You do see the inner lives of the characters. More so than in a novel. Did you say you haven't been listening very long. If so hang on in there, in about 20 years you will know these people better than you know your own family. Or you will if the writers stick true to the characters and don't give into the temptation to manipulate them to fit a story line.

I hope we're not in for months of cliff hanger as to whether Helen will go down or not - the script writers are working hard at getting her to incriminate herself or for her to be found not responsible for her own actions because of her supposed mental instability. The latter option is an unlikely final outcome though, imo, because that would mean Rob had won, although it might be a short term one. Unless they're going to drag it out even longer and have him recover and stay in Ambridge and get custody of Henry and the new baby while Helen is committed, before new evidence suddenly appears and she's released in appeal, I suppose. I can't see that happening though as I think Henry abuse would alienate too many listeners.

I've never been able to stand Peggy. Sanctimonious, self centred, manipulative, narrow minded, maudlinly sentimental - I could go on... But then she does remind me of an elderly aunt of mine who, on having found out that my ex had been abusive, remarked 'Well he was always very charming to me'!

Holy hell cika! Unfortunately, there are a few too many older types who probably feel much the same as Peggy does and would say so. She’s probably very representative of that, pre-feminist generation for whom appearances are probably just as important if not more important than reality. I realise I might be being unfair on Peggy, perhaps she is trying to be open-minded and fair – though I don’t know how you do that when your granddaughter says she’s been abused by her spouse – and I do have genuine respect for June Spencer, for her work ethic and her commitment to the programme, I just have no time for the character.

There's an interesting contrast between Peggy, traditional Archers and Kirsty, modern, hands-on and practical. Their differing responses is the ‘chocolate box’ critique versus ‘inappropriate for The Archers’ argument laid out. Looking at it coldly, if we want the show to survive long-term, we can’t rely on the same listeners who have always been around, you have to get some younger people who want a good drama with interesting storylines based around people that they can relate to meeting and overcoming real challenges and you need to experiment with the format – all of which the Rob and Helen storyline has done in spades. Agatha Christie is fine, but sometimes you also want Nordic Noir. The producers have done two things here – 1. they have created a storyline that is both deeply important and desperately needs the focus and attention it is getting using a character in Helen we believe it could happen to. And 2. – they have created a storyline that has brought in more younger listeners who have been emotionally and intellectually challenged and want interesting, psychologically astute programming and will become the super-fans of twenty years time, thus injecting new life into the listenership. That there has been so much commotion in the media and that the fans have raised £100k for charity is a happy consequence. Even better, they have proven to the wider world that they as a team have a full command of their craft creating compelling programming. It’s a win-win all round, even if it is at times a harrowing listen, one which I fear has a way to go yet.

I take comfort that crime doesn’t pay for long in Borsetshire and Rob will get his comeuppance eventually. Something else will come up and he’ll end up being sent down for it because no way will they allow him to not get into trouble for all of this, he’d just find another Helen and torture her off-air if they didn’t and how’s that presenting a positive outcome after all this investment we’ve all made.

Also, anybody see a feature in Saturday’s Daily Mail? It was a mock jury of journalists including some team columnists, Dame Jenni Murray, Clive Aslet off Country Life and Giles Brandreth at a hypothetical Helen trial. I was astonished that Jan Moir voted to find Not Guilty. She was very level-headed, fair and psychologically orientated in her reasoning, not exactly qualities I normally associate with her.

Perhaps Ambridge could go all 'Wicker Man' and sacrifice Rob to some pagan deity or other.

Today's episode showed so well how the media can influence how people see things. They've shown Helen in a bad light, and 'poor Rob' in a beneficial light.

This is a really interesting post. However I do think you do a disservice to older listeners and are making some big assumptions about this story line and how it sits in Archer's history.

I am uncomfortable with the sentence ...they have created a storyline that has brought in more younger listeners who have been emotionally and intellectually challenged and want interesting, psychologically astute programming and will become the super-fans of twenty years time, thus injecting new life into the listenership. - because I infer from it that you think the long time Archer's listener doesn't want or worse can't cope with a challenging story line.

If this is what you think, it maybe your knowledge of this drama has been over the years falls short. It has tackled difficult, challenging and socially important story lines in the past from rape to racial harrassment and from industrialisation in farming to the difficulties associated with passing on custodianship of land and food production. Its also not the first time that an Archer's story line has made the news pages. The death of Grace Archer back in 1955 was a national sensation and there have been storylines in my life time that have attracted attention from beyond the viewing audience.

It really isn't a drama only about Victoria sandwiches and village fetes, although it is these do crop up. What it hasn't done generally speaking is create an implausible community that lurches from one grim incident to the next in a sort of sensationalism arms race. The problem with most TV soaps is that their storylines are often so improbabale and focus on the nastier and grimmer elements of life. How many of us can really relate to a train derailment squidging our homes? Fewer than the number of us that have an opinon about GM crops of fox hunting I suspect. The Archers feels real because mostly it focuses on the small stuff which for most of us is reality

I also don't think the audience are overwhelmingly older. I subscribe to a FB page for Archer's listeners and there are plenty in their 20s and 30s. Personally I have been listening for more than 40 years. My parents listened so I did too. When I left home I continued to listen while living in halls at Uni and later in various houseshares. Initially my house mates humoured my Archers habit. It was a sort of in joke on a Sunday morning. "Schhh An is getting her weekly fix. But as the weeks went on, my house mates would start to ask questions. "Who is this one married to?" "How are these two relate?" "What did s/he mean by that?" (in reference to a past event of character.) Before long they too were hooked.

Every single person I ever shared with became an Archers listener and those I am still in touch with 20 years on, are still listening. They have introduced their spouses and even the young people who have shared their homes as nannies or au pairs. And so it goes on.

As for Peggy yes she has become something of an old so and so. However she wasn't always like she is now. I have had two conversations today about Peggy, one with my Mum (in her 70s) one with my neice (age 22) both have commented that Peggy seems much more meddlesone and narky than she used to be.

Also to be fair to Peggy she does not yet know that Helen says she has been abused by her spouse. Helen has never told anyone this except for Kirsty who she swore to secrecy. Peggy at present is faced with an incomprehensible and worrying situation; to wit, her grandaughter may be facing a murder charge having stabbed what Peggy believes to be her beloved and charming husband.

I'm not going to quote the preceding posts, not because they're not interesting but because of the space they'd take up, but I completely take the point about Peggy's attitude - she is representative of a certain type of her generation, although sadly not just her generation, and she doesn't yet know the reality of the situation. She has, however, known Helen all her life and Rob only briefly. That should count for something and yet apparently she believes that Helen might be capable of attempted murder and Rob is white as the driven snow. But as I implied, I have an irrational dislike of Peggy so I'm not unbiased.

I'm happy the storyline has brought in younger listeners, it's a subject that needs as much oxygen as it can get and as I've said several times, it's not the first time The Archers has dealt with a difficult storyline, although I agree this has been more melodramatic than most. I think NMdum1 is right, Archers convention won't allow Rob to get away with it, he'll be punished either by dying or by being found out if he survives. If he does it's not going to do me blood pressure any good to hear him whining about how badly Helen has treated him or, just as bad, being 'forgiving' and 'understanding'! I just hope they don't drag it out too long as I think that will turn people away who have been drawn in by the original sl.

(NMdum1, I'm also on the spectrum, diagnosed in late adulthood. By which time I had thankfully long learned to act as if I knew how to behave 'normally' in social situations I couldn't avoid, and one of the the most useful things I learned has been how to avoid telling the truth rather than outright lying!)

What rights does Ursula have to move into Blossom Hill cottage? Pat and Tony should tell her to get on her bike.

Isn't it owned by Peggy? I suppose if Rob's name is on the tenancy agreement then she has every right to stay there, especially if the rent is up to date. I can't imagine that Rob had Helen's name put on the lease.

I don't see how Rob being the tenant gives Ursula squatting rights?

It's not squatting. If the rent is being paid she can stay there as a guest - and I'm sure Rob would be happy for her to do that.

But Helen may well not.

She may well not, but as I said, I doubt Rob would have put Helen's name on the lease so she probably won't have a say.

Didn't Rob move in with Helen so she is the lease-holder.

I can't remember exactly. I thought he'd moved into that house with Jess originally.

Things are looking up. A Tregorran to the rescue!

Not sure of the actual situation but Peggy gave at least Helen the house, maybe them both but even if not Rob is Helen's husband so is probably entitled to a share. As for his Mum staying I'm assuming people are treading carefully considering Rob is at death's door due to Helen stabbing him. At least whilst she has to visit him in hospital it probably seems reasonable to let her stay there.

Or it would be if the hospital was in Ambridge but Rob will be in Felpesham or Borchester hospital or given the gravity of his injuries Birmingham. I am not convinced being close to you ailing son makes sense of staying in Ambridge. A hotel near the hospital would make more sense for someone who does not seem to be short of a bob r two.

I thought Usha owned Blossom Hill Cottage. Maybe she just rented it from Peggy. Peggy certainly lived there for years though.

I was actually swearing at her, you could almost see that self-righteous smirk on her face as she could not wait to add her two pennyworth to the situation.

I'm pretty sure Peggy gave the house to Helen and maybe Rob too when she was dishing out the inheritance a while ago. She caused all sorts of problems by missing out Tony and giving it all to the next generation. Maybe Peggy forgot that she didn't actually own it

To be honest I didn't pay attention to where the hospital was but I think there is supposed to be a suspension of belief here as I'm sure the idea was to save Ursula a stay in a hotel but if she's travelling to Birmingham every day not sure what the point is. Maybe she's just marking Rob's territory as it were

The bitch!

I don't think they have told us where the hospital is but It can't be in Ambridge because I have a map and there is no hospital! Oddly though I can't find Blossom Hill Cottage on it.

ambridge local hospital is borchester general or they is a hospital in felpersham. blossom hill cottage is on the outskirts of ambridge just of borchester main road.

Interesting discussion my dear cika, I haven't been precise enough. It’s not about how we see it, it’s about how the rest of the world sees it and how the change in this can only be a good thing.

Every so often, any show, television or radio needs to give itself a swift kick up the backside, which it certainly has and really stretch itself thematically and in-terms of the technical means by which it tells its stories. If it doesn’t it withers in slow motion, it is the lack of any real, sustained effort to do just that which is killing Casualty for example. The Archers has done just that in sticking with the Helen and Rob storyline for such a long-time and executing it in such an intense fashion, whilst still balancing it with all the other elements that make it The Archers. Lynda Snell and her Christmas show, the Grundy’s family and money issues, Brian being a tit, Brookfield Farm’s schemes and family issues, the inhabitants of Bridge Farm’s numerous misfortunes, Lower Loxley’s struggle to keep the show on the road etc, etc….

Of course this isn’t defined by Victoria sandwiches and village fetes and of course there is a lively, active and wide-ranging fandom, especially online covering a wide-range of ages and interests, but then so do most things. As you rightly point out cika, they’ve done an awful lot of contentious topics in their time, whether they be social issues or countryside-specific ones. I know enough about what would now be called ‘mythology’ to grasp this much. But that’s not really how the rest of the world sees it and anything that says “listen to us, we are really good and we are prepared to take you to uncomfortable places and do it in an adult and emotionally complex way and never patronise” is very welcome. It is unavoidable that twee Little England is how a good proportion of the UK public perceived it, at least until the last few weeks. It’s like the WI in a way, and I speak as a member, The Archers ain’t going to sustain itself and make that all-important 75th or 80th anniversary if it doesn’t present itself better and find a way of getting more under-45s like myself to buy-in long-term, or at least to look upon it more fairly. I grew up in a working class, Scottish family. It was Radio 1, Radio 2 or a thumping great rock album, that was it. I became an Archivist with a Masters degree, but Radio 4 is still seen by a lot of people I went to school with as the preserve of the posh. I doubt I’m all that unrepresentative a sample of the population. I was not deprived in any way, but it wasn’t something people like us really did much. Jeanette Winterson has it right when she said “why be happy when you can be normal?” But more generally, as a society, we all have higher standards now, we all demand more for our investment in all areas of our lives. The Archers creative team across the board, understand that well and have delivered something that will last. I think we'll be talking about this in 20 years, I really do. Even my brother, who is a sports nut and couldn’t care less listened to the ‘Stabbing episode’ on catch-up because people he knew were talking about it and fearing for Helen’s future as if she was a member of their family. He thought The Archers was just something boring old people listened to. He knows he was wrong now. He won’t stick with it, but his perception has changed. There are a lot of people who will stick with it and those who do not will be kinder to it.

The point is the creative team has faced-off against their own baggage and beaten it. Never again will anybody be able to say “oh, it’s just The Archers” as if it’s a twee, middle-class version of Emmerdale Farm in the 1980s without the pictures. I also find the dispute about whether something is The Archers or not The Archers peculiar. Short of necrophilia and a couple of other subjects, I don’t think there’s anything they can’t deal with, if done with care and thought and love. We’ll sit through most subjects, as long as the build-up is believable and the characters haven’t changed too much in the process – though a little bending and adapting to circumstances is healthy and extreme circumstances do create extreme responses – I don’t think you can argue against trying something hard. It’s drama. It’s meant to be hard. I am glad that the creative team agree.

The end result here is that, whoever succeeds Sean O’Connor as Editor doesn’t have to fight the same perception the next time they want to be daring or really difficult. They’ll have a legion of people friendly to the cause they didn’t have three or four years ago in addition to the legions that they had before and that, on-top of the vital business of highlighting the hell on earth some women and a few men suffer at the hands of their partners, is the point surely?

And just for reference – no matter how they might feel about it, I cannot imagine either of my grandmothers not being front and centre to defend me if I ever needed them – whether I was in the right or not. It might just be a generational thing, but I’m having trouble reconciling Peggy with Nana and Granny.

Hex on Ursula! And the plot certainly thickens doesn't it.... Positively on tenterhooks!

That would make sense. That would put it north of the village and on my map I can't read all the titles of the houses as they are further away (its one of those angled maps like the Met Office used before the Scots complained that it made Scotland look small and far away) This would explain why I can't find it. I can find Keeper's Cottage, April Cottage, Glebe Cottage, Honeysuckle Cottage etc.

But then it doesn't make sense for the police to go and question Susan. She lives at Ambridge view which is at Willow Farm south of th evillage half way up Lakey Hill.

What do you mean I take this too seriously?

Oh you nerd! Where can I get one?