Saturday, 13 March 2010
George takes the cake, and the child
I've been musing about George and all this palaver over his trying to take Simon away from Peter. Is he wrong to do it? Is he right but just used the wrong methods? Are his concerns justified or are they an excuse? Will Eve tear George a new one for doing all this behind her back? How will it all come out? I had some ideas and speculation and have written about it over here.
Labels:
coronation street,
corrie,
george wilson,
peter barlow,
simon barlow
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You might also like...
-
Friday 13th December 2024 Gus and Anthea have a brief meeting with their solicitor Cliff, but they quickly wind up when Max arrives with Fra...
-
Wednesday 11th December 2024 With the car crash a mystery, Debbie learns her burnt-out car was found, and her insurance is invalid due to th...
-
Kit Green, played by Jacob Roberts, has proven himself to be a character of many shades since he arrived on the cobbles earlier this year. I...
-
Here are the major storylines for the week ahead on Coronation Street, all wrapped up nicely in 50 words or less. Monday December 16 to Frid...
-
Here it is, my annual virtual award ceremony - part Inside Soap Awards, part Smash Hits Poll Winners' Party (it's a bit shorter than...
-
Monday 16 December 2024 Having been given the results of Frankie’s blood tests from the Doctor, Lauren reveals to Max that it’s more siniste...
-
Monday 9th December 2024 As Bertie runs across the street without looking, Debbie slams on her brakes which causes more tension between Dani...
-
In the great recoupling merry-go-round it does not take long for Daisy to discover that Bethany and Daniel are re-united and so Daisy is soo...
-
Coronation Street Blog celebrates 17 years online today. Thank you to everyone for all of your support. Glenda Young Novelist published by ...
-
Wednesday 4th December 2024 David admits to Max that he intercepted the visiting orders and visited Clayton but Shona must never know. Shona...
7 comments:
George supposedly never had time for his daughter, Lucy. But what about his wife, Eve? They appear to have been married for a long time, and she seems a kind, loving person - so how was it possible for George not to see Lucy?
I think we all thought George was going to be a villan but it turns out he is just a bombastic Grandad, a man used to getting his own way by fair means or foul. I think he thought he had messed up with his daughter, Lucy, and wanted to make amends through Simon by "giving him a good life". Peter has just given him all the ammunition by keep going back to the drink and who says he won't do it again, he is a bit of a loser. I hope this is not the end we see of Anthony Valentine because he has been great and I would like to see him and Eve popping up every now and again like Jack and Connie.
I think it was more to do with Lucy refusing to see George from what i got out of this.
George may well have been right to have his concerns about Peter/Simon, but the way he went about it was downright evil. I'm going to be gutted if he turns out to have gone soft/reconciles with Peter/Ken, as it looked very much like he was doing in the last episode - I hope he has further villainy up his sleeve. It'll be much more entertaining.
I can understand why George is doing this but behind even his wifes back shows just how determined and actually blinkered he has become.
He wasn't there for Lucy when she was little, that is established. Character wise his actios have actually been consistent and certainly not rash. Initially he was trying to help Simon indirectly by supporting Peter and Leanne. He ploughed a small fortune into the bar of course. Also he was very pushy about the private schooling and even (at such a late stage) paid for Peter's rehab treatment.
A lot of this was down to his enthusiasm at discovering he actually had a grandson of course. He desperately wants to play a very much active role in his upbringing (which i hope he still can).
His conflict with Ken was predictable but actually quite apt in many ways. It helped him get closer to Peter and thus to Simon. It also showed some of Ken's true colours that have exasparated Deirdre for so many years.
He showed a devious (or determined) side however, by manipuLAting Leanne when she very much needed support, in taking Simon away. After actually doing a much needed turn in having Simon over, he quickly abused this position and decided he could do a better job of caring for him.
This, as we know, is very short sighted. Particularly when you consider he was a struggling father himself, with demons, like Peter. He wasn't there for his own daughter. Did he not stop to think that his inherently selfish actions where not only to Simon's detriment but also forcing his own shortcomings as a father onto Peter as another?
I hope to see his relationship with Eve tested through this storyline and i also hope that they both become permanent additions to the cast.
So often with storylines like these, the character is introduced for the short term effect of the storyline, rather than long term to the benefit of the show. Stephanie Beacham being a good recent example.
A fantastic storyline. Consistent in its execution and in my view, a highlight of the rather underwhelming Kim Crowther era.
Yeah, George can't "rest in peace" one day knowing how he abandoned his daughter, and has made it his quest to care for Simon.
This was a good storyline, yes. Although, I feel so bad for poor little Simon, hopefully he can resume a normal life after.
Any alternastive would be better for the child rather than living an a stinking smoke filled room above a bookie's with a hopeless alcoholic loser of a father.
Post a Comment