i hear what you're saying mysterious about trask's own delusional belief system regarding himself and his family.

but what strikes me as ridiculous...and totally unbelievable...is the way that most of the other characters defer to him.

all jamision needed to do was tell his aunt or father about his treatment at the school and the trasks would have been run out of town on rail. more importantly if he told his mother laura or distant cousin barnabas trask would have found himself six feet under. barnabas would NEVER allow a member of his family to be mistreated or abused by one of the trasks. so the whole plot is bogus to me.

it's just unbelievable(to me,at least)that these circumstances are allowed to continue.

One other episode I can think of is during the 1967 Laura story which has a scene set in Phoenix, Arizona.  I remember it featured Dr. Guthrie, Frank Garner, and the two Phoenix policemen.  Not sure who else is in it.

Another unusual 1897 episode has no women in it.

if i recall there was more than one 1897 episode without any female characters. the storyline starts with lots of female characters...judith,rachel,beth,jenny,laura,magda...featured prominently but about midway through most of those characters are gone or the actresses who play them on extended hiatuses(joan bennett,kathryn leigh scott)and the storyline becomes something of a boy's club with quentin,barnabas,petofi and aristede dominating the proceedings.

i remember the infamous 1968 "fake carolyn" episode only featured the show's secondary characters as well.

i've been watching 1897 and last night i watched an episode that struck me as odd(odder than usual given that it's 1897)...

it was episode 753 and about halfway through i started to feel like something was missing. that it was a bore.

then i realized that this episode was populated only by the storyline's secondary characters and focused largely on the lesser plots(mainly the worthington hall snoozefest). it was just beth,jamison,charity trask,tim shaw and the werewolf stuntman.

so i started wondering what went into the production of an episode like this. episodes where none of the protagonists of a given storyline are present. where the supporting characters are given the spotlight. that don't really push the plot along in any significant way.

there was no barnabas. no angelique. no judith. no laura. just some annoying stupid girl, a maid, a schoolteacher and a little boy. one could argue that "quentin" was there in spirit but since it was just the "stunt coordinator" and not david selby it lacked star power.

were none of the main actors available that day? did the writers decide to give this dull secondary plot a boost? every now and then there is an episode like this.

that said i haven't watched this storyline in several years and i had forgotten how prominently beth factored into things at least during the early months. my memory was of her as a minor character but she gets lots of screentime. she's quite lovely.

i've been watching 1897 lately and as much as i love having diana millay back as laura collins for some reason she's not quite as swoonsworthy as she was during the 1966 storyline.

perhaps it's because 1966 was ABOUT laura and here she's just one stroke of a much broader and unwieldy canvas that's largely focused on quentin. also 1966 was tighter and more character driven rather than plot driven and the dialogue was alot crisper(who could ever forget her showdowns with liz). still she's fun.

another quick thought abut 1897 but it's strange to have barnabas and angelique in supporting roles when usually they're at the center of the storyline. i'd forgotten how colossal 1897 was in it's scope and the huge number of characters.

did anyone else notice that this site also had an article describing elizabeth stoddard as barnabas' "sister".

weird!

i'm always surprised when references to the elizabeth blackmail storyline are mentioned in terms of this film. with so many other things happening i'd be surprised if this was even touched upon. i'd have thought the willie character would already have been ensconced at collinwood(as he was in the 1991 series)to eliminate a lengthy introduction to that character.

i'm sure roger,carolyn and david will be among the next parts cast. and for god's sake mrs.johnson MUST answer the door when a certain cousin from england comes to call. she'd be a fun bit of stunt casting with an original actress(marie wallace,perhaps?).

i know we're still speculating(aren't we?)but vicki as a waitress is kind of a bummer. the whole "jane eyre" component of the gothic governess is elemental to the DS mythology. it was pivotal to dan curtis' conception of this whole story.

at this point i certainly don't find the 'variety' omission to be remotely "fascinating" but more annoying than anything else and a bit disturbing.

it's almost like they're doing something that they know might upset fans. like creating an unknown character outside the traditional DS mythology. if it's not vicki or maggie who the heck is she?

i realize that "we" are not necessarily the target audience for this thing as it needs to appeal to millions of new viewers completely unfamiliar with these characters. but still it would be upsetting if this ends up being an outside character.

the good will of the highly devoted fanbase would go a long here.

perhaps we're all of the mark and ms. heathcote won't be playing either vicki or maggie but collinsport inn waitress susie.