DianeDobbler

Oh I feel that! When I first started binge/catching up watching, I'd heard so much about the show, although I KNEW nothing of the show but Maggie Smith was on it. I assumed with all of these characters that storylines such as you describe would be the norm. It wasn't long before I realized that most story directions were dictated by keeping the main characters in the main house (save for the satellites of Crawley and Dowager), so anything that seemed to move the characters in different directions or locations was never going to happen. When I got to Thomas's storyline (the one where O'Brian seemed to get him sacked sans reference) I worried til I realized - oh, it'll be fine - they can't have Thomas leave the house.

Brendan Coyle really gets on my nerves in martyr mode and in romantic lead mode. I cringe. I like him when he's involved in someone else's story, which is why to date his helping Thomas out of the fix he was in with O'Brien/Jimmy remains my favorite of his storylines. I think his line delivery is sharper and smart and warmer. When he's a martyr, the acting is too wet. When he's a romantic lead, it doesn't work for me and I can't figure why - not looks though, because I don't mind with other character-actors. I don't think he particularly has any chemistry with Joanna Froggatt, and some of what bugs me in him bugs me in her, so maybe it's the combination that does it to me. Froggatt's anachronistic eyebrows have bugged me since S1. Most recently I liked when he was helping Anna get a bedroom sorted out. I guess maybe I think he's dreadful with subtext, which is a strange problem for an actor to have or for me to believe I perceive in an actor. But when he's on the level, and his character is on the level (and not romantic), I can enjoy Bates. When he's macho, pissy, threatening or romantic, he just comes off smarmy to me and I'd rather take a pass.

Yep - I just can't think of a situation where Mary went about getting what she wanted, and that accounts for how she ended up in a position she sought, or living the way she wished to live. I don't even mean "earn" as in merit. The woman did not take action. Other people take action FOR her. Edith OTOH takes action repeatedly and others throw themselves between her and what she wants to ensure she doesn't get it. I can think of a million decisions Mary made that sucked, but it didn't matter because external events and an army of people stepped in to undo the damage and make it right without her lifting a finger.

I don't see Mary as functional - I see her as enabled. I can't think of anything she's DONE that created the life she has, nor choices she's made. Nothing in her character. She has all of what she has due to external deux ex machine or the inexplicable devotion of others (meaning, she has never particularly earned that devotion). The principle things Mary has are the heir to Downton and a giant fortune, neither of which she got through her own agency. It was Matthew magically remaining in love with her for close to a decade and it's Matthew inheriting the massive fortune belonging to the woman he betrayed with Mary. She got what she wants despite herself, not because of her character. Edith is functional, her functionality is simply ignored, and that's probably why her relationship with her family remains dysfunctional and sad. She gets what she wants and then external agencies take it away from her (Strallen, Gregson, etc.). She still has her writing job, by our brief glimpse of her at the office that appears to be running smoothly enough. Sybil accomplished things and was respected and acknowledged for it.

Have we been told that Series 6 is the last Downtown series? If we were earlier in the run of the show, I'd guess that Atticus/Rose was intentionally rushed, augering problems ahead. However, if it's a housekeeping plot point, and Mary/Tom are slated as a couple to come, then I'd view it as a hustle and WE'RE the ones getting rushed into it - they're perfect for each other, yes it's rushed, Atticus is just "unconventional" (Jewish) enough for Rose to maintain her status as the free-thinker of the family, but come on Atticus is adorable sometimes these things happen this way! And done - so much for Rose. Fellowes has never shown much interest in writing for her. Her stuff just sets up other characters. About Anna going to Mrs. Hughes about the child on the train - it was how it was written and played. It felt off-tone, and deliberately so to make Anna seem nosy/set her up for a reproof from Mrs. Hughes. There are many ways to cover Anna for asking that question, and many ways for her to ask that question that position her as discreet, and relying upon subtext. Instead it played as if she were telling tales and Mrs. Hughes had to shut her down. As with Mary, it was HOW Mrs. and Mrs. Bates, and Mary, were presented to us this episode that was different. In the past we've been cued to completely root on the Bateses, and as for Mary, we've been cued to recognize her bitchy side, but in a "isn't she just awful but she's so Mary!" sort of way. In this episode, not only were there the moments already noted, but something about the scene at the train station seemed especially presented to make Mary appear insipid.

A lot of people have trouble buying it, and I'm curious if Episode 7 marks a permanent shift in tone or is just a fan service one-off. Last season these men were trotting around Mary, basically declaring they'd spend decades pursuing her if it meant they could have her in the end.

Oh God. Well someone I know (a former actress, yet) - declared months ago she figured it would be Tom and Mary in the end. You know despite her being a Grade A1 bitch and snob Fellowes has taken pains to trot out her liberalism in other aspects - such as Jack and Rose, such as her attitude towards Tom, which goes way back to when she applauded Matthew announcing Tom as his best man in front of everyone at the dinner table. And now they appear to be rushing the only other obvious "tie it neatly up in a bow" option for Tom - Rose - into a marriage with her opposite number (Atticus). "Tie up neatly in a bow" = keep all the key characters living in that house. That's what it means for Fellowes. I HOPE this is not the case but Fellowes just got rid of the Identikit suitors and certainly Mary can't exist without prospects. Just restating how I loved Maggie Smith's playing of the scene with Mary, talking about Isobel. I love how Mary's view of the friendship was Isobel looking up to/admiring Violet, and Violet tutoring/role modeling for Isobel the ways of the county and the ways of "our kind". And here is Violet, so clearly impacted by "losing Isobel", looking straight at Mary and saying she doesn't believe Isobel has EVER looked up to or admired Violet. You can't make a stronger declaration of pure friendship than that. There's no "advantage" of that sort Isobel sees in being friends with Violet, and no ego boost to Violet. I think the "we have a lot in common" was one of the most moving things Violet ever said - it was so genuine and not soppy. It's clear she's come round to facing the value this friendship has for her and isn't embarrassed by it, but ITA, DID regret telling Mary, specifically, as it was all wasted on Mary. I suppose it makes a bit of sense that Mrs. Hughes and Carson would have enough put by to purchase a cottage or something - they live at Downton and get room and board, so they could have saved up a bit over the years. It's amusing that Daisy's father-in-law of one day is a comfortable farmer who has adopted her in his heart as his daughter and heir, and that Mrs. Patmore has a relative who left her money, so some of the key downstairs crowd have a safety net beneath them when the Big House system falls more and more apart in the coming decades. I totally believe Thomas should go to America. Good looking, British accent, (under) butler to an English earl - there are soon-to-be-movie stars and all kinds of socialites who'd be competing for the status of having him be major domo in their households. OTOH, I guess both Crawley sisters are without prospects at the moment, and a lot of stuff seems to be being wrapped up, so perhaps all this is merely deck-clearing and Fellowes has a better/smarter game plan in mind for Series 6 than he did the past two series. The past two series he banked on us being fascinated with Mary and her suitors, and that didn't work out so well.

Well, I enjoyed this episode - first I've enjoyed the whole series, although I've enjoyed bits and pieces of other episodes. If it weren't for the fact that I can't work out the screenwriter's (Fellowes') timeline, I would swear this episode was a bit fan service-y, giving fans who've pushed back against Fellowes' chosen ones a little something. Not only did Violet smack down Mary at the dinner table about Edith, but she also smacked her down after Violet confided in her about Isobel. She explains to Mary that Isobel means something to her as a friend, Mary responds that Violet has the rest of them, Violet says it's not the same, and that Violet and Isobel have a lot in common (what an enormous admission that "in common" remark was from Violet, and Maggie Smith was so wonderful in this entire scene). Mary remarks that her grandmother is getting positively misty, and she never took her for being sentimental. There's a way of cloaking real feeling behind that sort of remark, where your intonation can be warm, indicating you mean the opposite of your words, and there's what Mary did, which was sort of paper over it. I LOVED when Violet immediately said she was very sorry she had shared anything with Mary, and instructed her to eat some cake. One reproof might be just lip service, two reproofs from Violet towards Mary in the same episode for being a bitch is making a point. In prior episodes the "Mary is a bitch" stuff was done with affection - admitting she could SEEM like one, but being sure to deal with the point with affection/admiration. In this one episode there wasn't any of that. Mary even came off callous when she saw Edith at the train station - she didn't know what was going on, but the juxtaposition of her sister and mother (and secret niece) trying to manage everything with discretion, while Mary is typically oblivious to other people's concerns, appeared intentional. A couple of the actors have said that Fellowes writes to what the actors do on screen. I don't think the timing works for that to have impacted the turnaround on Gillingham, but I found it startling that Blake told Gillingham he was far more natural and relaxed with Mabel (it was ONE scene last episode), and that it was sort of put on Mary, not Gillingham, that Gillingham hadn't gone away. That's a re-write. When it first happened, Gillingham wouldn't take no for an answer. This episode, it was entirely his obligation after having slept with her, and he was all "You had only to tell me." as if he'd been this reasonable all along. Rose and Atticus are awfully rushed, and I agree about the kiss. I think it's because, as convincing as Atticus is that he's a nice, lovely man infatuated with Rose, the two of them are only called upon to play this sort of giddiness with each other, so it's hard to determine if there's a genuine connection there in quieter modes. Last episode Isobel told Violet that her marriage to Lord Merton would be her last big adventure before she was "done". She didn't say she was surprised to find herself in love with him, or anything along those lines. After this episode and the treatment from his sons, I can see her deciding this is not her idea of an adventure and calling it off. I'll feel bad for Lord Merton if that's what happens. The dinner table scene was ridiculous - I simply don't believe the two bad sons would be that heavy handed. Not the style of the times. More the knife in the ribs than the club over the head. More fan service: the often insufferable Bates, and his martyred wife are WRONG? Are SEEN to be wrong? Are petulant dicks about it? Seemed out of character to me BECAUSE Bates is such a martyr and in the past even went out of his way to help Thomas, who had actively tried to destroy his life, and here he's being blinkered about such an obviously good soul as Baxter. I did love Thomas being nice to all three - Daisy, Baxter and Mosley, and enjoyed Baxter/Daisy/Mosley at the farm very much. Love Daisy's father-in-law, as always. I find Cora's solution to Marigold a bit dubious BUT Edith has demonstrated that she's devoted to that girl, and she's also clear that she doesn't want her father to know, and I imagine it's better for Marigold to be raised with Sybil and George on equal terms. I did love them finding Edith at the publishing business, and Cora referring to "your employees." Cora is oblivious most of the time, but when she's made aware, I do like how she reacts much of the time. I liked that she immediately identified Edith's dilemma with Violet and Rosemund's solutions as she did NOT want to be separated from/lose her child, I liked that she would have been supportive if Edith had gone to America (this episode re-emphasized that Edith is NOT Sybil when it comes to standing up social convention), and realizing Edith wanted to keep an eye on the publishing business, came up with the ward/nursery solution. I find it so odd that Edith is living a completely unconventional life, but emotionally speaking, doesn't own it. She's running a publishing business and writes a column. She had an affair with her boss and kissed him in public. She's worn some very daring clothes (and looked gorgeous last night). She learned to drive when almost nobody knew how to drive. She does these things, but emotionally, doesn't appear to embrace what it means, even though she enjoys it. She still wants the approval she doesn't get.

For the latest episode - Edith is found, Isis is on her way out, Isobel is engaged.

If we're going to hang our hats on the writing, then Tom seriously considered being with Sarah Bunting! It's absolutely ridiculous that Lavinia, or Lavinia's father, would want MARY to a) end up married to Matthew, and b) that LAVINIA's inheritence go towards the preservation of Mary's family's estate. That was one of the more callous, ridiculous points of the entire series. Matthew inherits from his dead (non-Mary) financee's father. He is pressed to use the money to save the bacon of the family estate belonging to the woman he kissed in the Crawley atrium while his actual finacee' was gasping for breath upstairs. Sorry Julian. I was never ever on Mary's side with that. I acknowledge Matthew is a martyr, but I also note his inheritence was ludicrous - did Lavinia's dad not know about Mary? I don't think Laura Carmichael is as conventionally attractive in the face as Michelle Dockery and Jessica Brown Findley, mostly because the latter two have symetrical features (however pinched and harsh Mary is looking), and Carmichael, while possessing, huge blue eyes and beautiful skin, has a very strong nose and a rather weak chin line/overbite. BUT. Her actual head/face is proportionate (the ratio of forehead to mid-face to chin/jawline). She has beautiful gorgeous large blue eyes, beautiful skin, and a kick ass body. Her face isn't going to break mirrors - far from it - it's simply not as symetrical as her sisters, but it's hardly condemning her to the scraps of the aristocracy, except that we have Julian Fellowes writing this.

Me too. I know he was cast as and spoken of as the dreary living end of husbandly prospects, but he and Edith had a real connection. It was romantic, the sort of relationship that's fun because from the outside, it looks like this no-hope girl hooks up with some Jane Austen heroine's reject, but the secret was they enjoyed each other's company, had a lot in common, and were well-matched. Little did people know they were actually happy! Fellowes ignored that Carmichael was very persuasive in her character wanting to marry Stallen and not being the least repulsed/disappointed by the idea. Thank heavens her family intervened. If they hadn't, Edith would be mistress of her own estate and heir to her husband's fortune. That was a near thing, huh. Now she's an unwed mother with a dead baby daddy, living at her parental home and the recipient of her elder sister's contempt. We're meant to believe she has an income - her writing and some of grandpa's money, so when her parents die she might be able to purchase a flat in town or something rather than leave herself to her sister's tender mercies. I just thought it was obvious Stallen and Edith would be happy together and the sudden opposition of the family seemed perverse and cruel. I really can't stand how they show no interest in Edith themselves, but do their best to sabotage anyone else's interest in Edith as well.

kpw, and in addition to the Job-like arc you describe, it gets very little screen time, very little embellishment. So the message is twofold - nothing good will happen to this character AND she's not important anyway. Her troubles/feelings don't count. Not as much as Mary's haircut. That's an extremely disheartening subtextual message. We may be meant to see Mary's behavior as OTT, but I don't know if we're supposed to want her punished, or just enjoy her as we're supposed to enjoy Violet. In the assignment of screen time, Fellowes is saying I know you're going to tune in more for Mary's hair and her point-to-point antics with the boys and Mabel Lane Fox than you are for stupid Edith and her problems. In that sense, the writing backs up the terrible things that are said to and about Edith. Hell, Fellowes would rather write scenes talking about her than scenes with her. I've said before Dockery is no Maggie Smith. For me, she's not pulling off the enjoyably entitled, often chilly aristocrat with surprising pockets of niceness/open-mindedness/unselfishness. It's dreary and empty and blah. She's not a "creature." You know, somebody interesting in their own right, as I believe a young Maggie Smith could have pulled off, although granted, at some point every actor needs a story. Mary needs something at stake. I also agree Mary had much more vitality in Series 1. I rewatched the hunt that featured Pamuck, and when she came in from the hunt rather disheveled Mary seemed quite young and excited, trying to keep herself composed, but the "young" pushed through. When Mary slapped Edith after finding out Edith had written the Ambassador, she was truly angry. As silly as I think the Pamuck thing was, as easily handled as I believe it could have been, it was played as having real stakes, and Mary appeared to feel that when it happened. Now, Mary just doesn't give a sh*t. She doesn't seem angry at Edith. She didn't seem genuinely upset that Edith tried to squash her haircut parade. She was just contemptuous. How dare Edith believe her petty grief trumped Mary's entitlement to the spotlight for a haircut. Not an angry "How dare Edith". She had no feelings about it. If she's this terribly bored I'd suggest perhaps she DO something other than get her haircut and bolster her ego by trampling over her sister's feelings and proving the family cares more for Mary's hair than they do Edith's grief. I agree Edith is more of protagonist. She's done more in her life than Mary has even attempted.

Fellowes wants "us" to want what Mary wants. That's the problem he hasn't solved in two series. Mary can want a million things, and he can't make us care. She can get them, and he can't make us care. Many fans cared about Matthew/Mary. He didn't make us. It just worked, despite his best efforts at miserable scriptwriting in Series 2. I feel the way I've felt with other showrunners - until we care about what he (Fellowes) cares about, nothing good will happen to anyone we already care about. Tom, Thomas, Edith, Sybil, whomever - will have to wait. All wait on her. Due respect to the fans of each actor, when they cast Gillingham and Blake, did they really think this would re-invest fans, or was it simply that they thought the main success of Mary/Matthew was down to Dockery, and the actor opposite didn't matter so much? They didn't credit the combination?

I forgot and can't BELIEVE Cora told EDITH she was being unfair to Mary. Mary decided to go ahead and get her hair cut at the same time she knew Edith was getting the news Gregson was dead. And she required an audience to show it to. The day Edith got her news. Edith objects - how dare Edith object. Having your feelings matter over stuff you should have got over is a Mary privilege, or a Robert privilege - an anyone but Edith privilege. Robert acted out more over realizing his services weren't actually required in the military than Edith did over Gregson, and that was Robert's ego. Edith is treated as someone who mustn't dare take up any room, as someone who has to operate inside strict parameters or she'll be tuned out, and the others can be as self-indulgent as they like. However much I disagree with both Rosemund and Violet's handling of Edith's situation, Rosemund, via the actresses acting, the writing, and what was said, has demonstrated she cares. Edith matters to her. She never acted as if it were the world's most tedious burden and the idea of having to pretend to care about it was really too much to ask considering everything else on her plate, and why was Edith such a trial. She went to considerable time and effort for Edith. Violet never acted that way either; never acted as if just anything to do with Edith having her own life was too boring for words. I definitely do not get the impression they are spending this effort solely to avert a family scandal. Edith matters. It says something to me that two rather self-absorbed members of the extended Crawley family managed to be interested but her parents cannot be interested. Her parents are supposed to be somewhat warmer, nicer, less conventional than her aunt and grandmother. Mary won't even ride astride - in 1924 - with her grandmother watching. It says nothing good. They treat her with zero respect. I really dislike any scriptwriting that overtly tells us that the double standard matters, that WHO it happens to counts more than what. I don't mean in obvious structural ways, such as leads versus background players, but Edith is a featured character on Downton, a member of the core family, and I just can't stand that Mary's haircuts and point-to-point displays on horseback are more important than Edith's child, and the loss of Edith's one love, not just in assigned screen time, but in attention paid by the other characters, who are fascinated by the former and bored to tears by the latter. This is instructional storytelling of the worst kind. Other stuff: as the writing has declined markedly, the acting becomes more important. The casting becomes important. IMO the only casting success since Matthew's death is Raquel Cassidy as Baxter (I mean permanent additions, not guest stars or recurring). IMO Dockery isn't standing up to the demands of holding the center of the show as the stories flag. IMO as well, Lily James is always alive - just look at her face when the telegram arrives. She plays Rose as full of empathy, feeling, even if Rose has nothing to do in a scene. Allen Leech likewise. Not saying that's the only choice - it doesn't suit every character - but actors need to find something to make the scene important, even if the script is hopeless. As the stories have flagged, I've become more frustrated that an actor/character who needs a good story to be interesting (Dockery/Mary) continues to get lead focus, while newer actors who do fantastic stuff with very little continue to be treated as afterthoughts, even though they're perfectly positioned to have a strong story. I think the two Mary suitors are rather middling, but the guy who played Gillingham appeared a thousand times more relaxed, convinced, and younger (and actually charming) in his brief byplay with the actress playing Mabel Lane Fox than in his entire two series storyline with Dockery. I guess I put it down to that actress, who can infuse dreary dialogue with conviction and energy, communicates that to her scene partner, and it's contagious. Furthermore, it was very easily conveyed that Gillingham/Lane Fox knew each other very well, had history, from the actors, and not from the lines of dialogue. Mary/Gillingham, to me, relied entirely on dialogue. I'm on the fence about the actor playing Atticus - he's a nice, accessible, endearing sort of good-looking in a classical way, but this past episode was the first I thought - oh, he was cast because he can convey "NICE" in such a genuine, natural way. I'm wondering if there are other notes.

THIS was just - give me a break Fellowes. This is more pretending that Mary is the living end in beauty and sex appeal. How HEARTLESS it would be for her to amp up the power of her beauty and sex appeal when it's already so overwhelming. I think Edith has made a million attempts to open up to her family, only to have them ignore her. It's not on her at this point for failing to put every detail of her life open to inspection. It's on them, as loving family members, to indicate that they're interested, that they love her, that they care. Her aunt and grandmother managed - they went to her. She didn't seek them out. Her aunt and her grandmother are perhaps too conventional and lack the balls (as said, aristocrats could take more risks because they could, because their money and status intimidated and influenced, and they had no problems with hypocrisy, i.e., do as we say, not as WE do) - but her aunt - who doesn't even live at Downton, took an interest, learned what was going on, put her own funds and time on the line to help out. Last we saw of Violet in Ep. 6 she cared enough about Edith to follow up with the Drews about what had happened. After years of the way they've treated Edith, it's on her family, not on Edith, to demonstrate that they give a damn. Catch a clue, Crowleys. But they don't WANT to. They're not interested. Because she doesn't expose herself to them doesn't excuse them for their behavior after Gregson died. Hell, Fellowes even had ATTICUS express the wish that gosh, he certainly hoped the point-to-point fun carried on. Took him about two seconds to catch on Edith doesn't matter and if any time she makes a bid to be a person worth considering in her own right, we shall all do our utmost to let her know there is nothing more tedious and she doesn't rate. Even more dreary when she points this out herself. What her family does know is she's been spending a lot of time with the Drew's child, that Gregson is confirmed dead, that he loved Edith enough to leave her his publishing business, that he's been Edith's only serious suitor since Stallen. Instead of jumping to conclusions that reduce Edith (pathetic spinster attaching herself to farmer's child), how about paying attention to her patterns of behavior, including her months away? They don't care enough. If she opened up more, she'd only have more of the matters of her heart reduced by her family. They've shown her private matters aren't safe with them. It's up to them to extend themselves, not her to reach out more. Everybody said Maggie Smith is a treasure - when she visited the Drew's farm and realized Edith and Marigold were gone, she gave it so much WEIGHT and heart. I believe Downton has drawn parallels between Violet and Mary, that Mary's a throwback to Violet. Violet has had insufferable moments. Violet has refused to admit certain things bother her. Her friendship with Isobel has been almost unacknowledged/unadmitted due to Violet's sense of superiority, although it's been very clear the past four or so episodes that Violet is much more open about the friendship (I loved Smith's line delivery on "You'll come?" to Isobel vis a vis something upcoming - the sense that the two of them know they're established, don't need excuses, and have reached a "taken for granted" comfort level). I like Dockery quite a bit in her interviews, but she simply lacks the Smith's ability to infuse this sort of character with humanity absent strong writing - something at stake, powerful subtext, etc. Violet is complex. She has a heart but there have been times you know she's going to ignore her heart in favor of convention, and it can piss you off. Her whininess at times about her own needs vis a vis the less fortunate can certainly grate - going back to her not wanting to relinquish her flower trophies to Mr. Mosley (what about Meeeeeeee), and just recently her complaint that her maid was leaving because the maid's mother was infirm but what about Violet - SHE's infirm. We can't expect many actresses to be Maggie Smith (OR Penelope Milton) - but when Smith says lines like that, they come from a genuine place in Violet. Violet really is thinking "what about me." Or she's saying it to express some other genuine emotion she can't say any other way. Whereas Mary comes out as a stone cold narcissistic bitch who doesn't HAVE other genuine emotions or care about anything. Even when she's "nice" or shows a side of her character that's admirable (her attitude towards Tom, and, last season, how she handled Jack and Rose). I'm not FEELING it. I think Dockery needs an action to play, not just a state of being to embody. It's funny, I wonder if the Edith stuff bugs Dockery. There's a bunch of youtube stuff, and one is when the actors were asked about what was most characteristic of their characters. I believe Dockery said the awful things Mary says to her sister. Her tone was quite rueful, not enjoying it much.

I love how everyone else in the Crawley family can display seethingly embarrassing behavior in front of the rest of the family, or at the dining table with many guests, or be inappropriate when a man's finacee' is gasping for breath upstairs, but let Edith lash out over a haircut's timing (my suspicion is Robert lashes out for less at least twice a week) because the man she loved died, and it's like - OMG. How embarrassing. Edith wants her FEELINGS respected. Does she not know how tedious she is? I also find it beyond bizarre that Fellowes seems to be cuing us to be somewhat dismissive of Greggson's death due to the time that has passed and "everybody knew", while playing Violet and the prince - a romance dead and gathering dust for sixty years - for poignance. If they tell us Gregson's death means nothing because he's been gone so long, why should the Prince and Violet mean anything whatsoever? It's been over sixty years! I think Anna's being taken aback over Mary's callous remarks is IT as far as Mary's commeuppance. When she was without Matthew at the end of S1, due to her own mistakes, we were meant to feel wretched for her. She got a dolly shot, Carson came and comforted her, the music cued us to feel terrible. This episode, Mary gets a haircut and the hairdresser has to tell us she can pull it off while other women can't. Mary decides to actually make a parade of her haircut in front of the entire family - the death of Edith's bf just RUINED the entire thing! Then Mary goes to the steeplechase or whatever it was, and her erstwhile romantic rival, by way of playfully SNARKING at her, tells her she looks like a Vogue model and a stick of dynamite - IOW, drop dead stylish, au mode (Vogue) and incredibly sexy (stick of dynamite). That's what passes for insulting Mary on this show - you looked gorgeous and incredibly sexy on PURPOSE! I definitely expect that the family will treat Edith's bolt as just another inexplicable bid for attention (does she not KNOW she isn't interesting??) rather than BE actually concerned for her. I just don't care about Mary anymore. This series has done it. I like Michelle Dockery out of character, and was interested in Mary/Matthew, but IMO her performance has been impacted by the complete lack of commitment in her storyline. She's playing her role with no stakes whatsoever, no internal energy, no point of view whatseover. She's just completely blah, Fellowes tells instead of shows anyway, but now Mary's story is almost all tell, and he sort of puts her through her paces from time to time to explain why we should like her anyway (her views on Tom, Tom telling her she's nicer than people think, etc.) without making her interesting or giving us (me) a reason to care. I like the old pros downstairs - I enjoyed Mrs. Patmore discussing her cottage. I enjoyed Violet and Isobel. I, also, suspect the Merton merger won't happen because a) no budget for a Merton estate and b) Violet and Isobel are meant to be the real pairing.

I did like the Thomas/Baxter stuff. It's sort of clever for Downton to give Baxter an evil past. I don't agree with Mosley that Baxter was as much a victim as the one whose jewels she stole. Nope, she was in love/lust, it overrode who she'd been before, and she committed a crime because he asked. That doesn't make her a victim - why? Because he got away? She still stole. However, what we're left with is someone who is clearly, IMO, a very good person, but had her moment being a not-so-good person, so she is compassionate and nonjudgmental. Also knows Thomas Barrow's family, so that helps even more - she probably already knew he was gay before she was hired at the house. So they have this history, almost like siblings. I thought about that when they were headed home in the rain after the doctor's visit. Barrow held the umbrella over her head. She mentioned he'd shown himself a courageous person and could do anything. He told her she was daft. I THINK a reason Thomas went for the "cure" was Jimmy left. He loved Jimmy, but was reconciled to the platonic thing. However, Jimmy was also his only friend, so he was lonely. I could see him trying to cure himself after Jimmy's departure, realizing that he had little chance of settling down or having that companionship as he was. If he cured himself, he could possibly have a life. I disagree with a review that said Thomas was never ashamed of who he was enough to try to "cure" being gay. I don't think he tried to cure it because of shame, but out of loneliness, the way society was. He was lonely and if he were straight, he could have a "normal" accepted relationship. I myself still find Jimmy's orientation somewhat ambiguous, but it almost doesn't matter. If a man wanted to live in denial, society was 100% set up for it, nothing Thomas could do. When he walked home with Baxter I thought - he has a pseudo family member/friend now, at least, and hope it lasts. She really does know him, and knows where he comes from.

Oh, well, you know, Greggson has been gone such a long time, why didn't Edith realize he was dead when the family realized it AGES ago. Look at Mary's hair! Look at Mary looking like a cross between a Vogue model and a stick of dynamite! I see we've entered the phase of Mary Sue-ing when the show runner has to beg the question because it's no longer self-evident. I love up thread, the poster who called Edith's story a tire fire, or similar, because the writing for Mrs. Drew makes NO SENSE. This is a woman who ought to have suspected by Edith's first visit that she was the mother; instead she's ripping up a birth certificate and "no no NO!ing". I'm not making light, but I have also read about those times, and Mrs. Drew isn't sitting at home playing patty cake with Marigold. She's up at dawn, she's working like a horse, and she knows she was in a foster situation. I did feel for Violet. Obviously, the past couple of episodes, Downton has been emphasizing just how much time Violet and Isobel spend together. They go to things together.They're a tandem. It's beyond the pretext stage when you're playing scrabble and doing jigsaw puzzles. The only part of the episode that made me feel okay Edith-wise was that Violet followed through. You know the others are all ... "Edith GONE? Wny that's just strange. Sure her bf died, but that was ages ago. Oh well - DO look at these housing plans!" I just hope Fellowes doesn't persuade us that Edith is better off sending her child far far away from her. Edith doesn't get to have a kid. That's for Mary (to ignore), and Tom (whom I love, but the child's with the nanny most of the time). I do love that Greggson left her his publishing business. I expect everyone to forget that before the Xmas special. This episode. Edith's baby daddy is dead - Edith gets NO scenes. Edith runs away - she gets two scenes. Mary gets her hair cut - TWO scenes. A f*cking HAIR CUT. Then supporting scenes about how awesome is her haircut. Isobel accepts a marriage proposal AND WE DON'T SEE IT. They're totally going to kill Isis cause her name is Isis. Couldn't be clearer. Love how it's adorable for Violet to reconnect with her ex-lover of sixty years ago but if Edith hadn't already known Greggson was dead, then pfft to her. George was in the episode but Mary wasn't shown so much as glancing at him. Atticus is cute. I want Rose with Tom, BUT. I see no flaws in Atticus, so why aren't they writing the story. Why has it progressed in one episode from "Well, hello, I'm Atticue - and JEWISH!" to "His parents are coming to dinner and they're practically promised!" I saw the preview about Blake saying "Kiss me now!" I think it's some sort of play acting - you know when an ex walks in the room, or you want to cover up something, it might helps if someone kisses you? Seen it in movies and tv episodes. That's how it struck me. Seems to me they're trying to create sparks that way - see, they kiss as friends, as a joke! But look at the chemistry! Except, I think, NOT.

OT: Yes there is. I've never ridden sidesaddle, but I ride. I've met people who ride sidesaddle for events , parades, and more. Sidesaddles are specifically constructed. Your alignment (shoulders, back, pelvis, hips, butt) is still squared with your mount's, same as in riding astride. Your right leg is just bent at the knee and secured by the pommel piece(s). The only security you have riding astride at speed is experience, and your ability to move with the action of your horse, same with sidesaddle. You're not a passenger strapped in. You have to ride. In sidesaddle, you're not riding at a right angle to your horse's forward motion. Your hips and everything else are squared off straight on as with a regular seat. Instead of your right leg flat against the right side of a horse and in a stirrup, it's bent across and secured by a piece, so you're still stable. The rest depends on how good a rider you are, just as a regular saddle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidesaddle ^Link describes history of sidesaddle construction, including a 1915 photograph of a female clearing a 6'6" jump sitting sidesaddle. End OT: I agree that there are similarities in type between Mabel Lane Fox and Sarah Bunting. On the short side, petite, not dissimilar in the face. Hate to imagine they reserved the livelier actress for Mary's story. Seriously with the death of Edith's baby daddy not getting scenes but Mary's haircut being the feature of the episode. This show is ridiculous.

I was reading there were rumors - only rumors - that Downton was going to off Isis because her name is Isis and that's an unfortunate name right now. I really hope if Isis goes - and I like the idea of a dog living forever - that's not the reason.

Have at it, if I'm not out of turn. See I made a blunder, but I think clear enough it's Episode 6 for S5.

I probably won't actually stop watching. :) However, having been a Matthew/Mary fan, and thus far not at all intrigued by Mary's current romantic options nor Mary solo, it is certainly striking, how the romantic lives of the other characters are addressed. I was following along with Mary/Matthew, I noticed Sybil/Tom got a bit of a short shrift, but another favorite, Thomas, got a great story with the Jimmy/Baxter/Carson/Mrs. Hughes/Bates stuff. I'm a Mad Men fan too, one of the fans hoping Stan/Peggy end up together at the end. At the same time, it's not THAT type of soap, where people have adorable romances, break up and get back together, it IS the sort of drama/soap that's about other challenges, conflict, and if a character does find some happiness or true loves, it makes sense to wait til series end. Downton, OTOH, is more of an enjoy the process drama, not wait til the end for a pay-off. The "storytelling" is so thin that it's not worth it for Tom to only find somebody at the end of the run. Want to enjoy stories for him and stories for others I like while the series is still running. Fellowes doesn't seem to like to tell stories. He just sets up a scenario and instead of developing it, restates it.

I'll tell you my problem with Bunting. Summarized in the old Woody Allen movie quote of "The food here is terrible, and such small portions." She's been Tom's only story, but they didn't write anything but dinner parties where she clashed with Robert. Tom himself never invited her. I didn't WANT Tom to invite her, but the script had it as sort of she was invited because she was "Tom's friend" although we never saw a single scene of the friendship, something that was emphasized when Bunting herself asked Tom "Who invited me?" and he admitted "Rose" and not himself. The main thing is, Bunting was his only story. But they wrote nothing for it. And dragged it out almost an entire series. And I didn't want it to be written anyway. Still, as long as she's there, write the damn scenes, get it over with, and get rid of her. In Series 5, Fellowes just hung fire. Here's Bunting. She's a fellow socialist and acquaintance of Tom's. We're going to placehold that for 10 episodes. Every time she's at Downton, it's through the offices of some other family member who appears to believe they're inviting her as a favor to Tom, although we've seen no evidence these two have ever spent time together. Honestly, I don't know if I can do the next series. Maybe it's best to leave it till it's completely done, then binge watch til the absolute end of show finale.

I don't think we've seen Edith has the same advantages. When she overheard her mother telling Mary that she didn't have as many advantages, she overheard her mother telling Mary that Edith wasn't as pretty as Mary. That is something a mother should never ever say to the prettier child, true or not. Not ever. Furthermore, as written, the Drews aren't sick of Edith personally, as Edith, but because Fellowes is writing Mrs. Drew as a moron, and writing the family circumstances as insane (sure, we'll just pick up and find another tenant farm to farm! Nothing easier! My missus would rather we hit the road and starve than let Edith round Marigold another second!). I am quite confident that if Mary had the small daughter being raised by the Drews, Robert wouldn't think they'd get sick of Mary. He'd worry Mary wasn't circulating enough around her own kind, and perhaps worry the Drews would begin to expect too much of her. What he said wasn't about hanging around too much. That was "who can stand that much of Edith, she's inflicting them with her patheticness." What Robert said came off completely as "Who can stand that much of Edith" and we all know he'd never say that of Mary. I have never understood this vile Catch-22 her parents cram Edith into. No advantages, gonna be hanging around at home nursing her elderly parents - but when someone DOES show an interest they sabotage it or insist he's all wrong. She might not have a prospect years on end, but when one shows up, he's the wrong guy. For all the world they come off as so disgusted by their own daughter they're automatically repulsed by any man who'd show an interest. I am completely confident that if any man Edith loved came back to Downton with Lavinia in tow, the family would commence telling each other how they hoped Edith wouldn't make a fool of herself carrying a torch now that her previous would-be intended had such a young, lovely, kind, sweet, wealthy fiancee'.

I had to laugh at the idea of Robert being a self-made anything. When he said that about himself, it was like - in what universe. He's be lost if he wasn't born to his station. If he ever did get a leg up, he'd spoil it by making the wrong choice. As an earl, he can squander fortunes and make other bad decisions left and right, and ridiculous successive strokes of fortune have bailed him out. Can't quite describe it, but I didn't even take that as absent-minded, but rather somewhat worse. You know how it's obligatory to give a compliment to someone but there's nothing good to say? It's the classic "That's some baby!" remark/joke about an ugly newborn. Or "My, I can't imagine how much trouble it was to cook all this food!" when the meal is bad. It read that way to me, and more. It also read as if Cora were correcting Edith, and putting her in her place, as in, "quit trolling for compliments/playing victim." I sometimes wonder if Fellowes dragged Edith back to the pigsty because her stint as Michael's lover/editor/great wearer of clothes got too much attention. I imagine the actors who mentioned that period in Edith's life as an asset - they include Allen Leach, Michelle Dockery and Laura Carmichael - had it as part of their promotional talking points, but it just seems strange to me that she pulled it off so well but was then dragged back to sad sack land.