Will Luke and Noah Ever Go All The Way?

... was that she took part in all three of daytime's major gay storylines. Having watched (and enjoyed) all three of those stories, I'm simply amazed I didn't realize that. I know she gets (and deserves) a lot of flak for what she's done to ATWT, but there's no denying that's she done more than her part in bringing gay characters to our screens and making them an intergral part of the core families on the show.

...in getting gay characters on soap operas. I really am grateful for that. If I have to be honest, however, I'm really disappointed with the overall writing on ATWT, not just the Nuke storyline, and I really wish they would start listening to us viewers--not just myself, but others here, such as Anthony, Defft, Nukely, and so many others--have made suggestions on how to improve the show, particularly with the writing--write for character, not plot; improve the integration of characters; pay attention to history; bring back Matt (sorry, I always have to throw that in); etc.

Anyway, as for Nuke: I actually think a consummation is going to happen soon--based on the storyline that started Monday, especially with the dialogue, and the fact that Passanante is even doing this interview--I just have a gut feeling it's just around the corner. In fact, with November being a sweeps month, and Nuke being the show's most talked about couple, I wouldn't be surprised if Luke and Noah have something extra to give thanks for.... I hope I'm right.

Check out my blog: http://radicalsexy.blogspot.com/

I'm sure she's being shredded, sliced and diced in some quarters as many see her as the enemy, and she certainly has her flaws, but the one thing I get from this interview is that the lady's hands are tied and there's really only so much she can say and do. She may write the show, but she answers to the higher ups. I suspect Luke and Noah would be a lot further along in their relationship if she had the freedom to write it as she sees fit.

I knew that she was at All My Children for Bianca, daytime's first core character teen coming out & beyond. Agnes Nixon said that Bianca's storyline was one that she had wanted to tell since her college days back in 19xx (Sorry I can't recall the year, but it was literally back in the day.) And, Jean Passanante was her protégé at All My Children, and after Agnes was not actively at the show, Passanante may well have been (and I have long said that she was) the protector of Bianca, the lesbian, until she, Passanante, too, was no longer at the show. But, many people were involved in the decision to go forward with the storyline because they knew upfront that they wanted to approach it with integrity, be willing to face the hate mail, and stick it out. And, that extended upward to the strong support of then ABC Daytime Head, Angela Shapiro. I didn't realize that she had been at One Life to Live for Billy & the AIDS Quilt storyline!

I do have one criticism of the article. I understand that she can't be made to answer questions about kissing and sex if she doesn't want to (or more than likely, can't) but there is a question that was not asked and it should've been a no brainer. JP says herself, more than once, that the couple is loved by fans, a fan favorite and helped raise the ratings. She then said that they haven't been on very much lately. That leads to the question I feel should have been asked: why did Luke and Noah (a proven ratings draw) spend the summer on the backburner while Parker and Liberty (an untested and ultimately unliked couple) ruled the show?  Why did the show not use them during the summer when you play your hot teen characters?   Yes, you must continue to develop new characters and Parker is a core character so he should be featured.  But why not do both, use what works WHILE you bring on something new.  Why do one in lieu of the other?  It makes no sense.  And yes, sure they have a story now, but other popular pairs go from story to story without a beat. Why did the boys have to wait for months for another one?  It's an obvious question, a logical question and an important IMO.... and I'm wondering why it went unasked.

We complain when people portray gay characters jumping in the sack and we complain when they don't show gay characters jumping in the sack. We finally have a healthy gay relationship not based on stereotypical ideas of casual sex and it is not enough for us. The community is never happy. Mature minds are happy that this story line is not following typical paths.

I'm glad to see Kevin back! I know the story became more popular with the addition of Noah, but I still look back fondly on the Levin years. I always thought that Kevin's reaction to Luke's coming out was that of someone who was insecure with his own sexuality. And come on, I can't be the only one who saw jealousy in Kevin's eyes when Noah put his arm around Luke on Monday. I know I probably live in my own fantasy Levin world, but at least I'm watching the show again (I had quit after they wrote Maddie off).

Obviously this is daytime television and we're not going to get anything that even goes so far as THIS --

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir3s3WzZTRU

 

 But had Nuke "Done the Deed" casually off-screen (with on-screen verbal acknowledgement of the consume)  the show could have checked that off and gone on to traditional soap matters. By holding it off so long ATWT has put a HUGE Pink Elephant in a very literal bedroom.

...I'm just wondering why they don't hint at the fact that stuff like that has taken place. If they can't show the intimacy..or the laying with each other shirtless in bed...making out -- why not hint at the fact that it's happened?

Excellent Work Dennis! Carry On!

as she and golden boy Executive Producer Chris Goutman seem to be the only two executives in daytime who seem to feel that their jobs are secure no matter what. History to date is on their side, as neither has paid the price paid that countless other writers and executive producers with shows in much better shape than ATWT have had to pay.

At the same time, it seems that both P&G produced serials have been so battered by the press, fans, and industry insiders that even the press-shy Passanante is being encouraged to market for the show.

One of the only encouraging elements that (if we are to take her at face value) is that Luke may have a storyline that lasts longer than one day. He would be amazing as only their crazy obstacles last long. I found it interesting how Passanante disassociated herself from Luke and Noah's lack of face time (with or without sex) and how she choose to respond to the Liberty and Parker comparison.

To me she was saying that fans can forget about these guys having sex as we are somehow supposed to "get" that since the nasty tweener sex between almost relatives got the writers into such hot water, that we/she can only imagine in how much trouble she'd be if she'd let the much beloved college-aged committed gay couple show some skin and or experience any intimacy other than kissing.

I think for those who love these characters, Dennis' suggestion about the Consummation Clock is a great one as it's likely that it will get picked up by other news feeds and it seems that TPTB will only move when cornered and praised. I am into the show any more, and much less into Nuke as Passanante/Goutman have gotten away with murder. I will keep an eye as gay men appearing on the canvas with more frequency, having sex, or at least talking about having had it and show some suggestion of it, would be a good thing no matter how low this show has gone.

I for one would love to see her replaced ASAP as irrespectively of any Nuke issues she can only write about babies, revenge, and does not have the vision to put together a sequential story that goes for the heart for more than one day. Daytime drama and fully self-contained episodes don't speak the same language.

I also did not like her run-around as it's clear that she knows how popular Luke and/or Noah are and fessed up to their use of focus groups. The latter is important in that so many fans think that TPTB don't know what the viewers are thinking. Passanante and Goutman know exactly how how most viewers feel and have come to the conclusion that unlike their straight characters, their gay ones will be used as hot buttons, esp. when it comes to their intimacy.

No matter how I feel about the show, this story is a HUGE get for AE as Passanante was made to work for her press about this student body election. The skeptic in me thinks that P&G dragged out Passanante as Chris Goutman has been inserting his foot in his moth so much recently that they decided to try to see how she'd do under pressure. If this were an election my thinking is that P&G will now see her as Obama to Goutman's McCain.

Guillermo's Media Guillotine: Entertainment, journalism, politics, and popular culture.

http://springintoaction.typepad.com

if they will put up one of those parental advisory messages on before Luke & Noah sleep together?

I wasn't aware of JP's work on One Life to Live, but I knew she'd been at All My Children prior to becoming co-Head Writer of Another World. AW was my favorite soap, and when it got cancelled P&G just moved her (and Goutman) over to ATWT. This was 1999, so Goutman and Passanante have been in charge of ATWT for over nine years--almost unheard-of in soapland (Granted, she had a co-Head Writer at one point) due the the unforgiving grind--and even more unforgiving network suits.

 

 On the one hand, nine years at one show can give the stories a lot more continuity, but in most cases you just see stories repeating themselves and a burned-out HW just tossing anything out there. For her to say she had no ideas about story "past December" can't possibly be true, because most soap writers have to have their "Bible" for the show mapped out a year in advance. She was probably referring to actual scripts planned through December, as opposed to the Bible, which can be general outlines and breakdowns needed much further ahead.

 

Her Luke/Noah story (I detest those blended couple names) is obviously something she hasn't written before, so it could very well be her favorite story simply due to its originality. A press-shy HW might very well want to chat a bit about a story she cares more about than...say, Lily/Holden reunion #30845 or Character Return from the Dead #105833. And let's face it: Passanante could not possibly stick her foot in her mouth any further than Goutman did, when he recently quipped (at least I hope it was a quip) that it didn't matter if people wrote hate mail, because he doesn't read any of it.

 

 She did seem like a cool lady, and after seeing her name in the credits (of AW and ATWT) all this time it was nice to actually read an interview with her...so thanks for posting this!

I haven't watched ATWT in a couple of weeks, just read the liveblogs and recaps here, but out of curiosity I went to the CBS site and read their recaps of the last week and a half. I looks like they are doing the "All About Eve" thing AGAIN! This is at least the third time in recent years that a seemingly innocent young woman starts working at WOAK and then starts scheming to become the star (Janice, Katie, and now Spencer). And this is after they made an aborted stab at the very same plotline with JanET (sorry, mistyped that earlier) early in the summer. And it's not all that different than what they are doing with Brian Wheatley (mysterious new character comes in with hidden agenda to muck up an established character's life). Head writers have taken criticism for retreading their favorite storylines over and over, and it is not hard to see why. If we're going to have to see the same stories, let's see them better written. It's back to YouTube for me.

Thanks for a great interview and one of the best we've read here -which is saying alot.

You know Sometime after the AfterElton interview, and a few other terrible interviews else where, it was rumored that they put the muzzle on Goutman and for good reason. It's just curious that Passanante would give an interview. I mean, that had to take a bit of nerve. They are either seriously loosing gay viewers or, I agree with Joseph, they're letting us know that now might be a good time to watch.

While I have taken time to criticize her work, (the fact that Nuke haven't been on the show isn't a reason for the slow development of their story, it's the symptom of it) I have always responded to people that wanted her gone by reminding them that she was the head writer when the Luke coming out story started. I don't begrudge the coy line about telling the Nuke story in their own time: it's a hell of a lot more genuine than, "we're telling an old fashioned story," because she should know that just doesn't fly. It's their show. They can tell it how they want. But what ever tight rope they seem to be walking could end up sending viewers away because it has. They seem to want it both ways, and that's what's annoying. To the point that I don't believe in Luke and Noah anymore. The story is moving so slow it's going backwards, to where they were more of a couple in my mind before their first kiss.

In the last episode, If Luke had walked up to Reg and kissed him in front of Noah while they were in Java and said, "Noah, were through." I wouldn't have bat an eye. I'd be thinking, "this could be interesting, Luke is going to have another, little platonic friendship." It's like Luke and Noah are brothers, not lovers. It might even be kind of icky to see them in bed together at this point. It isn't the smooching, it's the story.

So, after this big "shock" of a first, gay, teen-aged, sex-scene on day time is there really going to be anything left for them? I mean, I hope they do shack up quick, because then they can break up and maybe Luke and the show will be ready for a grown up romance. I'm serious, Luke is more like his mom every day. And Noah is Dusty. What's next for the little nut that hasn't rolled far from the tree? A totally hot, slightly psycho but sensitive stable boy. Maybe they can hire Eric William Morris to play a new character who works the farm and the farmers daughter.

I would look forward to and watch the show again if there was a compelling story. But I'm tired of having my chain yanked. And if the only reason that Nuke are not having sex is because TPTB are trying to work our angst into a froth, I'm not playing that game again. It's exploitative, not of gay people but of the fans sincerity and the political polarization that defines the times.

 

you don't want to see it but can't look away.  Perhaps what I find most disappointing about ATWT's treatment of Nuke is the fact that "they" are still trying to find a way to deal with us and our presence in their everyday lives.  There is nothing else I can add to what Nukely has already written much better or expressed far more eloquently (thank you, Nukely) so I will say only this.  It's just a feeling...  I watched Hollyoaks without any fear that John Paul or Craig would end badly.  Today I watch "Skins" on BBC Am and am always sure that Maxxie will be taken care of and treated with respect.  Even "Verbotene Liebe" gives me confidence that the relationship of Christian and Ollie will continue to be a strong one.

How are they different?  I can't really say.  All I know is that they are and so I enjoy watching them.  Maybe the answer lies in how the respective cultures deal with gay issues?  Regardless, I cannont watch ATWT without worrying what crackpot scheme or ridiculous plot twist the boys will become involved in.  That's if and when they are actually on the show.  I want to watch and I don't want to watch.  It's a lot like being trapped in a bad relationship waiting on something better.  We deserve more...

Well soaps are famous for ridiculous insane plots that are fantastical, make no sense in real world terms and stretch the bounds of believability. (Which doesn't excuse bad acting, directing or writing, but does sort of throw the "realistic" issue out the window)

The storylines for all the other characters on ATWT seem to be equally crazy and inconsistent and oft times unbelievable but I never hear folks saying that they don't believe Cassie and Emily are in love with each other.

So is it really just the sex thing that makes that couple more convincing? It seems like what folks are saying is either of two things:

1) Because they haven't had sex with each other, Luke and Noah can't possible be seen (by the audience) as boyfriends. Which would be a writing issue because the characters don't exist independent of the writing.

So Nuke will never be a legitimate "couple" until the writers decide to let them have sex with each other.

OR

2) Disregarding the sex issue altogether, the Actors (Jake and Van) have not effectively conveyed (through their acting) that Luke and Noah are in love with each other.

So in other words, regardless of the storyline into which the characters have been placed, Jake and Van have failed to convince the audience that their characters are in love with each other or hot for each other.

I'm just trying to get clarification about exactly what it is about these characters that inspires such negativity and so much of it seems to be centered around just the "sex" issue.

Sex and love aren't the same things.

So I think it would be entirely possible for two characters to be convincingly portrayed as being in love with each other before they've ever had sex. (Obviously not preferable and yes I think NUKE should have lots of sex - so please don't cuss me out about that)

Some folks seem to blame the characters for the lack of sexual activity ("Noah's not really gay" or "Luke's wants to stay on the farm because he's scared because he's a virgin", therefore, no sex)

Some folks seem to blame the writers for the lack of sexual activity (cockblocking Ameera, psycho dad, army, Brian, etc., therefore no sex)

Then a whole other set of folks seem to blame the actors themselves. ("Jake is uncomfortable with sex scenes" "Van doesn't like kissing Jake" therefore, no sex)

The discussions just seem to be so fervent (I've definitely gotten caught up myself) given the fact that so many posters on AE claim to hate the characters and think ATWT is horrible.

When it comes down to it, are we saying that Luke and Noah are not in love and are not actually boyfriends and will never convince us otherwise until they have sex?

Or are we saying that Jake and Van need to improve their acting such that they can convince us that NUKE really is deeply in love despite the fact that they have yet to have sex.

Being from the UK, I think it is ludicrous that Luke and Noah have only kissed and not been intimate. This is not realistic, we all know teenagers will do it. I have seen soaps in the UK portray gay teenagers and it was clear they have been intimate from hints and implicit suggestions. I think it would be enough to have them in the bedroom and start to take off clothes and then stop there, it would be obvious to viewers what was going to happen. That way no one would be upset, if anyone does get upset then they don't have to watch it! The UK is a small country compared to the USA and I cannot believe that people are so narrow minded to raise ridiculous objections to making it common knowledge that Luke and Noah are a proper couple even though there are no sex scenes! Surely it is good that Luke and Noah are seen to be committed and happy together long term and should be seen that not all gay couples are promiscuous. Netherlands and Germany are way ahead of us there and have portrayed gay couples beautifully. A bit round of applause for them please! The UK is getting better and have show fantastic episodes in Hollyoaks between John Paul and Craig and between JP and the Kieron. Come on, America, this is the 21st century!!!

Great question Maxiep, but I think a more important question is will it really matter if they do?

Before they introduced Luke's coming out character, Luke was just another one of those kids on a soap who I imagine are living in the attack until they decide to dust the kid off so she can get all Bad Seed up in the face of daddy's new girlfriend.

Luke's dusting off was a coming out story line, and ATWT had nothing to risk by telling a gay story as they were at the bottom of the ratings. Typically a story like that will play itself out and then the kid goes back into the attic or leaves for college never to be seen again. But something unexpected happened: Van Hansis. And ATWT kept his story going so they could reap the benefits of higher ratings all the while exploiting gays.

It is conceivable that once again ATWT will be in such a sink hole in the ratings, perhaps about to be canceled by the network, that P&G will release their homophobic grip on the show and allow Luke and Noah to have sex, if just to exploit gays yet again in an effort to profit by it. It begs the question, will that matter?