The Soda Shop Message Boards

Odyssey writers and fans alike have mentioned that marriage seems to make the character change, such as with Eugene getting married and becoming more responsible. Personally, I never really noticed any more maturity or significant change in his character. If anything, Eugene becoming a Christian changed him even more. Not only he talk about God more, but he no longer had those famous fights with Connie or tried to show off his intelligence.

So, does marriage really make a character seem more mature because s/he has a responsibility to the spouse?

I can't believe no one has posted in this excellent topic, Melstner Girl, and I wish I hadn't taken to so long to get around to it myself.
A remarkable topic idea. Truly fascinating... after all, the top AIO dogs have long insisted it does change a character significantly, which makes sense. So one just buys that. And assumes that, indeed, the characters would change too much.
But Eugene is extremely similar to his earlier self in almost all ways, when you stop to think about it. His general attitude doesn't have Katrina showing through... As you say, he still bickers with Connie. Though that went away a while, but GRC brought it back, thank God. He still is dedicated to his computer and science. He still says "indubitably" like he'd die if he said, "yes."
But on the other hand, we see him kissing Katrina. We see him caring about one woman more than he does all the scientific theories in the world. He has, now instilled in him, a great longing and an affinity for children.
We see Eugene miserable when he cant' have kids.
Would that have happened to the pre-Katrina Eugene who never seemed to bond with the Whit's End kids?
But as you said, the changes wrought by his new faith are far greater, as is to be expected.
In any case, in the end, as they say...
Nothing is changed. Everything is changed.

Truthfully, I don't see how marriage changed Eugene. Marriage might change some characters (or actual people as I have found out) But there are certain characters that won't change. Wooton and Penny for example: If they got married I'm sure it wouldn't change thier personality, it would just be weird for most listeners. But I'm pretty sure Jason would change some. Because when he was around Tasha or Monica he had a little bit of a Johnny Gage personality (No one under 40 will understand that refrence, Mwhaha) instead of his "That person is definatly a bad guy" personality.

SparkyHappyGiraffe wrote:Truthfully, I don't see how marriage changed Eugene. Marriage might change some characters (or actual people as I have found out) But there are certain characters that won't change. Wooton and Penny for example: If they got married I'm sure it wouldn't change thier personality, it would just be weird for most listeners. But I'm pretty sure Jason would change some. Because when he was around Tasha or Monica he had a little bit of a Johnny Gage personality (No one under 40 will understand that refrence, Mwhaha) instead of his "That person is definatly a bad guy" personality.

I don't know that marriage would change a character as much as having a kid would. I the case of Jason, I don't think Jason would change too much but in some ways he's on a path to change at the moment. He's doing some soul searching which could lead to change. He's already on the road of settling down. So I think that will change Jason more than marriage would.

Marriage doesn't seem to change them to an unpleasant degree...it just gives them more substance. It makes them a tad more respectable maybe ahah. Ok, in the case of Eugene, becoming a Christian is what made him more mature and he really grew a lot. In every aspect, we saw the true Eugene emerging...and Katrina was in more episodes as his friend and fiance then she is as his wife. I think the real reason they wont let characters marry is because when they're tied to one person, thats IT. They can't have any other romantic interests after that, which probly limits the ideas in a way.

I'm not sure what to think.

I have noticed Wooton around Penny does act kinda strange. He doesn't act like Wooton if you know what I mean

It's just he acts more mature, which is not bad. But it's not like Wooton. I'm very sad to say.

If Wooton is forced out of his comfort zone and actually has to make mature decisions instead of being a goofball, isn't that a positive step for his character?

Sage wrote:Marriage doesn't seem to change them to an unpleasant degree...it just gives them more substance.

Word.

I've often wondered why marriage would alter Connie's character drastically but it didn't alter Eugene's; marriage fleshed him out more rather than damaged him. Personal maturity, on the whole, tends to be independent of marriage; the only way that Connie would have to change specifically for marriage would be in terms of dealing with romantic relationships, and I have to wonder why it wouldn't be a positive thing for her character if she were to realistically and successfully handle romance instead of thinking like a fairy tale or a chick flick the way she did with Mitch.

We got a glimpse of what Connie would be like if she became a parent in 58 and it was horrifying. In a way you liked Connie coming down on Jules when Jules moved into her house. It made sense. Her house her rules and all. And it was cool to hear not just giving advice but more giving orders.

But it was also dreadful. She's our besty. We live through her. She's Whit's little girl, our big sister, our playmate. She's wiser than us, but she's also bumbling and and we enjoy her nutsoid tantrums and bad-raspberry-purple-hair days.

If Connie became an authority figure, it would somewhat destroy that. Even if she simply became a wife and never a parent (and really, after they already did it with the Meltsners...) she would still be dealing with deeper problems and new emotional needs and just seem more like an inaccessible adult. Sure, I'm kind of an adult myself. But your adult friends are an entirely different kind from your childhood besties.

Connie still wasn't all that bad with Jules, and she has gotten serious before. She already is more like Penny's mom.
Marriage in my opinion improves a character. It allows for a greater range of episodes and shows a totally different side of them sometimes. Like Whit, for example, in his memory episode has something to him that we never see elsewhere.

Blitz wrote:Connie still wasn't all that bad with Jules, and she has gotten serious before. She already is more like Penny's mom.
Marriage in my opinion improves a character. It allows for a greater range of episodes and shows a totally different side of them sometimes. Like Whit, for example, in his memory episode has something to him that we never see elsewhere.

Yes, I think it adds to a character. I like the eps where we get snatches of Whit's interaction with Jenny.

I can't believe I never noticed this topic. I actually used to roll my eyes everytime the producers would bring up the same old argument when asked questions about marriage or children for characters. Their idea sort of made sense, but I was actually a bit shocked that the writers were so completely opposed to change in a character. Characters are meant to be developed, and if you've been with the same character who has the same mannerisms and the exact same personality he (or she) did over two decades ago, it can get somewhat tiring. I'm not arguing for any specific cases, as I think that most of the characters that the producers have opposed marriage for would've indeed reacted negatively to marriage. However, I'm just a bit surprised that the producers always gave the same response no matter who the character was. Characters like Connie need a little change in their life, after all.

Pound Foolish wrote:If Connie became an authority figure, it would somewhat destroy that.

Connie already is an authority figure, though, and not just with Jules. She took on that role with Aubrey when she fired her (in a scene rather reminiscent of "A Bite of Applesauce"), for Mandy when she called her out on the ways she was running from dealing with her parents' potential divorce (and her poor handling of it in general), and for Lucy when she sent her home during "Connie Goes to Camp". Connie being in positions of authority is nothing new, even if it would be different should she be a parent instead of a mentor figure.

I agree with the idea that Connie getting married makes her seem inaccessible to people who grew up with her and saw her as a best friend and sister, but I would argue that this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Not only would it help to progress her character as she deals with new situations and circumstances (and I love character progression, if you guys hadn't noticed ), but it could help teach the lesson that your childhood role model is a person, too, and they're going to grow up and change.

Of course, on the other hand, Odyssey is a very long-running show, and they need characters that they can keep in certain roles long-term; child characters rotate out gradually, but Connie's pretty constant, so she's an overarching role model/mentor figure. And on the fandom end of things, it's always hard when a character you love and relate to changes in a way that becomes more distant to you, and Connie is a character who has reached a lot of people, so I can definitely see the argument against Connie getting married from that perspective.

(Actually, given how many people it would bring back to Odyssey for the occasion, I'd be rather pleased if there was some kind of conversation between people like Lucy, Jimmy, Mandy, Aubrey, and others talking about how weird it is to see her as a bride-to-be instead of as the figure they all knew growing up, just to make that nod.)

Tiger, how is it that you are always able to say things that make such perfect sense? You have good ideas and are able to articulate them so perfectly. You say things I barely knew I had a vague idea of until I see youve written them. #jealous of your logic and ability to say stuff ( I know there's a better word but can't think of it)

TigerShadow wrote:

Pound Foolish wrote:If Connie became an authority figure, it would somewhat destroy that.

Connie already is an authority figure, though, and not just with Jules. She took on that role with Aubrey when she fired her (in a scene rather reminiscent of "A Bite of Applesauce"),

Yes, which is an uncomfortable scene, but it makes sense. Still, being in a position of authority over an employee is very different.

TigerShadow wrote:or Mandy when she called her out on the ways she was running from dealing with her parents' potential divorce (and her poor handling of it in general),

She was? When? She gave Mandy advice, but...

TigerShadow wrote:and for Lucy when she sent her home during "Connie Goes to Camp".

Ugh. She did indeed. The problem with that episode is it does too good of a job establishing why Lucy of all people is breaking the rules. Lucy would be unlikely to do that unless she had good reason and, well, she had good reason. She was forced into drudgery, then made to attend boring hikes with Miss Piggy as a guide. What she did was entirely harmless. She went horseback riding (oh horror.) When Connie unfortunate Lucy home to parents who unfairly punish her further, it's impossible not to be on Lucy's side. See, this is problem with episodes where people become authority figures and make conflicting decisions about how others should behave. You step on people's toes. People are going to strongly disagree with the measures taken. Either it's too much or too little.

TigerShadow wrote:Not only would it help to progress her character as she deals with new situations and circumstances (and I love character progression, if you guys hadn't noticed ), but it could help teach the lesson that your childhood role model is a person, too, and they're going to grow up and change.

Connie has grown up and changed.

TigerShadow wrote:Of course, on the other hand, Odyssey is a very long-running show, and they need characters that they can keep in certain roles long-term; child characters rotate out gradually, but Connie's pretty constant, so she's an overarching role model/mentor figure. And on the fandom end of things, it's always hard when a character you love and relate to changes in a way that becomes more distant to you, and Connie is a character who has reached a lot of people, so I can definitely see the argument against Connie getting married from that perspective

Oh good.

ArnoldtheRubberDucky wrote:but I was actually a bit shocked that the writers were so completely opposed to change in a character. Characters are meant to be developed, and if you've been with the same character who has the same mannerisms and the exact same personality he (or she) did over two decades ago, it can get somewhat tiring.

I can show you a duck named Donald and a mouse named Mickey that say you're wrong. People love characters with reliable personas that stay consistent. And not just cartoon characters, all sorts of TV, radio and books franchises.

Pound Foolish wrote:

TigerShadow wrote:or Mandy when she called her out on the ways she was running from dealing with her parents' potential divorce (and her poor handling of it in general),

She was? When? She gave Mandy advice, but...

I don't think she did it in a "laying down the law" sense, but I seem to recall Connie firmly correcting Mandy's deceiving her parents and anger at David in "Out of Our Hands". It's not limited to just the Straussberg parents' separation; Connie made it very clear that she wasn't too happy to find out that Mandy stole her story and put her name on it in "Mum's the Word" and told her to correct the mistake, and she was very upfront about calling Mandy out on the way she was treating Trent and his friendship with unwitting contempt in "A Class Reenactment".

And in all of those instances it's worth pointing out that Connie wasn't being very harsh, but she was still firm. She gave Mandy advice on how to deal with the situation, but she also brought her up short about the way she was acting. I think that for the most part, that's how Connie would be as a parent; to me, the way she treated Jules had more to do with Jules than Connie's general tendencies.

Pound Foolish wrote:

TigerShadow wrote:and for Lucy when she sent her home during "Connie Goes to Camp".

Ugh. She did indeed. The problem with that episode is it does too good of a job establishing why Lucy of all people is breaking the rules. Lucy would be unlikely to do that unless she had good reason and, well, she had good reason. She was forced into drudgery, then made to attend boring hikes with Miss Piggy as a guide. What she did was entirely harmless. She went horseback riding (oh horror.) When Connie unfortunate Lucy home to parents who unfairly punish her further, it's impossible not to be on Lucy's side.

I don't remember the episode's specifics, but didn't Lucy go off on her own when she was specifically told not to? If that's the case, I'm not sure how being bored is a good reason to break the rules. And if Lucy's attitude later on (in either "The Nemesis" or "The Battle", I think; the two kind of run together in my head), Lucy admits that she did what she did out of a desire to be rebellious and different from the goody-goody she'd been known to be.

I don't recall Connie's response being that unreasonable, in any case; I thought Lucy indulged in a string of rule-breaking before Connie finally sent her home.

Pound Foolish wrote:

TigerShadow wrote:Not only would it help to progress her character as she deals with new situations and circumstances (and I love character progression, if you guys hadn't noticed ), but it could help teach the lesson that your childhood role model is a person, too, and they're going to grow up and change.

Connie has grown up and changed.

Good, so it shouldn't be a problem if the writers decide to take her character further.

I don't have much of an opinion on this. Sometimes characters change when they get married, but I don't think the marriage necessarily caused the change. We could also argue about "change." For instance, did Eugene change when he got married? I don't think he really did. His brainy personality didn't change. He became less wordy, but the marriage didn't cause the change. His less-wordiness might have even happened before he got married.

Novatom wrote:I don't have much of an opinion on this. Sometimes characters change when they get married, but I don't think the marriage necessarily caused the change. We could also argue about "change." For instance, did Eugene change when he got married? I don't think he really did. His brainy personality didn't change. He became less wordy, but the marriage didn't cause the change. His less-wordiness might have even happened before he got married.

I agree with this. I'm not as familiar with the new AiO, but my perception has been that Eugene has become much more moderate with his language and mannerisms as a function of being in the new AiO, not necessarily because of his marriage. Personally, I prefer the old Eugene, but it does make sense that he would be more mature and less wordy now. When he first came to Whit's End, and far beyond that, he could come across as quite arrogant to those around him. I'm glad that he has progressed away from that.

Eugene is really the only character who has changed at all after getting married or even having a romantic relationship, though that change in particular can be equally attributed to him becoming a Christian. I'll just say this: I think that any character could be changed drastically by marriage, but it's not necessarily. That is to say, marriage itself does not inherently and automatically give any character a personality overhaul. I can actually understand why the writers are so resistant to Connie getting married (I can't quite put my finger on it, but something about a married Connie just feels all wrong.), but I think it might actually be good for characters like Jason or Wooton.

TigerShadow wrote:
I don't remember the episode's specifics, but didn't Lucy go off on her own when she was specifically told not to? If that's the case, I'm not sure how being bored is a good reason to break the rules. And if Lucy's attitude later on (in either "The Nemesis" or "The Battle", I think; the two kind of run together in my head), Lucy admits that she did what she did out of a desire to be rebellious and different from the goody-goody she'd been known to be.

I don't recall Connie's response being that unreasonable, in any case; I thought Lucy indulged in a string of rule-breaking before Connie finally sent her home.

How isn't it? The rule was reasonable, but so was going off. They go on a camping trip for fun, and they're made to scrub the floor and do little else? The kindest way to describe this is unfair, and a huge oversight on the part of the camp to not let them know ahead of time that this wonderful camp would be Drudgery Camp. Then when the "fun" finally came along, it was dull. Lucy had more than sufficient reason to go on her own and break the rule. All she did was go do something fun, on only two occasions. She did no harm. That's the "string" of disobedience you refer to.

As I said, this is problem. When punishments come into play, people are going to differ on how severe they should be. Arguably, Lucy did nothing unreasonable. But you disagree.

That's really the problem with Connie becoming a disciplinarian. We all like Connie. She is a common ground we all share, and one of the biggest things that bind our hearts to aio. She is universal, easy to like.

Punishment is opposite of universal. It leads to disagreement. To go back to the example of Jules, most of what Connie said to Jules made sense. However, forcing Jules to go to church crossed a line. Jules practices atheism. Suppose Connie were Islamic and Jules Buddhist Would it be acceptable for her to tell her house guest and sister, "I know you're Buddhist but while you're here, you have to worship Allah with me. Okey doke?"

Again, you may disagree. Which again proves the point.

Connie is universal and to become a disciplinarian authority would destroy that. The few instances they already have may already be too much. As said previously, when you get into things like discipline, you step on people's toes.

We want a fun older sister. Not a strict babysitter.

ArnoldtheRubberDucky wrote: That is to say, marriage itself does not inherently and automatically give any character a personality overhaul. I can actually understand why the writers are so resistant to Connie getting married (I can't quite put my finger on it, but something about a married Connie just feels all wrong.), but I think it might actually be good for characters like Jason or Wooton.

Agreed, Sir Ducky.

But, PF, simple life lesson:

Without discipline, what's left of law and order in society will fall apart.