SusanSunflower

I'm having increasing difficulty wrt Mary's aversion to Henry's profession -- because Matthew ... Mary didn't see Matthew's accident (no PTSD), and Matthew died quickly, even "painlessly" and there was no fire. Matthew obviously should have been more careful when going over a blind-hill, but he was not going riotously fast or driving particularly recklessly ... Being afraid of suddenly losing someone you love, because it happened before and you know know blah blah blah, that I understand ... I might (maybe maybe) understand Mary's alleged "aversion" if she had arrived at the scene before Matthew was removed from the car ... or if Matthew's corpse had been disfigured by a fire .... but seriously, even safe-as-houses railroad trains leave the tracks periodically because of similarly large impediments (boulders) to their continuing safely to their destination... I can think of many reasons to have no interest in a race car driver, who is likely to be preoccupied with carburetors and pistons, and to smell like gasoline ... see also weight-lifters ... all tolerable if they have other interests and other people to discuss their passion with, iykwim...

Why is Mr. Carson hell-bent on Mrs. Hughes cooking him dinner, when they have both had an ample lunch at Downton and could easily "make do" with a fairly light "tea" in the evening? Does Carson have unspoken ambitions for Mrs. Hughes to play cook at their B&B (or hotel or whatever they're planning) in addition to housekeeper and chief bottlewasher? This all might have made better sense if it y'know made sense. Carson is fat enough as he is without two multi-course meals a day and -- so much for continuity -- Mrs. Hughes appears to have dropped 20+ pounds since last season (and looking the better, younger for it). Carson's also not quite as over-stuffed as he was. Is he sending her to the kitchen to avoid talking to her?

WRT to Thomas and change, I'm not sure when Thomas lost his original spark of ambition, his conniving to get ahead, to get anywhere but here, coupled with a rather poorly defined resentment that he shared with O'Brien. I think it would take a lot of retconning to look backward to find some point when Thomas "settled" or "surrendered" -- without any particular outward sign of depression, at least any I remember ... His original sour world-weary backstabbing disposition faded into something outwardly more benign ... perhaps when he became triumphed to become "under-butler" (a plot point I simply don't remember). Again, it could be retconned to stem from his "better living through chemistry" experiment (to rid him of teh gay) but I think I'm looking for "continuity" that doesn't exist. Perhaps there was some more significant event/life change I've forgotten? Thomas has never been a favorite of mine ... Fellowes has walked a P.C. tightrope giving his conniving and backstabbing gay character 9-lives in ways I found implausible. His relationships with O'Brien and then (out of nowhere and never well explained) with Baxter -- the audience was led to expect some sort of revelation of connections, beyond the fact that Thomas was abused by his father

Yes, it is unceasingly frustrating how much more interesting and better the characters and the story of Downton might have been ... even with the plots and storylines unchanged. I've lost count of how many times I expected (hoped for) a real blow-out fight or someone bursting into tears ... never.happened. Most recently Daisy's endless whinging and whining wrt Mr. Mason's farm -- and her guilt wrt her previous outburst possibly having cost this old man his future security -- it could have been a great dramatic, character development for Daisy -- that she's grown up now and her actions have consequences, but no, nothing learned. Similarly, I lost interest in Matthew long before he died because he (essentially) allowed Mary to walk all over him ... in the age before divorce, I cannot imagine how someone like Matthew would react to being "hitched to life" to a woman whose first allegiance was usually to the past and her father (and who kept pulling rank on him) Again, that could have resulted in serious character development for both Mary and Matthew ... something all newly marrieds have to grapple with. Mary bawling Matthew out in front of the lawyer for discussing estate matters (so soon after some calamity - Lavinia's death? -- I've forgotten), should have sparked some sort of tension ... nothing.

Fellowes wrote Matthew with the same disregard he wrote Mary -- Matthew in the first episodes was intelligent and chaffing a bit at the class differences ... and Mary was -- what -- jealous that this middle-class "nobody" was suddenly the heir and savior of Downton ... her fiancee having just drowned on the Titanic, throwing her own future and the future of Downton into chaos. Like the Mary + Pamuk lust, we saw aspects of Matthew in the early episodes that quickly vanished forever ... without a trace... Matthew's hereditary bloodline erased any other ambition or competence he might have been supposed to harbor -- having not followed in his father's footsteps but become a lawyer instead, bright enough, competent enough, suddenly his significance quickly demoted to his ability to produce an heir and possibly "win" Mary's affection (for the happy ending we all knew was pre-ordained. I haven't read P&P in a long time ... movie Bingleys border on simpleton pretty boys, although part of that is because we see Bingley largely through Darcy's alarm for his well-being -- Darcy having been burnt badly by his erstwhile brother, the handsome and chaming (and conniving) Wickham and eager to avoid his dear friend's rude awakening to the matrimonial plotting of the Bennett clan (father, mother, and all the sisters) In fact, Bingley's good natured appraisal of Jane is vindicated in the end ... and Darcy's alarm and belief that Jane's affection is shallow is proven baseless ... but, as Jane is dismayed to find, Jane might have gotten over Bingley, if Elizabeth (or Austen) had allowed it -- shades of Emma and S&S . Elizabeth and Darcy both contributed to Lydia's infatuation with Wickham and her near-ruination at his hands, since didn't Lydia believe Elizabeth's sudden disapproval of Wickman was fickle or do I have the timeline wrong? Matthew "should have" been much more interesting as Downton's "our middle-class interpreter" of all things Downton, but Fellowes seemingly was only interested in his potential Marry marriage / Downton savior aspects.

Matthew was a good-natured well-spring of simple bourgeois happiness and forgiveness from pretty much his first appearance in the first episode, when he rightly resents the expectation that he "chose a daughter" ... see P&P). He rolled with the punches but never descended into ugly grudge holding or resentment. In that, he's never been replaced or rivaled, only the similarly non-grudge-holding Mr. Molesley. Matthew was a "golden child" -- too "good" by half -- but for the most part Stevens managed to avoid Matthew being cloyingly too perfect - YMMV.

As far as I can tell Episode 8 is 1.5 hours airing 02/21/2016 -- it is the finale, but is NOT the Christmas special -- Then there's a week's hiatus between episode 8 (02/21/2016) and 9 (03/06/2016) -- when "Manners of Downton Abbey" will air. The Christmas Special is apparently listed as episode 9, and is 2 hours Mar 6 Episode 9 TV-PG; 9:00PM ET Episode 9 (120 mins) The final episode of the Emmy® and Golden Globe® award-winning drama's sixth and final season. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/masterpiece/schedule/ so check you that your dvr has the correct program length ... it may be confused by the variations

When my grandparents retired, in New Jersey, in the late 1950's, they chose an apartment in a very large building that had a restaurant on the ground floor as well as a hair salon, a dress shop and god knows what else ... quite likely maid service and room service if needed (say if someone got ill) ... there was a "desk" with concierge (who ordered taxis) and doorman (who managed luggage and taxi drivers) ... I only visited once with my mother when I was about 10, but no one seemed agog at the luxury of this arrangement. It may well be that single-man Gregson similarly chose a building with services to be used when needed -- regularly when in town for extended periods, but not personally contracted or managed, part of the monthly maintenance. I seem to recall lots of rich people used to live for years in hotels, and I think John and Yoko enjoyed certain similar amenities at the Dakota (that are still enjoyed by residents today). http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-05/the-dakota-inside-new-york-s-most-extravagant-apartment-building And the rest of us think that a motel with a heated swimming pool is a extravagance ....

It's just more "if Unca Julian had wanted us to know about it, he would have included it in the story" ... Was Gregson really an only child of deceased parents, who were, in turn, only children, no cousins or aunts or uncles -- only some discretely distant lawyer handling everything ... and Mrs. Gregson, also without nearest relations? Regardless of Marigold, Gregson's bequest to Edith of the flat, the magazine and apparently some money (liquid assets) would have set tongues flapping and any right-aged child in Edith's arms would have been speculated about (and Rosamund likely would have caught wind of it) -- but that didn't happen even though we know -- wasn't there a cocktail party? -- that Gregson was sociable and had many friends (golly, one of whom actually just might have been helpful to Edith at somep point or even just curious about Gregson's lady friend)... Edith's lack of curiosity wrt Mrs. Gregson, let's not go there.

I haven't seen pop reference recently wrt the difference between what the British study as "British History" and what Americans study in "American history" -- but I do recall that school children are supposed to demonstrate some fluency in the royal lineage and various wars and invasions going back to prehistory, Stonehenge, the various barbarian (generic) invasions. http://www.britannia.com/history/timelines.html..while American students start with 1492 and then skip rapidly to Plymouth Rock with a brief detour to Jamestown and maybe Nova Scotia (Norse) ... before plunging into the revolution ... the "other colonizers" (France, Russia, Spain, all sort of vague also-ran footnotes) For aristocrats, tracing one's lineage (and right to title) can go back only a few generations or can span multiple centuries ... as we see in historical dramas like Wolf Hall.... yes, some aristocrats are "more worthy" than others. I assume Mary's aside about their governess was an witticism and that Cora (at least) understood that the girls needed a reasonable educational grounding in order to rise above her own history as a new world "bucconeer" type.

Mary has had a lifetime of watching Violet wielding the shiv of the "bon mot" ... and children do learn who's got the power in their family, it has always (afaict) been Violet over Cora and Robert and Rosamund ... Of course, Violet is old and doesn't actually have to live with the residual anger and hurt feelings of her "cleverness." Real life, real people are hurt when they realize they have no "real" friends... or only friends they've had since childhood (rapidly dying off at Violet's age) -- sometimes they even give up their habitual sharp tongued wit. I don't remember Mary being bitchy with Mabel, but I can't remember her interacting with any other people of her own age and set ... Lavinia and Mabel both, my impression, rather "humbled" Mary ... Mabel loved and wanted Tony "anyway" ... and Lavinia had acted bravely against Carlysle to save her father ...

... it's the mean spirited or unnecessarily competitive quality that makes the difference... I think Mary crosses the line more often than Edith whose comments usually aren't nearly as sharp or "mean"

and I beg to differ -- I think "something" -- even just the Drewes knowing the truth about Marigold -- would have arisen at some point. It's one of those initimacy things. I think the subtext is that when the borders of class relationships are broken down (by whichever party), it throws everything off and that it is usually the lower classes who "pay" -- the aristocracy simply go on with their lives ... tenants, servants, other underlings have to leave -- whee -- Remember "nothing happened" Robert's infatuation with Jane (or whatever her name was). Downton really hasn't dwelled on "upstairs" exploitation of "downstairs" -- but then again there's Anna having to buy and then conceal Mary's contraceptives and Bates' "misunderstanding" ... The Drewes were (and are) expected to take Edith's secret to their graves...

I'll admit I haven't paid attention (perhaps because there was nothing to notice) wrt Edith's relationship with Violet and Rosamund ... If.I.were.her I'd not be too quick to forgive ... I gave Edith some slack wrt the Drewes because she was improvising (badly) in a panic having lost faith in Violet and Rosamund's trustworthiness and support. As I recall, she wasn't sure that they might not kidnap Marigold and spirit her away and she was still trying to pretend that nobody knew and it was a dire secret that must be kept ... even as more and more people were told or guessed. fwiw, Anna saw the "sneaky" hand off of Marigold between Edith and Mr. Drewe in the train at the train station on Edith's return to Downton after running away to London ... Ridiculous for Mr. Drewe to continue the charade with his wife, and she had been yelled at by him often enough there was no room for her to "demand" to be told the truth, etc. She obviously wasn't a simpleton, just written that way.

Yes, people who have been happily married -- as Mr. Mason had been -- tend to do better a second time around ... especially if they've learned from the experience ... Mr. Mason's a lovely man as we've known for years. Mrs. Patmore is neither complicated nor striving. I think they could be very happy.

It's "interesting" to wonder who has been delegated to be on standby when Bates and Anna and now Carson and Hughes are out of the building, in fact making a very good case for Thomas to be standby butler and Molesley as off-hours valet to Robert ... with additional off-hour duties (Anna and Hughes) also going to Baxter ... meh. The scene of Bates and Anna walking to the big house in the "early morning" seemed off to me -- even though neither Robert nor Mary have ever been shown to be early risers .. still -- the sun was out and the sky was blue as they "sauntered" ... FWIW, I assumed they were talking about being late for their own breakfast ... Wouldn't Hughes and/or Carson be needed in the house until quite late... to ensure everyone (not just the visible staff) got their work done and got the house ready for the morning -- trust staff to be behave "properly" -- doubtful.

Type casting is one reason. The other is the matter both salary and career potential -- having to turn down much more interesting parts (often for new improved salary) because you're under contract is a quite real incentive to get out while you're on the upswing ... the more middle aged characters are happy for steady work ($$$) for so very long and the exposure ... but I suspect that McGovern and Bonneville, etc. were all very carefully and generously contracted after Stevens left ... particularly since their roles really have not expanded enough to be worth the years of "treading water" in the same old part. Note that Bonneville and McGovern really don't need to worry about typecasting ... Carmichael and Dockerty being younger and relatively untried do .. Most of the older actors had plenty of credits before the first DA episode aired. That's how they got their parts.

I didn't think art expert was "sleazy" rather that a certain amount of flattery (even sexual favors) might well be part of the service ... and lead to recommendations of his expertise to friends. I couldn't decide how much of his line-of-talk was genuine, but "kissing up to the rich folks" and extramarital dalliances were not unknown ... ever. I had a very attractive boyfriend who was recommended to do some heavy-lifting work for the widow of a famous (libertine) man (she was about 80) who certainly suggested rewards for personal services and couldn't keep her hands off him when I met her. I would not be at all surprised if he willingly "performed." It was a long time ago and far away, but I was quite surprised by her boldness. My brothers, both strapping young men around that same time, similarly fended off or indulged bored housewives among the wealthy summer residents ... expectations and "entitlement" of the upper classes, see Gosford Park, see Mrs. Robinson

I would have expected both Edith and Mary to have been very well taught their heritage by Violet (if not Cora) and might have expected her to have been outraged at their ignorance (blaming Cora); however, I admit I was rather surprised that the paying guests were quite so inquisitive and apparently knowledgeable and so many were willing to part with 6d for the privilege. Wasn't opening at least part of the house part of the annual fete? I have no idea.

The Bates' property was his mother's home which was ceded to Vera as part of her extortion wrt divorce ... and reverted to him on Vera's death.

I thought they had already sold the house (that became his with the death of his wife or something like that, maybe in London?) ...but anyway the plan was that they would sell that house and buy a small hotel ... all of which is apart from living in a cottage on Downton grounds ... Carson and Hughes -- I think -- have bought one of the new houses being build by Downton on the periphery of the estate ... which they were planning on turning into some sort of hotel as well ... Still I believe I heard (circa the wedding) that their home is under construction ...

I saw it as an extension of the lower classes sense of entitlement ... perhaps inspired by Andy's generous volunteering to learn pig farming to help out old old old Mr. Mason.... and Daisy's belief the Cora should heed her demand wrt Mr. Mason ... just more loathsome change, even to the previously impeccably stalwart Mr. Carson

I was considering a sort of reverse of "no good deed goes unpunished" common thread ... with Hughes accepting Carson's "charity" in marrying her (in part because of their future plans of a B&B or small hotel) and Mr. Mason accepting Daisy's "help" in getting Yew Tree Farm (which also was not entirely devoid of self-interest on Daisy's part -- her inheritance, etc.) Hughes had no savings for retirement because of her sister, Mr. Mason's security was lost when his old landlord had a change in management plans ... both may live to deeply regret accepting the self-interested "generosity" of others ... eta: Julian seems to often have some sort of "sermonette" or implied message in his plotting ...

please, heart attack, massive, instantly fatal. ETA: Then again, worse, perhaps SHE'S been profoundly disappointed by their sexy times ...

Trying hard to find an alternative scenario in which newlywed Carson is terrified of revealing his off-duty self to Mrs. Hughes -- except of course, they've shared plenty of private moments in the course of their work for decades and his rectitude and obsession with detail is not something she's ever been shown to have admired ... No, he's just a petty tyrant who now has a new playground and underling to bully... If it were something else, some neurotic reactivity on Carson's part, we should have been give some clue by now. Carson's remarks about using house staff to provide services to his private married residence were ... cough... unlikely ... maybe he'd like to borrow some "good" China, crystal and silverware for his meals ... rather than feign abstinence, what an opportunity to borrow some of the better, if lesser, wines.