Originally Posted by miriampotter:
“Hello
Today we learnt that Charlie had the baby 16 years ago, and that Ruby is the baby that was 16 years ago, the whole thing is a farce, Charlie is 27 years old, I know that soaps time, is not always the same as ours, but they are missing out years here, if people had a child the way she did, would they really be comfortable having them in front of them, day in day out, reminding them of what happened, which in effect is what Ruby is doing each time, without knowing it, the script writers, must think we are think and stupid to believe this.
I really hope the story line does improve.”
Originally Posted by Thumbolina:
“Way back in the 50s and earlier there was such stigma on girls having a baby out of wedlock that often the grandparents brought up the child pretending they were it's parents, not grandparents. OK, sixteen years ago, 1993, attitudes had changed somewhat but the point I'm making is that grandparents pretending to be a child's parents is not uncommon, even now.
The script writers are using a scenario that has been played out many, many times in real life.
I thought Charlie was thirty, this would fit in time wise. How do you know she is 27?”
I actually know someone who was brought up by his grandparents and viewed his mother as his sister - she got pregnant at a young age too. I think the explanation they gave about Charlie going away to stay with her aunt and then realising that Ruby had bonded so well with Ross and his wife was actually quite a good element to throw in. The thing about Ruby being around as a reminder is something I think that they thought would fade as Charlie came to love her. Mothers love and all that....
Originally Posted by jagged_death:
“I think its been awful and contrived, its plucked out of nowhere and they have changed Charlie's age to fit it. Plus there is the hideous presence of the horrible Angelo to ruin it further. Rebecca Breeds have been great though but she is the only good thing about the storyline, well that and the fact that Esther/Rebecca generally do a good job together despite EA OTT acting in other places.”
Can someone please tell me when they stated on the show that Charlie was 27? I can only remember reading it on here when people were discussing how old the characters were when Nicole appeared and people were trying to work out how old Roman was. All things considered, I think the storyline is not a bad one and Rebecca Breeds has been doing a great job. Shame about Xavier ruining some of her scenes! Not minded Angelo either but agree that Esther Anderson is not the most fantastic dramatic actress ever. Mind you, thought Belle's final scenes were a bit OTT with all the shaky voice and half-closed eyes carry on so maybe I just don't do well with these kinds of things!