S01.E05: Charity Has Two Functions

[Roseanna]

20 minutes ago, Hiyo said:

Archie could have done everything perfectly, and by the book, and I have the feeling Bertha would have rejected him since his pedigree wasn't good enough for her Gladys.

Yes, Bertha would have opposed Archie anyway, but she wouldn't have known about him if he hadn't written to Gladys.

Of course that letter shows that Archie is no schemer, unlike Oscar. And because Archie didn't abandon Gladys when Mr Russell's ruin was rumored (Archie is in banking, so he couldn't help to learn the rumors), he obviously cares for Gladys, not her dowry (if the Americans have such?) and inheritance. 

Still, the wise course would have been to keep the relationship secret and wait for a few years. If they had been constant in their love and Gladys had been able to oppose her mother and declined "better" offers, Archie would have won her in the end. 

[Hiyo]

Quote

I agree. Marrying at 17, Gladys would have moved "from nursery to nursery".

You're assuming they would have been married. They could have tried seeing other for a bit and gotten to know each other more. Maybe Gladys would have fallen in love with him, maybe not, and vice versa, had they had some time to really get to know each other first.

Quote

Losing a girl he fancied at 24 doesn't mean that Archie's life is ruined, if he has any stamina. He will probably fall in love again.

I think the life ruining part was the wrath George may have unleashed on Archie's and his family, business wise, had he not accepted George's offer and kept seeing Gladys. That was the life ruining part, I think.

Quote

He said that it was Bertha's aim when they married, but we have seen otherwise: they are partners who support each other and benefit from the other's success.

I still think he is doing it more to make Bertha happy than for anything he might get out of it, though I'm sure he doesn't mind the occasional business profit it might bring them.

Quote

Yes, Bertha would have opposed Archie anyway, but she wouldn't have known about him if he hadn't written to Gladys.

Not sure what him having written to Gladys has to do with him not being good enough for Bertha.

Quote

Still, the wise course would have been to keep the relationship secret and wait for a few years. If they had been constant in their love and Gladys had been able to oppose her mother and declined "better" offers, Archie would have won her in the end. 

Even with all that, he still wouldn't be a match for Gladys in Bertha's eyes.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

13 hours ago, blackwing said:

Van Rhijn Household has Bannister (Butler), ? (Housekeeper), Miss Armstrong (not sure, is she the housekeeper?), Gambling Addict Cook (Cook), Bridget (Kitchen Maid), Jack (footman).  

Russell household has Church (Butler), Mrs. Bruce (housekeeper), Turner (ladys maid), Adelheid (ladys maid), French chef (Cook).

Are there any others who are identifiable?

Van Rhijn Household:

Bannister - butler

Mrs Armstrong - housekeeper

Mrs Bauer - head cook

Bridget - the house maid, kitchen maid and lady's maid

Jack Treacher - footman

Russell Household:

Church - butler

Watson - George's valet

Mrs Bruce - housekeeper

Turner - Bertha's lady's maid

Adelheid - one of the house maids, now Gladys's lady's maid

Monsieur Baudin - chef

Sorry all of you, but I've had no such trouble.

16 hours ago, blackwing said:

 I'm wondering why nothing has been done about Larry yet.  He is rich, nice and handsome.  And older than Gladys.  Why isn't Bertha matchmaking for him?

She was encouraging him towards Carrie Astor in the first episode. It's just that he's faded into the background since then.

10 hours ago, rollacoaster said:

That is something I appreciate about Bertha. She is at all times unabashedly herself. She is direct and straightforward about what she wants and expects. She does not simper or pretend or act sanctimonious.

Except in this episode, where she pretended not to have done anything to sabotage things with Archie.

9 hours ago, blackwing said:

What did poor Archie ever do to her?  You said that she won't screw with people who don't screw with her. 

Rollacoaster said "if you don't screw with her or stand in her way".

9 hours ago, blackwing said:

What about her sister?  She seems to have dropped her sister for some unknown (and probably unfounded) reason.

Not being rich, probably.

1 hour ago, Roseanna said:

Losing a girl he fancied at 24 doesn't mean that Archie's life is ruined, if he has any stamina. He will probably fall in love again.

Blackwing meant that George had no qualms about ruining Archie's life if he refused. When Archie hadn't done anything to deserve it.

.

[Roseanna]

After watching all episodes again, Mrs Morris' bitterness towards the Russells, although a general reaction, seems even more groundless.

Mr Russell gave Mr Morris a hint how the latter could speculate with stocks of his railway company. In practice, he gave him a bribe in order to get his railway station accepted. I don't know if this was illegal at the time in the US, but it certainly was immoral - but immoral on both sides. 

In any case, the aldermen made a deal with Mr Morris, but the broke it by trying to ruin him. So the greatest blame was on their side. 

Mr Morris has played too great a game, risking not only his money but all his fortune. After he lost, he preferred to flee from the social shame and left his family in the lurch.

When Mr Russell met the aldermen, he said that he couldn't forgive Mr Morris and Mr Fane  because they had inseulted his wife.  And indeed they had: when Mr Morris had asked his wife to accept Mrs Russell's offer as a place of a charity fair, she said it was Mrs Fane's decision and she told it to her husband that it was Mrs Fane's. Later Mr Morris said to his wife "I saw your face", that is, he had realized that she had enjoyed by hurting Mrs Russell.

Many have said earlier that Old New York had a right not to accept invitations from Russells. That is of course true. Aunt Agnes have done that, and she can continue to live as if Russells didn't exist - unless there will be marriages between families.  

Instead, Mr Morris and Mr Fane made business with Mr Russell, but their wife didn't understand that it was their duty to accept Mrs Russell at least partly, and after their husband failed to win Mr Russell, their wives' actions worsened the consequences.

 The Red Cross lady is wise: she prefers the charity works and therefore accepts money from all. To Mrs Morris charity was less important than to hurting Mrs Russell.

Also Mrs Fane is now wiser, or rather her husband made her see that in order to survive from ruin, one must accept the facts, even if it means become humble before the victor. 

[Roseanna]

7 minutes ago, Hiyo said:

Not sure what him having written to Gladys has to do with him not being good enough for Bertha.

Even with all that, he still wouldn't be a match for Gladys in Bertha's eyes.

I meant that Bertha only learned from their secret meetings because Archie was a fool enough to write to Gladys instead of writing to her governess. Without that, they could have continued to meet in secret, f.ex. when Gladys was supposed to be in her drawing lessons. 

The Russells would have eventually been forced to accept Archie if Gladys were, say, 24 years old and had declined all other offers. 

[Hiyo]

Quote

The Russells would have eventually been forced to accept Archie if Gladys were, say, 24 years old and had declined all other offers. 

I have a feeling Gladys isn't going to have much of a say in who she marries.

[Roseanna]

18 minutes ago, Hiyo said:

I think the life ruining part was the wrath George may have unleashed on Archie's and his family, business wise, had he not accepted George's offer and kept seeing Gladys. That was the life ruining part, I think.

George didn't threat to ruin Archie's family, only his career in finance.

George isn't omnipotent. There are other countries than the US and other careers than finance. "Go to the East, young man!"  

[Hiyo]

Quote

George didn't threat to ruin Archie's family, only his career in finance.

Yes, but this is George, I wouldn't put it past him to escalate things to get what he and Bertha want.

Quote

George isn't omnipotent. There are other countries than the US and other careers than finance. "Go to the East, young man!"  

And..?

[Roseanna]

1 minute ago, Hiyo said:

I have a feeling Gladys isn't going to have much of a say in who she marries.

No priest marries a woman who refuses to say wedding vows. 

Even before, Gladys can even sabotage relationships with men she doesn't like.

[Hiyo]

Quote

No priest marries a woman who refuses to say wedding vows. 

Even before, Gladys can even sabotage relationships with men she doesn't like.

I'm sure Consuelo Vanderbilt, among many, said and thought the same thing.

[Roseanna]

7 minutes ago, Hiyo said:

And..?

At the time there were great opportunities for Westerners around the world.

Peter Frankopan tells in Silk Roads how William Knox d'Arcy made a huge fortune first in Australia (gold mine) and Persia (oil).

[Hiyo]

All fine and dandy, but why should Archie have to change locations and/or careers just to appease George?

Also, don't care much about William Knox d'Arcy, since he really doesn't have much to do with this show or this era.

[ProudMary]

Never mind.

Edited February 24, 2022 by ProudMary

[Roseanna]

1 hour ago, Hiyo said:

All fine and dandy, but why should Archie have to change locations and/or careers just to appease George?

Not to please George but for himself, to prove that he can do his life himself, instead of accepting what first his family and now Mr Russel give him.

Again, we see here the difference between scions of Old Money who have inherited their wealth and position and are therefore are "soft" and Russells who are willing and able to fight. 

   

[Roseanna]

Watching again, I paid attention to Mrs Russell's inconsolable crying in her bed when her offer to the  place of the charity fair had been refused and I began to ponder that there must be other reasons than sheer ambition behind her social climbing. 

I guess Mrs Russell has experienced severe traumas in her childhood. We know already that when her mother died, she was poor and her dreams didn't came true. But what else happened? 

[Hiyo]

Quote

Not to please George but for himself, to prove that he can do his life himself, instead of accepting what first his family and now Mr Russel give him.

Prove what to himself? This doesn't make sense relative to what we saw on the show. Archie was never on some quest to prove himself; he was interested in Gladys, George and Bertha found out, slapped him down hard, and said no way in hell.

At this point I feel like goalposts aren't just being moved but entire stadiums are being switched.

Edited February 24, 2022 by Hiyo

[Roseanna]

21 hours ago, Pestilentia said:

Raikes has never presented himself as a person. He was a lawyer for about three minutes then he was totally in love, so much so that he relocated his business and declared himself her future husband. He assumed she was 'in' and agreeable before she even understood the question. He is assuming they are betrothed and using his enthusiasm and sheer will to pull Marian along for the ride- she's thinks she's fully convinced that she loves him and they have a future. 

Watching again, that's not what happened. Raikes declared his love to Marian in the third episode and he has been acted as a lawyer to Peggy. And we can't know his motives to move to New York and in any case, he seems to have managed well on his own.

It's not at all been one-sided courting. Marian could have said "no" to Raikes but the only occasion where she had done so was in the railway station when he asked if he could write to her. Since then, she has acted in the manner that any man would have interpreted as encouragement. She had met him several times and been not only friendly but clearly flirty, she didn't say "no" to his proposal and later even told him that he must get her aunts' approval, she invited him to meet Mr McAllister at Mrs Fane's and finally he answered to his kiss. 

Although Peggy "saved" Marian, it's noteworthy that she didn't disapprove the kiss but only asked if Mr Raikes thought Marian was "easy" or if he wanted her as much as she wanted him. So according to Peggy, Marian is erotically attracted to Raikes. 

 

[Roseanna]

34 minutes ago, Hiyo said:

Prove what to himself? This doesn't make sense relative to what we saw on the show. Archie was never on some quest to prove himself; he was interested in Gladys, George and Bertha found out, slapped him down hard, and said no way in hell.

But that's exactly what love stories in the 19th century often happened. Only, it was usually the heroine's father who opposed the match, but the heroine persisted to love the hero and finally he proved himself worthy of her and the father relented. 

In this time it seems unlikely, as we met Archie just now and weren't allowed to root for him (at least not definitely). Plus Oscar continues his schemes with the help of Turner. 

[Pestilentia]

Quote

I don't think she is honest and real at all.  I think she is calculating and cunning and doesn't care who gets hurt in the process. 

 

But that's the point- she is honest and real about being calculating and cunning and not caring who gets hurt in the process, lol.

 

Quote

Marian could have said "no" to Raikes but the only occasion where she had done so was in the railway station when he asked if he could write to her. Since then, she has acted in the manner that any man would have interpreted as encouragement. She had met him several times and been not only friendly but clearly flirty, she didn't say "no" to his proposal and later even told him that he must get her aunts' approval, she invited him to meet Mr McAllister at Mrs Fane's and finally he answered to his kiss. 

It's hard to know what Marian is thinking when her affect is so flat, but sure Marian is flattered. We've been led to believe she was nearly as sheltered and naive as Gladys- neither of them have a clue what they are doing or any sort of ability to read the intentions of men. But I fail to see what Marian's response has to do with Raikes' intentions- it just means he's been very effective in his persuasive efforts, that's all.

I still think she is being swept along almost under his thrall. It's a predatory technique that strong personalities use to influence weak personalities- he's moving so fast that she doesn't have time to really think. That's what his request to be allowed into her hotel room alone with her told us- he's pushing too fast and too hard. Why? What's the rush? The rush is to compromise her respectability before she knows what's happened, that's why. There's just no other reason.   

And it's clear Marian isn't thinking- she's reacting to the first real male attention she's ever had. She was raised to be proper- she knows how to behave, or did before her hormones flared. If she was actually thinking she'd be asking the same question I am- why is he is such a rush to ruin her reputation? What does he have to gain by doing that? Presumably he knows as well as the rest of us the damage he would be doing to her future prospects. If he truly loved her he'd want the best for her and be absolutely loathe to hurt her. Instead he's hellbent on the opposite. Why?

[Hiyo]

Quote

But that's exactly what love stories in the 19th century often happened. Only, it was usually the heroine's father who opposed the match, but the heroine persisted to love the hero and finally he proved himself worthy of her and the father relented. 

Except this isn't a 19th century love story, it's a Julian Fellowes story.

[SailorGirl]

I rewatched the first few minutes of the pilot last night, including Marian's first meeting with Raikes. 

Her father had railroad stocks but Raikes said they were worthless. She never asked, and he never offered, the name of the company. He dismissed her question about the railroad boom by essentially saying some companies thrive, some don't. The company in which you have stock didn't thrive. 

All we have is Raikes' word that Marian was left penniless -- were those stocks really worthless?

Creating a damsel in distress intentionally so he can come in and rescue her . . . with her own money that she never even knew she had??? 

[blackwing]

7 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Losing a girl he fancied at 24 doesn't mean that Archie's life is ruined, if he has any stamina. He will probably fall in love again.

We have already seen that there is graver trials in life. Marian lost her father and had to live at her aunt's house. Mrs Morris lost her husband, house and fortune. 

 

6 hours ago, Hiyo said:

I think the life ruining part was the wrath George may have unleashed on Archie's and his family, business wise, had he not accepted George's offer and kept seeing Gladys. That was the life ruining part, I think.

6 hours ago, Roseanna said:

George didn't threat to ruin Archie's family, only his career in finance.

George isn't omnipotent. There are other countries than the US and other careers than finance. "Go to the East, young man!"  

Of course losing the girl doesn't ruin his life.  He will find another one.  The life-ruining part was being threatened and forced to take a job that he didn't necessarily want.  George said he was going to get Archie a job with Abraham Seligman and his brother (?) who were going to try and build the Panama Canal.  He says "do you have a problem working for Jews".  This implies that many or some people would have a problem doing so, and that it was a job that was considered less desirable or would even cause some sort of minor scandal if he were to take the job.  This was a time when a young woman walking on the street alone was considered improper.  And I believe there was a lot of prejudice against Jews, Catholics and Irish amongst the high society during this time.  I guess this confirms my question that the Russells are not Jewish themselves, even though the actor playing George looks quite Jewish to me.

So Archie was basically given the choice of 1) you will get paid a lot of money, but it is a job with a pair of Jews that your high society may or may not approve of, or 2) I will make sure that you never work in finance again.  He wasn't even allowed to properly explain to Gladys.  He was just dismissed and said he could send her a letter.  That's it.  Doesn't seem like much of a choice to me.  That's the part that I feel his life has been ruined.  He doesn't get any say or control in the direction of his career.  I'm sure George felt like he was doing Archie a favour... "I'll make you rich".  But Archie's family already had a lot of money, I don't think money would have been the absolute motivating factor to him.

Your response was "so what?  If Archie didn't want to take the offer, he could simply move to Europe or change careers."  I don't think it's that simple or easy or fair.  I'm sure there are some people who would do that, but what if he didn't want to?  "You're going to work in this job that you don't necessarily want, otherwise you have to move to Europe or learn a new profession."  Sorry, but I think that's a tall order.

The unseemly part to me is that this rich and powerful asshole has the ability to control and dictate the future and course of life of a young man who he had never met before that day.  All because the young man had the daring to talk to his daughter, and his daughter was receptive.  Doesn't seem right.

 

[mojito]

On 2/23/2022 at 12:35 PM, Sarah 103 said:

The pilot starts with Mr. Scott being freed or running away.   

Doesn't seem like Mr. Scott's style. Waiting on emancipation? Running through creeks, sweating, breathing hard, while dogs chased him? Nah, I see him buying his way out because that's what self-made men do. Or boldly walking away and escaping in plain sight with trickery because that's what clever men do.  😉

 

20 hours ago, ZeeEnnui said:

I would LOVE a spin-off of the Scott family with the exploration of Black Harlem during this period.

The show starts in 1882. Harlem wasn't black during this period. That wouldn't happen until years into the turn of the century. 

Edited February 24, 2022 by mojito

[PRgal]

7 minutes ago, mojito said:

The show starts in 1882. Harlem wasn't black during this period. That would happen until years into the turn of the century. 

That would be a pretty cool series in itself!!  Harlem in the early 20th century!

[sistermagpie]

9 hours ago, Roseanna said:

The Russells would have eventually been forced to accept Archie if Gladys were, say, 24 years old and had declined all other offers. 

I think Bertha's made clear she won't be forced to accept anything. LOL!

9 hours ago, Roseanna said:

George didn't threat to ruin Archie's family, only his career in finance.

George isn't omnipotent. There are other countries than the US and other careers than finance. "Go to the East, young man!"  

But his life in finance is his life. Sure, he's not literally ruining it. Archie would survive. But casually threatening somebody that you're going to take away what their life is now is threatening to ruin it, even if one might choose a different term. George would have been ruined if he'd lost his bet with the alderman, even if he was ready to start again.

8 hours ago, Hiyo said:

All fine and dandy, but why should Archie have to change locations and/or careers just to appease George?

 

7 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Not to please George but for himself, to prove that he can do his life himself, instead of accepting what first his family and now Mr Russel give him.

Again, we see here the difference between scions of Old Money who have inherited their wealth and position and are therefore are "soft" and Russells who are willing and able to fight. 

   

From Archie's pov, George has just laid down absurd conditions for really no reason for something that really isn't worth it in the end. Archie probably is softer than George, but this situation is maybe more just about him not being like George in that he can't lose even if the stakes are low. He's not in this to prove that he has the biggest dick in the room, he is just courting a girl he likes who's absolutely not worth her sadist dad at this point. His best course of action is to dump Gladys and not take the job offer and thereby get away from all of them.

[eleanorofaquitaine]

I think that it is a bit weird that this conversation has become about Archie's actions when it's pretty clear that the show is more interested in George and Bertha's actions. I don't think that the scenario was set up to illustrate anything about poor Archie. Instead  it was meant to highlight the ambitions of the Russells. 

I mean, one can appreciate how willing George and Bertha are to buck the system. And, at the same time, one can say that sometimes their methods go too far. You don't have to be all-in on a character even if you like parts of them. 

[Sarah 103]

10 hours ago, Hiyo said:

Not sure what him having written to Gladys has to do with him not being good enough for Bertha.

Gladys is not yet out in soceity and so proper young men should not be courting her. It's stupid, but those are the rules of the society they are in.

1 hour ago, mojito said:

Doesn't seem like Mr. Scott's style. Waiting on emancipation? Running through creeks, sweating, breathing hard, while dogs chased him? Nah, I see him buying his way out because that's what self-made men do. Or boldly walking away and escaping in plain sight with trickery because that's what clever men do.  😉

 

I was thinking in terms of TV and what makes for a dramatic pilot/first episode, but I like your idea of buying his way out, which was a real possibility and would fit with the character. 

[Hiyo]

Quote

Gladys is not yet out in soceity and so proper young men should not be courting her. It's stupid, but those are the rules of the society they are in.

But that goes back to one of the points I made earlier. Even if Gladys was out in society, and Archie began courting her as per "the rules of the society they are in", he still wouldn't have been good enough for Bertha (and her ambitions) and George would have still cock-blocked him as ruthlessly as he did.

[Roseanna]

3 hours ago, SailorGirl said:

I rewatched the first few minutes of the pilot last night, including Marian's first meeting with Raikes. 

Her father had railroad stocks but Raikes said they were worthless. She never asked, and he never offered, the name of the company. He dismissed her question about the railroad boom by essentially saying some companies thrive, some don't. The company in which you have stock didn't thrive. 

All we have is Raikes' word that Marian was left penniless -- were those stocks really worthless?

We have Agnes' word that her brother was lousy on business. 

Before all, this is a show. One must not burden the audience with too much information in the dialogue. Although Mr Russell explained earlier to Mr Morris how one can make money with stocks, many had forgotten that information when watching the next episode.

The  name of company (if Fellows even used a real ole) woudn't say us anything unless we have made our P.D. thesis about the subject. And one simply can't waste time with such boring details that Raikes gives Marian legal documents - these kind of things happen off-screen. (And even if he had, somebody would no doubt have said that he had falsified them.)

 

 

[Pop Tart]

12 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Yes. Why is only Raikes criticized for breaking the rules but Archie is not? Because Raikes is not "in" and Archie is?

Yes, the proper route for Archie to take to pursue a relationship with Gladys was to gain an introduction to her parents - and that likely would have required his parents getting an introduction to the Russells. Or he could have tried to make Larry's acquaintance and gained an introduction to the Russell family that way. Of course we have no backstory for Archie so we don't know his reasoning. But his meeting Gladys in secret and then writing to her (which would have remained secret as well if Bertha hadn't found the letter), is all totally improper.

So while he is of the correct background, his behavior has not been correct at all. And given that correct background, he has no excuse as he definitely knew better.

[Roseanna]

4 hours ago, blackwing said:

George said he was going to get Archie a job with Abraham Seligman and his brother (?) who were going to try and build the Panama Canal.  He says "do you have a problem working for Jews".  This implies that many or some people would have a problem doing so, and that it was a job that was considered less desirable or would even cause some sort of minor scandal if he were to take the job.  This was a time when a young woman walking on the street alone was considered improper.  And I believe there was a lot of prejudice against Jews, Catholics and Irish amongst the high society during this time.  I guess this confirms my question that the Russells are not Jewish themselves, even though the actor playing George looks quite Jewish to me.

So Archie was basically given the choice of 1) you will get paid a lot of money, but it is a job with a pair of Jews that your high society may or may not approve of, or 2) I will make sure that you never work in finance again.  He wasn't even allowed to properly explain to Gladys.  He was just dismissed and said he could send her a letter.  That's it.  Doesn't seem like much of a choice to me.  That's the part that I feel his life has been ruined.  He doesn't get any say or control in the direction of his career.  I'm sure George felt like he was doing Archie a favour... "I'll make you rich".  But Archie's family already had a lot of money, I don't think money would have been the absolute motivating factor to him.

It's true that there were prejudices against Jews, Irish, Italian, Polish - in fact anybody who weren't WASP. But Archie had nothing against working in the Jewish firm when he thought that George as his future father-in-law was helping him to get a good job. 

2 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

His best course of action is to dump Gladys and not take the job offer and thereby get away from all of them.

Yes! Even if he can no more meet Gladys, by refusing to take the job George offered him, he at least saves his integrity.

[Roseanna]

6 hours ago, Pestilentia said:

It's hard to know what Marian is thinking when her affect is so flat, but sure Marian is flattered. We've been led to believe she was nearly as sheltered and naive as Gladys- neither of them have a clue what they are doing or any sort of ability to read the intentions of men. But I fail to see what Marian's response has to do with Raikes' intentions- it just means he's been very effective in his persuasive efforts, that's all.

 

I still think she is being swept along almost under his thrall. It's a predatory technique that strong personalities use to influence weak personalities- he's moving so fast that she doesn't have time to really think. That's what his request to be allowed into her hotel room alone with her told us- he's pushing too fast and too hard. Why? What's the rush? The rush is to compromise her respectability before she knows what's happened, that's why. There's just no other reason.   

And it's clear Marian isn't thinking- she's reacting to the first real male attention she's ever had. She was raised to be proper- she knows how to behave, or did before her hormones flared. If she was actually thinking she'd be asking the same question I am- why is he is such a rush to ruin her reputation? What does he have to gain by doing that? Presumably he knows as well as the rest of us the damage he would be doing to her future prospects. If he truly loved her he'd want the best for her and be absolutely loathe to hurt her. Instead he's hellbent on the opposite. Why?

Well, even if there was rules about the proper behavior, there were cases, as there has been in all times when young people forgot them together because they just wanted each other, not because the man was a calculating crook whose aim was to seduce the innocent maiden. 

Marian doesn't only make responses to Raikes, she makes initiatives herself. Even before the door, it was she who started the discussion if he wants to come in. 

There are surely good manipulators in the world, but in most cases not all blame can be laid in the man's door. 

[eleanorofaquitaine]

I guarantee you that if Archie was a penniless duke that Gladys secretly met and corresponded with, Bertha would not have had George threaten him. The issue was not that Archie behaved improperly and needed to be punished. The issue is that he isn't what Bertha wants for Gladys because Bertha wants to use Gladys to further her own ambitions. 

[sistermagpie]

2 hours ago, Hiyo said:

But that goes back to one of the points I made earlier. Even if Gladys was out in society, and Archie began courting her as per "the rules of the society they are in", he still wouldn't have been good enough for Bertha (and her ambitions) and George would have still cock-blocked him as ruthlessly as he did.

 

19 minutes ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

I guarantee you that if Archie was a penniless duke that Gladys secretly met and corresponded with, Bertha would not have had George threaten him. The issue was not that Archie behaved improperly and needed to be punished. The issue is that he isn't what Bertha wants for Gladys because Bertha wants to use Gladys to further her own ambitions. 

Right, this seems like the main point of Archie. Looking at it from a Doylist perspective, the show needed a suitor for Gladys for Bertha to get George to get rid of with extreme prejudice. They needed him to be a young man from an excellent family to show Bertha's higher ambitions. But since Bertha's ambitions are also being shown by Gladys not being out yet, they have to have her meet the guy somehow on her own.

So right, the situation probably isn't meant to show us anything much about Archie except that he's a normal person and so not prepared at all to deal with the Russells. His corresponding with Gladys without her parents knowing isn't a problem at all. All the Russells are explicit about that. I wouldn't be surprised if we never find out one way or another if Archie took that job or just dumped Gladys and ran.

[Roseanna]

20 hours ago, Pestilentia said:

We've been led to believe she was nearly as sheltered and naive as Gladys- neither of them have a clue what they are doing or any sort of ability to read the intentions of men.

But how is that possible? She is older (and in her age a few years usually make a big difference) and has been "out". Yes, it happened in the small town, but the "rules" are the same - the only difference is that in her hometown she was known and couldn't move as freely as New York City.

Actually, I can't believe that Raikes was the first man who has ever shown interest in her. She is pretty enough and she was a General's daughter - a good match, as nobody knew that her father was broke. 

 While both Marian and Gladys have had secret meetings with their suitors, Marian's tactics towards Aunt Agnes is different than that of Gladys towards her mother. Where Gladys is openly rebellious, Marian keeps her tongue in check.

Some here have thought it a good sign that Gladys speaks freely her mind to her parents. I am not sure of that (and of course it wouldn't happen irl). I suspect that Gladys is one of those persons who seem to be brave only because they have no knowledge about the world. Therefore, either her deviance is easily crushed (which means that Bertha could force her to a marriage against her will) or she will get herself into the serious trouble (believing Oscar and Turner's manipulating).

Marian has been criticized here for behaving against Aunt Agnes' orders which shows ingratitude towards her aunt who not only took her into her home, have treated her well (clothes, pocket money). However, I wonder if Marian's deceitful tactics will pay better in the end than Gladys' rebellious one. Perhaps Marian is a person who "bends before the necessity but doesn't broke".     

We shall see.

[Emmybean]

On 2/23/2022 at 12:58 AM, Noneofyourbusiness said:

 

Yes, Archie's family has history, as Gladys mentioned last episode, and we learned this episode that they even have an in with the Astors already. The inescapable conclusion is that Bertha wants Gladys to marry a noble, because that's the only thing grander than what she just sabotaged.

I think it’s possible that Bertha will end up aiming for an English title, but I think right now what she wants for Gladys is not someone who has an in with the Astors but an actual Astor, or Schermerhorn, or Stuyvesant—the real deal. I think Bertha would open her door to Mr Raikes if she knows about his friendship with a young Schermerhorn.

The irony is that Mrs Russell would not welcome the equivalent of a Larry Russell for her daughter.

[Roseanna]

Somebody wrote that Russells don't see their children as persons but paws. That is of course true, but it goes both ways: Larry and especially Gladys take all their parents have given them granted, enjoying benefits without a slightest idea how easily they could lose it. 

It's noteworthy that when Mr Russell was told about the railway crash, it wasn't his son (who is supposed to work with him) but his wife who was present when it was decided what must be done to save the situation. Why? Doesn't Mr Russell trust his son? Hasn't Larry shown interest in the company? And is beginning his career by working under his daddy the best method for Larry? 

I have read several biographies about business families that have been successful for generations and they have a common trait: while giving their sons a good start for their career and life (the best university, long journeys abroad etc.), the fathers also raised them to understand that the privileges mean also duties.   

Instead, Marian have experienced when her father died and left her penniless how unsafe place the world is. Therefore she has at least some sort of realism even when in love. She has insisted that Raikes should have her aunts' approval.  And she even told him that if they married they wouldn't afford the same things (f.ex. attending parties) they have now.     

[blackwing]

1 hour ago, Roseanna said:

Somebody wrote that Russells don't see their children as persons but paws. That is of course true, but it goes both ways: Larry and especially Gladys take all their parents have given them granted, enjoying benefits without a slightest idea how easily they could lose it. 

It's noteworthy that when Mr Russell was told about the railway crash, it wasn't his son (who is supposed to work with him) but his wife who was present when it was decided what must be done to save the situation. Why? Doesn't Mr Russell trust his son? Hasn't Larry shown interest in the company? And is beginning his career by working under his daddy the best method for Larry? 

I have read several biographies about business families that have been successful for generations and they have a common trait: while giving their sons a good start for their career and life (the best university, long journeys abroad etc.), the fathers also raised them to understand that the privileges mean also duties.   

Instead, Marian have experienced when her father died and left her penniless how unsafe place the world is. Therefore she has at least some sort of realism even when in love. She has insisted that Raikes should have her aunts' approval.  And she even told him that if they married they wouldn't afford the same things (f.ex. attending parties) they have now.     

That was me that said the Russells use their children as pawns.  I think Bertha especially is clearly using Gladys as a pawn to further her own ambitious desires.  I think if Bertha found out there is an 80 year old double amputee blind Duke of Northumberland who is looking for a wife, she and Gladys would be on the next ship over to England.  She doesn't care at all what Gladys thinks.  She is Gladys' mother and knows what is best for Gladys, and more importantly, how to use Gladys to achieve what is best for Bertha.

I don't think we know enough about the Russells and their children to determine whether or not Larry and Gladys take everything for granted.  We don't know when the Russells came into money.  Have they always had money and the children were raised with money from birth?  Did they only recently come into money within the past 5 years or so?  Let's say the family has always had money and the children grew up privileged.  I don't see any indication that the children take everything for granted.  They don't behave like spoiled brats.

In fact, Larry is pretty much a blank slate.  We haven't seen much of him at all or even know what he is thinking.  All we know is that he just graduated from Harvard and he started a position at George's company.  We don't even really know exactly what he does there.  I don't think he can be faulted for not taking an interest in the company when he is barely onscreen.

Pretty much the only times we have seen him are at the party in Newport with Oscar, a casual hello to Marian, and sitting at the dining table with his parents.  He hasn't been given any story of his own and thus he doesn't have any discernable personality other than he seems like he is a nice guy and is sympathetic to his sister's situation.

Larry and Gladys seem to be nice, respectable children.  They aren't above poking fun at their mother's Irish potato farmer roots, but they also seem to be respectful and don't openly defy their parents or want to fight them.  When Gladys was trying to escape the house and police warden Bertha caught her and sent her back to her room, Gladys didn't protest or try and leave anyways.  She did as she was told.  Someone who takes their wealth and privileges for granted would have just sailed out the door anyways.

Edited February 25, 2022 by blackwing

[KarenX]

I recommended this book already several threads ago but with do it again here.

The Rise of Silas Lapham was written in 1885 by William Dean Howells, about a filthy rich new money uneducated industrialist who grew up on a farm, his former school teacher wife, their young adult daughters, and the old money family they become entangled with (and the young adult children in the old money family). It is a very good contemporary companion to Edith Wharton and Henry James novels, and to this show.

I keep thinking about the Russells and what the Laphams would have done in the same situation. It’s a novel, of course, and not history, but it is an historical perspective of this time and you can learn a lot from it. Plus both Lapham daughters are fun to read about. They seem very earnest and real.

Edited February 25, 2022 by KarenX

[BabyBella94]

5 hours ago, Emmybean said:

I think it’s possible that Bertha will end up aiming for an English title, but I think right now what she wants for Gladys is not someone who has an in with the Astors but an actual Astor, or Schermerhorn, or Stuyvesant—the real deal. I think Bertha would open her door to Mr Raikes if she knows about his friendship with a young Schermerhorn.

The irony is that Mrs Russell would not welcome the equivalent of a Larry Russell for her daughter.

I don't even think she wants an actual Astor, or Schermerhorn, or Stuyvesant. She clearly wants something grander then that. 

[Roseanna]

2 hours ago, blackwing said:

I think if Bertha found out there is an 80 year old double amputee blind Duke of Northumberland who is looking for a wife, she and Gladys would be on the next ship over to England. 

No, that would be too much. A duke of 80 years would already have children and grandchildren with his late wife. Or if he had only daughters but not a son and heir, he can't be too old to beget children to Gladys. If some cousin would inherit his title and fortune, his widow would have to move to his castle to some smaller house and her position in the British society would be taken by the new duchess.

It may be that Gladys would be glad to lose her husband early in order to marry a younger man. But her mother certainly wouldn't.

[Hiyo]

Quote

That was me that said the Russells use their children as pawns. 

And you're not the only one who thinks that...

Quote

A duke of 80 years would already have children and grandchildren with his late wife. 

If he was cash poor he'd marry Gladys and get a nice dowry. Gladys would get a Duchess title. Win win for all.

Well, not Gladys, but Bertha needs something to show off to the old money crowd. So win win for Bertha and the 80 year old double amputee blind Duke.

Edited February 25, 2022 by Hiyo

[Maisiesmom]

I have been enjoying watching the show and reading everyones comments and speculations. I just wanted to tell those of you who may not know that the girls over at the website Gofugyourself do a re-cap of the show every week (usually on Wednesdays). They are funny, insightful, and pretty snarky (just like Aunt Agnes!) Check them out if you would like, they always make me laugh.

[yellowjacket]

1 hour ago, Maisiesmom said:

I have been enjoying watching the show and reading everyones comments and speculations. I just wanted to tell those of you who may not know that the girls over at the website Gofugyourself do a re-cap of the show every week (usually on Wednesdays). They are funny, insightful, and pretty snarky (just like Aunt Agnes!) Check them out if you would like, they always make me laugh.

Oh my gosh they are so funny.  They do a running gag about how many Tony awards are in a scene - "Nathan Lane (three Tonys)".  I think the record is twelve. 

Just now, yellowjacket said:

Oh my gosh they are so funny.  They do a running gag about how many Tony awards are in a scene - "Nathan Lane (three Tonys)".  I think the record so far is twelve, but the show hasn't figured out how to put Audra in a scene with the rest of the awardees. 

 

[rollacoaster]

On 2/24/2022 at 1:32 AM, Noneofyourbusiness said:

On 2/23/2022 at 2:52 PM, rollacoaster said:

That is something I appreciate about Bertha. She is at all times unabashedly herself. She is direct and straightforward about what she wants and expects. She does not simper or pretend or act sanctimonious.

Except in this episode, where she pretended not to have done anything to sabotage things with Archie.

Well, true enough. Even Bertha doesn't want to look too bad in her daughter's eyes. 

1 hour ago, Maisiesmom said:

I have been enjoying watching the show and reading everyones comments and speculations. I just wanted to tell those of you who may not know that the girls over at the website Gofugyourself do a re-cap of the show every week (usually on Wednesdays). They are funny, insightful, and pretty snarky (just like Aunt Agnes!) Check them out if you would like, they always make me laugh.

Yes! The comments on here have been very insightful and entertaining! Thanks for sharing about Gofugyourself. I'll add them to my go to recaps along with Tom and Lorenzo and Frock Flicks. 

Edited February 25, 2022 by rollacoaster

[Noneofyourbusiness]

7 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Or if he had only daughters but not a son and heir, he can't be too old to beget children to Gladys.

Men have no menopause. Their fertility goes down only somewhat with age. A 100 year old man can still beget children, if his partner is young enough.

Edited February 26, 2022 by Noneofyourbusiness

[Noneofyourbusiness]

On 2/24/2022 at 9:09 AM, SailorGirl said:

Her father had railroad stocks but Raikes said they were worthless. She never asked, and he never offered, the name of the company. He dismissed her question about the railroad boom by essentially saying some companies thrive, some don't. The company in which you have stock didn't thrive. 

All we have is Raikes' word that Marian was left penniless -- were those stocks really worthless?

Creating a damsel in distress intentionally so he can come in and rescue her . . . with her own money that she never even knew she had??? 

Presumably she didn't ask because she already knew. She knew the stocks existed, why not the name of the company.

As Roseanna said, it's consistent with what Agnes and Ada established about Henry squandering their inheritance.

How would he have gotten his hands on her money? People aren't going to just give it to him. I think he's an adventurer, but that seems implausible.

In any case, we can be sure he and Marian aren't endgame because it's developing too fast too soon.

Edited February 26, 2022 by Noneofyourbusiness

[SailorGirl]

11 minutes ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

How would he have gotten his hands on her money? People aren't going to just give it to him. I think he's an adventurer, but that seems implausible.

I think stocks back then were like bearer bonds -- whoever had the physical paper showing the stock ownership would be able to trade and sell them. No Etrade back then! 😄

Edited February 26, 2022 by SailorGirl

[Noneofyourbusiness]

8 minutes ago, SailorGirl said:

I think stocks back then were like bearer bonds -- whoever had the physical paper showing the stock ownership would be able to trade and sell them. No Etrade back then! 😄

I think they would have Marian's father's name on them. And as I said, how would he get his hands on them? It can't be as easy as people would give them to him because he was the lawyer, or it would happen all the time.

11 hours ago, blackwing said:

I don't think we know enough about the Russells and their children to determine whether or not Larry and Gladys take everything for granted.

The HBO website says, "He is protective of his little sister, Gladys, and like her he is a classic child of the rich. He thinks he doesn't care about money, because he has always had plenty of it."

[Bliss]

1 hour ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

 A 100 year old man can still beget children, if his partner is young enough.

That's one frontal nudity I don't need to see. 😖