| Welcome to Walford Web, the online home of EastEnders' discussion since 1997. We cover EastEnders news, discussion and spoilers. Join the discussion and make your voice heard! We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're wondering what EastEnders is, click here to see what all the fuss is about. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Shabnam spoiler | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: 31 Jul 2015, 20:56 (7,599 Views) | |
| BigApe | 1 Aug 2015, 03:00 Post #41 |
|
I figured that this storyline was statistically likely with the number of pregnancies in EastEnders in recent years. I know full well that the press will label the show "depressing" for this and call Corrie's upcoming baby death "good solid family drama" even though Corrie is basically making a soap by numbers and EastEnders actually has a lot more respect with issue stuff. But I think its so obvious this criticism is coming its not going to phase anyone. |
![]() |
|
| Jedi Pat | 1 Aug 2015, 10:04 Post #42 |
|
A very raw story, but that's what EastEnders usually does best. Makes me think back to a similar storyline in one of our Belgian soaps, where the heartbreak was even more real: one of the soap's leading ladies at the time fell pregnant in real life, and had agreed with the writers that her character would also discover she was pregnant, thus eliminating the need for obvious large coats or strategically placed shopping bags. Unfortunately, the actress's baby was stillborn, and it was then decided her character's baby would have to be as well, as the heartbreak of having to play a happy new mum would have been too much. The fact that the actress indeed did return to work to act out the scenes that showed her character grieve for her baby still amazes me. Edited by Jedi Pat, 1 Aug 2015, 10:04.
|
![]() |
|
| Londongirl89 | 1 Aug 2015, 10:07 Post #43 |
|
What a strong lady! |
![]() |
|
| Sey | 1 Aug 2015, 10:46 Post #44 |
|
Whilst I think this should have gone to Stacey, I have to applaud the balls in giving the plot to such an unlikable character. I just hope she ups her game as her performances often leave a lot to be desired. I'm sure Kush will smash this out of the park regardless. |
| |
![]() |
|
| The Local Butcher | 1 Aug 2015, 11:02 Post #45 |
![]()
|
Blimy that's rough. The same thing happened to Katey Sagal on the sixth season of Married... with Children. Thankfully being an absurdist comedy they were able reduce Peggy's pregnancy to being one of Al's nightmares.
Edited by The Local Butcher, 1 Aug 2015, 11:02.
|
| Warning: Posts made by The Local Butcher may contain sarcasm, frustrated expressions of fatigue in the face of Eastenders' neverending insanity, desperate and ill-conceived attempts to be funny, controversial opinions and nuts. Not necessarily in that order. | |
![]() |
|
| Mrs Peel | 1 Aug 2015, 11:59 Post #46 |
|
Whether or not Shabnam is unlikeable is a matter of opinion. She's a complex and quirky character, and I think TPTB are trying to show how her current personality, phobias and insecurities are as a result of what happened as a result of her first pregnancy and its repercussions. This interests me because, amongst other things, it highlights the extreme hypocrisy of Masood, who berates her for having abandoned the child the way she did, when everyone knows that, had she returned home, pregnant and unmarried, obviously refusing to name the baby's father, she would have been just as much of a pariah to the Masood family as Syed became at one time. In fact, faced with an unmarried, pregnant daughter and an openly gay son, Zainab would have spontaneously combusted. It's all very well and good, after the fact, her father berating her for not having turned to her family, but the stark reality is that they would have disowned her. As for the opinion that the stillborn child should have been Stacey's, this producer is trying to build future characters with a grounded history into the show. Stacey's and Martin's baby links Old Walford with Millennial Walford. The child will have links to the Beales, the Fowlers, the Butcher/Jacksons and the Slaters,, with indirect links to the Brannings and the Moons. Stacey will probably go into labour at the Vic, and Mick will deliver the baby, so there's your Carter involvement. As for the argument that the baby will bear no relevance until the child is twelve years or so, so what? We waited that long for Martin Fowler to get a personality and some dialogue, and he was the first baby born on the programme. It may sound crass to say this, but Shabnam's baby was always going to be the "expendable" child. Her family is a relatively new family with no links or associations to the more established dynamics and the baby's father is a new enough character to still be a work in progress. My guess is that we'll see what a shallow prick Kush really is. He's as much of a mamma's boy as Vincent is, except I think Carmel has his measure regarding his shortcomings far more realistically than the odious Claudette has of Vincent. |
![]() |
|
| Slater11 | 1 Aug 2015, 12:26 Post #47 |
|
Poor Shabnam:(, she really is the tragic heroine currently on the square. No doubt Rakhee Thakrar will do a fantastic job with an emotional, sensitive and heartbreaking storyline, which I have no doubt will be portrayed realistically and accurately. |
![]() |
|
| Slater11 | 1 Aug 2015, 12:29 Post #48 |
|
And also poor Shabnam will probably see it as punishment somehow for giving Jade up, it's going to be sad to watch when the storyline starts .
|
![]() |
|
| Mrs Peel | 1 Aug 2015, 12:33 Post #49 |
|
It's interesting that both of Jade is a lychpin for various guilt dynamics felt by her parents. Shabnam has felt that her entire life since abandoning her baby has been one for which she has to suffer and atone, even to the point of pushing other people away and immersing herself in religion, whereas the closest Dean has come to admitting his guilt over raping Linda has been when faced with the fact that his daughter has the same affliction, inherited from him and her mother, who are carriers, which killed his much-loved brother. |
![]() |
|
| Kim | 2 Aug 2015, 22:20 Post #50 |
|
I agree, I'd rather have seen this storyline with Stacey and Martin. Lacey has been back full time for almost a year and still, has had little of substance to do. The child has quite a legacy but a pregnancy is just a repeated storyline in this case and there hasn't been enough of Stacey and Martin as a couple to make it something I can root for given the number of pregnancies already. I think it'd have been better later, a la Natasha and Liam Butcher. It feels strange but I'm more interested in this storyline from Kush's perspective rather than Shabnam's. This is a young man who has already lost a wife. While the outrage the last time the show did a dead baby plot should prevent this from being as much of a disappointment as DTC's other 'big' storylines, I feel uncomfortable with this in a show which seems to have an agenda to dispense with adoptive/legal/step parents. I do fear that ultimately, it'll be a plot device. Glad to see that Masood should have something meaty at last, but I'm not sure I'll be coming back to the show. |
![]() |
|
| 5 Albert Square | 2 Aug 2015, 22:47 Post #51 |
|
I agree, it would be better with Stacey and Martin. Aside from the fact that Lacey has been back for almost a full year, there is only so much bad luck one person can have. She's already had Kush kiss someone else, had her daughter unexpectedly re-appear and been beaten up. Just how much bad luck can one person have?
|
![]() Thanks to Ennui for the avatar and signature! | |
![]() |
|
| Mrs Peel | 2 Aug 2015, 22:49 Post #52 |
|
This would have been better, had we seen Stacey and Martin develop as a couple gradually, instead of the way their association came about. I thing that DTC has deliberately made this quirky - throwing them together, Stacey "using" Martin to compensate for her feelings for Kush and then falling pregnant by him, Martin initially being reluctant and things, apparently, falling into place. They've complicated this by creating an attraction between Stacey and Kush that simply wasn't there before and came from way out in left field. There hasn't been enough Stacey and Martin because, once again, of this obsession with block storylining. So much is going on elsewhere that we have intense attention paid to certain storylines for a few weeks, and then we're left in limbo about them, and with a slew of babies being born in the past year, they've set upon a new lot of pregnancies. To me, Stacey and Martin have a lot more in common than Stacey and Kush. Sure, Stacey and Kush have both lost a spouse to death, but Stacey and Martin both lost fathers, tragically, at early ages, both went through troubled youths and both have killed Mitchells.
I don't think Kush is as much a nice guy as we were originally led to believe. The remark his mother made about him being up to the responsibility of a child, a remark which made him dash from the room, was very telling. He's lost his wife, but they hadn't been married long. I buy the fact that he may have initially indulged in promiscuity as a means of assauging his grief, but for too often, he's used the dead wife as an excuse to have sex without commitment. Stacey guilt-tripped him into recognising his priorities were Shabnam and their child, but I think Kush is the outwardly nice guy who's really a bit of a weak prick.
You are preaching to the converted. I find it offensive, the way a blood context has been emphasized this time over any sort of adoptive or legal connection. Kevin raised Dean and gave him more than just a surname; Angie and Den doted on Sharon and to them, she was their daughter. To hear Dean and Sharon refer to their parents by their given names and not as "mum" or "dad" and to hear Sharon refer to Carol Hanley and Gavin as her real mum or real]/i] dad is disconcerting. The Jade storyline is one thing, but lately we've got Jay recognising that Phil only cares about "blood" relations. This is a real insult to anyone who's ever been adopted or who's ever adopted a child.
The only thing this storyline has shown or will show is what an enormous hypocrite Masood is. And he's still licking around Jane. |
![]() |
|
| Slater11 | 2 Aug 2015, 23:34 Post #53 |
|
I don't agree that Stacey should lose her baby over Shabnam's or vice versa, we know it will be Shabnam's who will be stillborn, but it's still sad regardless. Shabnam will need the support of her whole family when it happens. I'm still hoping they can try and get Nina Wadia back for a guest stint as Zainab? Hopefully this will bring her closer to Kush if she doesn't know about his fling with Stacey by then and if she doesn't then I hope Kush doesn't use it as an excuse to try and get closer to Stacey again as things have cooled off for a while. I am wondering if they're setting it up for Shabnam to be jealous of Stacey because if Shabnam finds out about the fling and the fact that Stacey's baby with Martin will be OK, whilst she will probably sees her as punishment for losing Jade will surely tip her over the edge? |
![]() |
|
| Planck | 3 Aug 2015, 11:48 Post #54 |
![]()
|
I doubt it will happen but it would be interesting to see Ronnie and Shabnam bond over this. Both will have lost babies even if the circumstances are quite different. And it would probably make Ronnie considerably more likeable. |
![]() |
|
| Mrs Peel | 3 Aug 2015, 12:24 Post #55 |
|
Ronnie wouldn't give a rat's arse about Shabnam. She's never even spoken to the Masoods. She is incapable of empathising with anyone, even her own sister over whom she obsesses. Were she still around, Bianca would have readily bonded and empathised with Shabnam, having lost her first child under similar circumstances, but Ronnie Mitchell? Forget it. |
![]() |
|
| Slater11 | 3 Aug 2015, 12:29 Post #56 |
|
If it was Stacey I think Ronnie would sympathise. I miss their bond. |
![]() |
|
| Mrs Peel | 3 Aug 2015, 13:54 Post #57 |
|
They didn't have a bond. Stacey killed Ronnie's father, and Ronnie okayed her exit from Walford without punishment. When Stacey returned, handed herself in and expressed remorse for having killed even a bad man, Ronnie, ever the amoral psychopath, couldn't begin to understand why Stacey would ever want to give herself up and serve time for - you know - actually committing a crime. There was no bond between these two women, just a matter-of-fact acknowledgement on Ronnie's part that Stacey had got rid of her father. What Ronnie doesn't understand is that people aren't like her. They can't play judge and jury on someone's life and walk around as if nothing's happened. Since admitting her guilt, serving her time and getting released, Stacey and Ronnie have had absolutely nothing to do with each other, not that they were ever that chatty before. The only woman on the Square who's bound to approach Shabnam in her tragedy would, realistically, be Stacey. Ronnie's hardly the type to go running to another woman's door to commiserate her sadness. Ronnie doesn't sympathise or empathise with anyone. She can't. Edited by Mrs Peel, 3 Aug 2015, 13:58.
|
![]() |
|
| *Betty* | 5 Aug 2015, 09:43 Post #58 |
![]() ![]()
|
Ronnie and Stacey's complex relationship went back to Danielle rather than Archie to be fair. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Desdemona | 5 Aug 2015, 10:31 Post #59 |
|
double post
Edited by Desdemona, 5 Aug 2015, 10:36.
|
![]() |
|
| Desdemona | 5 Aug 2015, 10:34 Post #60 |
|
Indeed. There was a bond and complicity between Stacey and Ronnie. They both cared for Danielle (in their own way) and were victims (and survivors) of sexual violence. You could say that Stacey did Ronnie a favour by killing Archie. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · EastEnders Current & Future · Next Topic » |






.





7:50 PM Jul 11