Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Roseanna

Member
  • Posts

    4.5k
  • Joined

Reputation

14.5k Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

3.3k profile views
  1. I agree. As even the show didn't present Dodi as Diana's end game, why on earth did bother to to get it many episodes compared with the Pakistanian doctor and one earlier lover? Not to speak of Diana and Charles who were given one good moment during their Australian tour which made Diana's continuening love seem really odd.
  2. Henry VIII didn't actually divorce from Katherine of Aragon nor Anne Boleyn, both marriages were annulled. That didn't make Mary and Elizabeth bastards, in normal cases they would have been legimate children because they were conceived "in good faith", i.e. when their parents believe to be married to each other. If Katherine had accepted the annulment, Mary would probably retainded her place in succession. The result of Katherine's subborn fight was that Henry wanted no competitor with his children with Anne and later, because of Anne's supposed betrayal, his children with Jane. In later case, before Edward was born, Henry has no successor over a year, as also Fitzroy died. After Katherine and Anne's miscarriages, it's no wonder that Henry wanted all his three children in succession order, although he didn't make his daughters legitime. Maybe if his sister Mary's son had lived, he would have chosen otherwise (or married him to Elizabeth). As for Edward, his first draft of succession named "the heirs male of Lady Jane" which he only in the knowledge of immediate death changed "the Lady Jane and her heirs male". So it seems tha Edward regarded women as inferior and therefore unfit to rule.
  3. Well, they looked older than people in the same age today, they had bad teath, or missing teeth, and they could have smallbox scars, decent women didn't smile so that teeth appeared (if a woman does that in an old painting, she is a prostitute).
  4. Although planning and arranging the monarch's funeral is laborious, the work is much helped by the funerals of former monarchs, just like coronations. Also irl Elizabeth could choose only such details as music and flowers. Instead, Philip had much more freedom to plan his funeral.
  5. Workers were poor, not layers - they belonged to the middle class and could support a family quite comfortably. The only risk to marry a man of a good profession but without a fortune was that a husband could died young. But as we have seen, a rich man good speculate and loose his fortune. The best way to guarantee safety to a woman was a good education and a profession of her own. That was quite possible in the 1880ies. Otherwise, a woman could get a fate like Agnes: sell her body to a man she didn't like.
  6. In short, Agnes is a prejudiced snob. She doesn't evaluate people as individuals on the basis of their character and work, but on the basis of outer qualities of birth they can't influenced on.
  7. I feel just the opposite - I am tired of Harry irl after hearing too much of him irl. Although William's storyline was boring, at least there was one, i.e. accepting his role and meeting his future wife.
  8. I agree with SnapHappy: there are situations where confessions are wrong - a person who had done must just carry the guilt, not transfer the burden to the one she has wronged. And if we believe that the husband afterwards told the truth, the sister actually lied - they didn't have sex, just kissing and "a tender moment". That makes one suspect that the sister's motive was to make sure that Jessie wouldn't forgive her husband or otherwise make her miserable. Either she in love with her brother-in-love and wants him to herself or she is jealous or envious towards Jessie or wants to revenge on her for some matter.
  9. Isn't the whole idea of this show is that people don't "get over with" the past? While living for years in uncertainty about the fate of the loved one and after that learning that he/she was murdered is a lot worse than a random accident, even the latter rises existential questions and takes away one's own feeling of security. Also, if Sunny had lost his parent, child or spouse, people would undertand and sympathize with his grief better. Friendship isn't valued nowadays as it should be. As a friend and colleague Cassie was Sunny's "second half". Finally, it's IMO not the same thing to do something out of duty (because Sal "deserves" it) than to do it out of heart. Although you say that you don't undestand Sunny, you do: you made a perfect description of Sunny's conflicted feelings that made him make the decision he made, or rather he transferred the decision to Sal. But actually she did earlier just the same: she told only about the danger miscarriange without expressly saying "come home, I need you". As he didn't welcome pregnancy, I am not sure if he would have been any help to Sal as, however much empathy he would show her, he wouldn't (even if he wouldn't say it) be really sorry about losing the baby. Her mum could probably give her best possible support under the circumstances. Could Sunny really work as an police officer if he put his fiancee first? That said, the situation isn't normal now as Sunny is grieving for Cassie. Also, dating is elementally different than living together, not to speak of raising kids. And as others have said, Sunny has already kids, Sal doesn't.
  10. No, it was natural. First, there was no reason to doubt that after their husbands had left, the ex-wives drank and talked together in the house until 3 a.m. in the house together. Unlike men, they had no bond that would have made them to lie for each other. Second, men had a motive for that kind of crime, but women didn't. Third, even if a woman had strength to strangle the offer, she certainly had no means to carry the body to London and bury it there. Fourth, because the marriages had been broken, the men had no reason protect their ex-wife after the body was found and they were interrogated. Five, if a wife had followed her husband and killed a girl he had sex with and he had helped to bury the body and then kept silent with it, the plot would be too much like the Season 1.
  11. @JudyObscure wrote in Willsmania: Actually Charles replied in public, and Diana's Panorama-interview happened after separation but before divorce. Timetimetable: 1992: Diana: her true story by Andrew Morton, source Diana but she denies it August 1992: Squidgate published (Diana and James Gilbert) November 1992: Camillagate published (Charles and Camilla) December 1992: separation announced by PM June 1994: Charles interviewed by James Dimbleby in TV 1994: The Prince of Wales by James Dimbleby published 1994: Princess in love by Anna Pasternark about Diana and James Hewitt's affair, source Hewitt November 1994: Diana interviewed by Martin Bashir December 199: the Queen writes to Charles and Diana Augut 1995: legal divorce
  12. Actually, Charles replied, but nothing good came of revelations both made. More in the history section.
  13. I doubt Tommy ever had an ability to make "right choices" and lead a normal life. Maybe his brain was damaged already at birth by his addict mother and certainly she damaged him during childhood (that's why he so hated that his son was raised by an old woman). On the other hand, Becky was raised by Catherine and Richard. So why did she chose a man like Tommy (she actually liked him, her brother claimed in the firts season).
  14. I just can't understand aghast. Catherine never gave Tommy a chance with Ryan? Tommy wasn't as bad as she believed? I absolutely agree with gesundheit. Already in the first season we saw Tommy rape Ann, kill several people (including his two buddies) and he would have killed his own son, by burning him alive no less, if Catherine had prevented him. In the first season Clare talked that Tommy maybe would have some legal rights as a biological father. I can't understand and accept that kind of law. Biology doesn't make one a parent, except nominally.
  15. It wasn't not long that a second wedding, or any wedding of middle-aged couple for that matter, used to be small and quiet. If one has had a big wedding, as both Charles and Camilla had with their respective spouses, why would one want to repeat it? After all, in a private ceremony the couple can concentrate wholly on each other without needing to think about the public and TV.
×
×
  • Create New...