I’ve watched EastEnders since I can remember.

Arthur Fowler washing knives and forks, you bitch / you cow, a spinning bow tie, Saskia’s death by ashtray, you’re not my muvva, slip on shoes, earrings, Wellard, Willie, and Lady Di, a few different Bens, a couple of Laurens and one Ian Beale.

And more - Matthew Rose put through the ringer by Steve Owen, Max and Tanya clinging on to a Nick Cave soundtrack as their marriage crumbled, Janine Butcher staring out at the sky as her grandmother died, Billy Mitchell raging at a terrified group of tube passengers after learning his daughter would be born with Down’s Syndrome. Poor, tragic Whitney Dean, terrified, climbing out of a first floor window and running away from something awful.

And it’s still too soon to talk to me about Danielle.

It’s safe to say that it’s a big part of my life, which sounds pretty pathetic to type, and believe me, the last thing I want to be doing on a Saturday morning is writing this.

I care too much, and I want to still be caring about EastEnders in ten years. Because, when it is good, it is excellent.

But annoyingly, it’s a bit directionless at the moment. No, it’s an utter mess.

I can say that, safe in the knowledge that this is an anonymous post. I wouldn’t dream for a second of criticising the hard work of the talented writers, directors and the fantastic cast.

All the right notes are there. They’re just being played in the wrong order.

I’m not going to bang on about bins, and driving lessons, and who the hell is Eddie and what does he have to do with any of this. Those are just tiny missteps compared with things going on elsewhere in the Square.

Let’s start with the current most compelling storyline. Lee’s depression. The decision has been made to set a portion of his struggle away from home.

There he was last night in the call centre, with his jacket slashed by that loathsome colleague and the constant spectre of his grim faced boss hanging over him.

Much like young Eddie’s stabbing and subsequent funeral, it’s a storyline that would have benefitted taking place on the square, with people we already know.

It always unusual to leave Walford, but the decision to do so in this case reveals what that the residents of E20 are missing. A convincing villain. Somebody to turn the screws on Lee - a figure who amplifies his alienation and struggle with ultimately forgivable and understandable motives of his own.

If you can’t tell the story with the existing pieces of the jigsaw, something is going badly wrong with your jigsaw. He said, mixing his metaphors.

It’s especially frustrating, as Lee (with the exception of Phil, more on him in a bit) seems to be the only character battling with his demons and going through something horrible, with all the terrible secrets that go along with it.

Let’s move on to a story that is oh so incredibly similar. Jay. Longtime favourite for many - tragic life, downward spiral, but bags of common sense and a wise old head on young shoulders. He’s being put through the mill and rejected by those around him. And here he is like Lee, with distant, unknowable outside influences being the cause of the mess he finds himself in.

The only surprising thing about this whole mess was the badly fudged ending, with Phil taking him to the police to grass up his underdeveloped drug dealer nemesis (which would never happen, sorry), and then his subsequent readmission back into the Mitchell house like he Phil never even suspected him of trying to corrupt his daughter.

It’s smacks of a storyline being quickly dispatched for an easy resolution, when we all know what should have happened is Ben and Jay resolving it between them by finally grabbing that gun they claimed to have disposed of two years ago and subjecting that drug dealer to some East End style gang land justice - Louise getting caught in the crossfire, but Jay valiantly saving her by taking a bullet to the leg for his troubles. Then, and only then would Phil would croak an invite back into his house.

Lauren. What is Lauren doing in a house with the couple who pinned the murder of their daughter (and her best mate) on her own beloved Dad (yes, it’s complicated, but no - she loves him)? I have no idea either. And neither does the show, because as much as they try to spin it - it’s a decision that doesn’t stand up to even the tiniest bit of scrutiny. How many bedrooms does Dot’s place have? Why hasn’t rich Uncle Jack stepped in to sort her somewhere to live? One of those flats perhaps?

What should be happening is Lauren working to secure the downfall of the Beales from within, while her dad waits in the wings, ready to take everything they own. Because really - what are you doing in that bloody house???

Abi. What are you doing Abi? Why haven't you got a boyfriend off of Tinder? Why aren’t you obsessively stalking someone? You seem like the type. Scare me. You know you want to.

Max. Come back home with a new family. Teenage daughters. Cat, pigeons.

Patrick. Rudolph Walker is the finest actor on the show. Watching his performance subtly change each week as he recovered from his stroke was a masterclass. But that storyline did nothing to help him interact with other characters. You need something, but what? If you can’t think of anything, then you’re gonna have to go. Will you go head to head with Phil? That might be interesting.

Sharon, Kathy and Shirl. Why are you friends? You can’t all have him you know…
And Kathy - you’re back now - but god you’re dull. Do something.

Mick and Linda. Where are you heading? What will the Carter family be without two of their kids, a second rate Johnny, and no finely mapped out three year story that pushes you to the brink before bringing you all back together? What happened to the idea of Mick being nice almost to the point of self destruction? Surely there’s more mileage in that?

Stacey. Those mood stabilisers are working too well. We’ve got too many characters with common sense - and your current display of it goes against years of finely judged mania. Why aren't you jeopardising the family life you have with some dreadful decisions? Why are too many characters in this show providing a well meaning shoulder to cry on?

Phil. You’re going to live. We all know that. Now do something interesting before you get there, like trying to atone for all the hell you’ve put everyone through by going out there and making some friends with people and doing something good. Become Scrooge on Christmas morning.

Kush. I want to see you making a stupid decision about your life while watching another man bring up your son. I want more horrible things to happen to you. I want more death and destruction reaped on you, and I want to see you break.

Jane. Why aren’t you having therapy? Why aren't you having an affair with your physiotherapist? Why aren’t you sat in that house on your own everyday, looking out of the window starting to suspect that horrible things are going on under your nose. A murder perhaps? Are you going mad, or is something happening? Has somebody done something awful? Are you a witness to something, or are you re-living what you did on that tragic night a few years ago.

Kat Slater - please come back and do all the wrong things with your life so we can gawp at you like a slow motion car crash. Ride a milk float back into the square. Save us with your chaos.

What I want to see more than anything though is a new family, with a dense, intricate story, which runs for three years. We saw it work with the Carters, we saw it work with the Brannings, and we saw it work before them with the Slaters.

Actors leave, and as a result, family stories are reduced to those that have stuck around with diminishing returns. Create a new one from existing parts like you’ve done brilliantly with Stacy and Martin, or bring a new one in. Build them around key characters like Whitney, the same way the Carters sprung to life from Shirley’s backstory.

Give us a villain. Give us a new family. Maybe two. Give us a focus. Give us a mystery. Give us some of those incredible two handers you’ve not done in years. Stop clinging on to families that have ceased to be families. Give us a cliffhanger so unexpected and earth shattering we can’t believe what we’re watching. Focus: where will your character be in a year, two years, three? Pick up an episode where you left off once in a while. Give us a horrible secret waiting to be revealed. A tape waiting to be played. Give us a reason to watch for two hours a week.

Give us a show that everybody is talking about.

Cheers,

Peach

Quite long but looked at the part about Kush and totally agree. He's messed up the lives of a few people close to him. Has an Oedipus complex with his stupid ghastly mother who is a middle aged, sex hungry divorcee and thinks he's a hit with the girlies. Thinks he can ripple his biceps and everyone will come running but a snidey creep without a brain of his own. Incapable of having an independent life and a mummy's boy. Very much a spare part who needs a scene where the stupidly forgiving Martin can revisit his stupid face with his fist.

Dislike Kush and hopefully he'll get binned. Treats others like dirt and can deal with relationships.

You make some good points but for me, you want to push already good storylines even further than needs be.

I think the Depression story works because Lee'a tormentors are off the square. If you added in that 'bully and victim' element to his everyday life in Walford, the story would become just as much about the tormentor as it would Lee.

And with Jane, I think the recovery storyline is enough. I don't want to see paranoia or an affair or a breakdown. I want to see a woman struggling to come to terms with her slow recovery and potential disability. And that is working well. The scene where she walked in Masood's arms was played perfectly. Jane desperately needs to be humanised following the Lucy story, and this is doing the job.

Fabulous post.

And while they're at it could they make Steven into that David Wicks naughty boy that I had high hopes for. He should be a flirt, a schemer and a little ruthless....ATM he is an utter bore.

Some more questions about Jane:

- Haven't you been traumatised by being paralysed!
- Why are you not angry and bitter why this has happened to you?
- Was finding out about Stephen extorting money from the business and the whereabouts of Peter really a priority? Now you're satisfied with that, what do you want to do and where next?
- Where is your marriage with Ian going and what is the state of your relationship?
- How have you just brushed aside your stepson being in a young offenders institution?

The trouble is with recent producers of EE is there is no balance, its either one extreme or the other. Its either Kirkwood or DTC and a sensationalist show, or a SOC or Lorraine Newman where love and warmth is the order of the day.

SOC is just going to keep EE as a melodramatic soap, lots of warm touching moments, a lovely community where everybody gets on helping each other through their mundane lives. The odd off screen death like Eddie which will be contrived for some bigger event, such as Phil realising his family need him. Personality transplants galore. Its plain to see with everyone having a new personality where the show is heading!

If people cannot see this is SOC's vision for the show by now then they really do need it spelling out to them. You don't change characters overnight only to go back to what they were before. This is the biggest problem. A producer who has come in and pressed the reset button on every cast member. He's backed himself into a corner now, this direction has to continue otherwise its going to be unsalvageable if another producer were to come in and change direction again.

This is obviously the direction the BBC wants for EE. Its now just a budget style daytime soap, living off its name and former glories. The cynic in me believes the end goal is damage the show enough that they decide to end it. Everything about the show screams budget from the directing to the camera work and the lack of outside filming. People want and expect more these days whether you like it or not. I just don't think the BBC and EE is capable of delivering a show worthy of its name now. Too much damage done down the years and a budget which won't allow it to compete against ITV's flagship soaps.

I agree Vald. Just as with Vincent and Gavin, his return was heralded as a nasty, manipulative, dangerous, Machiavellian character but in the end offering almost nothing and actually being a patsy who after a minor flourish is just a spare part with no long term direction.

Hi Dom, how's the new job going?

Good post OP

Wow! what a brilliant first post, I like you Peach

I wish.

EastEnders is an untamed beast. It's an injection of love and warmth, a dash of old and a sprinkling of new. A gritty kitchen sink drama everyone is talking about. Anyone can fall in love. That's the easy part you must keep it going. Anyone can fall in love. Over the years it has to keep growing. Sun and rain, joy and pain. There's highs, there's lows. We've no way of knowing.

Thanks.

What a great post.

I'm 100% with you on loving and caring about the show, which is why it's such a shame to have seen it slip so far since 2010.

Just lately though, it really does feel directionless. Even under the utterly dull Loraine Newman, at least we still had bits of excitement and at least I had some hope, with the likes of David Wicks and Ronnie Mitchell returning, Janine Butcher's scheming, etc. There's just not a lot going for the show at the moment. Ronnie and Roxy's exit seems to be the only big thing coming up, and that's not necessarily a good thing as they are to of my favourite characters.

I would honestly change so many things.

Like you say, when EastEnders is good, it's the best thing on TV. When it's bad however, it's one of the worst.

What would you do, Lou?

I can sort of let this dull transitional period in the show slide, but I just remember how the last changeover resulted in a dramatic improvement pretty much within a couple of weeks. It was almost a different show.

Have some big prominent storylines that interweave a spiral off in New and fun directions, impacting a range of characters, and by this I don't mean overflowing bins.

Improve the cast. There is still deadwood in Donna, Tina and Sylvie. Characters like Kat and Janine could be brought back. Replacing Mick and Linda with Janine and David in The Vic would be a start. Also, introduce some new characters. A new family, Kat's son Luke, a villain with depth, etc.

Make the soap more exciting in general. More advertising, like 'There's a killer amongst them', more on location filming, and much more.

I could go on for a while!

I agree with you on the last transition period. It was super. You went from Snake gate to Stacey Slater returning, some great drama with David Wicks and Janine Butcher, Ronnie&Roxy and Ian&Jane being reunited, and of course the start of Who Killed Lucy. It made you proud to be an EastEnders fan once again. Until the 30th, there was constantly something to look forward to.

Have you turned into Anita Dobson?

Seems like there's precious little love, a whole lot of hate, and lots of secret sex on that show. It's unbearab le.

I agree with a lot of this, but what would the axing of Tina, Donna and Sylvie really achieve? Especially Sylvie who is recurring at best. I don't think their absence would improve the quality of the show. In fact, I think that SOC has proven that there are no such thing as poor characters, just poor writers. Les and Pam came to life under SOC. since he took over, we've seen vincent the family man rather than Vincent the 2D Mitchell hunter. A lot of other characters have come to life.

I cautioustly wonder where the show is going. Part of me thinks it's nice and calm and then the Christmas/ NYD episodes launch it into a big new year for the show. I could be wrong but I feel the bombs have been subtly planted by SOC and the departure of the Mitchell sisters is going for have a big impact on a lot of characters.

I have a perm. That's where the similarities end.

Yawn.