Mary and Edith, Edith and Mary

[Flyingwoman]

And then Mary said Edith had "no advantages at all."  Meaning I suppose that she wasn't as pretty as Mary?  But mostly IMO that men preferred her and so did her parents.

De-lurking to say that this scene always cracks me up, because I can think of one entirely superficial "advantage" Edith would have over Mary. But perhaps there were no well-born British men between the wars who liked boobs? Perhaps not. Perhaps gentlemen did not assess the anatomies of the young ladies with whom they danced. Perhaps gentlemen didn't have types, or perhaps that type of thinking was saved for the women they didn't marry, or perhaps the only desirable type was Mary's long-cool-drink-of-water type. Whatever. Still makes me chuckle every time I hear it.

[ZoloftBlob]

Oh I don't know. I think Laura Carmichael is pretty but.....

 

As my mom would put it, she's a bit horsey in the face. She's got a pretty distinctive nose that dominates her face in an unenglish manner, and I personally am not taken with how she is dressed in a lot of episodes. She can look stunning, but more often than not, to me, she consistently comes off awkward in her body language - which works because Edith is so very awkward and to be perfectly fair I assume some of the awkward posture is intentional because I have seen her in interviews where she's sooo not Edith and so much prettier.

[shipperx]

Got to say having seen the 'praying for Matthew's thing brought up by a few people and having happened to have watched the scene this weekend, I really, really don't find that incident qualitatively comparable to the stuff Mary just pulled.

Edith walks in on a totally random evening looking for a book she'd left in Mary's room with Mary leaping to her feet pretending that nothing whatsoever was going on and Edith is kind of amused by the never overtly religious Mary pretending that she hadn't just been praying. Matthew was alive and well at that time and at Downtown they had no way of knowing whether Matthew was in immediate peril or whether he'd been in more danger last week or would be next week. They only knew he was in France and in the military. He wasn't known as injured or on the front lines or at an officer's dinner. It was just a random day of the week in the middle of the war. And Mary was pretending that she wasn't praying when it llooked suspiciously like she was. None of that adds up as the exact same as the dismissal of confirmation of a violent murder on the very day it's confirmed or telling the grieving 'what could Matthew have ever seen in Mary in the first place, she ruins everything, the boring bore...while shes visibly devastated by someones murder. There's rude behavior (what Edith did) and there's deliberately rubbing salt in an open wound which is what Mary was doing. Matthew wasn't dead and Mary was pretending to not be concerned and got teased over that pretense in a day when nothing in particular was happening and the other is saying that a murdered loved one never should have loved you in the first place because you're worthless. Neither scene was 'nice' but there are distinct degrees of difference.

Edited October 31, 2014 by shipperx

[Avaleigh]

None of that adds up as the exact same as the dismissal of confirmation of a violent murder on the very day it's confirmed or telling the grieving 'what could Matthew have ever seen in Mary in the first place, she ruins everything, the boring bore...while shes visibly devastated by someones murder.

 

 

In my post you will see that I brought up the praying incident as part of a response to a poster bringing up Mary mocking Edith over her mourning for Patrick. I wasn't saying that Mary's behavior this past episode was the equivalent of the praying scene.

[ZulaMay]

I think we've seen Edtih's selfish side over the course of the series as well. Also, wrt the mocking of mourning Patrick--I felt like I saw a similar side of Edith when she caught Mary praying for Matthew. Edith had a smirk on her face and went out of her way to annoy Mary in the scene because they both knew that the other likely knew exactly who and what Mary was praying for. That's just the sort of relationship they have.

 

 Mary had to deal with a lot of pain wrt Matthew in season 2 and spent a large part of the season unhappy whereas Edith seemed like she was in a better place in general and emotionally. In season 3 Mary finally gets what she wants but there are some bumps in the road. She and Matthew have the disagreement about the Swire money that everyone knows Lavinia would have wanted him to have, she has the pain of Sybil's death just as everyone else in the family has, and the real kicker, she loses Matthew after they just had their first and only child, plus they only had a little over a year of married life together. I'd say that Mary definitely qualifies as having her share of bad luck. These losses seem like they're more readily dismissed because they're happening to Mary who is still very fortunate in other areas of her life. (If Strallan had died after a year of marriage I feel like there would definitely have been claims about JF not wanting to allow Edith to be happy and this being just another example of her streak of unluckiness.)

 

The death of Matthew is not comparable to the hypothetical "death" of Strallan because we all know JF did not want to kill Matthew.  He only did it because Dan wanted to leave and he had no choice, and he was not at all happy about having to do that to Mary.  If it were Edith he would have done it gladly, just as he gladly had her jilted at the altar instead of letting her down with dignity, in a happy moment as he did with Mary.

 

And I don't pity Mary at all for the argument over the Swire money.   I don't think we "all knew" Lavinia would have wanted him to have it, or at least we wouldn't if JF hadn't turned her into a martyr and post-mortem M/M shipper and twisted the plot into pretzels to arrange those letters from beyond the grave.  Moreover she was not a victim of that argument. She chose to take the stance she did, to potentially thwart her marriage because she couldn't accept that her fiancé's conscience trumped his desire to keep their giant house.  Her other option was to marry him, be Countess and live in a ten-bedroom house instead.  How horrible for her!!!

 

And Edith was in a better place emotionally during the war because she went out there and made herself useful, did something fulfilling and helpful instead of focusing on her own problems and personal happiness like Mary did.  Mary could have done the same but she didn't.  Edith set aside romance and marriage for a few years and found purpose, which made her happier.  Mary had that option but chose not to take it.

 

As for Patrick v. Matthew, I do think there is a big difference between mourning a cousin who has actually DIED v. praying for one who might be in danger.   It wasn't nice for Edith to be snarky about it but Mary was being disrespectful to the dead as well as disappointing to her father when she didn't even want to mourn her drowned cousin.

 

[Avaleigh]

And I don't pity Mary at all for the argument over the Swire money.   I don't think we "all knew" Lavinia would have wanted him to have it, or at least we wouldn't if JF hadn't turned her into a martyr and post-mortem M/M shipper and twisted the plot into pretzels to arrange those letters from beyond the grave.

 

 

JF is the writer and he gets to choose the way characters react and behave. Lavinia wanted Mary and Matthew to be together and said so. From beyond the grave the show has her confirm this. The idea that she'd suddenly be upset about Matthew taking the money after the show specifically told us that she thought Matthew and Mary being together was right and fine doesn't make any sense. 

 

She chose to take the stance she did, to potentially thwart her marriage because she couldn't accept that her fiancé's conscience trumped his desire to keep their giant house.

 

 

Matthew's reasons for not wanting to take the money turned out not to be valid. Matthew basically kept saying that he wanted to save the estate if he felt that he could do it honorably that but he didn't feel right because he was under the impression that Reggie wasn't in possession in all of the facts. Since Mary knew that Matthew didn't have a problem with saving Downton and saw an easy way that they could, she pressed him to take it and Matthew didn't resent her for it because he found out that Reggie did indeed still want to give him the money even after knowing the deal about what was going on between him and Lavinia.

 

In any case I didn't bring up the Swire money to say that Mary should be pitied. I never said anything like that. I mentioned it as one of the examples of Mary's marriage not going smoothly and was talking about how Mary has problems just like all of the other characters do.

 

And Edith was in a better place emotionally during the war because she went out there and made herself useful, did something fulfilling and helpful instead of focusing on her own problems and personal happiness like Mary did.  Mary could have done the same but she didn't.  Edith set aside romance and marriage for a few years and found purpose, which made her happier.  Mary had that option but chose not to take it.

 

 

Mary and Edith wanted different things and both made themselves useful towards the second half of the war just they went about it in different ways. Mary did the bare minimum in the beginning and then Matthew got injured so she devoted herself to helping him as much as she could and I don't see how this is a bad thing. Isobel, Lavinia, and Matthew were certainly appreciative. Mary had no guarantee that she and Matthew would get back together so I disagree that Mary's assistance to Matthew during this time was self serving or somehow unworthy of praise. 

 

During season 2 Mary wasn't the one who was going around talking about how she doesn't know what to do with herself. That was Edith. Sybil encouraged Edith to find a role for herself. Edit did so and her life became happier. Mary wasn't unsatisfied in the same way that Edith was. In season 2 Mary's unhappiness was tied into thinking that she wouldn't ever be able to get back together with Matthew. Between the stress of Matthew being in the war and worrying for his safety; the unsatisfactory relationship with Richard Carlisle that she thinks is the best she can do; the Pamuk scandal that rears its ugly head again; seeing Matthew engaged to a nice young woman; nearly losing her mother; thinking she's going to have to be sent away to America, etc. It definitely wasn't all smooth sailing for Mary during the second season and I feel like we can look at every season and see that Mary and Edith have both had things to deal with and that it isn't only Edith who has had to go through difficulties or had some unfortunate luck. 

 

All that being said Edith did have her moments in season 2 where just like Mary she was focused on herself and her own problems and demonstrated selfish behavior. Edith being complimented by the general that one time doesn't erase the objectionable things that came up during that season. 

 

In some ways I actually feel like Mary and Edith had similar experiences in season 2 in terms of finding roles for themselves, learning to work together with people including each other, having their romantic feelings runaway with them, feeling as though happiness is just within their reach, feeling the opposite as though they're destined to be unhappy, etc. Both had moments with the servants that made them look bad, both spent the first two years of the war living as they had before, both showed their snobbishness, they were on the same side during Tom and Sybil's aborted elopement, etc.  

[shipperx]

I found the dead alsoran fiancé leaving a fortune to conveniently save Downtown to be sort of unintentionally hilarious.

Poor Lavinia. Not only was she only a second prize place holder, but she quietly accepted that fact and conveniently died with absolutely no hard feelings, taking the time to reassure her fiancé and nudge him to go after his true love. Then after she and her dad die in a serendipitous fashion: here's a fortune to save your enormous house!

Fellowes sometimes seems to follow the axiom of a little is good than more is a whole lot better. The stuff with Lavinia was slathered on with a trowel, to the point it became unintentionally funny. It's not Matthew or Marys fault, of course. The characters had no control. But the way they wrote Lavinia got to be too much. Seriously, is anyone that understanding? If so they need an express lane to the angel wings line.

Again not the characters fault. But the writing in that had the subtlety of a sledgehammer. (Though rather than seeing it as a reason to pity Mary, I tend to think of late Lavinia's convenient fortune to be perhaps the most egregious example of the astounding plot gymnastics Fellowes performs to make things work out.)

Edited October 31, 2014 by shipperx

[ZulaMay]

JF is the writer and he gets to choose the way characters react and behave. Lavinia wanted Mary and Matthew to be together and said so. From beyond the grave the show has her confirm this. The idea that she'd suddenly be upset about Matthew taking the money after the show specifically told us that she thought Matthew and Mary being together was right and fine doesn't make any sense. 

 

Matthew's reasons for not wanting to take the money turned out not to be valid. Matthew basically kept saying that he wanted to save the estate if he felt that he could do it honorably that but he didn't feel right because he was under the impression that Reggie wasn't in possession in all of the facts. Since Mary knew that Matthew didn't have a problem with saving Downton and saw an easy way that they could, she pressed him to take it and Matthew didn't resent her for it because he found out that Reggie did indeed still want to give him the money even after knowing the deal about what was going on between him and Lavinia.

 

In any case I didn't bring up the Swire money to say that Mary should be pitied. I never said anything like that. I mentioned it as one of the examples of Mary's marriage not going smoothly and was talking about how Mary has problems just like all of the other characters do.

 

 

Mary and Edith wanted different things and both made themselves useful towards the second half of the war just they went about it in different ways. Mary did the bare minimum in the beginning and then Matthew got injured so she devoted herself to helping him as much as she could and I don't see how this is a bad thing. Isobel, Lavinia, and Matthew were certainly appreciative. Mary had no guarantee that she and Matthew would get back together so I disagree that Mary's assistance to Matthew during this time was self serving or somehow unworthy of praise. 

 

During season 2 Mary wasn't the one who was going around talking about how she doesn't know what to do with herself. That was Edith. Sybil encouraged Edith to find a role for herself. Edit did so and her life became happier. Mary wasn't unsatisfied in the same way that Edith was. In season 2 Mary's unhappiness was tied into thinking that she wouldn't ever be able to get back together with Matthew. Between the stress of Matthew being in the war and worrying for his safety; the unsatisfactory relationship with Richard Carlisle that she thinks is the best she can do; the Pamuk scandal that rears its ugly head again; seeing Matthew engaged to a nice young woman; nearly losing her mother; thinking she's going to have to be sent away to America, etc. It definitely wasn't all smooth sailing for Mary during the second season and I feel like we can look at every season and see that Mary and Edith have both had things to deal with and that it isn't only Edith who has had to go through difficulties or had some unfortunate luck. 

 

All that being said Edith did have her moments in season 2 where just like Mary she was focused on herself and her own problems and demonstrated selfish behavior. Edith being complimented by the general that one time doesn't erase the objectionable things that came up during that season. 

 

In some ways I actually feel like Mary and Edith had similar experiences in season 2 in terms of finding roles for themselves, learning to work together with people including each other, having their romantic feelings runaway with them, feeling as though happiness is just within their reach, feeling the opposite as though they're destined to be unhappy, etc. Both had moments with the servants that made them look bad, both spent the first two years of the war living as they had before, both showed their snobbishness, they were on the same side during Tom and Sybil's aborted elopement, etc.  

Edith's romantic feelings ran away from her twice and in neither case did it take up much of her time.  Maybe a few weeks tops.  Mary spent the entire war focused on her personal romantic life.  She cared for Matthew, true, but that was not entirely unselfish.  She did it AFTER he had sent Lavinia away and by all appearances had ended it with her.  She did it because she was still in love with him and wanted to be near him. And in part, IMO, because she hoped she might still get him back.  Why did she keep stalling her marriage to Richard?  Which she did.  He thought it was because she still held out hope for Matthew, and IMO he was right.

 

What Sybil said to Edith about finding a purpose?  She said that AFTER the war was over, not during it.  Both were talking about how they didn't want to go back to lying around all day.  Edith's decision to learn to drive and work at the hospital was all her own.  Sybil didn't tell her to do it.  She took that initiative. 

 

I realize Mary was dealing with different issues but they didn't take up much of her time.  Matthew was away at the front most of the time.  Other than that she had nothing to do but socialize a bit with Lavinia and deal with Richard.  She still had a lot of time on her hands and most of it she spent thinking of her own feelings and personal life.  She could have worked too but chose not too.  All of the other women in the family did.  And that was one reason Mary couldn't stop thinking about Matthew.  She didn't distract herself by doing something useful.

 

As for Reggie Swire?  There was a big plot hole in that, which was we do NOT know what the letter Lavinia wrote to him even said.  All Reggie's letter stated was "I know you two were having problems."  Maybe he knew Lavinia had called it off but he did not know WHY.  Matthew felt guilty because he had cheated on Lavinia....with Mary.  Lavinia's letter to her father said nothing about catching them making out in the hall.  So he didn't know Matthew had done that.  If he had known, would he have given him the money?  We don't know.

 

Matthew's feelings and reasons were not invalid.  He felt guilty, as well he should.   But from the start Mary displayed not an ounce of remorse or understanding for his scruples, even though she was there to see the look on Lavinia's face.   She had betrayed her too.  Moreover, it was not just saving the house that made her want to get her hands on his money.  From the minute she found out Matthew had a letter from Swire's lawyer she started needling him about how maybe he had left him something.  Matthew dismissed it but she was interested in a possible inheritance even before she knew Robert had lost the money.  Mary is money-hungry.

 

Of course Edith made mistakes during the war but the fact is she dedicated much of it to helping the soldiers...men she didn't know and with whom, as far as we know, she had no romantic interactions.  Mary helping Matthew for a while toward the end of the war was entwined with her personal desires.  Edith helped many, many people without any personal agenda other than a desire to be useful and fulfilled.  It doesn't negate her  mistakes but IMO she more than made up for them with what she payed forward to other people during those years.

 

As for their attitude toward Tom, they were on the same side but Mary was much more outwardly snobbish about it than Edith was.  She was scornful about him.  She was dismissive and contemptuous of him at the hotel (Edith was not), and she said in front of the whole family (and Tom) that she hoped Sybil would "wake up" and not marry him.  Edith kept that to herself, at least.  She disapproved but she didn't behave like that toward him or express her scorn the way Mary did.

Edited October 31, 2014 by ZulaMay

[shipperx]

 Matthew was away at the front most of the time.  Other than that she had nothing to do but socialize a bit with Lavinia and deal with Richard.  She still had a lot of time on her hands and most of it she spent thinking of her own feelings and personal life.  She could have worked too but chose not too.  All of the other women in the family did.  And that was one reason Mary couldn't stop thinking about Matthew.  She didn't distract herself by doing something useful.

 

I remember actually being surprised by that during that season.  They'd made a point of Sybil choosing to go learn nursing, and to become a nurse for the duration of the war.  They allowed Edith learn to drive and then end up driving a tractor (although, I had been thinking at the time that they should've gone the Connie Willis "Blackout"{a novel} route and having her learn to drive in order to become an ambulance driver.  That was the plot of one of Willis' female characters in that book}.  But, at least it was choosing to do something practical and useful.  Mary... she really didn't do anything different up until it was Matthew and then it was solely about Matthew.  Mary didn't change.  She certainly didn't step out of her traditional role.  I suppose it was meant to tell us something about the character that her role remained the traditional one and that she only added any effort when it became a personal thing, but it definitely came off as a deliberate writing choice that everyone else was at least somewhat actively involved in either the hospital (or tractor driving... and I'm still, really?  Tractors?  Weren't there ambulances? about that choice, but whatever).  Even Cora took on a tiny bit of managerial role.  Mary was just... Lady of the Manor who suffered through the house at sixes and sevens... until the man she loved got rolled in (to his miracle recovery).

 

As for Reggie Swire?  There was a big plot hole in that, which was we do NOT know what the letter Lavinia wrote to him even said.  All Reggie's letter stated was "I know you two were having problems."  Maybe he knew Lavinia had called it off but he did not know WHY.  Matthew felt guilty because he had cheated on Lavinia....with Mary.  Lavinia's letter to her father said nothing about catching them making out in the hall. 

 

It couldn't, could it?  My memory is fuzzy but didn't she rather conveniently fall into her deathbed after that?  When did she have time to write that letter while dying of influenza?  It had to be an earlier letter.

 

At best, I assume that Reggie was operating on the assumption that Matthew and Lavinia were engaged but Reggie knew that his daughter had been concerned about Matthew having some unresolved feelings re: Mary (which... not unreasonable).  I highly doubt Reggie knew that -- however, heroically understanding his daughter might be -- that she'd caught Matthew kissing Mary before promptly (and conveniently) shuffling this mortal coil with very little fuss.  There's being understanding and then there's... really huge plot gymnastics to have things work out for Downton's favorite starcrossed couple.   The Swire situation went a few steps too far to accepted without the occasional "oh good grief" rueful amusement.  It fell deadly close to Downton doing self-parody.  I never bought that Reggie would've known about the dancing/snogging.  There's accepting your late daughter's beloved fiance was 'conflicted'... and then there's his daughter catching said fiance snogging his ex right before she dropped dead virtually at his feet.  I'm going to say that Reggie probably knew that Matthew may have had some 'unresolved feelings' that concerned Lavinia, but I can't think he knew the exact details and willingly saved the (literal) Crawley farm.  It's a step too far.

 

Matthew's feelings and reasons were not invalid.  He felt guilty, as well he should.  Mary should have to given that she was there too and she also wronged Lavinia.  But from the start she displayed not an ounce of remorse or understanding for his scruples.  Instead she just got angry. Moreover, it was not just saving the house that made her want to get her hands on his money.  From the minute she found out Matthew had a letter from Swire's lawyer she started needling him about how maybe he had left him something.  Matthew dismissed it but she was interested in a possible inheritance even before she knew Robert had lost the money.  Mary is money-hungry.

 

Oh, while understanding Matthew's discomfort with taking the money (and there should be discomfort.  I don't know why Mary had no embarrassment about it),  I thought his refusal to use it ended up a bit mulish.  Look, it is shameful that he got left a bloody fortune from the guileless girl he used as a half-hearted Mary replacement... who conveniently died so that he didn't have to either marry her or humiliate her by crying off an engagement where she'd done no wrong ...so that he and Mary could have an unblemished happy ending.  But, that said, poor Lavina and her father were dead.  They weren't around to be mortified by the situation.  So, live with the embarassment, take the money, and do something useful with it.  

 

Mary did come off is somewhat mercenary, though, in that she never seemed to feel any embarrassment about the totally undeserved fortune falling into their laps from people who had not been treated particularly well.   Some embarrassment was warranted.  (But it doesn't require mullish self-destruction of not accepting money from people who had already suffered as much as they could {since they were dead} and wouldn't be around to be humiliated by the situation.)

 

As for their attitude toward Tom, they were on the same side but Mary was much more outwardly snobbish about it than Edith was.  She was scornful about him.  She was dismissive and contemptuous of him at the hotel (Edith was not), and she said in front of the whole family (and Tom) that she hoped Sybil would "wake up" and not marry him.  Edith kept that to herself, at least.  She disapproved but she didn't behave like that toward him or express her scorn the way Mary did.

 

They all suffered class consciousness (read snobishness) re: Tom.  That's okay (for me as a viewer) because it was it was time period appropriate and highlighted the courage Sybil was displaying by taking that leap and the degree of liberal/modern embodied in Sybil that she did it willingly.  She was dragging the rest of her family into the future.  In the end, it was good for all of them to learn that Tom is a human being every bit as deserving as the rest of them (at least I like to think they all realize this on some level.  I... still have a few doubts that Robert gets that, but Robert is pretty uniformly dense.)

Edited October 31, 2014 by shipperx

[ZulaMay]

Matthew did plan to do something useful with the money.  He told Mary if he took it he'd just give it all to charity.  And that is every bit as useful as spending it on Downton, isn't it?  Downton might benefit the local populace but so does charity.  He wasn't planning on giving it over to the state or anything.

 

My problem was not the decision he made or didn't make.  Of course choosing to take the money would have been a valid course of action. But it was the WAY Mary handled it that was appalling.  She didn't seem to understand his guilt at all, needled and badgered and nagged him about it, accused him of being at fault for them losing the house (when it was really Robert's fault), almost called off their wedding.  Then she opened his personal mail behind his back, against his express wishes.  I know they are married but sorry, there are still limits.  Mary had no relationship with Mr. Swire and given what she had done to his daughter she should not have interfered with his relationship with Matthew that way.  

 

We have plenty of context now in which to evaluate her actions.  She won't take no for an answer, she evaluates men based on their wealth and status, among other things.  She has proven herself to be self-serving, self-absorbed and pragmatic to the point of coldness in her relationships.  Whatever Matthew did or did not choose to do with the money, it does not excuse they way she handled it.  He had a conscience and she had no respect for it, or even for his privacy.  And her priorities were screwy too.  No one else was butthurt about having to live in a ten-bedroom house....except her.  Literally, no one else.

[DianeDobbler]

If we're going to hang our hats on the writing, then Tom seriously considered being with Sarah Bunting!

 

It's absolutely ridiculous that Lavinia, or Lavinia's father, would want MARY to a) end up married to Matthew, and b) that LAVINIA's inheritence go towards the preservation of Mary's family's estate. That was one of the more callous, ridiculous points of the entire series. Matthew inherits from his dead (non-Mary) financee's father. He is pressed to use the money to save the bacon of the family estate belonging to the woman he kissed in the Crawley atrium while his actual finacee' was gasping for breath upstairs. Sorry Julian. I was never ever on Mary's side with that. I acknowledge Matthew is a martyr, but I also note his inheritence was ludicrous - did Lavinia's dad not know about Mary?

 

I don't think Laura Carmichael is as conventionally attractive in the face as Michelle Dockery and Jessica Brown Findley, mostly because the latter two have symetrical features (however pinched and harsh Mary is looking), and Carmichael, while possessing, huge blue eyes and beautiful skin, has a very strong nose and a rather weak chin line/overbite. BUT. Her actual head/face is proportionate (the ratio of forehead to mid-face to chin/jawline). She has beautiful gorgeous large blue eyes, beautiful skin, and a kick ass body. Her face isn't going to break mirrors - far from it - it's simply not as symetrical as her sisters, but it's hardly condemning her to the scraps of the aristocracy, except that we have Julian Fellowes writing this.

[tapplum]

I have to admit I was surprised, as well as interested, to see so many negative opinions wrt Mary, as I’ve never had any problem accepting, and enjoying, her as the star of the show.

 

Perhaps because who I consider morally upstanding/good people has very little bearing on whom I consider entertaining to watch. Of course irl Mary might well be difficult to hang out with, and of course irl Edith would be in a terribly tough situation that merits a great deal of sympathy. As fictional characters, Mary is fun to watch while Edith bores me, which means I’m invested in Mary but have very little consideration for Edith.

 

To address some of the points in the thread, in show time Mary (of course) mourned Matthew very deeply for months, but as a viewer I only had to watch one episode of it, so it didn’t become tedious. In contrast Edith has been down in the dumps about the Gregson situation for episode after episode after episode, doing very little else, and while that’s realistic it’s also incredibly boring to watch. She’s not handling the situation in an interesting way, it’s not being used to evolve her as a character. Mary in mourning was a good deal more dramatic, which makes better television. It’s like someone said, on paper Edith should be a far more interesting character, but it only takes a second onscreen to understand why Mary’s the one who holds everyone’s attention. Her being a “stick of dynamite” and Edith being mousey with few advantages has everything to do with how they present/perceive themselves. Mary commands attention as her natural due, which I find attractive and watchable, while Edith really doesn’t seem to like herself much of the time and often gives me second hand embarrassment. Whether that’s because of natural predisposition or how they were raised isn’t really the issue, because the end result is the same.

 

It’s pretty obvious that Cora and Robert are hardly ideal parents to Edith, as they continually dismiss and often belittle her. It’s clear that they respect, if not necessarily love, Mary a good deal more. However, this doesn’t mean Mary’s necessarily been able to enjoy great parental relationships either. On the contrary, I’d argue they’ve been pretty dreadful to her as well. Robert betrays her completely wrt the entail, and Cora slutshames her quite viciously about Pamuk. When it mattered, when she actually needed them, they were not on her side. Robert chose the idea of the estate over his own daughter; whether one sympathises with his reasoning or not, he certainly made it clear that she can’t trust him, that she’s just not important enough. I would have found it perfectly credible and understandable that she never forgive either of them. And I do think it impacts her, that it might be part of why she’s so reserved and wary about opening up. 

 

Re the Mary/Edith “rivalry” (using the term loosely, because as someone else said, Mary won that competition at birth), I have to disagree with the idea that it’s all about nasty Mary abusing poor Edith. They’re both cutting to each other, Mary’s just better at it. Edith is generally less successful about things, so Mary has more ammunition. It seems to me that it’s not that Edith is above it/wouldn’t sink to that level/has no interest in being savage to Mary (a la Sybil), it’s just that she’s less good at it. It’s about lack of skill, not lack of will to be as cruel to Mary as Mary can be to her. She’s clearly resentful and often jealous, and has used the opportunities she’s found to strike back.

 

As for the Two Great Wrongs, sending the Pamuk letter v sending Strallan packing, I do consider that two completely different things. Translated to today’s ideas, it’s the difference between rendering someone permanently unemployable v. screwing up one hiring opportunity. Even if someone has a hard time getting employed, and might justifiably be devastated about that particular opportunity, there’s still no comparison to actually ruining someone’s life, all their future opportunities. Now, of course Mary had in fact done the deed. But even disregarding the obvious consent issues, Edith didn’t write the letter because of (extremely hypocritical) moral convictions. She did it to get back at Mary. Of course it was careless of Mary to give her the opportunity, but there can be no question that it was an extremely malicious thing to do. I should note that I have no problem with that in itself, but only as it relates to the idea of Edith as a persecuted victim. Rather, if it had been the start of Edith actually striking back, becoming a real power player and turning their squabble into an actual rivalry, that would have been very interesting and I’d probably have started to enjoy Edith. This is of course personal taste, but I like to watch competent characters, if they’re vicious that’s no problem but they should be good at it. I loved Mary souring things with Strallan, that she got to be vicious and victorious and provide a clear message that heroines all too seldom get to send: I’m not going to forbear and forgive, if you hit me I will always, always hit back harder. It might not be an ideal quality in an irl friend, but as far as fictional characters go that’s exactly what I happen to like. It was petty and spiteful, yes, but I don’t need Mary to be the better person, or even a particularly good one. That’s not what makes her entertaining.

 

As for the Swire money, it seems I was one of very, very few people who was on Mary’s side. I thought Matthew was behaving absurdly: Lavinia was dead so her feelings were not a concern, he’d obviously never much cared for her (or that was my reading; I realise, of course, that other viewers interpreted him as genuinely having feelings for her), meanwhile Mary was very much alive and as such should be what mattered. It’s not news that Downton is important to her. And when a loved one risks losing something very important to them, and you can make sure they don’t, then that’s what you do. Of course she’d be upset that he didn’t. Of course she’d question marrying someone who wouldn’t.

 

Similarly, I couldn’t fault her for reconsidering marrying Matthew when Cora became pregnant. Of course as a viewer I could tell it was stupid, but that’s because as a viewer I knew Matthew would remain the heir. Loving someone enough to marry them and loving someone enough to marry them and live a completely different life from the one you’ve always wanted and been raised to expect are two different things. That you’re not prepared to give up everything else you want for it doesn’t mean your love isn’t real, or doesn’t matter. It’s not like Mary could have her own title/career apart from her husband’s.There’s nothing wrong with Mary wanting Matthew plus: with wanting a Matthew who came with a title and a fortune. On the contrary, one of the things I love about Mary is that she wants, expects, demands everything. She isn’t prepared to settle, she wants love and money/status.

 

I suppose really that’s at the heart of it, I really, really like that Mary values herself so highly, that she demands great things from life. I like that she’s cutting, that she wins, that she believes she deserves that. I like that the show overall doesn’t punish her for being ambitious and arrogant, as all too often happens to the “bitchy” female characters. Someone made a comparison to Gossip Girl, which I agree is oddly fitting, since Mary’s kind of a lot like Blair, very concerned with her place is society and always striving to get what she wants. I suppose that’s maybe part of why I originally really enjoyed her with Richard, who’s rather a Chuck Bass character, and with whom she could have had such interesting and entertaining power struggles, only then of course (much like the original Chuck) he became actually abusive. But really the difference between the shows is that so, so much of Gossip Girl was about taking things away from Blair, punishing her for wanting too much. One of the things I love most about Downton is that it’s taking the opposite stance wrt Mary, even though I do agree that as of late she’s badly in need of a storyline with real stakes.

[ZoloftBlob]

Matthew inherits from his dead (non-Mary) financee's father

 

Well, if we're going to bitch about the writing....

 

I always found this particular plot utterly nonsensical. Really, Papa Swire had no one else in his life that he decides to leave his fortune to the guy who almost married his dead daughter? And who he kinda maybe sorta knew was maybe having problems with Lavinia? And not only was he leaving it all to Matthew but Matthew was the *third* guy in line and the first two are both dead? Really?

 

That Matthew didn't want to profit from Lavinia's death never bothered me - it made sense actually that he would feel bad and not want the money, and "saving the family" is all well and good, but the fate of the Crawleys if Matthew hadn't inherited was hardly the complete destruction of their way of life - it was moving to a more modest *mansion*. I mean, it wasn't like if he didn't take the money, the whole family was going to be sold into debt slavery in the coal mines.

 

That said - I completely agree that Edith and Mary, Mary and Edith, is about both of them attempting to smack the other, not just Mary twirling her evil mustache at Edith. Put another way - can you imagine what Mary's reaction would have been if Matthew and Edith had sparked in their scene in the church in season one? Ignore that it didn't happen as Matthew was still too "eewww girls" - where does the plot go if suddenly Edith and Matthew like each other? From a strictly factual standpoint - its a great match. The money, house, and titles stay with one of Robert's daughters. And Mary would have reacted as badly as well... I don't know. Because it would have been that bad.... And *Edith* would have delighted in rubbing it in her face to the end of time.

 

Mind you - I think the underlying competitive anger is part of why Matthew and Edith never happened - she was too desperate to spite Mary, and he was still well.... completely disinterested in the attention of women. But that competitive anger was there. Edith and Mary are very much two peas in a pod when it comes to how they like to smack each other. Mary is just better at it.

[ZulaMay]

I was offended by the Swire money plot.  Offended that poor Lavinia's money went to save the estate of the two people who betrayed her on her deathbed, and we were manipulated by absurd plot twists into the notion that it was "for the best," it was what Lavinia would have wanted as well her father.  Especially since as I have said, there was NO evidence her father knew about the little makeout sesh in the hallway that his daughter witnessed.

 

It made me sick to my stomach.  Lavinia was abused enough as a character as it was without giving her money to Mary.  Who had no remorse over what happened and no respect for Matthew's scruples.  I am not saying Matthew shouldn't have taken the money, just that I hated how Mary behaved about it (that was the ugliest side of her emerging) and how the whole thing was written.  Ugh.  

 

As for Mary and Edith, I agree Mary is a lot better at cutting people down than Edith is.  And yes, Edith went after Mary plenty in S1. BUT she has improved steadily since then and has not instigated sniping nearly as much as Mary has.  Is it because she knows she'll lose? In part, yes.  But it's partly because she is too mature for that now.  She's not fighting a battle she knows she is going to lose. So why in the Hell does Mary keep fighting a battle she won a long time ago?  It's petty and mean.

 

If Edith is resentful of her sister ( as she has EVERY right to be) then she has at least managed to keep it to herself for a long time.  For the most part.  And that in itself shows self-discipline that Mary lacks.  She has been sensitive to her sister in her time of pain, as she was in S2 when Matthew disappeared and when he died.  Certaily she didn't rub salt in the wound.  But when Gregson goes missing, when he is discovered to have been murdered, not only is Mary insensitive, she is downright cruel about it.  Her complete lack of empathy is appalling.

 

So yes, Edith has played her part in the feud and she is probably still envious but again, that is perfectly natural under the circumstances.  And she has not instigated things for a long time.  So she is withdrawing from a losing battle that she would prefer to win. Fair enough.  But that's a damned sight more mature and healthy than continuing to wage a battle that was won a long time ago.  It should be enough for Mary that she is the victor.  But it never is.  

 

All other things being equal, I'd say Edith is being the bigger and better person here. So I give the moral victory to her.  It can't be easy to absorb those blows all the time but she does it.  It's called having the strength to accept the things you can't change.  

 

She didn't absorb the blow when Mary put on her fashion show this past episode, but why should she?  That crossed a line.  She didn't insult Mary:  she called her out on her lack of empathy and her narcissism.  And instead of having the self-awareness or grace to admit fault, Mary launched a brutal attack in front of a room full of people.  A victor can afford to be gracious sometimes, but Mary isn't.

 

Edith has learned to be a much better loser.  Mary is still an abysmal winner.  That's what happens when you don't teach your child good sportsmanship.

Edited November 2, 2014 by ZulaMay

[tapplum]

Well, surely it’s obvious to everyone that the Swire inheritance plot was questionably handled in a lot of ways. As for Mary’s behaviour, it seems it’s essentially an issue of what one wants/likes in a character. Personally I’m tired of selfless and self-sacrificing heroines, which I guess is part of why Lavinia never appealed to me. In contrast, I often enjoy Mary’s selfishness and rather admire her practical, mercenary attitude to many things. And to be perfectly honest, if my boyfriend valued the hypothetical feelings of his dead rebound over mine, I’d definitely reconsider that relationship.

 

“As for Mary and Edith, I agree Mary is a lot better at cutting people down than Edith is, but that's not an admirable quality.” - I suppose really that’s the heart of the matter. This is personal preference of course, as quite a few people believe that that IS a desirable quality. It’s often one of the things I like best about fictional characters. Is it morally admirable? No of course not, but again not everyone is concerned with whether a character is morally upstanding. On the other hand, if that IS the basis on which one dis/likes characters, then I perfectly understand taking issue with Mary.

 

Of course Edith has every reason to resent Mary and Mary’s treatment of her. Of course it’s perfectly understandable for her to wish to strike back/defend herself. My impression however is that when she refrains, as she has often done of late, it’s not because of being more grown up/morally superior/more forbearing, but simply because she’s tired of losing. While that’s again perfectly understandable, I fail to see how it makes her a better person. It’s the difference between not stealing because it’s wrong (actually being moral) and tending to refrain because one has been forced to realise that one simply is not a very good thief and therefore will be caught and that’s very unpleasant (not actually that moral).

 

But really it comes back to personal taste. Most people who prefer Edith seem to do so because they consider her a better person than Mary, which personally I don’t see that she is, but obviously interpretations differ. On the other hand, my lack of interest in Edith has nothing to do with considering her on the same moral level as Mary, but is about how she lacks all the qualities, the confidence and competence, that make Mary compelling. To each their own.

 

That said, I too was unhappy with Mary’s verbal slapdown of Edith during the haircut admiring scene (which was pretty wtf to begin with, as scenes go). It’s not that she was cruel to Edith (though obviously she was), since her being cruel to Edith doesn’t detract from my enjoyment of her character, but rather that she wasn’t witty about it. It just came off completely as Mary punching below her weight, and rather clumsily to boot. She needs a better foil.

 

Also complete agreement about not liking how she treated Anna wrt the contraceptive, since Anna’s always been one of the select few Mary seems to genuinely consider “her people” and it made no sense for that to suddenly change. It’s been one of the things that made her more nuanced and interesting, that her maid is “her person” in a way her sister so clearly isn’t, and yet the mistress-servant dynamic has never stopped being extremely present in their relationship. It would be a shame to lose that.

[ZulaMay]

I don't think being wittier would have made that moment any more appealing.  It was cruel to do that and it wouldn't be any less cruel if she were wittier.  Sometimes it's funny, but when she goes too far not even an excess of wit can make it enjoyable.

 

As for being more "competent" than Edith?  How is that the case?  What does Mary do better than Edith does except hold people in her thrall?  Edith is the one who writes a column and helps run a newspaper, the one who is quick to learn new things and shows an interest in them.  The one who worked at the hospital and did a great job at it.

 

I do think Mary is smart and competent but I see no hard evidence that she is any more so than Edith.  There is plenty of evidence to point to Edith's competence.

 

And I don't like sappy self-sacrificing martyr characters either. I hated what they did to Lavinia.  I like sassy female characters and I don't mind some bitchiness.  In fact when I watched "Parades End" I preferred Sylvia to Valentine.  But Mary IMO has Sylvia's bad qualities but with less charm, depth and charisma.  And the biggest difference is that Mary is presented as the heroine.  Sylvia was presented in a much more complex way.  And she had a real antagonist, which Mary does not. Sylvia was presented as the anti-heroine she was meant to be.  Mary is presented as a "flawed heroine" but comes across more as a villain a lot of the time.

[shipperx]

Ive got to say that if not for the antagonism I'm bored by Mary's plot because other than being...Mary... I don't know what it is. She's always wanted the estate as her fiefdom but she rarely shows interest in it and rarer still has she been interested in actively managing it. Its only an occasional thing for her and treated as an entitlement. Most of her stuff like hunts, fashion shows, hair cuts, and verbal smackdowns are because she is bored and has nothing real to do. She has no passions, interests, obligations, or hobbies. Shes juggling suitors she doesn't want because she has nothing else to fill her time. (Poor George)

And I honestly don't get why ever bachelor in her age range who comes near her falls for her. I understand some men being attracted (she's a wealthy, titled, fashion-plate with a droll tongue) but her last season of three lookalike suitors bored me with her plot, and now a second season of her occupying herself with bland suitors she hardly wants just annoys. Sure, Mary is wealthy and attractive so men will be attracted. But not every man. And I would that the occasional man would become turned off by her ice queen of smackdowns persona. Why is her attraction portrayed as ubiquitous? For some reason we're to believe her the irresistible siren of her set and...I'm not sure that I totally buy it.

Edited November 3, 2014 by shipperx

[ZulaMay]

I think Mabel is/was a better catch.  She's confident and sassy too but not in such a cutting, often mean way.  She seems warmer and more vibrant. She's younger, very pretty if not quite in such a model-esque way, has loads of money.  I don't get why Tony dumped her for Mary.  I don't get why she even likes him since he seems too dull for her.  But I give her props for just admitting what she wants, and not trying to hang onto him just for the sake of besting Mary.  I like what she said about happiness being "a choice" in a way.

 

Too bad she's gone.  

Edited November 4, 2014 by photo fox
edit to add spoiler tags

[DianeDobbler]

And I honestly don't get why ever bachelor in her age range who comes near her falls for her. I understand some men being attracted (she's a wealthy, titled, fashion-plate with a droll tongue) but her last season of three lookalike suitors bored me with her plot, and now a second season of her occupying herself with bland suitors she hardly wants just annoys. Sure, Mary is wealthy and attractive so men will be attracted. But not every man. And I would that the occasional man would become turned off by her ice queen of smackdowns persona. Why is her attraction portrayed as ubiquitous? For some reason we're to believe her the irresistible siren of her set and...I'm not sure that I totally buy it.

 

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

This past episode, Tony tells Mary/Blake their kissing tableau wasn't necessary, all she had to do was tell him to go and he'd be off. He wasn't the slightest bit bitter or intense about it, he appeared to think they were silly, but he was good-natured and friendly, and then off he happily went with Mabel. Then Charles blithely tells her he's off to Poland, could be months, could be a year, and he expects she'll be married when he gets back, toodle oo. What happened to the Mary magic? It wore off completely in Ep. 7, and Fellowes seemed to be making quite a point of it. We know how heavy handed he is - so Mary is reproofed TWICE by Violet, once for Edith's sake, the other for Violet's own sake, and then she's portrayed as a menace and a threat at the train station. They almost over-wrote how blithe she was at Edith's return - it looked especially callous considering what was actually going on. They also dressed Edith up to look fantastic. It was the first episode where the audience might be forgiven if they felt Edith and Mary were written on equal terms and that Edith might be as important or even more important a character than Mary.

Edited November 4, 2014 by photo fox
edited to add spoiler tags

[tapplum]

If one's objection to the scene was the cruelty, then obviously it's immaterial how the cruelty was expressed. If on the other hand one's objection was the subpar repartee, then of course it being wittier would have made all the difference. Different strokes, and all that.

 

Competence perhaps isn't the perfect word. I'm looking to express a feeling of the character being competent at handling their life, at dominating their own life. Of being generally capable of achieving things they desire, arranging situations to their satisfaction (nota bene, not without struggle or cost). I see that in Mary, who has largely been able to get what she wants and seems overall to have a functional idea of how to do so; and I saw it in Sybil, although what she wanted happened to be very different things. I don't see it in Edith, though she does have the column and now the paper, which is great and I hope will be explored. One might say that their "career" is being a society lady, which from all appearances Mary enjoys and does well, while Edith doesn't, so I reckon it would make Edith both happier and more watchable to give that up and focus on a different career/goal/identity, such as newspaper owner.

 

Both of them have stagnated lately, Edith in her misery and being unable to get the situation under control, Mary with nothing meaningful to do. Keeping them at Downton is holding them back. I'd love to see them both in London, preferably staying together in Rosamund's house - starting out with a more even-footed rivalry and gradually learning to work together when away from the rest of the family. Edith could run the newspaper and actually be successful at it while also having interesting business struggles, maybe meet up with Richard, who always made a great antagonist. Mary could fall in love with Mabel, whom she certainly had a lot more spark with than she did with any of her suitors, and who would certainly bring stakes to Mary's storyline.

[DianeDobbler]

I don't see Mary as functional - I see her as enabled. I can't think of anything she's DONE that created the life she has, nor choices she's made. Nothing in her character. She has all of what she has due to external deux ex machine or the inexplicable devotion of others (meaning, she has never particularly earned that devotion). The principle things Mary has are the heir to Downton and a giant fortune, neither of which she got through her own agency. It was Matthew magically remaining in love with her for close to a decade and it's Matthew inheriting the massive fortune belonging to the woman he betrayed with Mary. She got what she wants despite herself, not because of her character.

 

Edith is functional, her functionality is simply ignored, and that's probably why her relationship with her family remains dysfunctional and sad. She gets what she wants and then external agencies take it away from her (Strallen, Gregson, etc.). She still has her writing job, by our brief glimpse of her at the office that appears to be running smoothly enough.

 

Sybil accomplished things and was respected and acknowledged for it.

[ZulaMay]

I agree.  Mary's getting the life she wants has had little to do with competence.  For the most part she has just been lucky and supported by the people around her.  Lavinia dies, Richard doesn't publish, her parents forgive the Pamuk thing and so does Matthew, Isobel talks Matthew into letting of his guilt and getting back with Mary, Swire leaves him a fortune, Tom talks him off the wall the night before the almost-canceled wedding, Violet meddles with Matthew by telling him Mary is still in love with him, Lavinia is fast-tracked for sainthood and ships them from beyond the grave.

 

And so forth.  Then she was lucky enough to survive childbirth and not develop eclampsia, which often runs in families.  Her husband leaves her his fortune that once belonged to the woman they betrayed.  Everyone helps her through her grief and encourages her to help run the estate, which she doesn't even seem to do anymore much.

 

What did she ever do to earn her life?  I can't think of anything. 

[DianeDobbler]

Yep - I just can't think of a situation where Mary went about getting what she wanted, and that accounts for how she ended up in a position she sought, or living the way she wished to live. I don't even mean "earn" as in merit. The woman did not take action. Other people take action FOR her.

 

Edith OTOH takes action repeatedly and others throw themselves between her and what she wants to ensure she doesn't get it.

 

One of the last non-haircut times Mary took action, she told Anna she needed to know if Gillingham and she were suited in the bedroom, particularly as in future married aristocratic couples would live in much closer quarters than in the past (where a woman who imagines herself spending her life married to a man with a "proper estate" got the "close quarters" notion I do not know, but will let that slide). So she compels her absolutely uncomfortable maid to go off and purchase a "device", as of course milady herself couldn't be seen to be doing so. She then has a week in the sack with Tony Gillingham, and it's thanks to that prudent forethought that Mary was able to walk down the aisle with Tony without a qualm.

 

Wait, I mean, it was thanks to Mary taking that action that she knew she and Tony weren't suited, and she was able to give him the boot before committing herself in marriage.

 

Wait, no she didn't. He announced he was rejecting her dumping, and she stood there catching flies and then just walked on with him.

 

But lo! Enter Charles Blake, who announces he's appointed himself her Sassy Gay Best Friend. He has a plot to rid her of Tony! Leave it all to him! I don't recall Mary having the idea to have Charles solve her Tony Gillingham problem (a problem which appeared to be largely Mary's unwillingness to tell Tony to stuff it). Charles volunteered! He collects Mabel and "works" on her, talking her round. He buttonholes Gillingham, and works on HIM, talking HIM round. Mary has nothing to do but get her hair cut, as others are taking care of her important matters for her, including getting the relevant parties asked to stay at Downton. Charles did such a good job that by the time he commands Mary "Kiss me!", Gillingham appears quite reconciled with Mabel, and reports that the kissing stunt was unnecessary, as all Mary had to do was speak up, which she'd appeared unwilling to do.

 

Now Edith. Edith decided to keep her child - no external force entered to compel her to keep her child. Without getting into the merits of each side of the Drew situation, and the different "solutions" that didn't stick, Edith made all of the decisions there. She was living in London with her child and going to the office when she was found, and then everybody sat down together and worked out a solution with Edith's participation (the "Downton Nursery" solution was decided upon when Edith chose to continue in publishing). That's the woman who takes charge of her life. It's external stuff that doesn't work for her - she lacks the birds, mice and fairy godmother that are always making things work out for Mary. Mary has the life she has because there's always a Charles Blake who decides he's got nothing he'd rather do with his free time than take Mary's problem off her hands, and she doesn't even have to ask. Or a dead fiancée's dad who decides to leave a massive fortune to the guy who was making out with Lady Mary in the foyer while his beloved daughter was dying upstairs.

 

Edith made the decision to pursue a relationship with Stallen - that was what I call self-determination. But instead of good angels, in her life she has bad angels that worked to thwart her decision. I can't think of terrible decisions she's made that came back to damage her life, or decisions she's failed to make (other than getting away from Downton permanently) that have created the life she has now.

 

I don't consider her sleeping with Gregson, nor having Marigold, as terrible decisions. That's just Edith's luck - getting caught - and I think in the end she's going to be glad she had Marigold. The fact that Edith has a child, and the fact that Edith owns a publishing company, are the direct result of actions and decisions Edith took on her own behalf. She and Gregson weren't just romantically involved - she had obviously demonstrated her capacity as a businesswoman or I doubt he'd have given her power of attorney before he left for Berlin.

 

I can think of a million decisions Mary made that sucked, but it didn't matter because external events and an army of people stepped in to undo the damage and make it right without her lifting a finger.

Edited November 4, 2014 by photo fox
edited to add spoiler tags

[shang yiet]

It'll be hilarious if we see Mary bored and frustrated with farming work, pigs and all, with no suitor in sight while Edith enjoys her exciting newspaper business, meeting eligible tycoons in the newspaper business and other famous people in London.

[ZulaMay]

 

Now Edith. 

Edith decided to keep her child - no external force entered to compel her to keep her child. Without getting into the merits of each side of the Drew situation, and the different "solutions" that didn't stick, Edith made all of the decisions there. She was living in London with her child and going to the office when she was found, and then everybody sat down together and worked out a solution with Edith's participation (the "Downton Nursery" solution was decided upon when Edith chose to continue in publishing). That's the woman who takes charge of her life. It's external stuff that doesn't work for her - she lacks the birds, mice and fairy godmother that are always making things work out for Mary. Mary has the life she has because there's always a Charles Blake who decides he's got nothing he'd rather do with his free time than take Mary's problem off her hands, and she doesn't even have to ask. Or a dead fiancée's dad who decides to leave a massive fortune to the guy who was making out with Lady Mary in the foyer while his beloved daughter was dying upstairs.

So perfect.  Mary is literally like the bitchy stepsister who gets treated like Cinderella by the writer.  I supposed JF thinks it's clever to inverse the formula, but IMO that trick has gotten stale and transparent.  And highly unsatisfying.  There's a reason Cinderella is a classic.

[Avaleigh]

while Edith enjoys her exciting newspaper business, meeting eligible tycoons in the newspaper business and other famous people in London.

 

 

Edith has been in this position before but back then she didn't seem to me like she truly took advantage of the chance to meet new people and create her own circle of friends. After Matthew died Edith already had her job and Mary was in mourning, not going out, not sure what she was going to do with herself and unhappy in general. Edith was wearing great clothes, she was going back and forth to London, we saw that she would attend parties, but for whatever reason she didn't make any significant new acquaintances and seems to have spent the majority of her time with married Michael Gregson. The reason it's significant to me that he's married is because Edith has many times expressed the desire to get married so it didn't make sense to me why she was so focused on Michael rather than with taking advantage of the opportunity she had to meet new people. She didn't even know precisely what the real story was with his wife but she seems to have put all of her hopes on this one man rather than exploring her options a bit.

 

It's choices like this that make me feel that Edith is indeed in control of her own destiny and the idea of bad things happening to her only because of "external forces" isn't what I've seen happening when it comes to situations that have caused unhappiness for Edith over the years. She's had some terrible luck as well, no question,

as far as thing like Gregson's death and the jilting

but there are many other situations where I think Edith ought to have taken some responsibility in terms of the unhappiness that's she's experienced. I disagree that it's everyone else's fault that things haven't always worked out for her. 

 

She put out the Drewes and had them jump through emotional hoops for her. If she'd at least attempted to be truthful with her mother who as we've seen was immediately willing to help her in whatever way Edith wanted, she might never have needed to send Marigold to the Drewes at all and a lot of pain might have been avoided.

 

I honestly winced when Edith called out to Mr Drewe to help her mother with her bags only to order him to bring Marigold back to the house only to take her away again by making it seem like the Drewes were trying to take care of more kids than they can afford. It just left me shaking my head.

 

We've seen members of the Crawley family take advantage of working class people before and Edith is no different.

The incident with the Drewes does ultimately show a selfish side of Edith's character. She definitely seems more concerned about her own feelings at the end of the day and doesn't always seem to appreciate how her actions are capable of hurting other people.

 

I've gone on record as saying that I hated the way Mary used Anna to get the diaphragm. I thought it was rude of her to push and even worse that it didn't for a moment seem to cause her any concern of what would happen if Bates found the item she asked Anna to hide. She was entirely concerned for herself and brushed off any inconvenience that Anna had. With Edith, it's like she actually sees herself as a victim of Mrs Drewe's and didn't pause for a moment as to how heart wrenching it might be for the family to deal with this back and forth stuff just to protect and accommodate a woman who basically helped turn their lives upside down emotionally. I thought Edith's behavior here was wrong and she's barely going to be held accountable for it. Apart from her mother telling her that Mrs Drewe feels as though she was shamefully used, I got the impression that Edith likely didn't give the feelings of the family a second thought.

 

I'll save the post for another day but I do also disagree with the idea that Edith is "functional" and that Mary is basically a person who doesn't do anything. I thought a large part of season 4 was about Mary finding her role. I know some people like to focus on the part of Mary's suitors but I got the impression that Mary finding a role for herself at Downton was Mary's main storyline in season 4 with the suitor stuff being done to test out what sort of man after Matthew might have chemistry with Mary. We see that Edith took more care with her clothes and appearance during season 4 because she was in a relationship. Mary is still helping to run the estate, statements by Robert and Tom both make that clear, but now that she's wants to date she thinks it might be a good idea to freshen up her appearance. Since there is a lot of criticism for thirty something Mary receiving the attention of two male suitors (three if we count Evelyn who hasn't been around and was only brought on again to introduce Charles Blake) it seems like it makes sense to show Mary worrying about her looks and wanting to brighten them up. I see this as Mary being proactive in terms of trying to find her way to another relationship that will make her as happy. I thought it made sense for Mary to take Tony up on his offer rather than jumping into something if she didn't know for sure.

 

I wish that Edith had held back a bit with Gregson and had at least looked around a bit before fully committing herself to someone she knew wouldn't be fully available to her for the foreseeable future. I think it would have been more sensible of Edith to wait for Gregson to make some progress on the divorce front while living her life in the mean time and not turning down any other opportunities that might have come her way. JMO.

Edited November 3, 2014 by Avaleigh

[photo fox]

Guys, I just had to hide several excellent posts because they contain plot points from the current UK season. Per Dave's post in the pinned mod topic, plot points are considered spoilers until the show airs in the US, and need to be spoiler tagged. The only exceptions are the episode topics and the UK-specific speculation topics.

I'm going to edit these to add the spoiler tags, and then they'll be unhidden. Going forward, however, posts in here with untagged spoilers will simply be deleted.

[tapplum]

Both Mary and Edith are obviously functional people, who have over the course of the series made different choices and attempts to get what they want. What I originally wrote was that “I see that [ability to dominate one’s own life] in Mary, who has largely been able to get what she wants and seems overall to have a functional idea of how to do so; and I saw it in Sybil, although what she wanted happened to be very different things. I don't see it in Edith”. In other words, Mary has, overall, successfully got to where she wanted to be. Edith has not. Which indicates to me that Mary’s idea of how to get what she wants is functional, while Edith’s seems less so.

 

I agree that Mary hasn’t “done” much lately, or really got anywhere. However it seems clear to me that that’s because she doesn’t know what she wants, as opposed to being unable to get it. Edith, on the contrary, seems to have a considerably clearer idea of what she wants, and has made a some attempts to get it, which have essentially all failed and often ended up putting her and others in rather hideous situations. She’s been in difficult situations, and been unable to take control over them, or manage them to her satisfaction. Mary too have been in difficult situations, but hasn’t been steamrolled by them in the same way, instead managing to come out on top. Since I don’t share the impression that everything and everyone is 100% against Edith and 100% for Mary, to me it does say something about Mary being a more competent character.

 

Yes, people do things for Mary that they might not do for Edith (though I strongly disagree that Edith is without support), but I’d consider the ability to elicit that response, to get people on her side, an ability of Mary’s. Given the times they live in (especially in the first seasons) and their place in society, essentially their career/purpose is to get other people (especially but not limited to eligible men) to do what they want and give them what they want (especially but not limited to proposals). Mary’s good at that, Edith’s not. I mean, I’d say Mary’s greatest failure throughout the entire show was failing to get Robert where she wanted him wrt the entail. His stance was imo a terrible betrayal of his own daughter and morally ofc that’s on him, because he should be on Mary’s side without her needing to get him there - but Mary did fail to get what she wanted from him, so yeah, it was also a failure on her part. Meanwhile Edith can barely get her parents to notice her - and again morally that’s on them and a terrible parental failure and absolutely not Edith’s fault, but it also highlights Edith being unable to achieve her simple, longstanding goal, as well as being unable to cut ties and find fulfillment elsewhere.

[shipperx]

I'm not sure how much of Mary's success is Mary being proactive and how much is protagonist privilege. (See: Lavinia conveniently dropping dead on her wedding day & posthumously granting her blessing --up to laughable ouiji board extents that I had forgotten about until seeing the rerun last weekend-- to pave Mary's way back to Matthew without any pesky scandal attached or lingering complications but with a bonus fortune included! Vs Gregson being

murdered while trying to get a divorce

). I'm not sure how much credit I can bestow based upon benevolent plot fairies.

All that said, it's purely subjective. It's going to depend on how we view the show and our personal hot buttons/preferences. That and we are all subject to confirmation bias as we watch.

Nonetheless it's been an interesting debate to read as it shows how we do indeed find interest and rooting characteristics all on our own. What one person finds entertaining another can find tedious and vice versa.

I admit relative 'success' wasn't something I necessarily thought of. Are we more inclined to root for or to appreciate a character based on their level of success? When and or does 'merit' factor into their success and how is this anything but subjectively judged? Interesting topic that I could see meriting a number of different responses.

Edited November 4, 2014 by shipperx

[kpw801]

Guys, I just had to hide several excellent posts because they contain plot points from the current UK season. Per Dave's post in the pinned mod topic, plot points are considered spoilers until the show airs in the US, and need to be spoiler tagged. The only exceptions are the episode topics and the UK-specific speculation topics.

I'm going to edit these to add the spoiler tags, and then they'll be unhidden. Going forward, however, posts in here with untagged spoilers will simply be deleted.

How do you put the spoiler tag on a post?

[Avaleigh]

And to be perfectly honest, if my boyfriend valued the hypothetical feelings of his dead rebound over mine, I’d definitely reconsider that relationship.

 

 

Haha, IKR? Thank you for this. The writing for that storyline sucks but it is what it is. The fact of the matter is that Lavinia was ridiculously pro Matthew/Mary and was rooting for their happiness from beyond the grave even. We can't change the writing so I just accepted it for the silliness that it was since it's part of the story at the end of the day. I can't just pretend that it didn't happen or that her character wasn't written as having those feelings. 

 

Everything on the show told me that the Swires respected and loved Matthew enough to want him to be happy so I can see why Mary wouldn't feel guilt over the idea of Matthew honoring their wishes by allowing himself to be happy. (Obviously, yes, it's completely ridiculous that Reggie would leave his money to Matthew not to mention the detail about the two other guys who were in line before him dying, but again, the writing is what it is.) Matthew also told Mary that he wanted to be able to help Robert financially he just didn't think that he could do so honorably. Once Mary saw that he could I think she saw it as a way of making two situations better. Matthew was feeling guilty and was under the impression that Reggie never knew about any of the difficulties of his relationship with Lavinia. It turns out that Matthew was wrong as the letter completely changed his attitude once he accepted that it was genuine. To me that suggests that Matthew was satisfied in Lavinia having given her father an idea of what happened. Matthew ended up feeling content as far as feeling that Reggie had been acquainted with the facts before his death and still had respect and affection for Matthew, so I think Matthew ended up appreciating Mary forcing him to read Reggie's final words to him. I actually thought it was a bit cowardly of Matthew anyway to not at least respect the man enough to read his last words to him without being forced to but that's a separate issue.

 

I’d consider the ability to elicit that response, to get people on her side, an ability of Mary’s.

 

 

I agree with this too. Mary attracted the interest of guys like Matthew, Pamuk, and Evelyn on her own merit. Likewise, Mary's personality seems to have gained her affection, respect, and devotion from two of the servants in the household. Mary has special relationships with both Anna and Carson but Edith has never been close with any one member of staff in particular. I also disagree that Mary hasn't done anything to earn the relationships that she has with certain people. We've seen her be very supportive of Anna in the past. When Bates was on trial for murder and he was sentenced to death it was Mary who was holding her and trying to comfort her. Isobel and Mrs Hughes were there and very supportive as well but I definitely remember Mary putting her arms around Anna when the guilty verdict was read. Mary has helped Anna in her relationship with Bates, she's shown that she's wiling to lie for them, she assisted in getting Robert to be understanding about Bates not traveling to America with him, etc. With Carson we saw how she was when he was sick--have we ever seen her take care of either of her parents when they were sick? We know she and Cora both tried to help out when Violet was sick but Isobel didn't really want them to but apart from that I can't think of anything. With Carson we also saw Mary get protective over him after Edith

basically insulted him in front of everyone while he's helping to serve them dinner. It isn't the first time that Edith has thoughtlessly made it seem like the work of a servant is completely trivial while she's being served by one. She did something very similar during season 2 with William and I was strongly reminded of that scene in S5E6 when Edith made the snarky comment about Carson.

.

 

As far as Mary vs. Edith when it comes to suitors and abilities--I thought the season 1 bit where Edith challenges her over Anthony Strallan was a pretty good example of Mary showing herself as being more skilled in a social setting like that. I thought Edith came across as awkward and trying too hard so even though she'd been having this nice conversation with Strallan, it was Mary who was able to capture his interest in that moment so I thought that scene (and others) have given us an idea of Mary's success in social areas.

 

kpw801  [  spoiler  ] insert spoiler [ / spoiler  ] only without the spaces

Edited November 4, 2014 by Avaleigh

[photo fox]

How do you put the spoiler tag on a post?

 

 

kpw801  [  spoiler  ] insert spoiler [ / spoiler  ] only without the spaces

 

Yep, that's the ticket!  Or, you can highlight the text in question and click the http://i.imgur.com/7yqibqp.jpg icon above the reply box.

 

PM me if you have any issues, and I'd be happy to help.  :)

[tapplum]

Complete agreement. Mary's relationships with Anna and Carson were always some of my favourites. Overall Mary seems to have internalised a sort of noblesse oblige notion wrt the servants, which Edith seems not to have, but it clearly goes beyond that with Anna and Carson. In the wedding episode, with Carson standing next to Robert, it was so obvious that he was *family*, and really he has been a father to her in ways that Robert hasn't.

 

And yes, that scene with Strallen really, to me, encapsulates the entire Mary/Edith relationship. Edith trying embarrassingly hard, and ultimately failing, to get something it would never occur to Mary to want, because it's so beneath her - and Mary being able to take it away from her at any time, without effort.

 

But yes, there's absolutely a lot of personal preference and confirmation bias. At the end of the day, Bitch Queen/Snarky Asshole just happens to be completely my type, as far as fictional characters are concerned, so it's pretty much a given that Mary would appeal to me.

 

I think it's less a question of relative success, more that relative success is an indication of whether the character is the type to own and be able to handle their circumstances, or rather the type that circumstances happen to with the character trying feebly to catch up. From my point of view, Mary's and Edith's circumstances are objectively speaking really similar - but in practice they're miles apart, because of their personalities, of how they approach those circumstances. 

 

To be a little meta, Mary walks onto the set of her life and completely believes she's the main character - and she manages to make everyone else believe it, too. Edith doesn't at all seem to share that conviction, much less be able to impose it on anyone else.

Edited November 5, 2014 by tapplum

[kpw801]

Yep, that's the ticket!  Or, you can highlight the text in question and click the http://i.imgur.com/7yqibqp.jpg icon above the reply box.

 

PM me if you have any issues, and I'd be happy to help.  :)

Okay let me see if I have it.  Edith took her baby from Mrs. Drew and took it back to Downton as her "adopted child"

 

Got it!!

Edited November 5, 2014 by kpw801

[DianeDobbler]

As I recall, after Lavinia died and while Matthew was still nailed to the cross, he referenced at least once that he'd been to see Reggie Squire in, I think, the hospital. There were indications that Matthew was maintaining his relationship to her father after her death, and, as well, I THINK, that when he was dying, Matthew acted as a son. At least that's how I took the script's shorthand.

 

So if we just use Downton logic that simply mentioning something in passing creates a rationale or motivation, then perhaps, lacking other heirs, Matthew's continued devotion and attention to Mr. Squire during his illness or whatever, even after Lavinia's death, created a Farmer Mason-esque feeling in Mr. Squire towards Matthew, as if Matthew were his son.

 

I can get on board with that, applying Downton logic. Mary's entitlement I cannot. Matthew inherited a pile of money from the father of the woman Matthew cheated on with Mary. Mary knows this and should have kept her big mouth shut. Matthew actually would have been the better man to use the money elsewhere. How many fortunes does it take to save Lord Grantham from his bad decisions? Let the place go already.

[ZoloftBlob]

Edith is helpful and compassionate with other people so why assume she isn't with the servants?

 

Because she doesn't bother to know their names. There was that lovely scene where Edith is milking Daisy for info on what happened to Pamuk in Season one and she barely remembers Daisy's name.

 

Don't get me wrong, Edith is much put upon but she ain't no Sybil either.

 

 

[shipperx]

I'm kind of remembering something I read in the Death Comes to Pemberly thread (or an article on it) complaining about Elizabeth Bennett Darcy inspecting the balls refreshments menu in the kitchen with the complaint that the lady of the Pemberly would never have been there and would only have consulted with the housekeeper upstairs.

There is some validity to that in that Daisy, as a new scullery maid (in season 1 she had just been hired, and scullery maid is just about the lowest on the indoor servant pecking order there was. Reading about that job in history books -- it sucked. Poor Daisy) and later cook's assistant (a definite step up) is among the most 'downstairs' of the staff. She's not a lady's maid or upstairs maid or even a parlor maid. She rarely sets foot upstairs. (That said Sybil went to the kitchens and Rose did as well at least twice, so the bowels of the house are not a complete unknown, thus: point taken).

I was inclined to say that Anna is specifically Mary's ladies maid. It's not like Mary has a relationship with Baxter or O'Brien. Anna by right of her job is intimately acquainted with Mary's life. Naturally Mary has some sort of relationship with her. Mary may not be a warm personality but she's not a robot, either.

Does Edith have a lady's maid? We've never really seen one with either Sybil, Rose, or Edith. A personal servant may be a privilege of rank. Returning to Austen, it seemed the Bennett sisters had to share Hill, maid of all work, at Longbourne. It's possible some ambitious upstairs maid, hoping to earn a reference, may be doing ladies duties for Rose, Edith, and various guests on an as-need basis. We do not really know. The cast is sprawling as is.

Speaking of character action/inaction, I laughed last weekend at the rerun of the influenza where we see O'Brien, Sybil, Edith, and even Mary anxiously hovering at Cora's bedside and instances of each nursing/attending Cora. Robert, on the other hand is twice snogging the parlor maid. Oh, Robert visited Cora's bedside once. Briefly. But his main occupation during that time period was trying to bribe Branson to dump Sybil and hitting on the parlor maid. Nice.

Edited November 5, 2014 by shipperx

[Brn2bwild]

Because she doesn't bother to know their names. There was that lovely scene where Edith is milking Daisy for info on what happened to Pamuk in Season one and she barely remembers Daisy's name.

 

Don't get me wrong, Edith is much put upon but she ain't no Sybil either.

 

That was Season One, though.  She might know their names now.

[Avaleigh]

There was also the moment where Carson was having a heart attack in the dining room, right in front of everyone, everyone behaves accordingly with the exception of Edith who is loudly wondering about the state of her dress.

 

In season two there was a moment where she implies that she was basically feeling supportive of the women who gave William a feather of cowardice. William is standing there, serving her and waiting on her and the rest of her family and Edith basically says that he's hanging around doing "nothing". William looked totally hurt and Edith didn't seem to have any sort of care for his feelings.

 

Recently, we had Edith being

snarky about Carson as he's waiting on her.

 

It was she, not Mary, who went to check on Isobel in 4.01 when everyone else was only worrying about Mary.

 

 

Mary was the daughter to go with Cora to check on Violet and see if Isobel wanted help in taking care of her. Just because Edith wasn't around for that doesn't make me think that Edith wouldn't have been willing to nurse Violet. I feel the same wrt Isobel and Mary.

 

Mary by contrast is good to people who are there to serve her and be loyal to her, like Anna and Carson.

 

 

We've seen Mary be kind to people without expecting any sort of reward like when she made it a point to discreetly tell William about his mother. William wasn't somebody that she was shown to have a special relationship with.

[Llywela]

Does Edith have a lady's maid? We've never really seen one with either Sybil, Rose, or Edith. A personal servant may be a privilege of rank. Returning to Austen, it seemed the Bennett sisters had to share Hill, maid of all work, at Longbourne. It's possible some ambitious upstairs maid, hoping to earn a reference, may be doing ladies duties for Rose, Edith, and various guests on an as-need basis. We do not really know. The cast is sprawling as is.

There is a housemaid called Madge who acts as lady's maid to both Edith and Rose - she is referred to from time to time but has never appeared on-screen.

 

Anna was a housemaid who also took on lady's maid duties for the daughters of the house until Mary got married, so the upgrade to having a personal lady's maid came with marriage there (and was a promotion for Anna, too); unmarried daughters make do with a housemaid doing double-time.

Edited November 5, 2014 by Llywela

[ElizaD]

Re the Mary/Edith “rivalry” (using the term loosely, because as someone else said, Mary won that competition at birth), I have to disagree with the idea that it’s all about nasty Mary abusing poor Edith. They’re both cutting to each other, Mary’s just better at it. Edith is generally less successful about things, so Mary has more ammunition. It seems to me that it’s not that Edith is above it/wouldn’t sink to that level/has no interest in being savage to Mary (a la Sybil), it’s just that she’s less good at it. It’s about lack of skill, not lack of will to be as cruel to Mary as Mary can be to her. She’s clearly resentful and often jealous, and has used the opportunities she’s found to strike back.

 

As for the Two Great Wrongs, sending the Pamuk letter v sending Strallan packing, I do consider that two completely different things. Translated to today’s ideas, it’s the difference between rendering someone permanently unemployable v. screwing up one hiring opportunity.

 

This is why I have no patience with the "poor Edith" refrain and the idea that she's her mean sister's victim. Edith is just as capable as Mary of being mean and callous, and that's the generous interpretation of her character.

Why was she so frightened of Mary finding out about Marigold?

Because she expects Mary to treat her the way she'd treat Mary if the roles were reversed (an unfounded fear, IMO: Mary wouldn't air the family's dirty laundry in public for the sake of petty vengeance). Edith is the one who deliberately set out to ruin Mary's reputation when Mary didn't just take her mocking in silence but responded with a wittier insult. It's Edith's habit to act mean and then turn on her sad, shocked face when her behavior doesn't win her affection, petting and kind words: she can dish it out but she can't take it. And Edith is not behind Mary in the entitlement stakes either,

as her treatment of the Drewes has demonstrated. She can be kind to wounded officers, but servants like Daisy/William/Carson and tenants like the Drewes are only there to make her life more convenient and an irritation when their own feelings or well-being get in the way.

 

Has Edith ever apologized for something she's done, which would require admitting that she's not always the victim? I genuinely can't remember right now, apart from the vague

"Oh, I wrote a letter to Marigold's first adoptive mother, she's got a new child now (and that makes it alright)"

. Mary hasn't apologized for every act that viewers have had problems with, but she has blamed herself for some of the things that have happened to her. That's why I personally find her a better person than Edith: she can be a bitch, but she can also be kind and doesn't think all her problems are the result of the universe being out to get her. In a way, I'm reminded of Scarlett O'Hara and Melanie Hamilton. Scarlett was the spirited anti-heroine who'd do anything to keep Tara and liked having men in her thrall, rather like a more aggressive/active and less compassionate Mary; both have the dramatic virtue of sparkling onscreen. Edith, on the other hand, is the mousey one, but she lacks Melanie's hidden gumption and peerless generosity of spirit, which makes the Downton sisters far more unequel in redeeming qualities and entertainment value than the Gone With the Wind sisters-in-law.

[tapplum]

Sorry about not quite having figured out how to quote yet.

 

I actually like that Mrs Hughes (a character typically positioned as in the right) isn’t particularly fond of Mary, since it makes the positive relationships that Mary has with some of the other servants (Carson, Anna) much more interesting and meaningful. It’s clearly not a general feeling among the servants that Mary is awesome, nor that she’s dreadful: to most of them no doubt she’s just an employer. That makes her relationships with Anna and Carson stand out. And the fact that Mary hardly goes out of her way to help people in general makes her obvious caring for Anna and Carson stand out as well. I thought her lashing out at Carson was about her feeling betrayed by him (the father figure who, unlike Robert, had always been on her side). She still behaved badly towards him, but I could sympathise with why (and think Carson could, as well), and iirc she was very sorry about it afterwards (which she certainly isn’t always when she’s been nasty to other people).

 

I didn’t mean to suggest that Edith treated the servants badly, rather that she doesn’t seem to feel responsible for them in the way of Robert, Mary and Violet, who iirc got quite involved with William not because they knew him but because he was theirs. I doubt however that she has any real relationship to any of them, though of course it’s possible that she does. It’s just that we’ve seen literally every other family member have special servant relationships (Mary with Carson/Anna, Sybil with Gwen and later Thomas, Cora with O’Brien, Robert with Bates), so the fact that we haven’t seen that with Edith suggests to me that it’s not in evidence.

 

And well yes, I pretty much agree completely that men don’t just fall for Mary, though they certainly seem to do it easily enough - obviously she wants them to, obviously she plays games with it, and obviously she’s competitive. It’s just I don’t consider that a problem - on the contrary, I find it far more interesting and plausible than if they’d all really just fallen for her without her doing anything to encourage it. Different strokes, again - I’ve absolutely no issue with her playing cruel social games, as long as it’s done well. Wrt the Strallen incident, I thought it was completely obvious that she did it to spite Edith, to show Edith that she had better not provoke Mary or Mary would take anything she wanted away from her.

[ZoloftBlob]

This is why I have no patience with the "poor Edith" refrain and the idea that she's her mean sister's victim. Edith is just as capable as Mary of being mean and callous, and that's the generous interpretation of her character.

 

I agree. Edith definetely has that mean streak, and I think I've said in other posts, if she had the advantage, she'd love grinding her bootheels into Mary. I think overall, Edith tries to be a nicer person than Mary, but of the Crawley girls, the only one I'd want to get to know is Sybil

[Avaleigh]

Mary hasn't apologized for every act that viewers have had problems with, but she has blamed herself for some of the things that have happened to her.

 

 

I agree. I thought it couldn't have been more clear in the first season that Mary blamed herself for what happened with Matthew. Mary also took responsibility for Pamuk and didn't get into all of the details about how she asked him to leave multiple times and never invited him in the first place. She confronted Carlisle head on and again took responsibility for Pamuk without trying to put any kind of spin on it though she easily could have. 

 

We even saw Mary apologize to Bates when she and the Duke were snooping around in the servant rooms even though the Duke thought it was weird that she'd feel all apologetic towards a servant. 

 

It's Edith's habit to act mean and then turn on her sad, shocked face when her behavior doesn't win her affection, petting and kind words: she can dish it out but she can't take it.

 

 

Another good example of this is when Mary and Edith are at the flower show back in the first season. Edith is giving Mary a hard time about Matthew so Mary feels irritated and counters by criticizing Edith's hat and dress. What was interesting to me about this scene is that Edith seems a lot more interested in keeping up this sibling rivalry than Mary does. When Edith says that Mary thinks herself so superior [to Edith] Mary is clearly bored from the entire exchange and just rolls her eyes and removes herself from the conversation. She's tired of Edith and I got the impression that season and in others that Edith sometimes just doesn't know when to stop. 

[tapplum]

Yes. One really glaring difference is that Mary owns her bitchiness and her actions in a way that Edith doesn't. Say what you want about her, but Mary tends to be pretty open about who she is and doesn't pretend to be a particularly nice person.

Edited November 5, 2014 by tapplum

[NumberCruncher]

Yes. One really glaring difference is that Mary owns her bitchiness in a way that Edith doesn't. Say what you want about her, but Mary tends to be pretty open about who she is and doesn't pretend to be a particularly nice person.

I agree with this which is why I can't hate Mary as a character. She doesn't pretend that she's a nice person which, to me, tends to make her more sympathetic than a character who merely takes advantage of others or makes bad decisions and then plays the victim when bad things happen (and I'm not necessarily just referring to Edith here, BTW). The fact that Mary can at least acknowledge her bad choices and is willing to bear the consequences associated with them earns points in my book.

Edited November 5, 2014 by NumberCruncher

[kpw801]

I agree. Edith definetely has that mean streak, and I think I've said in other posts, if she had the advantage, she'd love grinding her bootheels into Mary. I think overall, Edith tries to be a nicer person than Mary, but of the Crawley girls, the only one I'd want to get to know is Sybil

I woudn't mind getting to know Edith.  At first she was just so jealous of Mary and competitive because as a middle child with a big sister like Mary she had nothing else in life to aspire to but to be as good as or better than her.  They were all raised to believe that their goal in life was to marry well, produce heirs and take their place in upper class society.  Unfortunately for Edith, Mary overshadowed her in every area until the war.  It was during the war that Edith was finally allowed to shine.  She had an opportunity to meet all different kinds of people and get some kind of self confidence.  When she was toasted by the visiting dignitary for her quiet and efficient care of the wounded soldiers all the Crawleys were astonished!  I was hoping that one of the officers might take a fancy to Edith and who knows what could have happened if that dastardly imposter hadn't come along.  I understand Edith.  I know people who have dated and even married people they really didn't like that much.  I think deep down she knew that wasn't Patrick but she saw the opportunity to be a countess and to have the man of her dreams all in one package even if he was burned beyond recognition with a Canadian accent.  So in her eyes she "lost" Patrick twice, then because of Mary and her shenanigans she lost the chance to marry a titled man who found her lovely and who she enjoyed.  After that, she pretty much was seduced by Michael Gregson after she found her voice in writing.  To make it worse, he had finally won Lord Grantham's approval after "saving his bacon".  What a triumph!  If he had been able to get that German divorce... but then he died and leaves her the mother of his illegitimate daughter.  

 

She gives the baby up for adoption and it is too much for her to bear.  I don't fault her for wanting her baby back.  There are some adoptions and some states that allow a birth mother to change her mind within a certain time frame.  She had bonded with that child and nursed her for a long time - I have nursed a child.  There is a deep bonding that takes place.  Part of you is nourishing that child.  I cannot tell you how it felt after nursing my first baby and then having him fall asleep sated and content on my shoulder.  I can't imagine having to give him away and never see him again.  Since it was informal she had the right to take the child back - sorry Mrs. Shroeder that's the way it crumbles cookiewise.  Believe me there are plenty of illegitimate babies among the upper classes to ensure she would be able to satisfy her mothering instinct.

 

So she brings the baby back and reaches an agreement with Mr. Drew who promises she will be able to be a part of the child's life.  In the debacle that ensued I blame him.  He gave Edith false hope that he could manage things with his wife and that Edith would be allowed to "take a great interest in the child".  Unfortunately for the child and for Edith, Mrs. Drew began to feel threatened and he did not enlighten her and Edith no doubt after seeing how her Daddy flipped his lid over Ethel's bastard  child and the drama behind that was scared to death to say anything about it.  I think Edith has grown a great deal but she has had a lot of emotional trauma - moreso than Mary because at least when Matthew died, Mary had the position of grieving widow and the support of the family and everyone in the family sporting black morning bands sharing her sorrow.  Edith as usual gets the emotional equivalent of Charlie Brown's Halloween rock whenever she needs emotional support.

 

I have a son who is a brooder.  He is not a very cheery person but there are times when I can just look at him and know something is wrong.  I can not only see it, I sense it.  There is no way in the world that Edith's family did not see her pain and have an excuse that she didn't tell them.  Now that you mention it, Robert took more interest in Mary's unhappiness with Carlisle than he does with any of Edith's unhappiness.  When Edith told Matthew "Don't bother Matthew, I am always a failure in this family." Robert never went to her to say, "Honey what makes you say that?"  "Why do you feel that way?"  I would have.  I'm just sayin.

[ZulaMay]

Why was she so frightened of Mary finding out about Marigold?

Because she expects Mary to treat her the way she'd treat Mary if the roles were reversed (an unfounded fear, IMO: Mary wouldn't air the family's dirty laundry in public for the sake of petty vengeance). Edith is the one who deliberately set out to ruin Mary's reputation when Mary didn't just take her mocking in silence but responded with a wittier insult.

 

It's Edith's habit to act mean and then turn on her sad, shocked face when her behavior doesn't win her affection, petting and kind words: she can dish it out but she can't take it. And Edith is not behind Mary in the entitlement stakes either,

as her treatment of the Drewes has demonstrated. She can be kind to wounded officers, but servants like Daisy/William/Carson and tenants like the Drewes are only there to make her life more convenient and an irritation when their own feelings or well-being get in the way.

 

Has Edith ever apologized for something she's done, which would require admitting that she's not always the victim? I genuinely can't remember right now, apart from the vague

"Oh, I wrote a letter to Marigold's first adoptive mother, she's got a new child now (and that makes it alright)"

. Mary hasn't apologized for every act that viewers have had problems with, but she has blamed herself for some of the things that have happened to her. That's why I personally find her a better person than Edith: she can be a bitch, but she can also be kind and doesn't think all her problems are the result of the universe being out to get her.

 

I don't think it's Edith's habit to be mean and then pout when it doesn't get her attention.  The fact is Mary got attention no matter what she did, whether she was nice or sharp, demanding or giving.  Edith saw how Mary got attention and tried to emulate it (flirting, sniping), but she wasn't good at it so it failed to get her attention.  That's just not who she is.  So instead she tried to get it in positive ways (being helpful, working at the hospital, writing, finding a suitable husband) but even THAT didn't get her any positive attention.  She can't win either way.  

 

Mary can take it better because she has the thick skin of someone who has always been validated and tended.  Her ego hasn't been damaged like Edith's so it bounces off of her.  The fact is that kids who don't get enough emotional support in childhood don't develop those buffers that they need to weather criticism.  She is too full of self-doubt to take it.  And no one ever defends her even when Mary is truly awful,  which probably makes her think she deserves being treated that way.  Which she doesn't.

 

I think Edith did blame herself for the pregnancy.  She took responsibility, she was going to go terminate it on her own.  But Rosamund figured it out.  I also think she blames herself for things in the sense that she thinks she's unworthy, and no wonder. She has often been treated as such.  As for the world being out to get her?  Felllowes has said repeatedly that Edith is unlucky.  It is his theme  when it comes to the character and that's how he writes her stories.  Bad shit happens to her.  And he sees her as someone who gets up and soldiers on like "Mother Courage," not as someone with a victim mentality.

 

I don't see why she has no right to feel sorry for herself when bad stuff happens.  Mary does too:  when Matthew took the inheritance, when he got engaged, when he died.  It's natural.  And since she doesn't get much attention or sympathy from her family (which she doesn't), she has to nurture herself.  Her reaction to bad fortune is a combination of nursing her hurt alone and then getting up and moving on, like the walking wounded.

[shipperx]

I suppose where I tend to have a problem is not in having favorites or preferences (we're all entitled to those) but in the concept that all Edith's misfortune is 'earned' in some way. Or that being subject to misfortune marks one as less worthy.

There's a sense of judgement at times in some types of reactions to what happens to Edith that I don't share. I never understand the arguments I've occasionally seen where Edith saying 'my life's project' brought on her being jilted much less in any way earned it. What,honestly, is so terrible about wishing to build a happy life, because however he may have heard it that was all she meant. And unintended miscommunication should not 'earn' humIliation, heartbreak, and loneliness. Similarly, I do not grant as a given that her impetuousness in sleeping with Michael 'earned' all of her subsequent woes rather than pregnancy resulting from the one and only time she's ever had sex (as a 30 year old virgin who had been spent months dating a man who lovesd her and actively wanted to marry her... Because how could she know that he'd be murdered? And it's not like birth control was super easy to come by for a thirty year old unmarried virgin.. Think Mary had any with Pamuk? Doubtful. Mary, as a mother and widow, had to bully her married ladiy's maid to procure it, illustrating that it was a 'shocking' and scandal in its own right purchase for that time. (And any failure on Michaels part to use French letters --if he didn't, the failure rate was significant-- weighs heavily on the more experienced partner).

You rarely see arguments that Mary brings on her misfortunes as in no one ever claims that Mary 'deserved' Pamuk dying in her bed because she was so 'reckless' (she didn't).

In fact rather than saying that Mary deserved' any ensuing scandal (she didn't) because of her 'recklessness', it's usually claimed that everything is entirely Edith's fault, as though she manufacturd the incident and Mary's actual actions --which could cause scandal -- never existed... And which never materialized in any substantive scandal anyway (and which we know was gossiped about in servant circles separately).

For the record, I don't think Mary 'deserved' Pamuk dropping dead on her because she was reckless. And she did not 'deserve' Edith lashing out by telegraphing the truth of what happened.

Mary wouldn't 'deserve' being publicly outted over her sex week with Gilliam either.

And she doesn't 'deserve' that Matthew died because she snogged a dying woman's bridegroom on the eve of dying woman's wedding day.

And yet... somehow bad things which happen to Edith seem to be discounted as divine judgement over her being unhappy or desperate or generally less fabulous than everyone else. (And I don't generally consider extroversion vs introversion as a qualitative assessment of character).

I don't think things actually work that way anyway. We don't always get what we deserve or deserve what we get. We don't deserve public humiliation (usually) or the death/loss of loved ones. It's a bit too much retribution for my taste.

Additionally, I rarely think relationship dynamics happen in a vacuum (or treated as though they do on writing) which is to say I don't think the Crawley family's dynamics begin with the airing of Episode 1.

Writing 101 says start by showing how things 'normally' are for the characters then, through the course of story, showing character evolution. The child pecking order, the way Cora and Robert viewed Edith's lack of 'advantages', Mary's disdain for her sister (even prior to the Pamuk secret), and Edith's frustration are establishing the kind of relationships that are the status quo for these characters, not some aberration. We weren't supposed to think that those attitudes were something new.

Nor are they set in stone.

Stories function on change-- on the things changing or circumstances changing and the ways characters change in particular.

I always remember a lecture on screenwriting I once attended which said that characters or situations which cannot change are by their very natures tragedies.

The point is how characters have changed between Season 1 and now.. The arc more than any one moment.

They all have changed. I think one problem though is that the show has stagnated. Few characters are changing much now.

And I think perhaps one problem with the writing for Mary now is that while she was evolving in root worthy ways during her romance with Matthew and was rootworthy when there's the evolution of overcoming her grief, this season's bored compassionless dilettante actbseems like regression. She's more early Mary than Matthew's Mary at the moment.

I think her way of reemerging from grief is locking her humanity up in not particularly productive ways...and I actually think I'm supposed to be seeing it that way based on Violet's 'lack of compassion' smack down this last week.

Mary's evolution as a character is at best on hold and at worst is backsliding. They need to bring back more of those touches of compassion or it's going to appear that she's growing more abrasive with age.

Edited November 6, 2014 by shipperx

[DianeDobbler]

And I think perhaps one problem with the writing for Mary now is that while she was evolving in root worthy ways during her romance with Matthew and was rootworthy when there's the evolution of overcoming her grief, this season's bored compassionless dilettante actbseems like regression. She's more early Mary than Matthew's Mary at the moment.

 

Shipperx, just want to co-sign every single one of your points and all of your reasoning, as I see it the exact same way.

 

I do want to comment on the quoted section. There's nothing wrong, dramatically, with Mary's regression. The problem is I'm not sure it's intentional, but rather what we're left with absent any other qualities in either the writing or the performance. From everything I've read and seen on video of Michelle Dockery, she's a lovely, funny person with a good heart, and I'm looking forward to the movie she is apparently making, or has made, with Elisabeth Moss. But Moss has the ability to find subtext in the most impossible, the most rigidly constrained dialogue, as she was able to do in S6 of Mad Men. Dockery doesn't have this quality. I believe she's an honest actress, an earnest actress, but lacks enough imagination or a real ability to mine her dialogue for subtext. As I've said before, it's very unfair to compare any actress to Maggie Smith (or Penelope Wilton), but if you just "picture" some of their dialogue on the page, there's not much to it. They themselves find the shadings. They have both been written consistently throughout the series. I do understand the sort of personality that Mary is meant to be. However, Mary is not uniquely reserved and constrained on Downton Abbey. Other Downton characters are seen to have these attributes in their own way, from Carson to Violet to Cora to Rosemund and even Mabel was quite a cool character. If I picture Mabel's dialogue, it's not so different from Mary's dialogue. She, too, hates sentiment and said so, she dislikes drama, she expresses affection with put downs "Not if I see you first." It's as if Fellowes hardly bothered to write a different sort of dialogue for Mabel than for Mary. They were just women of similar backgrounds with different points of view. Mabel, however, had a pulse. Mary does not, and that's a Dockery thing. She plays what's on the page. If expressly directed or written to do something else, she'll do it. Otherwise she plays simply what's there, nothing else, no discernible inner life but what can be projected onto her knowing what we know of her history, but IMO she's not projecting it in her performance. Another performer who practically master classes dialogue and shading is Leslie Nichol. Sometimes she has fun getting a little schticky, but most of the time she's got the most basic dialogue and creates a complete inner life and awareness of given circumstances for Mrs. Patmore. We know there's stuff on her mind, or she's busy with her tasks, or whatever. Rachel Cassidy (Baxter) plays another quite reserved character, and I believe the sensitivity in the character is in her performance, because her dialogue doesn't drip with it. Mary's also meant to be sensitive in some ways.

 

I'm not certain Laura Carmichael is all that as an actress either - nor any of the daughters, truly, including the late, lamented Sybil played by Jessica Brown Findley. For all the derision I see about Rose around the web, Lily James does invest her with energy, life and empathy. She's alive in the scene even if it's not her scene. Laura Carmichael, however much of a whipping post and scapegoat her character has been on Downton, IS, as others have pointed out, given actual protogonist material. She takes action, and she's given real stuff to react to. A lot of the important stuff in her story happens off camera so that we can get Mary's two extraneous suitors and a discarded financee' walking the grounds explaining Mary to us, but when Edith IS on camera she has active stuff to do most of the time, with actual stuff at stake. And really, that "walking the grounds" scene is something we're getting a lot. OTHER characters explaining Mary, when Mary should explain Mary - not in speech, but in the actress's performance. Just as Maggie Smith explains Violet and Leslie Nichols explains Mrs. Patrmore and so forth.

 

In my opinion, where we are in Downton in S5 is an unfortunate combination of actress and writing/plot.  I've taken the time to see Dockery in other things. She's always genuine, and communicates intelligence, but that's about it. Not that interesting. She needs a lot of help from the writing, because IMO she lacks the imagination to pull what's not there out of what's on the page, bring her own thing in it. We're getting to where the character is being formatted round the performer's limitations (which happens a lot on television, particularly on soap operas), rather than for the performer's strengths or towards a direction where the character should go. It's been said Fellowes writes towards what the actor gives him, and more and more with Mary I'm seeing other characters telling us who Mary is, which IMO signals an acting problem. IMO the true test of an actor's abilities isn't a great script, or classic play, but bad scripts.

Edited November 6, 2014 by DianeDobbler