Discussion:
Good Grundy news
Add Reply
Jane Vernon
2019-08-06 08:04:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.

I hope they stay apart.

Just my two penn'orth.
--
Jane
The Potter in the Purple socks - to reply, please remove PURPLE
BTME

http://www.clothandclay.co.uk/umra/cookbook.htm - Umrats' recipes
Vicky Ayech
2019-08-06 08:26:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:04:02 +0100, Jane Vernon
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
Just my two penn'orth.
I thought what he said was lovely, very grounded and honest. I am
hoping she will realise he is right and being together is the thing
that matters. But it is not looking good so far.
Mike
2019-08-06 08:41:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:04:02 +0100, Jane Vernon
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
Just my two penn'orth.
I thought what he said was lovely, very grounded and honest. I am
hoping she will realise he is right and being together is the thing
that matters. But it is not looking good so far.
The problem is I think, that Emma is a spoilt brat with ‘upper class’
aspirations (wonder where she gets that from?) who thinks the world owes
her everything she desires and why is she being denied all?

Ed is prepared to work hard to provide for his family, doesn’t think the
world owes him anything and doesn’t resent the Grundy family destiny
(despite the nasty streak apparent in so many of the S.W.’s to do them down
all the time). Happiness in life for Ed does not depend on riches and
golden ladder rungs but a contented family life and a good wife to support
and be supported by.
--
Toodle Pip
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-08-06 08:58:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:04:02 +0100, Jane Vernon
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
Just my two penn'orth.
I agree: I think them separating would be for the best for Ed. Not sure
about Emma: at the moment, I don't feel too sympathetic towards her.
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
I thought what he said was lovely, very grounded and honest. I am
hoping she will realise he is right and being together is the thing
Agreed. A little sad that he had to say it so tearfully, but very
believable.
Post by Mike
Post by Vicky Ayech
that matters. But it is not looking good so far.
The problem is I think, that Emma is a spoilt brat with ‘upper class’
aspirations (wonder where she gets that from?) who thinks the world owes
her everything she desires and why is she being denied all?
There have been times - such as when she was running for PC - that I
felt she had good points (of argument I mean, down boy ...). But her
whiny voice ...
Post by Mike
Ed is prepared to work hard to provide for his family, doesn’t think the
world owes him anything and doesn’t resent the Grundy family destiny
(despite the nasty streak apparent in so many of the S.W.’s to do them down
all the time). Happiness in life for Ed does not depend on riches and
golden ladder rungs but a contented family life and a good wife to support
and be supported by.
Like his parents, really. (Though I think Ed is basically more honest
than Eddie - though more easily led, be it by Emma or that evil toerag.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

A lot of people think that being skinny is the happy ending, and its not.
Being happy is the happy ending. - Sarah Millican, in Radio Times 3-9 March
2012
Vicky Ayech
2019-08-06 10:10:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:04:02 +0100, Jane Vernon
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
Just my two penn'orth.
I thought what he said was lovely, very grounded and honest. I am
hoping she will realise he is right and being together is the thing
that matters. But it is not looking good so far.
The problem is I think, that Emma is a spoilt brat with ‘upper class’
aspirations (wonder where she gets that from?) who thinks the world owes
her everything she desires and why is she being denied all?
Ed is prepared to work hard to provide for his family, doesn’t think the
world owes him anything and doesn’t resent the Grundy family destiny
(despite the nasty streak apparent in so many of the S.W.’s to do them down
all the time). Happiness in life for Ed does not depend on riches and
golden ladder rungs but a contented family life and a good wife to support
and be supported by.
That's not quite fair. Emma is prepared to work very hard too and
always has. She just sees that she works much harder than most females
in Ambridge and she has 3 jobs rememebr, and helped Will a lot with
childcare and housework as well as being a good mother and
daughter-in-law, and she had the dream of a secure home of her own.
That's not just envy of those better off. But maybe she worries more
than Ed about their home not being secure. Although it was Ed had to
sleep in the tent.
Mike
2019-08-06 10:42:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Vicky Ayech
Post by Vicky Ayech
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:04:02 +0100, Jane Vernon
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
Just my two penn'orth.
I thought what he said was lovely, very grounded and honest. I am
hoping she will realise he is right and being together is the thing
that matters. But it is not looking good so far.
The problem is I think, that Emma is a spoilt brat with ‘upper class’
aspirations (wonder where she gets that from?) who thinks the world owes
her everything she desires and why is she being denied all?
Ed is prepared to work hard to provide for his family, doesn’t think the
world owes him anything and doesn’t resent the Grundy family destiny
(despite the nasty streak apparent in so many of the S.W.’s to do them down
all the time). Happiness in life for Ed does not depend on riches and
golden ladder rungs but a contented family life and a good wife to support
and be supported by.
That's not quite fair. Emma is prepared to work very hard too and
always has. She just sees that she works much harder than most females
in Ambridge and she has 3 jobs rememebr, and helped Will a lot with
childcare and housework as well as being a good mother and
daughter-in-law, and she had the dream of a secure home of her own.
That's not just envy of those better off. But maybe she worries more
than Ed about their home not being secure. Although it was Ed had to
sleep in the tent.
I didn’t suggest that Emmur doesn’t work hard and I still stand by my other
observations of her.
--
Toodle Pip
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-08-06 14:13:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In message <***@4ax.com>, Vicky Ayech
<***@gmail.com> writes:
[]
Post by Vicky Ayech
That's not quite fair. Emma is prepared to work very hard too and
always has. She just sees that she works much harder than most females
Granted.
Post by Vicky Ayech
in Ambridge and she has 3 jobs rememebr, and helped Will a lot with
childcare and housework as well as being a good mother and
daughter-in-law, and she had the dream of a secure home of her own.
Good mother I can grasp. What does being a good daughter-in-law actually
involve?
Post by Vicky Ayech
That's not just envy of those better off. But maybe she worries more
than Ed about their home not being secure. Although it was Ed had to
sleep in the tent.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Back then, many radio sets were still in black and white. - Eddie Mair, radio
presenter, on "PM" programme reaching 40; in Radio Times, 3-9 April 2010
Jenny M Benson
2019-08-06 15:25:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Good mother I can grasp. What does being a good daughter-in-law actually
involve?
In my case, I think it was resisting the temptation to tell my mil that
even though her son didn't like the liver she served him, he really
liked what I cooked!
--
Jenny M Benson
http://jennygenes.blogspot.co.uk/
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-08-07 00:15:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jenny M Benson
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Good mother I can grasp. What does being a good daughter-in-law
actually involve?
In my case, I think it was resisting the temptation to tell my mil that
even though her son didn't like the liver she served him, he really
liked what I cooked!
(-: - but Clarrie is a good cook, who I think can make a good meal out
of unpromising material.

Did he not like liver at all (I don't, except slightly as part of some
pastes), or only as cooked by the mil?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

After all is said and done, usually more is said.
Jenny M Benson
2019-08-07 16:04:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Jenny M Benson
In my case, I think it was resisting the temptation to tell my mil
that even though her son didn't like the liver she served him, he
really liked what I cooked!
(-: - but Clarrie is a good cook, who I think can make a good meal out
of unpromising material.
Did he not like liver at all (I don't, except slightly as part of some
pastes), or only as cooked by the mil?
The latter. When I said "what I cooked" I meant "the liver what I
cooked." I think it was not only the species of liver but my cooking it
properly!
--
Jenny M Benson
http://jennygenes.blogspot.co.uk/
krw
2019-08-07 20:41:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Jenny M Benson
In my case, I think it was resisting the temptation to tell my mil
that even though her son didn't like the liver she served him, he
really liked what I cooked!
(-: - but Clarrie is a good cook, who I think can make a good meal out
of unpromising material.
Did he not like liver at all (I don't, except slightly as part of some
pastes), or only as cooked by the mil?
The latter.  When I said "what I cooked" I meant "the liver what I
cooked."  I think it was not only the species of liver but my cooking it
properly!
I suppose you can eat undercooked liver.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
John Ashby
2019-08-07 21:15:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by krw
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Jenny M Benson
In my case, I think it was resisting the temptation to tell my mil
that even though her son didn't like the liver she served him, he
really liked what I cooked!
(-: - but Clarrie is a good cook, who I think can make a good meal
out of unpromising material.
Did he not like liver at all (I don't, except slightly as part of
some pastes), or only as cooked by the mil?
The latter.  When I said "what I cooked" I meant "the liver what I
cooked."  I think it was not only the species of liver but my cooking
it properly!
I suppose you can eat undercooked liver.
By some fluke.

john
Mike
2019-08-08 15:21:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John Ashby
Post by krw
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Jenny M Benson
In my case, I think it was resisting the temptation to tell my mil
that even though her son didn't like the liver she served him, he
really liked what I cooked!
(-: - but Clarrie is a good cook, who I think can make a good meal
out of unpromising material.
Did he not like liver at all (I don't, except slightly as part of
some pastes), or only as cooked by the mil?
The latter.  When I said "what I cooked" I meant "the liver what I
cooked."  I think it was not only the species of liver but my cooking
it properly!
I suppose you can eat undercooked liver.
By some fluke.
john
I’ll just have the onions, thanks.
--
Toodle Pip
Penny
2019-08-06 15:40:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:13:48 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
What does being a good daughter-in-law actually
involve?
Probably not suggesting to one's child she point out to Nana that the
picture shows a horse rather than a gee-gee...

Possibly also not getting upset (as said one-time child did) when MiL helps
by tidying up and doing the washing up. Smiling and saying thank you works
much better (and is what she did when I behaved in similar fashion).
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
BrritSki
2019-08-09 10:02:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Penny
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:13:48 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
What does being a good daughter-in-law actually
involve?
Probably not suggesting to one's child she point out to Nana that the
picture shows a horse rather than a gee-gee...
Possibly also not getting upset (as said one-time child did) when MiL helps
by tidying up and doing the washing up. Smiling and saying thank you works
much better (and is what she did when I behaved in similar fashion).
I was very lucky with my MiL. When she used to say after big family
dinners "How lucky I am to have you all here" I'd simply say to her that
you reap as you sow [1].

[1] Not a thread-swerve to Cleopatra's Needle.

Vicky Ayech
2019-08-06 17:31:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:13:48 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
[]
Post by Vicky Ayech
That's not quite fair. Emma is prepared to work very hard too and
always has. She just sees that she works much harder than most females
Granted.
Post by Vicky Ayech
in Ambridge and she has 3 jobs rememebr, and helped Will a lot with
childcare and housework as well as being a good mother and
daughter-in-law, and she had the dream of a secure home of her own.
Good mother I can grasp. What does being a good daughter-in-law actually
involve?
She's always ready to help Clarrie.
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Vicky Ayech
That's not just envy of those better off. But maybe she worries more
than Ed about their home not being secure. Although it was Ed had to
sleep in the tent.
Chris McMillan
2019-08-06 08:51:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
Just my two penn'orth.
Marry in haste, repent at leisure Emma. I suspect Soozan always expected
Ed to be the lesser of the two Grundy evils. She likes Clarrie when it
suits her, but has little time for the others in her social climbing world.


Sincerely Chris
Jim Easterbrook
2019-08-06 09:10:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
I agree. Thinking back to Ed's comment about a mortgage not giving you
security, he was in line to inherit a secure farm tenancy until the
Grundys got into debt because Susan forced Neil into an unsuitable job as
a feed salesman and he allowed them to buy on credit. I think generations
of Horrobins have done more damage to generations of Grundys than either
realises.
--
Jim <http://www.jim-easterbrook.me.uk/>
1959/1985? M B+ G+ A L- I- S- P-- CH0(p) Ar++ T+ H0 Q--- Sh0
Vicky Ayech
2019-08-06 10:13:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 6 Aug 2019 09:10:13 GMT, Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
I agree. Thinking back to Ed's comment about a mortgage not giving you
security, he was in line to inherit a secure farm tenancy until the
Grundys got into debt because Susan forced Neil into an unsuitable job as
a feed salesman and he allowed them to buy on credit. I think generations
of Horrobins have done more damage to generations of Grundys than either
realises.
OAP moment here. Sorry. Susan forced Neil into a job and credit
buying and that got the Grundys into debt? And the Horrobins did
damage to generation of Grundys? You are gaslighting me, innit? You
want me to get confused and think I am an old gaga.
Jim Easterbrook
2019-08-06 11:06:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
I agree. Thinking back to Ed's comment about a mortgage not giving you
security, he was in line to inherit a secure farm tenancy until the
Grundys got into debt because Susan forced Neil into an unsuitable job
as a feed salesman and he allowed them to buy on credit. I think
generations of Horrobins have done more damage to generations of Grundys
than either realises.
OAP moment here. Sorry. Susan forced Neil into a job and credit buying
and that got the Grundys into debt? And the Horrobins did damage to
generation of Grundys? You are gaslighting me, innit? You want me to
get confused and think I am an old gaga.
Susan wanted Neil to have a job with a car and suit wearing and so on, so
he became a feed salesman. The Grundys persuaded him to allow them to run
up a larger feed bill than they should have. The feed company eventually
sued the Grundys for the money, leading to their eviction from Grange
Farm and the move to Meadow Rise, where Ed went off the rails.
--
Jim <http://www.jim-easterbrook.me.uk/>
1959/1985? M B+ G+ A L- I- S- P-- CH0(p) Ar++ T+ H0 Q--- Sh0
Steve Hague
2019-08-06 11:20:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jim Easterbrook
than either realises.
OAP moment here. Sorry. Susan forced Neil into a job and credit buying
and that got the Grundys into debt? And the Horrobins did damage to
generation of Grundys? You are gaslighting me, innit? You want me to
get confused and think I am an old gaga.
Susan wanted Neil to have a job with a car and suit wearing and so on, so
he became a feed salesman. The Grundys persuaded him to allow them to run
up a larger feed bill than they should have. The feed company eventually
sued the Grundys for the money, leading to their eviction from Grange
Farm and the move to Meadow Rise, where Ed went off the rails.
Very succinctly put. Joe also went off the rails, and started hitting
ferrets with a hammer.
Steve
Mike
2019-08-06 12:23:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Hague
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jim Easterbrook
than either realises.
OAP moment here. Sorry. Susan forced Neil into a job and credit buying
and that got the Grundys into debt? And the Horrobins did damage to
generation of Grundys? You are gaslighting me, innit? You want me to
get confused and think I am an old gaga.
Susan wanted Neil to have a job with a car and suit wearing and so on, so
he became a feed salesman. The Grundys persuaded him to allow them to run
up a larger feed bill than they should have. The feed company eventually
sued the Grundys for the money, leading to their eviction from Grange
Farm and the move to Meadow Rise, where Ed went off the rails.
Very succinctly put. Joe also went off the rails, and started hitting
ferrets with a hammer.
Steve
He went ‘on the lump’ didn’t he?
--
Toodle Pip
Sam Plusnet
2019-08-06 18:23:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Hague
Very succinctly put. Joe also went off the rails, and started hitting
ferrets with a hammer.
But found he couldn't get a decent tune out of any of them.
--
Sam Plusnet
Jim Easterbrook
2019-08-06 19:05:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by Steve Hague
Very succinctly put. Joe also went off the rails, and started hitting
ferrets with a hammer.
But found he couldn't get a decent tune out of any of them.
They were all a bit flat.
--
Jim <http://www.jim-easterbrook.me.uk/>
1959/1985? M B+ G+ A L- I- S- P-- CH0(p) Ar++ T+ H0 Q--- Sh0
John Ashby
2019-08-06 19:22:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by Steve Hague
Very succinctly put. Joe also went off the rails, and started hitting
ferrets with a hammer.
But found he couldn't get a decent tune out of any of them.
They were all a bit flat.
Should have used a mouse-organ.

john
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2019-08-07 00:13:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by John Ashby
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Sam Plusnet
Post by Steve Hague
Very succinctly put. Joe also went off the rails, and started hitting
ferrets with a hammer.
But found he couldn't get a decent tune out of any of them.
They were all a bit flat.
Should have used a mouse-organ.
john

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

After all is said and done, usually more is said.
Vicky Ayech
2019-08-06 12:37:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 6 Aug 2019 11:06:28 GMT, Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
I agree. Thinking back to Ed's comment about a mortgage not giving you
security, he was in line to inherit a secure farm tenancy until the
Grundys got into debt because Susan forced Neil into an unsuitable job
as a feed salesman and he allowed them to buy on credit. I think
generations of Horrobins have done more damage to generations of Grundys
than either realises.
OAP moment here. Sorry. Susan forced Neil into a job and credit buying
and that got the Grundys into debt? And the Horrobins did damage to
generation of Grundys? You are gaslighting me, innit? You want me to
get confused and think I am an old gaga.
Susan wanted Neil to have a job with a car and suit wearing and so on, so
he became a feed salesman. The Grundys persuaded him to allow them to run
up a larger feed bill than they should have. The feed company eventually
sued the Grundys for the money, leading to their eviction from Grange
Farm and the move to Meadow Rise, where Ed went off the rails.
Oh, thank you, I didn't remember the feed bill stuff. So the Grundys'
losing Grange Farm was Susan's fault indirectly. And Neil's.
Mike
2019-08-06 13:34:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
I agree. Thinking back to Ed's comment about a mortgage not giving you
security, he was in line to inherit a secure farm tenancy until the
Grundys got into debt because Susan forced Neil into an unsuitable job
as a feed salesman and he allowed them to buy on credit. I think
generations of Horrobins have done more damage to generations of Grundys
than either realises.
OAP moment here. Sorry. Susan forced Neil into a job and credit buying
and that got the Grundys into debt? And the Horrobins did damage to
generation of Grundys? You are gaslighting me, innit? You want me to
get confused and think I am an old gaga.
Susan wanted Neil to have a job with a car and suit wearing and so on, so
he became a feed salesman. The Grundys persuaded him to allow them to run
up a larger feed bill than they should have. The feed company eventually
sued the Grundys for the money, leading to their eviction from Grange
Farm and the move to Meadow Rise, where Ed went off the rails.
And wasn’t that about the same time as Kneel’s near-dalliance with Maureen?
--
Toodle Pip
krw
2019-08-07 14:04:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
I agree. Thinking back to Ed's comment about a mortgage not giving you
security, he was in line to inherit a secure farm tenancy until the
Grundys got into debt because Susan forced Neil into an unsuitable job
as a feed salesman and he allowed them to buy on credit. I think
generations of Horrobins have done more damage to generations of Grundys
than either realises.
OAP moment here. Sorry. Susan forced Neil into a job and credit buying
and that got the Grundys into debt? And the Horrobins did damage to
generation of Grundys? You are gaslighting me, innit? You want me to
get confused and think I am an old gaga.
Susan wanted Neil to have a job with a car and suit wearing and so on, so
he became a feed salesman. The Grundys persuaded him to allow them to run
up a larger feed bill than they should have. The feed company eventually
sued the Grundys for the money, leading to their eviction from Grange
Farm and the move to Meadow Rise, where Ed went off the rails.
And wasn’t that about the same time as Kneel’s near-dalliance with Maureen?
No - that was when Soosan was the Ambridge One.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
krw
2019-08-07 14:03:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jim Easterbrook
Grundys got into debt because Susan forced Neil into an unsuitable job as
a feed salesman and he allowed them to buy on credit.
The Grundys always bought on credit but Neil let the firm increase the
credit limit to "help" out a friend. It backfired as in reality the
Grundys could not pay the smaller or larger bills.
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
Min
2019-08-07 00:32:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
Just my two penn'orth.
Languid wave - YANAOU! I also thought how mature he was being.
--
Min
steveski
2019-08-07 00:44:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Min
Post by Jane Vernon
I listened to Friday's episode with trepidation. However, I felt an
enormous sense of relief at the end of the episode. Ed is right! He
has done everything he can and when it comes down to it, if being with
him and having the children with him is not good enough for Emma, then
they have completely different sets of values and they should not be
together.
I hope they stay apart.
Just my two penn'orth.
Languid wave - YANAOU! I also thought how mature he was being.
Mind you, he was blubbing like Fotherington-Thomas :-)
--
Steveski
Loading...