Sanditon - General Discussion

[Shanna Marie]

On 4/24/2023 at 11:04 AM, iMonrey said:

I've never understood this show's aversion to having Charlotte wear her hair up. Even at her own wedding she was the one and only person at the reception with her hair hanging down her back.

Worse, she still had her hair down after the wedding. I can kind of accept it for an unmarried woman, though it's not historically accurate in this period. I can even kind of buy it for the wedding if they were portraying her as virginal (given the size of that kid only a year after the wedding, maybe that was necessary) but a married woman of her status with a position of community authority would have not only had her hair up, but probably would have worn a cap.

19 hours ago, Orcinus orca said:

And in what universe did they applaud the newlyweds IN A CHURCH in the 1800's?

I think that was still in the era when the wedding wouldn't have been a separate ceremony. It would have been part of the regular church service, so people would have behaved like they were in a regular church service.

17 hours ago, norcalgal said:

As for Teacher Charlotte, was it illegal for women of a certain social rank to work? Lower class women had no choice, but I thought it was illegal  - or if not illegal, then common practice for women at/above a certain status not to work outside of the home?

It wasn't illegal. It just Wasn't Done. That was a big part of the plot of Emma, with the poor genteel ladies Emma got in trouble for mocking, and then Jane Fairfax, who faced the dreaded prospect of having to work as a governess. Also a big issue in Sense and Sensibility. Women of a certain class could only get away with working as a governess or companion, and then only while unmarried. If they had status but no income, they were screwed and had to live in genteel poverty on the charity of others. Since that was a position Austen was in, she wrote a lot about how precarious the lives of women were. She could supplement her income with her pen by writing books, but she couldn't get a real job, and once her father died she had to depend on her brothers. She was in a tricky zone of too upper-crust to actually work for a living, but too poor to be able to actually afford to live. And she couldn't even publish her books under her own name. The original publications were credited to "a lady."

I would imagine Charlotte's teaching falls into the category of "charity work." She wouldn't have been a salaried employee but rather was doing this as public service akin to visiting the poor with baskets of food, etc. A lady of the manor for a huge estate would absolutely not have had a real career. Her encouragement that a girl could be anything she wanted to be would have been unthinkable at that time. Maybe a very wealthy girl could get the private tutoring to learn advanced things, but women weren't allowed at most universities until later and a female lawyer wouldn't be allowed in any court.

[RedHawk]

On 4/24/2023 at 8:51 AM, smartymarty said:

I was okay with the happy ending. The show is over; let's let all plots tie up pleasantly.

Agree about Otis though -- we barely saw him to understand that there was still True Love there. (I can't remember now what the falling out with him was about in season one? Was he redeemed only by finding G's mother?)

And so tired of Charlotte. Didn't care for the Surprise! Lydia likes someone else! pulled out of a hat. Glad only for Colbourne to be happy. (Better would have been he marries Lydia and Charlotte becomes the spinster teacher.)

Really was just rooting for Lady Susan and the minister's sister.

WTF was that with Mr. Parker leaving his dying wife's bedside to visit Old Town??? Why couldn't he wait? Fortunately for him, she was Not Dead Yet when he returned. (I never understood this plot -- does he somehow own the land that Old Town sits on? That's why he could evict everyone?)
 

I was ok with Happily Ever After as well, although bummed we didn't see Lydia's beau sitting smiling beside her at the wedding. 

I did think for the briefest moment that we'd get the unexpected ending of Charlotte choosing to be a spinster school teacher after Colbourne and Lydia truly fell in love and got married. Knew it would never happen though.

Yeah, WTF with Tom running off to Old Town as his wife lay dying?! I had to laugh, he's never going to change. 

20 hours ago, One4Sorrow2TooBad said:

Leonora was my favorite character, always seemed to bring everything together. 

The character and actress grew on me so that I enjoyed her very much at the end. 

I also liked the few glimpses we got of the Parker children in the finale. The actress playing the older Parker girl was in "The Holiday" with Cameron Diaz and Jude Law when she was younger and she was so cute in it. Fun to see her again.

Edited April 25, 2023 by RedHawk
Clarity

[gingerella]

Count me in on those who were fine with the And They All Lived Happily Ever After ending. This show was always a puff piece, like a dessert buffet laden with sugary, sticky sweets looking all pretty and appealing. It was never a full course meal with gravitas. So the My Pretty Pony ending was fine for me, for all the reasons that @RedHawk mentions above.

[norcalgal]

8 minutes ago, gingerella said:

Count me in on those who were fine with the And They All Lived Happily Ever After ending. This show was always a puff piece, like a dessert buffet laden with sugary, sticky sweets looking all pretty and appealing. It was never a full course meal with gravitas. So the My Pretty Pony ending was fine for me, for all the reasons that @RedHawk mentions above.

Thirded, fourthed (I know these aren’t real words) or whatever the number is by now.  In fact, with no spoilers regarding this season, I just assumed all the white hat characters would get a happy ending.

[Doublemint]

Someone mentioned the Parker children above - I thought it odd that they were completely absent during all of the scenes of Mary's illness.  Where were they?  Makes no sense.

[RedHawk]

1 hour ago, Doublemint said:

Someone mentioned the Parker children above - I thought it odd that they were completely absent during all of the scenes of Mary's illness.  Where were they?  Makes no sense.

I know, they were mostly absent this season then turned up at the end. At least the kid actors got a day's pay! 

[MJ Frog]

9 hours ago, gingerella said:

Count me in on those who were fine with the And They All Lived Happily Ever After ending.

Exactly. Is this not why we watch Jane Austen? Or I mean "Jane Austen"? If you're looking for bleak existentialism, you've come to the wrong fictional universe.

[IndiaCat]

On 4/24/2023 at 2:12 AM, Andyourlittledog2 said:

Seriously, that was an expensive carriage for a farmer's daughter's exclusive use to go to the docks.  Who paid for that? 

It was the Parker’s carriage. In season 2 when Alison and Charlotte are returning to Sanditon, Charlotte says Tom sent his carriage for them. It’s the same carriage (unattractive yellow-green velvet interior). So Tom lent her the carriage to leave town. 

 

 

[twoods]

4 hours ago, Doublemint said:

Someone mentioned the Parker children above - I thought it odd that they were completely absent during all of the scenes of Mary's illness.  Where were they?  Makes no sense.

Maybe they kept the children away so they wouldn’t contract the same virus that Mary had. That, or the writers forgot she had children until the final episode.

[quarks]

15 hours ago, Dehumidifier said:

At what age do babies first get vaccinated? I know there are all sorts of rules about babies on sets. They may not have been able to use a younger child with a large cast in close proximity. Or it could be a cast members kid now immortalized. 

Anyway, one year later doesn't have to mean exactly 12 months to the day.

I don't know what the UK rules are for vaccinating or filming babies. I do know the US rules - the baby has to be at least two weeks old, and if the baby is under six months old, the baby can only be on set/camera for twenty minutes per day - that is, one VERY brief shot, assuming you can get it in that twenty minutes (not just a question of the baby cooperating, which they usually don't, but also the lighting and so on). 

That final scene would have required more than twenty minutes of filming, so I'm not surprised they went with an older baby. And since they kept the other kids in the scene, they didn't really have an option of "five years later," which would have ended the "wow, what a large baby" comments but started the "wait, Augusta hasn't found someone yet? Oh no. What if she goes back to Evil Edward!"  But I kinda wish they'd just tried to use a smaller doll.  Or avoided that scene completely and just ended with the wedding reception.

[sharifa70]

I’m satisfied with most of the season. I could have gone without the Augusta/Edward story (she’s too smart, he’s irredeemable: last season’s Esther plot was my point of no return for him), and Tom doesn’t seem to have evolved at all. The biggest thing for me was Otis & Georgianna. That felt completely rushed and un-earned to me. He shows up for a scene or two, goes back to London, and next time we see him, Georgianna is back in love with him? Building that story would have been much better than wasting our time on Augusta & Edward.

I would watch the hell out of a Susan/Samuel series.

[shapeshifter]

19 hours ago, gingerella said:

Count me in on those who were fine with the And They All Lived Happily Ever After ending.

10 hours ago, MJ Frog said:

Exactly. Is this not why we watch Jane Austen? Or I mean "Jane Austen"? If you're looking for bleak existentialism, you've come to the wrong fictional universe.

Sure, and true. But Jane did it so much better. At least they could've:

29 minutes ago, sharifa70 said:

gone without the Augusta/Edward story (she’s too smart, he’s irredeemable: last season’s Esther plot was my point of no return for him), and Tom doesn’t seem to have evolved at all. The biggest thing for me was Otis & Georgianna. That felt completely rushed and un-earned to me. He shows up for a scene or two, goes back to London, and next time we see him, Georgianna is back in love with him? Building that story would have been much better than wasting our time on Augusta & Edward.

And, yes:

29 minutes ago, sharifa70 said:

I would watch the hell out of a Susan/Samuel series.

provided the story arc was nothing like those we saw in this series.
That is, for starters, pick a story and figure out how long it will take to get there. Then make sure the actors' contracts will last as long as needed.

Production issues and then perhaps the pandemic had something to do with the wide swings of plot arcs in the beginning. But that's no excuse for leaning into the chaos. 
An oversized baby a year after a marriage is forgiveable. 
Otis The Kidnapping Colluder reappearing as Giorgianna's One True Love via a scrap of paper is insulting to the viewers, the actors, Austen's memory, and everyone working on the show. 
Sure there are vampire Austen stories, but wasn't this was supposed to be more true to the original? Or was there an accepted pivot to be true, instead, to the spirit of Bridgerton that I ignored more than I should have?

I do think Jane Austen might have appreciated the 21st century-written story of the dowager Lady Denham choosing her own independence over marrying Mr. Pryce. Austen might have even liked Mr. Price expressing his intensions to continue their friendship; IDK.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by shapeshifter

[Shanna Marie]

11 hours ago, MJ Frog said:

20 hours ago, gingerella said:

Count me in on those who were fine with the And They All Lived Happily Ever After ending.

Exactly. Is this not why we watch Jane Austen? Or I mean "Jane Austen"? If you're looking for bleak existentialism, you've come to the wrong fictional universe.

Yeah, everyone happy and paired off is a very Austen ending. However ...

1 hour ago, sharifa70 said:

The biggest thing for me was Otis & Georgianna. That felt completely rushed and un-earned to me. He shows up for a scene or two, goes back to London, and next time we see him, Georgianna is back in love with him?

I feel like almost all the happy endings here were rushed and unearned. The thing with Austen was that her characters all had to grow and overcome their flaws to get their happy endings. They went through stuff that led directly to them being able to find their match and then be happy, and there was often a bittersweet element to the happy endings, so they weren't all perfect and shiny. Lizzie and her family were stuck with Wickham as an in-law, for instance. Elinor's husband was disowned by his family and lost his inheritance.

But I don't feel like there was a real character arc for any of these romances, nothing like Lizzie having to readjust her impression of Darcy while he had to have a reckoning about how he'd regarded her and treated her, or Emma having to grow up and gain empathy, or Marianne having to get a grip, or Anne having to learn to stand up for herself. Georgiana did have to grow up and stop being frivolous, but that wasn't presented as the obstacle keeping her away from Otis. She was split up with Otis because he got her kidnapped and nearly forced into marriage so someone could take her fortune. He was the one who needed a character arc to redeem himself so they could be together. Or else they needed to have her reject him because she was being frivolous and he was so serious, only for her to learn what really mattered. The situation, the character arcs and the outcome didn't match.

Charlotte was the main character, but did she have any kind of growth arc? She was basically Mary Poppins, practically perfect in every way and flitting around solving everyone else's problems until she was rewarded with her own happy ending at the last second without her actually doing anything to achieve that ending. I'm still not clear on why they split up at the end of the previous season, other than that it was the end of the season and they needed a cliffhanger. Mostly, it seemed to be a communication issue, that they couldn't openly express their feelings for each other, which led to misunderstandings. And that was never resolved. They were kept apart all season because of her engagement, then she breaks her engagement and we're back to misunderstandings from lack of communication until someone else figures out the misunderstanding and resolves it. She may have been able to express her feelings to Ralph to break up with him, but then that had nothing to do with how the romance with Colbourne was resolved. That's not a particularly satisfying romance to me.

Samuel and Lady Susan seems a little better, but it's still not all that developed.

I have no problem with happy endings. I just want them to be satisfying, to feel like the characters earned them and to feel like I've gone on a journey with them, taking them from where they were at the beginning to being better people at the end. What Austen did so well was show us flawed people who had to learn something to find happiness, and I don't think we got that here.

[smartymarty]

13 hours ago, quarks said:

That final scene would have required more than twenty minutes of filming, so I'm not surprised they went with an older baby. And since they kept the other kids in the scene, they didn't really have an option of "five years later," which would have ended the "wow, what a large baby" comments but started the "wait, Augusta hasn't found someone yet? Oh no. What if she goes back to Evil Edward!"  But I kinda wish they'd just tried to use a smaller doll.  Or avoided that scene completely and just ended with the wedding reception.

They could have just shown Charlotte pregnant?

[Ilovepie]

I am fine with a HEA for literally every character. This show is so silly, it doesn't matter. It was an easy watch, and I will miss the world of Sanditon which seems to operate as some alternative regency universe and that's fine.

A few questions:

1. Exactly how was it okay for Charlotte to ride all night alone in a carriage with Alexander?

2. How was Mary at the edge of death's door one minute, then later in the day sitting in the parlor, drinking tea and dressed looking like she was never even sick?

3. That baby was awfully big for "One year later".....the math does not compute......would have been better to say "Two Years Later"......

[norcalgal]

6 hours ago, sharifa70 said:

I’m satisfied with most of the season. I could have gone without the Augusta/Edward story (she’s too smart, he’s irredeemable: last season’s Esther plot was my point of no return for him), and Tom doesn’t seem to have evolved at all. The biggest thing for me was Otis & Georgianna. That felt completely rushed and un-earned to me. He shows up for a scene or two, goes back to London, and next time we see him, Georgianna is back in love with him? Building that story would have been much better than wasting our time on Augusta & Edward.

I would watch the hell out of a Susan/Samuel series.

I already applauded this post, but I still feel the need to quote it with a hearty ITA!

[MJ Frog]

8 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

I feel like almost all the happy endings here were rushed and unearned. The thing with Austen was that her characters all had to grow and overcome their flaws to get their happy endings. They went through stuff that led directly to them being able to find their match and then be happy, and there was often a bittersweet element to the happy endings, so they weren't all perfect and shiny. Lizzie and her family were stuck with Wickham as an in-law, for instance. Elinor's husband was disowned by his family and lost his inheritance.

Yep, you'll get no argument from me. What we got in this show was little more than Jane Austen fanfic. Mine was a response to those who seemed to feel things needed to be darker or more defiant of expectations, and my point was that that isn't exactly Austen's oeuvre.

[Haleth]

Happily ever after for everyone was fine. The anachronisms were starting to bug though, as were all the plot holes mentioned above. And ESPECIALLY the trope of misunderstandings because no one would talk to each other.  Words, people!!!

23 hours ago, Ilovepie said:

. How was Mary at the edge of death's door one minute, then later in the day sitting in the parlor, drinking tea and dressed looking like she was never even sick?

Yeah, that made me laugh. The doc did say it would be a miracle.

Edward as a minister?  Why would anyone believe his sermons?

[Ilovepie]

1 hour ago, Haleth said:

Edward as a minister?  Why would anyone believe his sermons?

Isn't that the truth? I am pretty sure he will be given "the living" and leave the sermonizing to Reverend Hankins.....

[Doublemint]

1 minute ago, Ilovepie said:

Isn't that the truth? I am pretty sure he will be given "the living" and leave the sermonizing to Reverend Hankins.....

Reverend Hankins is in a different church in the little town - "the living" is a chapel on the grounds of Lady Denham's house.   That is the chapel where she was supposed to be married.   The Duke's Mother thought it was nice and wondered if Mr. Colbourne had or would consider building one at his house.

[RedHawk]

To wrap up "Sanditon" I went back and rewatched Season 1. Enjoyed it very much and prefer to have that (specifically Theo James and the Esther/Babington story) as my last memory of the show. 

[Jillibean]

On 5/2/2023 at 1:34 PM, RedHawk said:

To wrap up "Sanditon" I went back and rewatched Season 1. Enjoyed it very much and prefer to have that (specifically Theo James and the Esther/Babington story) as my last memory of the show. 

I feel like both elements were just so missed in the latter two seasons. It really does feel like a completely different show, one that was The Sound of Music remixed with P&P. There didn't feel like a lot of original things here. That said I still enjoyed it and it was fun escapism. Does anyone have any similar/better recommendations? I've watched all the other Jane Austen miniseries and North & South. 

[pezgirl7]

4 hours ago, Jillibean said:

Does anyone have any similar/better recommendations? I've watched all the other Jane Austen miniseries and North & South. 

Have you watched any of the Jane Eyre adaptations? Also, I’d recommend Miss Scarlet and the Duke to anyone. It’s a later period, and not really a romance, although there are hints of one. Bonfire of Destiny and The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society, both on Netflix, were pretty good too. 

[shapeshifter]

I posted this on the Primetimers Awards: Small Talk: And the Winner Will Be… thread:

3 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

I guess it's a bit of an indictment of everyone responsible for the show that absolutely nobody here (including me) thought to nominate season 3 of Sanditon (March-April 2023) for anything, whether liked or loathed.
IDK. 
Is it better to hate a show than to forget it entirely within 2 months? 

 

[Hedgehog2022]

On 1/20/2020 at 10:56 AM, taanja said:

That is exactly me. It's eye candy. The people are pretty and I don't have to think too hard about anything. 

I recorded this series and kept all three seasons on my DVR for a later time when I wanted to watch something that would be entertaining and an escape from the reality of today's news cycle. I haven't been disappointed! I knew it was an "adaptation" from an unfinished Jane Austen novel so I knew there was going to be some controversy about the new content. Having said all that...I love it! Here's what I love about it:

1) The beautiful landscape shots of the coastline, cliffs, beaches, estates and their properties. Absolutely stunning.

2) The chemistry between Miss Heyward and Sidney Parker and Alexander Colbourne was intense and through the roof...very Austen like.

3)The costumes, make up and hair were point perfect as well as the other 19th century homes and interiors, carriages and beautiful black stallion horses.

4) The actress, Rose Williams, is stunning. In the show they used minimal make up and she is a natural beauty. 

 

I am now into the first three episodes of Season Three...bracing myself for the end and am trying  not to read spoilers to the conclusion. Too bad this wasn't extended for a fourth season. Poldark had five seasons but could have wrapped it up in four. 

 

 

 

[Tyro49]

So who exactly did Lady Lydia get engaged to? She announces a surprise engagement, but to whom?????

[norcalgal]

8 hours ago, Tyro49 said:

So who exactly did Lady Lydia get engaged to? She announces a surprise engagement, but to whom?????

The show never provided details. Instead, they used this as a ploy/plot device to have other characters think she was engaged to Colbourne.  

[One4Sorrow2TooBad]

I'm sure she'll find someone eventually.

[Salacious Kitty]

1 hour ago, One4Sorrow2TooBad said:

I'm sure she'll find someone eventually.

She did. They were pen pals. 😊

[Roseanna]

On 4/26/2023 at 6:41 PM, Shanna Marie said:

Charlotte was the main character, but did she have any kind of growth arc? She was basically Mary Poppins, practically perfect in every way and flitting around solving everyone else's problems until she was rewarded with her own happy ending at the last second without her actually doing anything to achieve that ending. I'm still not clear on why they split up at the end of the previous season, other than that it was the end of the season and they needed a cliffhanger. Mostly, it seemed to be a communication issue, that they couldn't openly express their feelings for each other, which led to misunderstandings. And that was never resolved. They were kept apart all season because of her engagement, then she breaks her engagement and we're back to misunderstandings from lack of communication until someone else figures out the misunderstanding and resolves it. She may have been able to express her feelings to Ralph to break up with him, but then that had nothing to do with how the romance with Colbourne was resolved. That's not a particularly satisfying romance to me.

I wouldn't call Charlotte perfect at all. She is a pretty, friendly, helpful and charming girl but as others here have said, she made grave errors of judgment and tended to act too urgently on the basis of imperfect information but instead of being justly criticed for that by Sidney and Colbourne who had earlier reprimanded her for no reason, she was praised by them.

In the first season she at least realized herself that she had been naive but in the third season she defended her opinion and made Colbourne to accept that women must decide herself. Well yeah, but then they must face the consequences - Austen described that marriage based on love didn't guarantee happiness when characters were too different (Elizabeth's parents) and could lead to a life in poverty with too many children (Fanny's parents).     

On 6/30/2023 at 12:21 AM, Hedgehog2022 said:

2) The chemistry between Miss Heyward and Sidney Parker and Alexander Colbourne was intense and through the roof...very Austen like.

That can be an impression in the series but in her novels Austen actually showed a strong suspicion towards mere "chemistry". Remember, Elizabeth at first got on well with Wickham and only began to change her mind after seeing Pemberton and listening to his housekeeper describe his sterling qualities. Marianne fell for Willoughby who jilted her and she married Colonel Brandon with love but started to love him. Edward Ferrars who Elinor loved was rather dull and the same applies to Edmund Bertram who Fanny loved, not the sexy Henry Crawford. Emma and Mr Knightley had chemistry but it was long based on friendship whereas Frank Churchill was dashing and sexy. Actually only Anne Elliot and Captain Wentwoth had had that instant chemistry in their youth, although they are enstranged almost until the end of Persuasion.       

Both Sidney Parker and Colbourne are rather like heroes of Brontës, not of Austen.

In this series I don't understand why Charlotte fell for guys who first treated her badly. (Cf. when Darcy dismissed Elizabeth in the ball as "tolerable but not handsome enough to tempot me", he didn't speak to her.) I liked the guy who wanted to become an architect in the first season best.

The positive side was that Edward didn't get Augusta. It would have been like Marianne had married Willoughby as if his seduction and jilting of Eliza had been of no importance. I don't say that people can't be reformed but Austen was realistic letting Henry Crawford to elope with Maria Crawford, not for love or lust but simply because of vanity for not accepting that some women could resist him.  

[Roseanna]

On 4/26/2023 at 6:41 PM, Shanna Marie said:

Yeah, everyone happy and paired off is a very Austen ending. However ...

I feel like almost all the happy endings here were rushed and unearned. The thing with Austen was that her characters all had to grow and overcome their flaws to get their happy endings. They went through stuff that led directly to them being able to find their match and then be happy, and there was often a bittersweet element to the happy endings, so they weren't all perfect and shiny. Lizzie and her family were stuck with Wickham as an in-law, for instance. Elinor's husband was disowned by his family and lost his inheritance.

But I don't feel like there was a real character arc for any of these romances, nothing like Lizzie having to readjust her impression of Darcy while he had to have a reckoning about how he'd regarded her and treated her, or Emma having to grow up and gain empathy, or Marianne having to get a grip, or Anne having to learn to stand up for herself. Georgiana did have to grow up and stop being frivolous, but that wasn't presented as the obstacle keeping her away from Otis. She was split up with Otis because he got her kidnapped and nearly forced into marriage so someone could take her fortune. He was the one who needed a character arc to redeem himself so they could be together. Or else they needed to have her reject him because she was being frivolous and he was so serious, only for her to learn what really mattered. The situation, the character arcs and the outcome didn't match.

- -

I have no problem with happy endings. I just want them to be satisfying, to feel like the characters earned them and to feel like I've gone on a journey with them, taking them from where they were at the beginning to being better people at the end. What Austen did so well was show us flawed people who had to learn something to find happiness, and I don't think we got that here.

I agree. This series was only about twists of plot, not about characters.

Plus, Austen never let the readers forget that the heroine's happy end was an exception whereas most of other women hadn't such luck and also the heroines' parents' marriages were flawed. Love wasn't enough, the man must also have a good character and principles and naturally means to support a family.   

When Augusta told Charlotte that she had doubts, Charlotte should have said that then she shouldn't do anything in haste but wait to make sure. Even now it wouldn't have been wise to marry a man who one had known only a short time and who nobody had a good opinion about (yeah, everybody knew that Edward had been disinherited by her aunt and he had also caused a public scandal by shaming Esther in the first season), but nowadays divorce is possible.          

[Roseanna]

On 4/26/2023 at 6:41 PM, Shanna Marie said:

Georgiana did have to grow up and stop being frivolous, but that wasn't presented as the obstacle keeping her away from Otis. She was split up with Otis because he got her kidnapped and nearly forced into marriage so someone could take her fortune. He was the one who needed a character arc to redeem himself so they could be together. Or else they needed to have her reject him because she was being frivolous and he was so serious, only for her to learn what really mattered. The situation, the character arcs and the outcome didn't match.

One of the biggest problems in this show for me was that when I watched the third season, I didn't remember much about the former seasons, except of course Sidney and Colborne and the architect.

Now I have watched the first and second seasons anew and I must wonder why Georgiana's mom thought Otis was a perfect match for her daughter only because they love each other. Although he is an ardent opponent of slavery, in the first season he had gambled and lost a big sum and it was because of his debts that Georgina was "sold" and kidnapped. And although he swore that he had never boasted about Georgina's inheritance, it was really stupid to speak about a girl he wasn't even engaged to to random casual acquaintances who had no difficulties to find information about her.

So I would have needed to know that Otis had changed to a man who could be trusted as a husband and an eventual father.

We have seen what constant problems Tom Parker caused to his family and the village for his reckless risk-taking. I was really angry at him not paying his workers in the first season and holding the regiments' debts to shopkeepers as a little matter in the second season. Not to speak of Sidney's marriage for money. Arthur is kinder than me by describing Tom as "a man of vision". 

[Roseanna]

On 4/26/2023 at 4:34 PM, sharifa70 said:

I could have gone without the Augusta/Edward story (she’s too smart, he’s irredeemable: last season’s Esther plot was my point of no return for him)

Oh yes, Edward was even more sinister in the second season by stealing Babbington's letter to Esther to make her doubt his love for her and by giving Esther laudanum so that she would be considered mad and thus lose her aunt's inheritance.

Augusta may be smart in other matters but she is also inexperienced in love, so she had an excessive belief in her own judgment and a rebellious character. If Elizabeth Bennet could make a mistake about Darcy and Wickham, why wouldn't Augusta? I think the actor did right to play so well that anybody who hadn't known Edwad's past, could have believed him.   

On 4/26/2023 at 10:46 PM, Ilovepie said:

1. Exactly how was it okay for Charlotte to ride all night alone in a carriage with Alexander?

Well, Charlotte went alone to London in the first season to search for Georgina. She had Otis's address but it was still foolish and hopeless - why on earth she didn't ask help from Sidney who was her guardian?

I think that Georgina's elopement with Edward could be kept secret and her reputation thus saved, but in the first season Charlotte babbled about her kidnapping to a lady she had just met - hadn't she any sense at all?  

Also, why was Charlotte so hurt when Colborne apologized for his behavior in the end of the second season? Yes, she was in love with him and she was willingly kissed him, but he was quite right: an employer should never behave like that towards a governess and if he had no intention to marry her, the decent solution was to give her good recommendations to a new job. What was she actually thinking? Stolen kisses could easily have led to more.

The colonel may have been right when he said that Colborne was guilty of leaving his wife alone in London and living in the country, but that doesn't lessen his own guilt.     

[Roseanna]

On 3/22/2023 at 9:48 PM, iMonrey said:

Lest we forget, Esther was equally villainous back in Season 1, although we were eventually persuaded to believe it was because Edward was manipulating her. That does remove some of her own agency, however.

Esther was basically "tamed" by the relentless pursuit by Babington. 

No, it wasn't Esther who was equally villanous with Edward in S1, it was Clara who found her aunt's testament and burnt it when he promised her a part of the inheritance and they sealed the pact by laying together on the floor. When Esther learned about his betrayal, she told all to her sick aunt who threw Edward and Clara out of her house.

I don't generally like stories where a man continues to pursue a woman after she has clearly shown her disinterest. But Babington showed to be no stalker when he said that he loved Esther and didn't mind that she didn't love him, he didn't want to own her but make her happy and share his life with her. And after Edward had publicly shamed Esther, Babington said that he understood that he had held her as a hostage wheras anither kind of man would have jilted her.

That interpretation was shown to be true in S2 when Edward said to Clara that Esther doesn't believe she is worthy of love. Thus stealing Babington's letter would undermine her confidence. 

So, I don't think Babington "tamed" Esther at all. He loved her as she was, made her laugh and was a good lover. It's no wonder that she began to love him back. 

[Roseanna]

On 4/4/2023 at 1:32 AM, Doublemint said:

Augusta doesn't know anything about what he did to his Sister or about Clara and the baby - no one else (except Dr. Fuchs and the Minister) knows either.  She knows he owed a lot in Sanditon and probably had a reputation with the girls in town.  She has met a lot of young men in Bath and at the shooting party who were very interested in her, but she likes Edward.  

Augusta knows at least that his aunt disinherited Edward and ordered him to "do penance", and if she has any sense, she should have realized that he must have done something really bad. The reason why she likes him is most evidently that she is used to do things that her uncle has forbidden.  

[Roseanna]

On 4/11/2023 at 5:46 AM, norcalgal said:

Charlotte came off very poorly in this episode for the reasons listed in @Shanna Marie’s post.  Even after Augusta fobbed off Charlotte by not mentioning the name of her secret love, you’d think Charlotte would have pressed her for the guy’s name to get a better understanding why Colbourne was so opposed to him. By now, Charlotte *knows* Colbourne is a man of great character (taking on another man’s child as his, restoring the family fortune after big bro ran away from the job, going out of his way to get his brother to represent Georgiana), so Charlotte is made to be stupid merely taking Augusta’s claim at face value that Colbourne was just being “mean”. 

Yes, if Charlotte has developed at all since S1 when she helped Georgina with a neart-disastrous result, she should know that parents' and  guardians' opinion about suitor may be right. There are fortune hunters and callous seducers. 

And has she ever heard of women who regretted marrying for love that didn't last?