The Julia In My Head

I always feel now as if I'm carrying around in my head an image of Julia, as a great, classic TV character I knew from childhood, who has somehow leaked out of, or faded from, the master tapes on DS, only to be replaced by a poor copy who doesn't measure up to the original, and misses the point of the character.

I liked her as a smart, assured, original-thinking, inspired, magnetic, competent scientist and protagonist.   Nothing against displays of emotion, but I didn't see this great character dissolving into tears whenever threatened, or just getting carried away by events without any control over them, and I certainly never saw her trying to hand Vicki over to vampire Barnabas on a platter.

That great moment where she was lying in wait for Barnabas when he entered her bedroom to kill her, after she figured out his secret, was a defining moment.... for the Julia I knew.    Then she was redefined as a more average, tiresome cliche woman character, too often, playing the Maggie role of the terrified female who lets you know how scary everything is supposed to be... and neutral-personality helpmate and sidekick.

Most times that I see Julia, she seems wrong.    I want my Julia from childhood back again.

Well there are glimpses. How about when Julia slaps Cassandra (Angelique).

Well there are glimpses. How about when Julia slaps Cassandra (Angelique).

I don't remember ever seeing that, except in an avatar, but I may see it soon.

soap operas in general...and d.s. in particular...have a peculiar habit of introducing a villianous character who does really dreadful things but if that character becomes extremely popular and cannot be killed,jailed or otherwise done away with they try and soften that character up...often going so far as making that character a hero or heroine.

if i may get a bit o.t. here back in the 1990's i used to watch "the young and the restless".

there were three characters i remember as being particularly loathsome...michael baldwin,lauren fenmore and phylis newman.michael was a rapist,lauren a vixen and phylis a murderer!

imagine my surprise when i tuned in recently and found these former scoundrels re-cast as the shows central figures and all-around-do-gooders.

enter d.s.

the show often introduced really nasty villians and once that character became "popular" and could no longer be effectively disposed of they softened them up and even made them "nice".
that's what i think became of the complex,duplicitous julia of 1967.barnabas was going to boil her in oil or something to that effect but once she became popular they recast her as the newly virtuous barnabas' partner in saving the collins family from every sort of calamity imaginable.

i remember watching the 1970 episodes when gerard was cast as the villian-du-jour.there were lots of scenes of barnabas,julia and quentin sitting around collinwood trying to figure out how to save everyone.
i also remember thinking boy were these three really dull characters.they lost their edge along the way to popularity.

julia doesn't exactly have the blood on her hands that barnabas and quentin did but those were two total fiends before they became the show's warped "anti-heros" but still she wasn't exactly physician of the year.

Gerard must not have been popular, or else after 1840, it would have been Barnabas, Julia, Quentin, and Gerard sitting in a room trying to figure out how to save everyone from evil villain X, and then popular villain X would have joined them in the room for the next storyline.    They could have called themselves the Former-Monsters New-Heroes Evading Justice League.    (Note that PT Gerard has almost nothing to do with PT1841.)

More evidence that much of the greatness of DS is in my head rather than on the screen.    I had thought that Barnabas evolved into a protagonist... instead of taking advantage of that great source of drama, they just shifted his personality, so gradually that they hoped we'd forget that he was a villain.    Marathoning these episodes changes everything.    The transitions (that weren't) look so much more false, sped up.

They could have called themselves the Former-Monsters New-Heroes Evading Justice League.

And maybe they could have gotten themselves some nifty spandex uniforms, too.    (Though, of course, no one outside the group would have so much as acknowledged they were wearing them, much less questioned it.  )

I do take the point of this thread, but I don't entirely agree that Julia became a boring character after the characters got their Spring 1968 makeovers.  Julia still led the way when it came to duplicity and general craftiness (I just love it when Liz is having yet another meltdown into catatonia and Carolyn learns that Amy has disappeared just as she did in Liz's nightmare and hysterically asks Julia "What should I do??" and Julia glares at her and lets a beat pass and grits: "LIE to her!"  Classic stuff). 

And some of Julia's finest moments were in the Leviathan storyline, particularly the first six weeks or so, when Barnabas has also been recast with a suavely evil, debonair veneer, once again hiding a horrifying secret that he keeps this time from Julia herself.  Apart from their scenes together, a highlight of the series as a whole for me is Julia's confrontation with Angelique on Little Windward Island.

As I've written before, in my opinion EVERY storyline on DS had its moments of gold and its moments (sometimes hours unfortunately) of lead.  One circumstance that has led to many fans re-evaluating certain storylines is that we watch the show very differently now from how it was intended.  Many fans watch the show in marathon sessions--to relax on a Friday evening at the end of the work week, for example.  I don't hear much about fans having the discipliine (or just having the time in their schedules) to watch one episode per evening.  I certainly don't.

G.

Count me as one of the marathoners. I don't think I'd have the discipline to watch one episode a night. Sometimes they just segue into one another and I can't remember if I saw the end/opening credits.

It is interesting to note though, that being able to sit down and watch the bulk of a storyline at once has really endeared me to some storylines I was only exposed to 2 episodes at a time, and wasn't too keen on the first run through. It's easier to see the forest versus the trees or what have you.

I don't think that a character can't be both "good" and interesting.    It's lazy writing that gives a protagonist a neutral personality.    Writers seem to have an assumption about there being the "hero" who appeals to everyone (nothing appeals to everyone), and therefore can't have individual traits or an original personality....  and then there are the "character" parts played by "character actors".   

The various Star Trek series seemed reluctant to let the lead character (who is always the highest raking person for some reason) exhibit much of an individual personality.    DS9 re-evaluated all its characters partway through, and actually gave Sisko a personality, this made him interesting, and the really program improved at that point.

Julia could have been interesting because of a sharp mind and her willingness to jump into situations that would throw most people completely.    I don't think being duplicitous is interesting necessarily, though it can be.    I want a Julia who surprises us with her reactions to, and solutions for, the mysterious and deadly threats that are thrown at her, without losing her need to do the right thing, despite pressures on her to give up, betray people, or look out for herself.    It's a challenge to make that kind of character interesting, but it's the best kind of character when it works.

I like supposed character actors to be cast as leads.    Barnabas/JF would be the perfect example, except for when they make him a standard bland hero.  What a great opportunity missed.....  "evil" Barnabas, interesting but limited.... just plain "good" Barnabas, worse...  but a conflicted Barnabas, torn in different directions, cursed but trying to fight through the haze of his curse to put things right for the family.... 1897 Barnabas, especially early on, is perfect, I think.

Another example of the lead as a "character"... Doctor Who.

I'm close to finishing the series watching one episode per day, starting with episode 210.  I found Julia satisfying right to the end.  The only dissatisfying thing was that there wasn't very much of her at the end.

Some things that stick out in my mind: Julia has just arrived in 1897, and is being thrust into a perils-of-Pauline situation.  As she is being tied to the railroad tracks (so to speak), yes, she's in tears, but she still manages to get off a nasty barb at the predator.

Later in the series, she's locked in a basement cell, with no hope of ever escaping.  No windows, two candles.  I'm shouting at the TV, "Blow out one of the candles!" and lo and behold, she does!

Still later, she comes under a nefarious spell.  And as soon as the spell is lifted she's analyzing how the spell affected her.

As for boring episodes with Quentin and Barnabas in 1970...I saw those differently from mscbryk.  I thought to myself, "Well, heaven only knows what has happened to her career, but at least she has found friends with whom she can be comfortable, and that's nothing to sneeze at."

Thanks Lydia, I think I need to look for and emphasize those kinds of details when next I watch.  (I'm talking funny today.)

It occurred to me during all that that these days, most of what I find interesting in DS are things I think or wonder about concerning the consequences or implications of this or that event for the characters that have been left unsaid, rather than anything expressed or dealt with directly, onscreen.   I might not be giving DS credit for the questions raised in my head, and I don't know whether I should or not.  Sometimes I feel I'm doing too much of the work.

i'll ammend my statements on julia bit...

i find episodes and periods throughout the show's entire run where i really like julia and find her to be an interesting character.

as gothick mentioned during the leviathan storyline and i adored 'hoffman' during parallel-time.

but when she's sort of just "good" barnabas' assistant grayson seems unchallenged by the material.i think she's better when she's being somehow duplicitous.
by late 1970 i got the impression she was just bored with the whole thing and sometimes phoned it in.

but i think 1967 "miss hoffman" is my favorite interpretation of the character.