The setting of 'Emmerdale' as I mentioned before is in rural Yorkshire. There is a public house there which, as in most soaps, is the centre of all main story lines. They either finish or start here. This is because, everyone who lives nearby come into the public house at the end of the day. All of the major story lines start or end here, this is because the public house is the only place where the scriptwriters can get every character and their explosive personalities into one space. This then creates tension, which is what the viewers tune in to see. This setting seems realistic; it looks like a normal country village in the Dales. This is appealing because it looks so mundane in the credits, yet as you begin to watch, you see that the activities there are not. This sense of mysteriousness, of seeing beneath the surface is important in any soap opera, because as you watch you like to believe that maybe this is what your community is like. The houses in the village are quaint, as you would imagine them to be, with small flower baskets outside the doors. This adds to the illusion that each person in the village is perfect, even though we as the viewer know they are not.
The name for everything that is in the scene is known as the mise en scene. This is very important, because each prop or extra character added into the scene can create more depth and more tension to the soap opera. The settings of these two soap operas are very different. 'Eastenders', is filmed in the London. With this setting being very fast paced and urban, it allows story lines to also be like that. Often life can seem bleak for many people in 'Eastenders', yet this to fits in with the representation that the setting gives us. Looking out over pictures of 'Albert Square', the sky seems grey, almost smog like. The smog may be seen as putting the characters in a somewhat claustrophobic environment. This all adds to the dramatic tension that we watch in soap operas.
'Emmerdale's' setting is the complete antithesis of this. It is bright and sunny, in rural Yorkshire. As the title music starts, the pictures you see of 'Emmerdale Village' are picturesque. Also on the introduction to the soap, you see shots of farms, and fields with sheep in them. This is the opposite from 'Eastenders' again, because people who work in London don't tend to labour in farms, they are more likely to work in construction. This can represent a different way of living, as northern people still farm to feed their families, whereas the people in 'Eastenders' are more likely to own a stall on the market or work in the pub to support themselves. The fact that the setting of 'Emmerdale' is so beautiful is supposed to reflect the bad traits of its characters. It may be seen as misleading the viewer, making them think that this is a perfect village, with perfect people living in it, but it isn't, in fact it is very far from that. Having people who aren't what they seem, or who have kept things from others in the village are useful for script writers, because they are a mine of stories waiting to happen. It is important to have this is soaps, because it keeps people interested in it, and keeps viewing figures up.
I think that the 'Eastenders' setting is more realistic, but only because I am from a suburb, like Walford. Although both settings are realistic for the type of people that live there. The setting most appealing to the viewer is probably 'Eastenders', as it represents so many different aspects. Everywhere you go, you will find a setting something like 'Eastenders', yet the pleasurable site of the Yorkshire Dales is less common. Glamorous settings are rarely used, because these programmes are supposed to portray real life, and sometimes glamour just is not appropriate. TV bosses more than likely spend all their money on making the setting look at rural/urban/metropolitan as possible rather than blowing their budgets on flashy fabrics and expensive locations.
There are similar characters everywhere you go in life, and this is the same in the world of soap opera. As mentioned before, there are public houses in both soaps. And of course, these require Landladies, not Landlords. The fact that both of the public houses have Landladies is supposed to represent the stern, tough element that some women possess. Take for example Peggy Mitchell ('Eastenders') and Diane Blackstock ('Emmerdale'). Is it a coincidence that both of these women are mid-50's, with bleached blonde hair and a string of failed relationships behind them? I think not. This stereotypical personification of women is a demonstration of how women may look like they are tough and the key link in holding their families together, (both are single parents/grandparents) yet deep down they are vulnerable and falling apart inside.
The use of having an older woman in the main focal point of the show is not only to respect the older bracket of the viewers, but to be somewhat of an agony aunt to younger people in the community that come to them for help. I think that in today's society, this is a realistic portrayal of a character. It is common now to find these types of women, especially single parents, who struggle with their daily lives and put on a brave face. And I'm sure you would not be shocked to know that women, chiefly housewives, are the main viewers of soap operas.
Another common character to find in soaps is the 'loveable rogue'. Here we have the son and the estranged husband of the two ladies mentioned before. Phil Mitchell ('Eastenders') and Rodney Blackstock ('Emmerdale'). These two men also have similarities; both are womanisers, using some poor unsuspecting woman for all they can get. They are both also wealthy businessmen, Phil owns the café in the square, the Arches (a car garage) and the Queen Victoria, the local pub. Rodney owns an antiques business in 'Emmerdale' village and he also owns a holiday park nearby, which his daughter and most of his ex girlfriends work. I find this type of character hard to believe.
Their personalities are quite similar. They both have 'connections', so that if you cross them, you will be in no doubt whether to again. They are well respected, and maybe even feared in the communities in which they live. You would expect someone of their mental intelligence to learn from their mistakes, but instead they repeat them, several times. This is an example of a subverted stereotype.
You would anticipate the male characters to be displayed as more intelligent than the females, but they are not. Arguably, some of the men in soaps are more clever and shrewd, but it is the people you least expect that are not as able as they seem. This switch in roles may have been to suit the viewing public, which are mainly women. It always has been this gender driven. In the 1960's and 70's, shows like 'Coronation Street' were showing housewives, not women that worked, and they were showing men that dominated the family and were the main breadwinners. Conventions like this change with each generation, and I'm sure it will change again.
'Eastenders' and 'Emmerdale' are both well known for their controversial and shocking story lines. Recently 'Eastenders' have included euthanasia and murder. The story most emotive story line 'Eastenders' have chosen is incest. The main character is Kat Slater, who was raped by her uncle when she was 12. The child she gave birth to was then raised as her sister, with only Kat, her father Charlie, and her grandmother Mo knowing the truth. The story was written very well, and the actors and actresses involved were extremely professional in their portrayal of people affected by this. It was given a substantial amount of media coverage, in newspapers and magazines. This was a new subject for scriptwriters to broach, especially before the watershed. It was received well, although there were a small number of people who thought it were inappropriate. I feel that the incest story line was only successful because of the acting and the writing. It was not that realistic, and I couldn’t think of anyone that could relate to it, but it was good television, which is what it is all about.
'Emmerdale' was more successful in its most recent controversy. Two lovers decided they wanted to try for a baby. The only problem being they were both 16. Most young people who watch the show could relate to this because the thought must have crossed their minds at one point. It was interesting to watch the attitudes of the parents in this situation. The two youths involved came from single parent families; they were looked after by their fathers. This is a very maternal issue, as sexual issues are something discussed between mothers and their children. The fathers were adamant that their two children were never allowed to see each other again, which of course made them even more determined to do what they wanted. Needless to say, they split up, while the girlfriend was pregnant. This then threw up the next issue of abortion, which has always been a bit of a taboo, especially with people who believe strongly in religion. The scriptwriters had to be very careful with their chose of endings for this story line, because the show airs at 7 o'clock, an hour before 'Eastenders'. Katie lost the baby, so they didn’t have to go through the traumatic experience of abortion.
I feel that the 'Emmerdale' teenage pregnancy story line was more convincing than the 'Eastenders' incest story line. Teenage pregnancy has always been a problem in the UK, usually through one night stands and irresponsibility, so it puts a different twist on things by having two teenagers planning their pregnancy. The actors in question did well to give such a convincing performance of two young people wanting to have a baby.
Camera angles are always used to get a different response from a viewer. Close ups are mainly of the face. This is to show the extreme emotion a character may be feeling at any point in a scene. These are powerful, because they show the raw emotion, this can make viewers feel an empathy with the characters, making them feel attached to them, and tuning in to the next episode. Medium shots are also used, showing characters from the waist up. Long shots are used to show whole figures, and some of the landscape. This maybe used to emphasise the isolation someone maybe feeling, or a distance they are trying to put between themselves and another character in the soap.
Short scenes are used in soap operas to keep the viewers interested. You will never find a scene lasting longer than a minute and a half, for this specific reason. As an old plot finishes, a new plot begins. This is to capture the viewer in the hope that they will tune in to the next episode. Soap operas are also used as a way of incorporating different themes and plots within the time limit. You will find that there is a main story line that will run from anything from a week to a month. This will initially get the viewers to tune in, then there are smaller stories, which go on for a couple of days, to stop the viewer from getting bored, then you have the short 'sketches' almost, which are comical and last for about 30 seconds.
Flashbacks are also used in soaps to remind the viewer of something that happened previously in the week's episodes or something that we haven’t yet seen. Flashbacks give the viewer the opportunity to look inside the character's head and see into their deepest thoughts. The use of music encourages an emotional response from the viewer, for example someone's death is made more powerful by the use of tragic music and the clichéd 'violins' in the back ground. Another thing, which allows insight into a character's mind, is when they are in a scene on their own, speaking their thoughts out loud. This is known as a soliloquy, and is commonly used on stage. These are particularly powerful because they allow the viewer to create an empathy with the particular character.
The cliffhanger is at the end of an episode, where the plot is left at a crucial point; this leaves the viewer anticipating the outcome, and almost guaranteeing them to tune in for the next episode. Cliffhangers encourage viewers to watch the next episode, promoting high ratings for the programme. The viewer then becomes addicted to the programme, due to their involvement with the characters, the situations and with the outcome.
'Eastenders' always has popular cliffhangers, this is mainly because of it famous theme tune. The most memorable ending I ever saw was when Tiffany Mitchell died in 'Eastenders'. She had been run over outside the public house, and her husband Grant came outside and saw her lying in the road. In the pouring rain, he slumped down on his knees, with his wife in his arm looking up into the sky, as the camera was getting further away. This ending was so effective, because there was no music, just plain silence, which can be equally as emotive as having some sad music in the background. Having the rain in the shot was an example of pathetic fallacy, which proved to be potent, as it mirrored how Grant was feeling. Rain can symbolise new life and the washing away of impurities, so this may be perceived as a new beginning for Grant, as he had just had a new baby daughter with Tiffany. This ending was particularly emotive because as the camera got further away from Grant and Tiffany, you could see that they were alone in the square. This represents the isolation that Grant was feeling as his wife had just died. You begin to pity Grant, as you then understand that he is alone and confined, and you want to tune in next week to see how he is coping. That is the power of cliffhangers.
Soap operas today are influential in our society. When people see things on the shows, they imagine what it would be like to be that person. They enjoy being able to live a double life. As you would expect, there is a minority of grounded people who understand that soaps are not at all fact, even though they concentrate on domestic themes. Some people view characters in soap operas as role models, especially the characters that have been through tough times in their lives, and still manage to survive. I don’t feel that characters in soaps give a good example of how to behave, mainly because soaps are way too over the top in their problems and solutions. Scriptwriters have a social responsibility, because topics they cover are often groundbreaking. They need to have shocking headlines to retain their old viewers and inherit new ones from other places. But as they get more and more confident with choosing new plots, they need to be aware that, considering the time their programme airs, a lot of families with children are watching. As we live in a world where people mature at a much higher rate than 20 years ago, children are exposed to a larger amount of violence and sexually explicit material. Soaps are often blamed for youth crime, because they write about these things and young people see this and think because it is on television, it is acceptable. I think that is why, whenever people commit crimes in soaps, they get the heaviest sentence possible, as something of a deterrent.
Soap operas are educational in the sense that they educate people about how other people in different situations to them live and cope. They should not be taken seriously, because they are not real. Viewers can gain a broader knowledge of social situations and become more rounded individuals by watching soaps because they can teach you how to deal with a larger group of people than you have in your community. Soap operas are pure entertainment, because they allow you to escape. You can dream and make believe for 30 minutes every evening that you too are in that soap. This provides many people with an outlet to reduce stress in their daily lives. Soaps are entertaining because they show real situations and how people deal with them, sometimes in the worst way possible. People also enjoy watching others misfortune, something characters in soaps have a lot of.
I think soap operas have been granted with too much value in our society today. Basically, it is a programme on the television about how people in a road, in a town somewhere muddle on with their daily lives. Yet so many people dedicate their whole evenings to watching soap operas. I'm not denying they are fun to watch, but they are not an essential part of life, and definitely don’t need to be credited with as much value as they do in our society. I feel that out of the two soap operas I have analysed, 'Emmerdale' is more convincing, but 'Eastenders' is more imaginative for these reasons. 'Emmerdale' doesn't tackle as many hard-hitting story lines as 'Eastenders', which is probably why it is more convincing to the viewers. However, 'Eastenders' is much more imaginative, because it finds unique plot lines that nobody else has ever tried before. 'Emmerdale' is more confined to the type of story lines it can use because of its viewing time, this then allows them to concentrate on everyday issues, that seem ordinary to some, yet refreshing to others. 'Eastenders' is free to choose what kind of story line it wants because it is a lot closer to the watershed. They can then grab people's attention by using dramatics, rather than real life situations.