes on to tell a tale that goes completely outside what had been any established fact upto this point.
specifically that his uncle jeremiah(who remember was supposed to be close in age to barnabas according to what was told in the 1795 storyline)had a wife before josette.laura stockbridge had been his first wife!

this threw me into a tailspin!there had never been any mention of this "first wife" ever from what i can recall.i watched the first laura collins story some time ago but from what i can remember she had been l.murdoch stockbridge then l.murdoch radcliffe and was not a collins until she married roger(presumably sometime in the mid-1950's).this throws the whole "cannon" out of whack majorly!

are there any thoughts/explainations that might help me out here?

[ClaudeNorth]

Well, I've given up on trying to find any sort of continuity in the series.  No one involved with DS ever thought the episodes would be seen more than once, and that is the attitude with which they wrote them.  Trying to fit it all together will only make you crazy.  That's how I ended up the way I am today... 

[michael c]

claude,

i too had given up on continuity in the series but this was just such a glaring inconsistency that it literally prompted me to dash from the t.v. set to the keyboard in frustration.

even though they never thought that these episodes would be seen more than once didn't they think that maybe their viewers had some sort of memories of what had been told before and might not say "wait a minute...laura was never marrried to jeremiah."?

even today soap operas only air once but they generally maintain some level of continuity.the writers of d.s. really played fast-and-loose with the storytelling.

[PennyDreadful]

   I've always gone with the theory that Jeremiah married Laura when he was very young - maybe sixteen or so.  The marriage was a bad one, surrounded by mysterious happenings, and was not really spoken of again.  It was a sore subject and Jeremiah didn't like talking about it.  That's why it was never mentioned in 1795.  It had happened long enough ago that there was no point in bringing it up,  and knowing the Collins family, the marriage was kept out of the history books.

   Now, as for the age discrepancy, I don't think they ever said Jeremiah and Barnabas were EXACTLY the same age - just that they are around the same age.  I could be wrong on that, but I don't recall them ever saying they were exactly the same age.  Let's assume Jeremiah is only 5 or 6 years older than Barnabas.  That puts them at around the same age, but Jeremiah is a tad bit older.  If Jeremiah married Laura at sixteen, Barnabas could then have been ten or eleven.  It's a stretch, I know, but it's the best I could do to explain this continuity bug. 

[Fletcher]

Well, at least the continuity errors on DS were mistakes.  Today's soaps mess-up continuity intentionally -- usually in order to "shoe-horn"  some outlandish plot into the already established history of the show.  I really hate it when they do that, and think it shows a real lack of respect for viewers.

As far as I know, DS didn't mess with continuity on purpose.

[Midnite]

there had never been any mention of this "first wife" ever from what i can recall.

Yes, 1897 was not only the first time his marriage to Laura came up, but also the first mention of any prior marriage; not even in 1795 when it's discussed that he was to marry Millicent for her real estate holdings.

i watched the first laura collins story some time ago but from what i can remember she had been l.murdoch stockbridge then l.murdoch radcliffe and was not a collins until she married roger(presumably sometime in the mid-1950's).

I think the characters in the present just didn't know that Laura Murdoch Radcliffe Collins was really Laura Murdoch Stockbridge Collins Radcliffe Collins.  Or something.  

Also, in an early 1966 ep, Laura is able to recognize Josette from her portrait even though she tells her son she hadn't visited the Old House before.

are there any thoughts/explainations that might help me out here?

Well, considering that Jeremiah's age in relation to Barnabas kept changing (in the present, Barnabas referred to him as middle aged, then in 1795 they were (as you said) the same age, and later in PT Barnabas was said to have been born in 1770 whereas Jeremiah's headstone in regular time said he was born in 1763... ouch!), I can't say I'm surpised that Jeremiah's marital history changed as well.  There's even a time when Barnabas mentions his "Cousin, Uncle Jeremiah."  

I've always gone with the theory that Jeremiah married Laura when he was very young - maybe sixteen or so. The marriage was a bad one, surrounded by mysterious happenings, and was not really spoken of again. It was a sore subject and Jeremiah didn't like talking about it. That's why it was never mentioned in 1795. It had happened long enough ago that there was no point in bringing it up, and knowing the Collins family, the marriage was kept out of the history books.

I like this.     Laura Stockbridge Collins died in 1785, and Barnabas stated that he first laid eyes on her when he was 10.  It's possible that she married Jeremiah between these years.  Though it does not explain how Laura would recognize Josette.  Ouch again.

Now, as for the age discrepancy, I don't think they ever said Jeremiah and Barnabas were EXACTLY the same age - just that they are around the same age. I could be wrong on that, but I don't recall them ever saying they were exactly the same age.

You've got me.  I thought it was stated they were the same age, but I'm at a loss as to where it was.  Anybody?

[Joeytrom]

In 1795, Jeremiah told Vicky he and Barnabas were the same age.  This is in the episode where Vicky was surprised that Jeremiah was concerned for Barnabas when he was choking (due to Angelique and the voodoo doll)  as she always thought they never got along.

[Midnite]

Thanks so much, Joeytrom!  RobinV's summary for ep #371 will be restored in the coming days, but in the meantime here's an excerpt from it:

Vicki expresses surprise at Jeremiah's concern and affection for his nephew, which immediately makes him angry. He chides her for her strange, rude impressions, then yells that he and Barnabas are the same age and as close as brothers--don't ever say such a thing again!

[PennyDreadful]

Ah-ha.  Thanks for clearing the age question up Joeytrom.  I took a look at Dale Clark's DS Book of Questions and Answers Volume 6 which addresses this issue.  Here are some excerpts of what Mr. Clark says:

   Just because Barnabas was ten when he first saw Laura Stockbridge doesn't necessarily mean that he was ten when she and Jeremiah were married.  It is possible that Laura wasn't always a phoenix but "human" for at least a part of her existence... Perhaps Laura arrived in Collinsport with her family when she was but a child and grew up with (but not necessarily close to) Barnabas and Jeremiah.  Somewhere along the way, as they all grew up, Jeremiah and Laura's paths crossed and they married.

[Joeytrom]

I also think Laura was human at first from when she is born until she dies in a fire and then returns as a Phoenix to sacrifice another with her in a second fire.  Perhaps Laura is under a curse of her own from centuries before.

If Barnabas was ten when Jeremiah married her, he would be only 20 in 1795!  That seems highly unlikely.

[michael c]

when laura is and isn't a pheonix is one of those d.s. mysteries i'll never totally understand.

is the laura who married roger and gave birth to david and ended up in a mental institution really the same laura who returns to claim him?or was she a real human being that the pheonix laura either takes over or replaces?was the "real" laura the woman who's burned body was found in pheonix,az.?

she also doesn't seem to be a creature of particularly great powers.she comes on strong but is easily thown off her game and always seems to be on the brink of destruction.perhaps that's because she returns to collinwood towards the end of her 100 year life cycle.

speaking of which.laura only comes around collinwood for a few months during both of her storylines.so besides creating some minor drama for the collins family what does she do with the other 99 years and 9 months of her exisistence?

[Gothick]

Again, in an issue of Dale Clark's zine Inside the Old House about ten years ago, novelist William Mann wrote a speculative essay trying to reconcile the various versions of Laura's legend and craft a coherent backstory for her.

In the 1966/67 storyline, it was made clear several times that Laura's personality changed radically after the fire in Phoenix (btw I just LOVE the scene in the Phoenix morgue!).  After Laura's final departure, Roger says to Liz something like "I don't believe that was Laura at all."  When he first sees her, David turns to Vicki and says something along the lines of "That isn't my Mother."

The denouement of the 1897 storyline does hint that there was a single Laura entity that survived down through the centuries.

Doreen Valiente, one of my favorite authors, used to say that "a Witch needs to be able to believe at least three contradictory things before breakfast every morning."  Perhaps the same could be said of DS fans!

G.

[PennyDreadful]

  The DS writers left Laura's whole background a mystery.  I suspect Laura is always the same Laura throughout the centuries.  However, she is always initially re-born as a human (and grows from childhood).  I don't know if she has any real conscious knowledge of the fact that she is/will become a phoenix.   It is only when she is re-re-born  (()) that she attains full phoenix-hood and knowledge of her true nature, powers, past, etc.  I'd also guess, and this is just conjecture on my part, that during her human "incubation" stage she has weird visions and nightmares of her past incarnations, but she isn'tfully aware of what they mean.   

   Since we never actually saw Laura in her human stage, everything is really mere conjecture based on the few tidbits they gave us in the series. 

  One thing I've always been curious about - why does this Laura creature repeatedly attach herself to the Collins family?  We never really find out.  However, after Jeremiah, Edward, Roger and who knows how many others, it's rather clear that Laura the phoenix has an affinity for our favorite cursed family.
 

[Joeytrom]

That scene in the Phoenix morgue looked like it was filmed in a real morgue.  What was used as the establishing shot for Phoenix? Was it a slide or a film?  I didn't get a good look at this when I saw it.

[michael c]

penny,

you bring up an interesting point about laura.where as angelique shows up at collinwood like a bad penny throughout the centuries she is all about a particular member of the family who like herself lives through different time periods.laura is rather indescriminate about her choice of spouse...as long at it's a collins.