S04.E02: The Balmoral Test

[Daisy]

I guess I'm the odd duck here.  During the Thatcher portion, I kept thinking but why didn't they just ask? Like. they had the protocol sheet, it said drinks, and then dinner. Why not just ask them if it mean you had to be black tie for drinks? They just assumed. Other than Philip being, you know. Philip and a big baby - to me anyway it seemed that the Queen was trying. She had extra shoes, she was pointing out for next time how to dress etc.  I am a city girl at heart  but I wouldn't really go to the country with impractical clothing. 

At the games, they didn't even try. You've watched how it is done. why not just try to go fast, even if you make a fool out of yourself?  Then just laugh and dab your face. But to me it was just... i suppose. reverse snobbery?  And how she acted during the Highland Games. that didn't make sense to me at all. but again, I'm the odd duck since everyone thought the royals were being snotty. Maybe they were. but i don't think the Thatchers were being very open either. 

This is just a sad sad road Diana and Charles are headed. 

[swanpride]

Oh, I wondered the same thing, but at the same time, it was kind of dickish to point out how ill-fitting the blue dress for hunting was after they were already on the hill, instead of pointing out immediately that the dress is not ideal. And how the hell is Thatcher supposed to know that "nobody sits on this chair"?

Plus, it might just be me, but if I expect a guest who visits me for the first time, I would make sure that someone is there to greet said guest and show her the ropes.

[Roseanna]

8 minutes ago, Daisy said:

At the games, they didn't even try. You've watched how it is done. why not just try to go fast, even if you make a fool out of yourself?  Then just laugh and dab your face. But to me it was just... i suppose. reverse snobbery?  And how she acted during the Highland Games. that didn't make sense to me at all.

Margaret, although herself the royal snob par excellence, was for once right when she said that even for Prime Minister taking a day off wouldn't make the country any worse, but could give her perspective. 

Thatcher was evidently a woman who tried to make everything perfectly which was in a way natural as she had to compete with men and would have to be much better than them in order to win them. But working 16 hours every day doesn't often give the best results, because then you are too tired to get fresh ideas but can only follow your chosen tracks.  

[Daisy]

4 minutes ago, swanpride said:

Oh, I wondered the same thing, but at the same time, it was kind of dickish to point out how ill-fitting the blue dress for hunting was after they were already on the hill, instead of pointing out immediately that the dress is not ideal. And how the hell is Thatcher supposed to know that "nobody sits on this chair"?

Plus, it might just be me, but if I expect a guest who visits me for the first time, I would make sure that someone is there to greet said guest and show her the ropes.

 

The way I saw that was if Elizabeth did it in front of everyone (or even stepped to her and went "do you want to change?") it would have been equally embarrassing. She gave her some shoes and basically said (I don't know how often the PMs go to Bamoral), but basically, "next time. don't dress the way you do, because they'll see you etc". Maybe it's just my perspective, but i would have been more appreciative of the doing it on the Hill, vs. everyone's eyes on me. (but then again. i probably wouldn't have been in that situation to begin with so. 🤷‍♀️

I will say - I'm not saying that they were perfect and the Thatchers were blegh. Philip was being his dumbo self, and Margaret snapping about sitting in the chair was just dumb (that  made me roll my eyes). but equally. I just don't think the Thatchers overall made an effort to try either. They were both wrong.  (and I think it was kind of mean for not one person to be there for them either. unless they were running late or something)

 

 

[swanpride]

True, but she could have told her in the car.

Not that I disagree about the reverse snobbish attitude, I pointed out the same. But is was very much a two-sided thing.

[Roseanna]

The British are famous for their snobbery but it's also general that when the aristocracy lost their actual power, they make the distinction towards the upstarts by sticking to the "manners". As the Prime Minister Thatcher had the real power, so the Windsors tried to show her in Balmoral how vulgar she was, not realizing that what they really showed was their own vulgarity.

Good manners aren't meant to be for feeling superior and testing others, but just the opposite: to ease socializing. If there is somebody who makes mistake from ignorance, a really polite person pretends not to notice it - or even does the same to show it's okay.              

[Blakeston]

17 hours ago, swanpride said:

At least eyeore didn't constantly expect that the world revolved around him and it was everyone's job to cheer him up.

I think, at this point in Charles' life, he had completely given up on the idea that his family could cheer him up. I think he was just miserable because he couldn't be with the woman he loved, and because his father figure had been assassinated.

There had better not be any more Diana/stag symbolism throughout the rest of this series. Between this and the movie The Queen, Peter Morgan must be obsessed with comparing Diana to that particular breed of animal. He's beaten this horse (stag?) to death. Enough already.

[qtpye]

19 hours ago, Ellaria Sand said:

I absolutely HATE the hunting scenes in this show. Yes, I am aware that the royals are hunters. And yes, I understand the symbolism of hunting/killing the stag. Regardless, watching that beautiful creature walking wounded thru the woods was heartbreaking.

The scenes of the Thatchers at Balmoral were the definition of uncomfortable and awkward. What a miserable group of people. All of them. Deciding when to wear black tie attire (for dinner but not drinks), Phillip’s rude comments, the ibble dibble game...not for me.

Agree. I hope that we will see more of the politics as we move forward.

Charles...sigh! He is not an easy character to portray but Josh O’Connor has perfectly captured Charles’ passive, detached nature. It is also not an easy character to fully understand. I found myself wanting to scream at the TV.

The writing for Diana is interesting. IMO, she is depicted as making all the right moves to ingratiate herself with the family. My interpretation of her scenes in this episode is that she knew what she wanted - clearly, what she thought that she wanted - and knew how to play the game. For now! And Charles can’t be honest with anyone, including himself. Yikes! It is almost painful to watch.

 

19 hours ago, greekmom said:

Like the poster above, Gillian is killing it as Margaret T.   I cannot believe for a moment though that no one would have given Thatcher's office an itinerary and instructions of what was going to happen on the weekend at Balmoral. That was Thatcher could have packed better and understood what was expectations.  Even though I remember Thatcher I can't believe they made her so sympathetic in this episode.  The fact that she still liked to do stuff for her husband as iron his shirts and unpack for him.

I found that the Queen was sympathetic to Thatcher not getting protocol while the rest of the royals were major dicks.  

I hate Charles with a passion. But I can get why Diana fell for him.  She was 18 years old and sheltered. I read somewhere she was a big fan of harlequin romances which could have shaped her view on how romance goes.

And finally damn - that poor stag.

 

9 hours ago, Lsk02 said:

Until it came to hunting. The Queen had no time for heels and blue dresses when it was time to hunt. Ha!

I do suspect the conversation in the car when Thatcher talked about her fun being work may have had something to do with Elizabeth’s sudden exasperation with Margaret, too. She got the subtext and wasn’t thrilled with the insult. 

It seems that the Royals do not understand that not everyone enjoys killing animals for "sport". I am no tree hugger but I hate to see beautiful animals die for no better reason than a trophy and bragging rights. It is different if you need the animal's meat for food, but that is not the case here.

4 hours ago, swanpride said:

Oh, I wondered the same thing, but at the same time, it was kind of dickish to point out how ill-fitting the blue dress for hunting was after they were already on the hill, instead of pointing out immediately that the dress is not ideal. And how the hell is Thatcher supposed to know that "nobody sits on this chair"?

Plus, it might just be me, but if I expect a guest who visits me for the first time, I would make sure that someone is there to greet said guest and show her the ropes.

 

2 hours ago, Roseanna said:

The British are famous for their snobbery but it's also general that when the aristocracy lost their actual power, they make the distinction towards the upstarts by sticking to the "manners". As the Prime Minister Thatcher had the real power, so the Windsors tried to show her in Balmoral how vulgar she was, not realizing that what they really showed was their own vulgarity.

Good manners aren't meant to be for feeling superior and testing others, but just the opposite: to ease socializing. If there is somebody who makes mistake from ignorance, a really polite person pretends not to notice it - or even does the same to show it's okay.              

I remember reading something about how in starting the 18th century bourgeois women were different from the aristocratic women because they were often very well educated and knowledgeable. Men looked at them as more than mere breeders of the next generation. I think Madame Pompadour was from the bourgeois set... was an example of this new kind of woman for that time.

I think princess Margaret was very intimidated by a woman who cold achieve the rank of Prime Minister all on her own. Margaret always thought she should be queen because she is prettier and had more charisma than her sister (and she was their father's favorite). She never thought Elizabeth earned her place and was only there by an accident of birth (though the same can be said for her). Her yelling out about the chair was so pathetic when it could have been done so much more gracefully. I think Margaret was just a very unhappy woman despite having everything in life just handed to her (except that one guy she was never allowed to marry).

Not too long ago, I had to interview people for a position in our company. There was a certain type of candidate who are very good at bullshitting because of their charm and charisma. They knew what you wanted to hear and could give it to you. However, if you really went into a deep dive with their answers then they became flustered.

I would not call Diana conniving but she does reminds me of this type of candidate. I do think she is a very sweet girl but she also has no idea what she is getting into.  I remember when she went to the symphony with Charles, she could superficially talk about things but really could not keep up when Charles wanted a little more nuanced conversation (this might have happened in first episode...I'm not sure).

[BradandJanet]

The show makes a big point of how obsessed Thatcher was with working. The queen also read all the the papers in the red boxes and probably did some work on vacation as well. The show is overdoing it with Thatcher, walking and talking like a woman in her 80's, showing up to the country with only dress clothes, while Diana comfortably contradicted Prince Phillip about the wind direction. 

I've watched just the first two episodes so far, and I'm a little disappointed by how over-the-top everything seems to be. These people are too complex to be turned into stereotypes.  

[vibeology]

Honestly, both parties behaved poorly in the Thatcher/Windsor situation but as the hosts, the Windsors are far more to blame. Why wouldn't a courtier have reached out to the Thatchers prior to their trip to give them a rundown since it would be their first visit? I'm sure the answer is because the Windsors wanted these guests to feel out of sorts. They're bad hosts and the few times Elizabeth tried to right things, it was still undercut by either her actions or her family's actions.

I don't feel sorry for Margaret Thatcher because that's just not something I'll ever be capable of, but I do know that she walked into a trap. Asking makes you look foolish, acting makes you look foolish. It was a no-win. Think of what the Windsors would have said if they found out the Thatchers had asked a servant about drinks and dinner. It would have been just as awful in a different way.

[Avaleigh]

11 hours ago, Rickster said:

I’ll join the minority, because I think Anderson’s portrayal is off too. I think she’s having a problem getting the voice right and it’s overly husky and somewhat hesitant. I think you got it right with her acting a woman in her 70’s, not the Iron Lady. Also, despite her upbringing, I think it impossible for a senior member of the Tory Party to be unaware of the folkways of the British upper classes.

I’ll also agree with the poster who said the portrayal of Charles hunched over and head down while part of his personality, is way overdone to the point of caricature.

Yes. You've perfectly described how I feel about her voice. I agree about the huskiness and the slowness when she speaks. The hesitant delivery is almost frustrating at times.

I agree too about Charles.

11 hours ago, TV Glotzer said:

Why is Gillian Anderson playing Margaret Thatcher like a geriatric?  Whatever you think of her politics, Thatcher was demonstrative in her presence and robust in her speaking style.  Nothing at all like the crackling and halting manner of speech here, or the labored mannerisms (no pun, sorry).  Give me Meryl any day.

The lack of overall energy is a puzzling choice to me. Thatcher definitely had energy and her own brand of charisma, and it isn't coming across here at all to me. 

I'm sure that Gillian Anderson will win all of the awards and everything but I wish she and the showrunners had made a few different choices here. 

[Sir RaiderDuck OMS]

14 minutes ago, Avaleigh said:

I'm sure that Gillian Anderson will win all of the awards and everything but I wish she and the showrunners had made a few different choices here. 

Remember that Gillian Anderson and series creator/showrunner Peter Morgan have been living together for years. If an individual director doesn't like her portrayal (which is very good if not perfect -- the real Thatcher didn't constantly turn her head away from people, then look at them side-eyed), there's not much they can do.

Edited November 16, 2020 by Sir RaiderDuck OMS

[JudyObscure]

29 minutes ago, vibeology said:

Honestly, both parties behaved poorly in the Thatcher/Windsor situation but as the hosts, the Windsors are far more to blame.

Exactly. The first rule of good manners is to make the other person feel comfortable and correcting another person's actions or clothing is about the rudest thing you can do.  Margaret was horrible.

I did have to laugh when the Thatcher's came down too early in black tie and even the Corgi whined at them for such a huge faux pas.

Mr. Thatcher said it for me, "Boorish, snobbish and rude."

[MaggieG]

44 minutes ago, vibeology said:

Honestly, both parties behaved poorly in the Thatcher/Windsor situation but as the hosts, the Windsors are far more to blame. Why wouldn't a courtier have reached out to the Thatchers prior to their trip to give them a rundown since it would be their first visit? I'm sure the answer is because the Windsors wanted these guests to feel out of sorts. They're bad hosts and the few times Elizabeth tried to right things, it was still undercut by either her actions or her family's actions.

I don't feel sorry for Margaret Thatcher because that's just not something I'll ever be capable of, but I do know that she walked into a trap. Asking makes you look foolish, acting makes you look foolish. It was a no-win. Think of what the Windsors would have said if they found out the Thatchers had asked a servant about drinks and dinner. It would have been just as awful in a different way.

Agreed. It's an awful feeling being a guest in someone's home and not feeling welcome or feeling like the hosts are making fun of you. Even for Thatcher. I do like her husband and they seem to have a solid relationship. 

[Blakeston]

I'm more sympathetic to Charles than most, but I thought he came across as a dick at the symphony. Diana said that she loved Verdi because his music is romantic, and Charles haughtily corrected her, as if she had said, "Verdi's music was good for nothing but romanticism." Shut up, Charles.

It's interesting that Mountbatten threw back the lobster because she was going to have babies, and then the Queen Mother in this episode said it was barbaric to kill the stag because it was breeding. I guess they're making the point that this family values one's ability to produce worthy children above all else.

 

[Avaleigh]

4 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Good manners aren't meant to be for feeling superior and testing others, but just the opposite: to ease socializing. If there is somebody who makes mistake from ignorance, a really polite person pretends not to notice it - or even does the same to show it's okay.              

I thought that Elizabeth was doing her best to make the situation better by telling the others to leave the room and change for dinner. There was nothing to be done to erase the initial awkwardness that the Thatchers would have felt once they entered the room and saw that they weren't properly dressed. They would have felt uncomfortable whether the others pretended to notice or not. So Elizabeth did what she could to make it less awkward by having everyone else immediately change so that the Thatchers would feel less out of it. To me this showed that she was trying and did care about making them feel more at ease.

This sort of reminds me of a story I once read from (I think) the former royal butler Paul Burrell about the Queen hosting a dinner someplace on the royal yacht Britannia. Some foreign dignitary made the mistake of putting fruit into his finger bowl and drinking it and just as he was starting to realize that he was getting it wrong, the Queen picked up her fingerbowl and took a sip so that he wouldn't feel uncomfortable. 

Margaret didn't care about putting people at ease but I think Elizabeth did/does, both in real life and on the show.

[dubbel zout]

2 hours ago, qtpye said:

not everyone's grand estates are kept up by the government.

Balmoral is the queen's private property.

34 minutes ago, Avaleigh said:

Queen hosting a dinner someplace on the royal yacht Britannia. Some foreign dignitary made the mistake of putting fruit into his finger bowl and drinking it and just as he was starting to realize that he was getting it wrong, the Queen picked up her fingerbowl and took a sip so that he wouldn't feel uncomfortable. 

That was Queen Victoria, I believe.

[Avaleigh]

14 minutes ago, dubbel zout said:

Balmoral is the queen's private property.

That was Queen Victoria, I believe.

This is the story I was talking about:

“I was once on the Royal Yacht Britannia in the South Pacific and the Queen was hosting a dinner for a local prince,” wrote Burrell. “Dessert was served. The prince forgot to watch what the Queen did—instead, he popped the grapes into his finger bowl, then some cherries, then when the cream and sugar came out, he poured them in too, making a kind of fruit soup. I was standing behind the Queen looking horrified. He was about to raise the bowl to his lips to drink it when he looked at the Queen and realized he had made a terrible mistake. Not wanting to make him feel awkward, she picked up her finger bowl and took a sip. Now that’s class.” 

https://www.readersdigest.ca/culture/dinner-with-the-queen/

I think there is a similar story though with Queen Victoria. 

Edited November 16, 2020 by Avaleigh

[swanpride]

To add to the moments the hosts were dickish: Laughing about Thatcher when she asked what the excitement was about and getting the side where they sighted the stag wrong. The fact aside that Thatcher is obviously not a hunter (and they themselves are obviously having hang ups about "lower Borns" hunting "for sport" instead of "ecological balance (yeah, right, tell that the Foxes)), how the hell is she supposed to know the area well enough to realise where the stag could have been and where not? It's extremely rude to leave her out of the loop in the first place, but even ruder to laugh about her actually asking about the situation.

Thatcher's distain was still in its own way snobbish, especially her sneering about the games, and about Germans and Scotts.

[poeticlicensed]

2 hours ago, MaggieG said:

Honestly, both parties behaved poorly in the Thatcher/Windsor situation but as the hosts, the Windsors are far more to blame. Why wouldn't a courtier have reached out to the Thatchers prior to their trip to give them a rundown since it would be their first visit? I'm sure the answer is because the Windsors wanted these guests to feel out of sorts. They're bad hosts and the few times Elizabeth tried to right things, it was still undercut by either her actions or her family's actions.

I call major BS on how they portrayed this. While I haven't been to any royal events, I have attended a few hoity toity events that have a schedule and you are told beforehand what exactly will happen, what time and what precisely you are to wear. This helps you pack. Also, Thatcher had been around long enough that drinks at 6 and dinner at 8 means you change in between. If they had drinks from 6-8, everyone would be too drunk to eat. I think they were just using this as a plot device to show what a mismatch the royals and Thatcher were. 

As for Diana, I have to confess that Diana and I are about the same age  (if she was still alive) I was 22 and I was engaged and planning my wedding when they got married, so I, along with my friends were glued to everything Diana related. I thought Charles was old and gross and I couldn't believe she was actually marrying him. Looking back, I can see how a 20 year old would get caught up the romance of it all. To say Diana was sheltered is putting it midly, but she was groomed for marriage from a young age, hence she knew about hunting and parlor games and which fork to use.  I think she saw Charles as the handsome prince who was going to sweep her away. Apparently she did see the red flags with Camilla but it was too late. I do think that if she got more support from Charles and the family, things may have turned out different. 

[tennisgurl]

Wow, I think that Philips nod of approval to Charles after he hung out with Diana was the most approval he has ever shown Charles, no wonder he realized right away that he was inevitably going to marry her.

 

[AZChristian]

6 minutes ago, poeticlicensed said:

This helps you pack. Also, Thatcher had been around long enough that drinks at 6 and dinner at 8 means you change in between. If they had drinks from 6-8, everyone would be too drunk to eat. I think they were just using this as a plot device to show what a mismatch the royals and Thatcher were. 

Okay, here's the transcription of that scene:

Denis:  (reading from protocol sheet) "6:00 p.m. is drinks before dinner."  (Stops reading and begins making assumptions):  "Dinner is black-tie, ergo drinks are black-tie."  (Maybe he didn't read far enough down the protocol to know that dinner would be significantly later and considered a separate activity.)

Then the maid (who is in the room) comments on the fact that Margaret hasn't brought any outside shoes.  Why wouldn't the maid tip them off that one does NOT dress before drinks . . . unless she's sworn to secrecy as part of the test!?!  LOL.

I believe that Philip's complaint about dinner being served too early alluded to the fact that they were all planning to have time between drinks and dinner to dress up.

[swanpride]

Maybe dinner time wasn't even listed, so they had no idea how much time there was between drinks and dinner.

[cardigirl]

Re: the stag and the trophy head, isn't the meat also used? I believe they eat quite a lot of game and fish. 

[swanpride]

An actual hunter usually eats what he kills. Hence I don't necessarily mind hunting game, but I do mind fox hunting (which they keep glossing over I noticed). It is for sure a better way to get to your meat than what we do to pigs.

Thus said, I am not sure if that particular stag would still be tasty. You need to kill your game with one quick shot, otherwise the sweat and the fear basically ruins the meat. But I am not sure if being already wounded before the kill shot has a similar effect.   

[Minivanessa]

1 hour ago, cardigirl said:

Re: the stag and the trophy head, isn't the meat also used? I believe they eat quite a lot of game and fish. 

I would be surprised if the meat from any game shot - or fish caught - on the Balmoral estate went to waste. Besides the BRF, there are tenants/employees on the estate year-round so no shortage of mouths to feed. I would also assume that the estate practices herd management to the extent possible; i.e., they hunt when necessary to cull herd size, etc., and don't just go out and randomly slaughter the animals. Not sure about all the bird-shooting, but I assume there's some kind of management in operation for the birds too. I'm not personally a hunter but neither am I a vegetarian so I try not to say harsh things about the people who do hunt and fish if they do it with some sense of responsibility. 

@swanpride posted while I was writing this. I had the same idea about the meat from the wounded stag. And yep, the fox hunting is a different subject, IMO, and seems like basically a way for a lot of horse-mad people to justify galloping around in a group, followed by drinks and jollity and a certain amount of fooling around for those who are into that sort of thing. So fine, let 'em do all that without the excuse of "hunting" the poor fox. 

Edited November 16, 2020 by Jeeves

[swanpride]

Quote

So fine, let 'em do all that without the excuse of "hunting" the poor fox. 

And without ruining the harvest of other people.

 

[AZChristian]

12 minutes ago, cardigirl said:

Re: the stag and the trophy head, isn't the meat also used? I believe they eat quite a lot of game and fish. 

In an earlier episode (maybe Season 3) Philip was whining (this time) about how tired he was of eating venison all the time.  Some people consider it a delicacy because it's not easy (especially for non-hunters) to get.  But someone who has access to a LOT of it on their property, and gets to eat a lot of it (and it's much healthier than many meats) still whines.

[swanpride]

To be precise, it is not easy to get GOOD venison for non-hunters. Basically the hunters keep their best shots, and the not so good shots, well, they get sold and that's what the "common" people might get to taste. Hence a lot of people thinking that venison is tasting "strong" when in reality it just means that the hunter botched the shot. and I am ready to bet that the royals just ate their best shots and left everything else to the staff.

Though nowadays you can actually buy frozen venison in the supermarket. That's not shot, though, but from enclosures. That's a pretty recent development, though.

[tennisgurl]

Congrats show, you actually made me feel bad for Margaret Thatcher. The royal family were so snobby and awful, like they set up this entire insufferable weekend just to mess with the new PM and her husband, its not a "test" its some kind of weird hazing ritual. Is it me, or have the royals actually gotten more snobby over the years? Like the more society moves past a more rigid birth based class system and they become less relevant, the more they obsess over old timie rules and etiquette and just come off even more stale. At least Elizabeth tried to cut the Thatchers a bit of slack. Margarete especially has become one of the snobbiest of all, despite her youthful dalliances with being wild and rebellious and hanging out with artists and activists. 

So did they really not give them a schedule of events or give them any idea of what they would be doing? I guess that they assume that anyone who comes "should know" the rules, but it seems terribly lacking in class and manners, especially for people who say they take class and manners so seriously. That being said, Margaret T. really should have known to bring an outdoor outfit and sensible shoes, she had to have at least had some idea that they would be trudging around the countryside hunting and fishing riding, which is something they are well known for doing. I would think that, while she and her husband are from humble beginnings, they would at least have some ideas about upper-class manners and and the general life style, even if they dont know all of the rules. She is the PM, she didn't just arrive straight out of doing inventory at her dads store. 

Of course, as much as Margaret T hates the snobbery of the royals and the other members of her party, she is plenty snobby too, just in different directions. 

Edited November 16, 2020 by tennisgurl

[AryasMum]

On 11/15/2020 at 10:10 AM, Lillith said:

Both Gillian Anderson and Emma Corrin are killing it. And both really worked on the voices and mannerisms of these two women. I'm enjoying this because it's finally a part of history I actually recall. I never thought I'd feel empathy for Margaret Thatcher and I know Princess Margaret was also and awful snob in real life. I do am however skeptical that Mrs. Thatcher would be quite so clueless about what goes on in Balmoral, i.e. not bringing outdoor shoes. How the Royals spent their time in Scotland was fairly well known, so while some of the intricacies probably would have been lost on the Thatchers, I don't buy there were quite that clueless. Same thing they did with Jackie Kennedy, who was a stickler for ettiquette herself so I never bought she'd not know precedence, etc. The rest of the cast, as usual is bringin their A game. I felt Olivia Coleman was a tiny bit awkward last season, but she's got it down now. 

It was silly how shocked she was by the service.   As if she doesn’t have servants falling all over her at Downing Street.  Perhaps she could have done some of her work while her husband unpacked his own bags. 

[Maire]

Like others loving the Diana episodes because as a teen I was obsessed. (See my senior yearbook pic with my Diana haircut 😆) The actress really has her tone and speech pattern down. 
 

Its not that I think Diana was unsophisticated but she was very young and couldn’t have known what was in store for her. They truly used her and she was right all along ( if scenes are factual) that Charles dnd Camilla plotter against her. These Balmoral scenes had me in mind of “Succession” so much I’m surprised they didn’t play “Boar on the Floor”

Edited November 16, 2020 by Maire

[dubbel zout]

1 hour ago, AZChristian said:

When the maid (who is in the room) comments on the fact that Margaret hasn't brought any outside shoes.  Why wouldn't the maid tip them off that one does NOT dress before drinks . . . unless she's sworn to secrecy as part of the test!?!  LOL.

I think servants don't offer that information unless you ask. It's probably considered too forward of the servant to presume the guest doesn't know any better.

[poeticlicensed]

41 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

The royal family were so snobby and awful, like they set up this entire insufferable weekend just to mess with the new PM and her husband, its not a "test" its some kind of weird hazing ritual. Is it me, or have the royals actually gotten more snobby over the years? Like the more society moves past a more rigid birth based class system and they become less relevant, the more they obsess over old timie rules and etiquette and just come off even more stale.

I thought that Thatcher nailed it when she said that she was expecting more culture from a group of elites, when in fact they were happy playing parlor games like ibby dibby or whatever it was. Not that everyone who is privileged should be discussing philosophy and art at dinner every night, but I think she was suprised that they didn't display more class along with their snobbery. 

And as someone above accruately noted, good manners dictate you make your guests feel welcome, not unwelcome. They were terrible hosts. 

Edited November 16, 2020 by poeticlicensed

[swanpride]

Honestly, nobody really came off well in this episode aside from Thatcher's hubby. He was the only one who somewhat tried.

[RemoteControlFreak]

23 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I am not against hunting irl, but I didn't like if the stag was wounded on purpose just to get those scenes filmed.  

I don’t think it was a real stag, just movie magic. It definitely was not a real dead stag carried back on the horse. 

[Umbelina]

7 hours ago, NYCFree said:

I actually thought the show took great pains to show the opposite. Diana in no way embarrassed herself (like the Thatchers). Instead she knew “the ropes”. So much so that the whole royal family is now telling Charles to marry this teen who will fit in.

As far Diana's experience with royals?  Sure, she knows them, and knows "country" ways, but I doubt, at 18 years old, she was ever actually invited to a private and formal party with all of them present, and just standing around instead of being in a reception line.  

6 hours ago, JudyObscure said:

Exactly. The first rule of good manners is to make the other person feel comfortable and correcting another person's actions or clothing is about the rudest thing you can do.  Margaret was horrible.

I did have to laugh when the Thatcher's came down too early in black tie and even the Corgi whined at them for such a huge faux pas.

Mr. Thatcher said it for me, "Boorish, snobbish and rude."

Ditto.  Also, apparently "the Balmoral test" is a real thing, and if true?  It's dickish and petty.

5 hours ago, Avaleigh said:

This is the story I was talking about:

“I was once on the Royal Yacht Britannia in the South Pacific and the Queen was hosting a dinner for a local prince,” wrote Burrell. “Dessert was served. The prince forgot to watch what the Queen did—instead, he popped the grapes into his finger bowl, then some cherries, then when the cream and sugar came out, he poured them in too, making a kind of fruit soup. I was standing behind the Queen looking horrified. He was about to raise the bowl to his lips to drink it when he looked at the Queen and realized he had made a terrible mistake. Not wanting to make him feel awkward, she picked up her finger bowl and took a sip. Now that’s class.” 

https://www.readersdigest.ca/culture/dinner-with-the-queen/

I think there is a similar story though with Queen Victoria. 

I would do the same, and it doesn't surprise me that the Queen would as well.  As for Margaret?  (or most of the others?)  I sincerely doubt they would be so kind or polite.

2 hours ago, AryasMum said:

It was silly how shocked she was by the service.   As if she doesn’t have servants falling all over her at Downing Street.  Perhaps she could have done some of her work while her husband unpacked his own bags. 

From what I've seen of Downing Street, no, she doesn't have a ton of servants, certainly no dresser, etc.  LOL, remember the fish sticks scene in The Queen?  

2 hours ago, poeticlicensed said:

I thought that Thatcher nailed it when she said that she was expecting more culture from a group of elites, when in fact they were happy playing parlor games like ibby dibby or whatever it was. Not that everyone who is privileged should be discussing philosophy and art at dinner every night, but I think she was suprised that they didn't display more class along with their snobbery. 

And as someone above accruately noted, good manners dictate you make your guests feel welcome, not unwelcome. They were terrible hosts. 

I agree.  

They are not the only wealthy family that invites people over for amusement at their errors though.  Many years ago when living in the San Francisco bay area, I heard of similar "parties."  They would invite a few "peons" each time to be the monkey/amusement for the elite.

Edited November 16, 2020 by Umbelina
typo

[Roseanna]

I think the opera should have been a red flag to them both: to Diana Verdi's music was romantic whereas he knew about his role in the Italy's unification - and he corrected her like a teacher. They simply had no common interests. 

   

[qtpye]

6 hours ago, dubbel zout said:

Balmoral is the queen's private property.

That was Queen Victoria, I believe.

 

Balmoral is a private property and, unlike the monarch's official residences, is not the property of the Crown. It originally was purchased personally by Prince Albert, rather than the queen, meaning that no revenues from the estate go to Parliament or to the public purse, as would otherwise be the case for property owned outright by the monarch in accord with the Civil List Act 1760.[32] Along with Sandringham House in Norfolk, ownership of Balmoral was inherited by Edward VIII on his accession in 1936. When he abdicated later the same year, however, he retained ownership of them. A financial settlement was devised, under which Balmoral and Sandringham were purchased by Edward's brother and successor to the Crown, George VI.[33]

Currently, the estate is still owned outright by the monarch, but is managed by Trustees under Deeds of Nomination and Appointment.[32]

I know that it is a family property but in all honesty, I have no idea if that means the government pays for any of the upkeep or if that is all on the family.

[mledawn]

On 11/15/2020 at 2:30 PM, dubbel zout said:

I was really surprised at this. I get they wanted to play up the differences between Thatcher and the BRF, but I find it nearly impossible to believe Thatcher brought no suitable outdoor clothes. They would probably be the wrong clothes—i.e., not ancient Barbour jackets and ratty sweaters and the like—but she really had nothing?

I didn't appreciate her attitude at the Braemar Games. She doesn't have to like the event, but those people are part of her constituents whether she likes them or not. She's as much of a snob in her way as anyone else. 

Did Thatcher really think the queen did nothing but stalk and play parlor games at Balmoral? She acted like she was the only who did any work.

These are points that I thought of myself as I watched. For Thatcher to arrive at Balmoral so massively unprepared seemed really out of character. 

Thatcher's comments about the Games were really grating - and I'm sure designed to contrast/compare with the "snobbishness" of the Royals.

As an aside, hearing Tobias Menzies say "Sandringham" had me in Outlander flashbacks and I rewound it a few times!

[kieyra]

Purely as a TV show watcher and not that well-versed in the Royal Family ... the wounded stag “stalked” by the royals as a metaphor for Diana was a bit heavy-handed. 

[AZChristian]

1 hour ago, Umbelina said:

From what I've seen of Downing Street, no, she doesn't have a ton of servants, certainly no dresser, etc.  LOL, remember the fish sticks scene in The Queen?  

And I doubt Hugh Grant as the PM in "Love, Actually" would have been dancing down the stairs if he expected servants to see him.  LOL.

[Umbelina]

Just now, AZChristian said:

And I doubt Hugh Grant as the PM in "Love, Actually" would have been dancing down the stairs if he expected servants to see him.  LOL.

Yeah!  I do remember listening to the commentary on that one though, and they said the lack of servants and the wife cooking fish sticks was an accurate representation of life at 10 Downing street, and then something about how that "always shocked the Americans."

Also, same writers...so.
 

[Ohiopirate02]

1 hour ago, Roseanna said:

I think the opera should have been a red flag to them both: to Diana Verdi's music was romantic whereas he knew about his role in the Italy's unification - and he corrected her like a teacher. They simply had no common interests. 

   

That exchange gave me some Age of Innocence vibes.  Charles and Newland Archer are definitely cut from the same cloth, and Diana was channeling her inner May Welland.  Then you have Diana telling Philip that she is a country girl and loves the muck even though that is a lie just like May's whole act to get Newland to propose. 

[tennisgurl]

The Thatchers being all shocked and confused by proper royal protocol reminded me of the episode with the Kennedys, where JFK and Jackie apparently had no clue when to curtsy or how to act among the royal family, even if both the Thatchers and the Kennedys would certainly at least know some of how to present themselves among royalty, or would have at least looked into it beforehand. Look show, just because people aren't born in Buckingham Palace doesent mean that they cant still learn what forks to use, especially when they're world leaders. 

[Umbelina]

4 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

That exchange gave me some Age of Innocence vibes.  Charles and Newland Archer are definitely cut from the same cloth, and Diana was channeling her inner May Welland.  Then you have Diana telling Philip that she is a country girl and loves the muck even though that is a lie just like May's whole act to get Newland to propose. 

I'm not sure it was a lie that she loved the country.  She certainly seemed quite at home there, and she more than passed "The Balmoral Test."

 

[Ohiopirate02]

6 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

I'm not sure it was a lie that she loved the country.  She certainly seemed quite at home there, and she more than passed "The Balmoral Test."

 

Diana grew up in the country and knew what was expected of her at Balmoral,  but she was a city girl at heart.  She could enjoy herself (or fake enjoyment) for a couple of days when necessary. 

[qtpye]

2 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

The Thatchers being all shocked and confused by proper royal protocol reminded me of the episode with the Kennedys, where JFK and Jackie apparently had no clue when to curtsy or how to act among the royal family, even if both the Thatchers and the Kennedys would certainly at least know some of how to present themselves among royalty, or would have at least looked into it beforehand. Look show, just because people aren't born in Buckingham Palace doesent mean that they cant still learn what forks to use, especially when they're world leaders. 

I have some seen some Americans who have refused to bow, particularly to English royalty, due to principle and acknowledgement that they are no longer their sovereigns. I know someone who has lost clientele at his financial firm because of this attitude.

However, it is crazy to think that Jackie Kennedy would not know how to follow protocol.

My biggest gripe is when that had the American astronauts who walked on the moon were presented as total yokels talking to the intellectual giant that is Prince Phillip. I think they were even running around the palace like overexcited toddlers.

[Umbelina]

2 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Diana grew up in the country and knew what was expected of her at Balmoral,  but she was a city girl at heart.  She could enjoy herself (or fake enjoyment) for a couple of days when necessary. 

I'll answer this in the season 4 thread.  😉

[qtpye]

19 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Diana grew up in the country and knew what was expected of her at Balmoral,  but she was a city girl at heart.  She could enjoy herself (or fake enjoyment) for a couple of days when necessary. 

I have not watched past this episode but my two cents is that she was just a kid and was trained and smart enough to say the right things. She was an aristocrat so the world was not totally foreign to her like it was to the middle class Thatchers. However, she had no understanding of what she was getting herself into.

I mentioned I conducted job interviews where people said and did the right things (worked particularly well if they were charismatic and charming, like Diana) but actually did not have an understanding of the nitty gritty of the position. Sometimes, this was not because they were trying to fool me but more so that they were inexperienced, so that actually did not know what they wanted.

I put Diana in this category. She probably did fib, at least a little about her interests, and was too dazzled by the idea of "Future Queen of England" to really think about how tough that role can be.

 

Edited November 17, 2020 by qtpye