What Would We Have Done About Nolly? The Noele Gordon and Meg Dilemma - Part 1

A happy Meg Richardson at the motel in the 1960s.

We disapprove strongly of the Nolly TV series, and the ridiculous Feminist posturings of Russell T Davies and its star, Helena Bonham Carter. Both stink of misandry and an ideology that is now questioned more and more.

The Nolly story was hijacked into a Feminist 'men against women' issue, like so much nowadays. It's easy. It's lazy. It's untrue.

If the Patriarchy truly existed, then women would not have been allowed to set up the Feminist movement or gain positions in industries largely set up by men - like television. As it was, Lady Plowden was head of the IBA before the end of the 1970s, and decreeing Crossroads be reduced from four to three episodes a week.

But what would we have done after the IBA decreed that Crossroads was to be cut back to three episodes? Television journalist Hilary Kingsley opined in her 1988 book, Soap Box, that the decree seemed to panic ATV and its successor, Central, and contributed to the sacking of Noele Gordon.

We don't know what was going on behind the scenes, but it seems that the rest of the cast were not all happy with the leading lady.

We wrote to ATV after the sacking was announced. We'd come up with a way to freshen up Crossroads and keep Nolly very much to the forefront. We received a very nice 'thanks, but no thanks,' reply - a pro-forma, we think.

We found the tragedies and dramas inflicted on Meg rather too much, particularly in the last few years. We always pictured her standing in her sitting room, waiting for the latest hideous bolt from Dame Fortune to strike her.

So, assuming that the storyline had developed as screened up until the Sam Hurst storyline of late 1981, how would we have saved Meg and given the character a fresh spring in her step?

And what would we have done about Nolly?

The first thing would have been to sit down for a straight talk with Noele Gordon. Slobbering all over her memory and using Feminist ideology - misandry under another name - to disparage Jack Barton is really not on. Which is why Russell T Davies's hijacking of her story for Feminist ends is completely unacceptable.

Russell is too young to remember early Crossroads, and was only eighteen when Noele was sacked. If you peel away a few layers and look at things he has incorporated into his work in the past, it becomes obvious that he is not as sound as he thinks.

There had been difficulties with Noele behind the scenes, whether they were to do with personality clashes with production staff or anything else is immaterial. It needed laying on the line to her that, if she was the leader of the cast and the show's spokesperson, then she needed to behave in a way that fostered good relations between cast members, an understanding that actors acted and producers produced (she had this with Reg Watson) and an excellent team spirit. 

The decision to stay or go would have been hers.

We think this is an approach that would have worked well. Noele appreciated straight talking, and her advancement in the world of television had been all her own doing, as herself, not as some quivering, misandrist Feminist.

If more women weren't there it was because it was an unproven and developing medium and they didn't want to be. But as soon as it established itself, Feminists were attempting to kick the boardroom doors down in droves, screeching 'SEXISM!'.

Noele had simply gone out there and done what she wanted. And she had succeeded.

If she had accepted our terms and decided to stay, then we would have unwrapped our plans to revitalise Meg and Noele's role in the show.

Noele had recently experienced the death of her mother and, let's face it, the tragedies and tribulations of Meg were not exactly the best ingredients for a happy  life in the acting profession.

Noele was dedicated to her role and, one of the loveliest things about her, she cared about the show's fans. She knew what it felt like to be lonely, and the show's place in the affections of millions of lonely people (not that all Crossroads fans were lonely) obviously resounded with her. But playing Meg could not have been much fun in the last few years.

So, Meg would have sprung back. We'd have reverted more to the early Meg character with a major new challenge, her determination to make the best of change (as she did when her husband died and she started the motel) and maybe a little light romance later on.

So returning to 1981, loaded with Rubik's Cubes and the Royal Wedding and the inner city riots in parts of England, we would make our first change to the Crossroads plot at the point of her conversation with Sam Hurst/Norton.

The Sunday Times Review of the Year, 1981.

Sam's advice about being free of excess baggage and travelling in hope would have provoked a different response from Meg: 'Is it really that easy, Sam? And is it really necessary to physically move to drop the excess baggage?'

'Perhaps not, Mrs Mortimer. Travelling in hope, moving forward, doesn't necessarily mean moving house...'

Meg would have been seen, uncertain, unhappy, still tranqullising herself, and all would have gone as it did in the original show up to and including the fire...

Jill would have received the QE2 phone call from Meg, just as originally seen onscreen, and rushed to the docks.

But, from then on, things would have been different...

Part 2 is here