SusanSunflower

Thomas sat down to chat with the already half-drunk butler (who immediately, implausibly dropped his guard and hostility on proving Thomas did not send the note to the cook that had been the crisis that got him drinking....). I'm pretty sure that we did not see the actual bean-spilling wrt Lord Sinderby's mistress (Diana Clark) and bastard child, but as I recall nasty butler implied the family was not upright. Thomas' ears perked up. Stowell (butler) later said to Thomas he had drunk too much and said things he shouldn't have (so he did KNOW who else knew about Sinderby's indiscretion). How Thomas could summon the Mistress and child and have them arrive so quickly is just "magic of movies" ... but I'm sure Stowell knows it was him.

@majormama -- don't give JF ideas -- they're already such as Mutt and Jeff/Laurel and Hardy duo, he might continue to mine this comedic vein ... yikes!!! Denker has such as scent of true lower-class vulgarity to her, I suspect she's going to prove herself a very bad apple (or maybe a saint, sigh) before she departs or the show ends.

Since I doubt we will ever meet the Sinderbys ever again I doubt it matters but I can easily imagine Lord Sinderby absolutely bedeviled trying to figure out who knew enough to have successfully and convincingly contacted his mistress and invited her there (and probably paid her fare?) ... Iow, who was trying to sabotage his family with access to the details of his most-private secrets. I'd guess the butler would be short-list suspected ... and the butler likely -- knowing his own guilt in this near debacle -- might or might not desire his own revenge on Thomas ... It's fun to imagine, but I suspect it's moot.

Actually, I thought Edith was rather baffled by Robert's "I doubtless need your forgiveness just as much" (or something like that) in reply to her asking him for his forgiveness -- she got a sort of baffled look on her face and then recognized that he was smiling at her and he seems pleased with himself, gave her a pat and left .... which was one of those sort of "inexplicable things that dads do" moments ... particularly then followed by Robert's equally rather awkward farewell toast to Tom in which he admitted that he had accepted him after all.... or some such ... Hugh Bonneville really is wonderful in that Robert really does try to rise to the occasion and say and do "the right thing" ... but (like most people in real life) he's not wildly good at public speaking most of the time and it often comes out a little awkward. As least that's how it seemed to me and was much more endearing and "authentic feeling" than some great eloquence could ever be.

The problem with Merton's sons is that their response to his entreaty that they "make nice" to Isobel is that horrid "no way Jose" letter ... it shows the contempt they have for HIM ... I'm with Isobel ... situation hopeless, time to give up the ship. Better to live single with the convivial companionship of Violet and Dr. Clarkson than have the shadow of those boys lurking, every holiday, for instance. Actually that time gap/leap drove me crazy: How long was it between Isobel getting that letter and her final refusal to Merton? Months? (Robert was reportedly on-the-wagon for months). It was part of why I thought Goode would show up for Christmas -- all that hunting at the beginning of the "special" was months before the Christmas celebration at the end. See also, Carson discussing properties with Mrs. Hughes, with the final months later Christmas proposal ... and of course the children, frozen in time, at ages where change -- talking and motor development -- occurs in leaps and bounds, constantly.

Such a contrivance -- Apparently commercial broth (and dried soup) were available for purchase, although I would imagine a big house like Downton would have constant stock pots for soups and for cooking (adding to sauces, bastes, etc.) and Violet's cook and larder would have access whatever they needed from Mrs. Patmore ... Violet's childhood "perfect broth" was likely the product of the big kitchen of that time with some magical 'hokus pokus" and/or embellishment by her nurse. http://www.foodtimeline.org/foodsoups.html eta: Yes, Denerk's broth was dreadful. Violet's pronouncing it delicious was a loud-and-clear signal to Spratt that Denker was not going anywhere and had, in fact, won ...

Yes and spared everyone the speculation I've seen elsewhere that she's somehow damaged, even possibly Down syndrome ... It feels like the ambiguity approaches "cheating" because it's almost impossible to remember how old the character is supposed to be -- particularly in view of an child actor who physically appears much older -- getting "buggy" about developmental milestones being reached appropriately feels "obsessive" -- but damn that child (actor) is vacant, bordering on listless too much of the time... etc.

LOL. It's really difficult -- I was thinking about this wrt "what would you change/how would you like to see this series end" -- Most of DA's characters have become significantly less interesting as time has gone on ... rather than becoming richer, more nuanced or "better understood" as you might expect (see U/D). See John Bates as an example -- he was interesting with his war history, his harridan of a secret wife, his painful leg, his "service" relationship with Robert and Robert's loyalty to him ... etc. This was nothing exceptional, but more interesting than what he is now. Are Anna and John having trouble conceiving or are they totally okay with not-conceiving after 3-4 years, at their age? Could/would they consider adoption? What is their financial status? Could they (or just Anna) quit service and open a B&B/hotel as they were talking about? (how odd is it that Carson/Hughes have never talked to Anna/Bates about possibly being in "competition" with their so-very-similar planned future). The story/characters have been hobbled by the Downton Triangle -- for almost every character for them to "move on" means leaving Downton environs and the series entirely -- even Daisy and the farm (which seems to have gotten much closer than it used to be). Actually I'm sorry Bunting was written to be so awful -- I was hoping that she and Tom could set up as exemplars of younger middle-class pillars of the community and open the series up in that direction. The children are much too young and, as yet, have no specific personality. Cranford, of course, comes to mind quickly -- but it certainly has been done before -- see Larkrise etc -- usually becoming trite and predictable "little house" like...

Yes, badly badly written wasted season ... and I agree with others here that Mary's interest in someone with racing cars as a hobby would be nonexistent -- she has a fatherless son to remind her daily -- no matter how gorgeous, expensive and/or exclusive the car. I liked that she was shown admiring his quickness in shooting and changing guns -- but I wasn't sure how much gusto he had for it or her or anything, something Matthew managed to radiate -- making him attractive -- even in subdued fashion. (eta: See also ROSE.) Something lacking is everyone else, except intermittently maybe Daisy and Molesley in their cramped-small-world fashion. Gusto, verve, esprit, whatever you want to call it, was one of Gregson's better qualities as well iirc. Even in this 90 minute "special" so much could have been removed completely to allow more satisfying endings for Atticus, Rose and Tom -- and we still know nothing about the to-be-built "cottages" or the house Carson actually has purchased ... etc.

I found the Christmas Special, while pretty to look at, emotionally flat ... which I attribute in part to the impending loss of so many of the few "nice" people, the ridiculous transformation of (#1 central character for most) Mary into a shrew, and the preponderance of unpleasant characters -- prince/princess, Lord Sinderby, Merton's sons, both Violet's lady's maid AND butler (make them go away now) and, for me, Thomas, whom I loathe. Sinderby may have been "due" for a stumble, but it was Sinderby's mistress and child who were thrown in jeopardy -- for what? -- for some potential public disgrace of the entire household (including Atticus) -- because he had the misfortune to hire a nasty nasty butler who couldn't hold his tongue or his liquor? Even the "Prayer of Sybil" seemed Hallmark ridiculous, even as my eyes welled. It was everything I like least about the show -- flashy and shallow -- characterized by Robert's (for me cringe-inducing) public announcement that he had, in fact, come to love and respect Tom, despite everything, after all these years. Yes, if only he could get Tom to leave Sybbie in his care ... maybe if he asks one more (or more) time? (each time IMHO, demonstrating how much he really doesn't respect or accept Tom). Whatever. Even the sparkling Matthew Goode failed to shine brightly -- and I did expect to see him appear, somehow, maybe with Atticus, at Christmas. Oh, and the not-really-a-conclusion of Greene's murder inquiry irks like hell. Episode was overstuffed and still left me "hungry" .... unwhelmed, even annoyed. Like a bad broth, despite prime ingredients.

I don't buy Daddy Warbuck's "conversion' to loving Rose and her nasty family -- and not realizing the Granthams were at the root of the "dirty tricks" . Maybe not immediately, but he and/or his nasty nasty butler will figure out that his mistress' visit was triggered by someone in the Grantham camp -- IMHO, the obviousness of the "payback" for being rude to Tom and then Thomas getting the nasty nasty butler to divulge what must have been information held close-to-the-vest. Like Marigold, one of those "secrets" or "deceptions" that can't last ... someone wrote the bogus note to the cook, someone summoned the mistress from London ... obvious inside job. They may not be able to finger Thomas ... but then again, he "should" already have a reputation due to past exploits. The nasty-nasty butler will likely want revenge (no matter how much he hates Sinderby) and he wants to keep his job .. no, we (the audience) will never hear of this incident again, but imho we should ... Let's see who -- besides Shrimpy -- knows that it was Rose's mother responsible for the photos of Atticus ... And Rose's secret is knowing that Atticus' father not only cheats on his mother, but has a second family ... how cozy.

The problem is that broth often tastes really strangely nasty or just hopelessly bland and greasy once you remove all the vegetables and meat you added and/or strained it through cheesecloth. Beef broth is much harder than chicken. Yes, better to start with a liter of the rich broth from the big house. Serious cookbook recipes for "broth" involve pounds of bone and big pots. eta: IOW, Soup is easier to make than broth

Yes, I think the intrusion of "changing times" this season was pretty much limited to the King's radio broadcast, ladies' fashions, Mary's bob and maybe Mary's contraception. Mary being the least "times they are a'changing" character of them all. Mary's backward-looking sense of "propriety" is exactly why no one wants her to know about Marigold. Mary and Carson resisting "progress." Not even a new kitchen appliance ...

IMHO, the characters in Upstairs/Downstairs were much more fully developed and interesting ... from the very first episodes ... and it was not in "plots" or "storylines" so much as details and acting ... Mr. Hudson is a very good example -- he was many things -- vain and pompous and proud, stubborn Scotsman, bigoted and poorly educated. At times, his naivete maintained by his closed existence made me wonder how bright he was. While he was proud to work for a family who had titled guests and big-name politicians, but I never felt that he "worshiped" Mr. or Mrs. Bellamy. In comparison Carson seems to have two speeds, being manipulated versus being pompous and "proud" keeper of standards. One thing that's very different also is that on U/D everyone downstairs knew and cared about each other, even if they didn't always like each other. Upstairs people went through the motions of propriety and really didn't question their roles or relationships. The entire show was not remotely about everyone upstairs or downstairs finding their perfect love. Mr. Bellamy genuinely appreciated his wife who was, after all, a remarkable woman -- and she did things, had friends, had projects and causes. Yes, he was in parliament and they were in London, however Cora , like Mary need not be friendless and without hobbies. Mary's equestrian skills two episodes back made me realize that she could and should have been shown as an avid rider. How much better, a notoriously fiercely competitive rider ... yes, that would have been a good flourish ...

Crs97 -- I absolutely agree, could not agree more ... Edith had a moment of vast potential to be interesting ... much more interesting than Mary -- and to fulfill the promise she showed during her stint as an aide at the convalescent hospital. Sybil was a real nurse, but Edith put her stumbling and stammering (palpably inadequate) self forward, which was very brave. So was writing that first column. Had she and her columns continued, we might have been able to get some insight at to what was up in Parliament and other issues of the day (just in passing, for context). Now, she's apparently destined to be never married, baby on her hip for as long as Marigold can be persuaded to allow it, stuck at home, avoiding Mary with all her might. Glad she's got the kid, but jeez, what a lonely future ... and that's the difference between Edith and Mary -- because Edith does feel like lonely person, while Mary really doesn't, not that it matters much to cold-cold-hearted Mary. Sheesh, even Violet has Isobel.

and, fwiw, Greene's murder was not even a satisfying resolution of Anna's rape ... nor, of course, was Mr. Bates' reaction, nor was Anna's emotional recovery which just sort of happened ... so they're back talking about making babies. (Even Anna and John's 3-year (?) infertility problem could have been mined for character/relationship development. Suggest: Anna mention the irony of Mary needing birth control while she and John would give anything for a child ... etc. Somehow Greene's murder (if it was murder and I'm not at all convinced) was some sort of "put paid" on Greene's villainy, except then the miraculous lineup (of victims?) I do remember The Forsyte Saga -- and even though Soames did not dispatch horse carriage of death to kill Bosinney, although Bosinney was distracted by the rape and then there was -- act of god to kill an adulterer -- the fog -- in many hearts, Soame's bad act led directly to Bosinney's death and Irene's long lonely exile.

Hard to know -- I suspect that Violet and Kuragin could have been prompted by audience "boredom" with the prior plot lines or maybe just to make better use of Maggie Smith and/or pander to the over-50 crowd - See also Isobel and Merton (though I think Clarkson is better suited tempermentally). I think Kuragin -- more than being distasteful -- is supposed to represent just how coldly men treated women and marriage "in those days" -- particularly "Europeans" -- while Robert has not only forgiven Cora but blames himself ... oh my!!! Since Kuragin's wife still breathes, I think any suggestion that Violet would "run away with him" (or that Fellowes would seriously consider writing such a thing) is ridiculous -- See also Gregson's institutionalized (she doesn't even recognize me) wife. There are so many plot possibilities that are simply not conceivable with Fellowes writing the scripts in his belabored workmanlike fashion, which after all these years, is no more lively or chalk full of surprises than it ever was. Dully consistent. Imagine a battle over Gregson's estate with lawyers and courtrooms -- think Forsyte Saga!! Think Bleak House!! or rather, don't bother.

Well, it would give whichever actor -- Bates is fine with me -- something to sink his teeth into. (Moseley had his unfortunate winetasting debacle) I just realized I probably thought of it because of Violet's maid's drunken scene. It's been a funny season -- Violet has become flesh-and-blood in the last 2 episodes in a way I certainly never saw her before and I really like it. Isobel's always been an "open book" in many ways but she's been a more "shaded" character as well. And of course, Cora has been something of a revelation as a 3-D character as well (if inconsistently). It's been so striking and so "out-of-character" for these characters we've known for so long, thinking of Violet in bed talking to her maid about the Prince, her face soft and relaxed, guard down. Anna (in particular) and Bates are due, though Bates had a down-time sitting in his comfy chair in front to the fire. Yes, it was fun to see Daisy, Baxter and Moseley walking and talking, even if Daisy's lines were utterly cringe-worthy no-human-being-ever-said-that -- yes,yes, you were blind but now you see and you want to throw yourself off the London Bridge, got it. All her talk of leaving probably means she's staying put. Mrs. Pattmore has had some dynamite scenes as well. Did I miss mention of O'Brien? Last seen running off to India with Susan? Christmas Special reunion????

If Fellowes had not shown us "what really happened" I think it would have eaten up more precious minutes than it did. Similarly, it would have been very very nice if Rose had decided to convert before the wedding and undergone instruction, and had a real Jewish wedding, etc. -- but that would not even remotely have fit into the timeline of ending the season which was rushed enough. As it is, it feels like losing a daughter without gaining a son ... though I trust they will both be in the Christmas Special. And we will also "learn Tom's decision" at the CS which feels like it's been hanging fire for years now ... still, it's hard to imagine Downton without him. Cue Kleenex.

Funny, I remember rather liking Susan whenever the family went up to their old estate for whatever. The actress certainly got the juiciest part, even it none of it made very good sense unless she is simply nutz. Why would she target her future son-in-law at all, much less so crudely? I think it is odd that Shrimpy suddenly became #1 DAD after "ruining everything" in his marriage. Oh well, but @Mary Hedwig, your assessment may be correct, that she simply "lost it" at some point (or perhaps this is Fellowes writing about that mystery that is menopause). FWIW, I've been surprised that not a single character has had a drinking problem that I recall. Robert -- a few seasons back -- or Tom -- the Irishman -- would have been rather obvious, but now with Shrimpy, it could explain so much that otherwise doesn't make much sense.

The Alan Bates butler in Gosford Park was a conscientious objector -- and he was shown to be absolutely terrified that his "secret" get out ... trembling even, leaving the rather awkward impression that he was indeed a "sniveling coward" ... Fellowes did not make Molesley a conscientious objector and rather deliberately imho made Molesley another "coward" -- without even acknowledging the possibility of C.O. status. The whole white feathers at the concert again -- cowardice, rather than principle. Even Mrs. Pattimore's PTSD cousin was executed for refusing to fight, i.e. "cowardice" -- but he had fought and was not a C.O. There were C.O.'s who were taken to a battlefield, ordered to fight and then executed (in utter cold blood) when they refused to fight. Thousands other were imprisoned under very harsh and hostile conditions. For some it was much more of a political movement more than a pacifist movement. Fellowes keeps sort of sashaying up to their story and then backing away. WWI was extremely unpopular on the homefront and it took a lot of propaganda and deaths to keep the army filled with cannon fodder. Fellowes' depoliticized handling of the story just annoys me (badly, obviously). On the anniversary of WWI, there has been a lot of soul searching particularly wrt to the execution. In fact, as I recall, the matter of Mrs. Patmore's cousin and the other handful of men (I believe there were under a dozen like him) executed like him would not be handled (and recognized as a travesty and atonement/pardon granted) I believe until the 1970's possibly later. So that whole heart-tugging mini-plaque was probably absolutely ridiculous, but I can't be certain. Tom I believe at one point intended to volunteer to create some sort of agitprop but then was shocked to discover he was rejected for a heart murmur. Back before antibiotics, there was a lot more rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease which can leaves people with very "dicky hearts," bad valves, loud murmurs, and the possibility of dropping dead. Tom's bad heart was, of course, never mentioned again and he certainly seems healthy, though he doesn't exactly engage in hard manual labor or exercise. My unpopular opinion is that we may never be told who murdered Green ... Even Fellowes seems bored with the story ... maybe it will be forgotten during the hiatus. I was excited by the stunningly blue-eye man appearing in the preview of next week, so some Mary-resolution may be on the horizon. Good.

According to WIKI, it was Violet who wrote the original note (exempting both Mason and Moseley). Clarkson wrote to correct Mason's medical exemption and (for some unknown reason) did not correct Molesley's at the same time. I had assumed Clarkson as the local medical man had been responsible for originally misleading the draft board at Violet's request. That he was willing to misuse his position in order to do Violet's bidding is what I despised him for and, I always wondered if this whole incident figured in Isobel's attitude towards Clarkson and Violet. Clarkson caved repeatedly wrt both Cora and "the family" wrt the convalescent hospital, at least once when (as I recall) he had indicated he supported Isobel's plan. Handsome, but no backbone. (Replayed wrt Robert's Harley Street specialist and Sybil).

Yes, well, since I think my post was the one that brought this up ... I can say that that is what I remember -- except I thought that Clarkson was responsible for the original notification of the draft board as to these faux-illnesses .... I do remember the conversation between Molesley and Clarkson in which the former suggested he did indeed have some sort of lung problem -- but since Clarkson never examined him and had never treated him for same -- it seemed an obvious lie that was accepted happily enough by Clarkson -- I've always despised Clarkson as Violet's pet doctor who could keep her favorite servants safe at home (William Mason did not even know about her "largess" and would have volunteered but his lacked his father's permission to do so and had not received a draft notice) ... thousands were dying daily in the trenches....

At Violet's request to prevent both fathers from losing their only sons, Clarkson wrote a letter wrt a lung condition Molesley supposedly had -- which he never had -- and skin condition William Mason never had. from downton Wiki: William Mason: "Unbeknownst to William, Violet Crawley had used her position as Dowager Countess of Grantham to write to the Army Medical Examiners, advising that William had a skin condition which would prevent him from going to war, and so they should not bother with calling him up for recruitment. Her intention was to prevent William's father from potentially losing his last child in the war."" Joseph Molesley: "" Violet's action to protect him was undone, however, by a conversation had between Dr. Clarkson and Isobel Crawley: Violet had included a report about Matthew Crawley's valet, Mr. Molesley, having a lung condition in the same letter that had reported William's alleged skin condition. Isobel knew Violet's statements to be false and told Dr. Clarkson, who sent notice to the Army at once. Only William's information was corrected, since Molesely later spoke privately with Clarkson and lied to him that Violet's statements about his condition were, in fact, true. William was later called up for military service."" http://downtonabbey.wikia.com/wiki/William_Mason Clarkson never actually examined Molesley. Molesley never had any "lung" symptoms. (There were as I recall other indications that Molesley was simply a coward.) eta: Downton wiki says that Violet wrote the original letters herself, and Clarkson immediately corrected William Mason's status when he learned of the "error" ... I had thought Clarkson had written the original deferral letters ... so apparently the Draft Board took Violet's word on the condition of her servants ... no doctor needed.

I've observed childless women "of a certain age" fixate on someone else's child in ways that were not healthy -- in fact, I was recipient of such "affection" at about age 6-7. I think Mrs. Drewe had reason to be very uncomfortable with this woman (who after all had a niece and nephew at home to lavish her attentions on) fixated on her little doll-like Marigold. Who, who "likes" people who cannot take a hint? and who then refuse to act in accordance with prior agreement(s), suddenly showing up with no warning, requesting entrance and if refused, visibly, disturbingly upset and lingering. Yeeech. Mrs. Drewe was played for a fool by her husband and treated no better by Edith for Edith's own reasons. She thought Marigold was a child entrusted by her dead parents to her and her husband to raise ...