S02.E07: Wonders Never Cease

[Affogato]

https://www.thefrickpittsburgh.org/Story-Memory-and-Mourning-Death-in-the-Gilded-Age

interesting article about mourning dress

[TVForever]

1 hour ago, hoodooznoodooz said:

After I pass away, would you please take care of Ada, the way you did about a month ago? 

Has it been a whole month?😂😂

[chaifan]

3 minutes ago, ofmd said:

But is that really true from her pov? From all we know, and I have only foggy memories of season 1, so I might have forgotten, but afaik, Oscar has been a perfectly competent, conservative banker.

I agree.  Oscar is a bit of a party boy, but as far as I can remember we haven't seen him do anything terribly irresponsible with money.

My reasoning is that Agnes' late husband was likely very traditional, and in those days, even though it was legal to do so, men were still not likely to leave all their money/property to women in their wills.  I think it would be very believable if Agnes' husband put his fortune in a trust to provide for Agnes, pay for the household expenses, etc., and made Oscar the trustee.  (Or, if Oscar was still a child, to become Trustee upon a certain age.  I don't know when Agnes' husband died.) 

So I can easily believe Oscar had access to all of the family money. 

And I'll say it again - I just loved that end scene with Oscar and Agnes. 

Peggy's plot line...  well, at least they finally tied her plot back to the other main characters.  But that was a very quick arrangement of the meeting for Marian to speak at.  I was very much expecting Marian to offer to teach painting at Peggy's school.  I do like how they're bringing the Irish into this, and showing how there were many groups who were discriminated against, just in different ways.  Still wishing they'd drop the flirtations with Mr. Fortune.  But if that's what it takes to get us more Audra Mc. on the screen, I'm fine with it.

Clock boy...  I guess it's just the nerd in me, but I like this little tangent of a plot line.  But I'm disappointed that, according to another post here, they've veered so far from reality on the patent process.  I don't mind taking liberties with history, but this just looks like no one even tried to be accurate with the process.  It could have been cured with a simple one liner explanation from the watchmaker guild guy, something like "Technically, there is no requirement for patent requests to come from the guild members, but as a practical matter they give our members high deference and tend to reject any that aren't from us."  I think we all could buy something like that, that there was an inside silent deal between guilds and the patent office.  But I'm glad they didn't go with evil clockmaker stealing poor boy's invention. 

 

[Marley]

Lol no one needs to read spoilers to predict this show. It is so obvious just like Downton Abby was.

Larry and Marian has been obvious from the beginning basically to me. Of course it will be dragged out just like Mary and Matt Crawley on DA. I don’t mind Marian and Larry tho but their chemistry isn’t off the charts or anything to me. They are kind of cheesy tho.

The clock guy isn’t gonna be successful. I’m sure his invention will get stolen or something. They aren’t gonna let him be successful and move out. Maybe for like a couple days but he will prob come crawling back.

I am already tired of Fortune and Peggy. Such a dumb route to take. Who wants to see this dumb shit with Peggy getting with a married man. It makes Fortune look like shit too. He was a real person was he like this in real life? Who knows but it’s dumb.

I should hate George but I love him and Bertha together. Their chemistry is fab to me so I don’t want them to be fucked up.

Gladys is kind of nothing at this point.

The dramatic scene with Oscar admitting to losing most of the family money made me laugh because again you could see it coming from a mile away so I was not shocked at all.

The reverend died in like 11 seconds lol that was so fast. Again did not surprise me I was waiting for him to fall and take a turn for the worst.

I am still enjoying the show tho but I just wish JF and the writers would be a bit less obvious. This show could be extra amazing in the hands of a really good writer.

[kristen111]

Why three important happenings all in one night?  It was too much.  Oscar, the death and the Brooklyn Bridge.

[quarks]

54 minutes ago, chaifan said:

So I can easily believe Oscar had access to all of the family money. 

And I'll say it again - I just loved that end scene with Oscar and Agnes. 

 

 

The only reason I question this is that for two seasons, Oscar has stated, several times, that he can't rebel against his mother - with the strong implication that this is because if he does, he'll be financially cut off. This came up just this season when Oscar initially said he would not be able to walk Ada down the aisle because Agnes had forbidden it. It was only after significant encouragement - and seeing that other relatives and servants were going to the wedding anyway - that Oscar agreed to do the right thing. And after seeing that Marion had managed to get away with minor rebellions.

So the sense I got was that Agnes completely controlled the purse strings and limited her son's access to the funds.

Which turned out to either be completely wrong, or, a convenient change to ensure that the season finale features Marion feeling that she absolutely has to marry Cousin Dashiell to save the house and keep everyone employed (including Peggy, to ensure that Peggy feels she at least has the financial independence to leave Editor Boss and His Suspicious Fondness For Serving Her Strong Alcohol) and/or Ada saving the day with her inheritance. I think the second: an Oscar who could have dipped into the family funds at any time would have been a very different character in season one and early season two.

[Tango64]

The back and forth conniving about the opera houses is getting a bit tiresome. I'm still rooting for Bertha, but all the little ups and downs are too much. I've got the duke! Oh no, now she has the duke! I have the duke again! Oh no, somebody else has the duke! Now the duke has his own duke! What box are all the dukes going to be in?!!

[taanja]

13 hours ago, iMonrey said:

Well everyone who predicted Oscar would lose all of Agnes's money was either very prescient or privy to spoilers. This strikes me as a rather stupid plot twist that makes Oscar look like an idiot. I could see someone like Larry making such a foolish mistake given his lack of experience in the business world, but Oscar is supposed to be a banker. To invest all of his family's money in some sham business without doing the least due diligence on the alleged company and their odds of getting a good return is just laughable.

I am never spoiled. It takes the fun out of watching as far as I am concerned.

The scam itself was just screaming -- look at me! -- EVERY single detail of Maude Beaton's existence was literally garnered from gossip. I saw it coming a mile away.

I guess I didn't really care about Ada and new hubby and their doomed marriage. I feel we barely got to know him so I am not mourning his death. I don't even recognize the actor so I have no affection for the character either way.

But I do hope it turns out that he had money and it ALL of it goes to Ada! haha! I will laugh!

[Pestilentia]

Quote

Maud Beaton, quite literally, didn't have to convince or lure or pressure Oscar to do anything. That's what kept me on the fence about whether it was a scam. 

 

To me that's how I knew it was a scam. 

  
That's how good grifters work, they make you feel as if everything was your idea. A bit of mild resistance is tossed out which only further inflames the desire of someone eager to make money hand over fist in a short period of time. Every word that was said to Oscar was only said to inflame his greed even more.

If you watch all those scenes again you can see how the things said to Oscar were specifically worded to whip him into a frenzy- he couldn't write that check fast enough.

It's a technique as old as time.

[taanja]

5 hours ago, Trillian said:

Small nitpick about the scene where Marion meets Larry and she’s all decked out in pretty pastels:  there’s been a death in the family and there’s a dead body in the house. Shouldn’t there be a mourning wreath on the door and the inhabitants wearing black?  That felt jarring to me. 

It literally only just happened. Within a day they will all be in black.

[sistermagpie]

3 hours ago, hoodooznoodooz said:

After I pass away, would you please take care of Ada, the way you did about a month ago? 

And...every single month before that? LOL.

3 hours ago, ahpny said:

At least we didn't have to suffer (yet?) with a "stolen invention" story. I suspected the seemingly-kind clock club person might be angling to "steal" Jack's wonderous clock invention.

That's totally where I thought it was going and was so relieved when it didn't.

Also, agreed ono the editor giving Peggy whisky to drink to celebrate something. This guy is just all wrong, and it's hard to tell whether it's a hint or just him being anachronistic. He kisses her while hiding from a lynching, answers doors shirtless, keeps trying to work with her despite being married and now he's offering her shots? That she's accepting? WTF? The scene with the toast made me think of Peggy being offered her first whisky on Mad Men--but there it was in character for everyone.

It's true that the Reverend's financial situation should be known, and it seems like he's just been a guy who took care of his mother in a modest way for years, but I suppose they could come up with some unknown relative who suddenly dies after him. Or there's Marian's "worthless" stocks. Something to tide her over before she gets with Larry.

And I do think that moment with Larry was a good way to show she's meant to be with him. They're not an exciting couple, but they seem to find comfort in the other's blandness and they can trust each other. It's a better foundation than most other couples we've seen on the show, save Ada and Luke.

[iMonrey]

6 hours ago, kitkat343 said:

I also agree with everyone who said that Agnes has too much sense to let Oscar control her money, but I wonder if it was left somehow in a trust she controlled until her son turned 18 and then he gained control of it?  This show was much weaker last season, so I don't remember much of it and might have missed where it was stated that Agnes stupidly gave Oscar control over the family money, but that wouldn't really be in character for her (she's quite bright and really likes controlling everyone) but this isn't the most brilliantly written show so its possible she handed over control of her finances for plot purposes.

It has never been stated that Oscar had control of, or access to, the family fortune. In fact when he was trying to sell himself to George as a potential match for Gladys he said he would one day inherit his mother's house. Just the house. That's it, as far as his inheritance was explained. 

This story could have been written much better. In fact it wouldn't have taken much, just a few lines of dialogue here and there and an extra scene or two. As it stood, it was impossible to tell why Oscar put so much trust into this strange man whose business operation and position were never adequately explained. If George Russell had never heard of this company before then nobody had. What made Oscar think it was legit if nobody ever heard of it before? Just Maud going into an office and signing some papers made him think it was worth putting his entire fortune into it, without even asking around if it was a good bet? Really?

The show just wanted to skip to the desired result without putting in the work. Lazy, sloppy writing.

[Roseanna]

3 hours ago, ahpny said:

At least we didn't have to suffer (yet?) with a "stolen invention" story. I suspected the seemingly-kind clock club person might be angling to "steal" Jack's wonderous clock invention. Not so much, so far.

Yeah, so far. 

3 hours ago, Affogato said:

I think the thing is Maud convinced the matchmaking cousin she was who she says she is. Matchmaking cousin tells Oscar. Oscar trusts her. It is matchmaking cousin’s propensity to gossip and drama.  Os ar has likely been conservative with money so far. 

But how could Maud convince Aurora? Had she a letter of recommendation from someone who Aurora knew and trusted? 

Was something in her background story true or was all lies? 

[edhopper]

Was all their money just sitting in the bank? No assets, no shares of other companies? Just sitting in an account you could write one big check on? And the bank didn't even contact Agnes to see if this was legit? And did Oscar just hand over the money with no contract, nothing signed to show his shares, no lawyer to look it over. This is stupid Nigerian Prince stuff.

[Roseanna]

47 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Also, agreed ono the editor giving Peggy whisky to drink to celebrate something. This guy is just all wrong, and it's hard to tell whether it's a hint or just him being anachronistic. He kisses her while hiding from a lynching, answers doors shirtless, keeps trying to work with her despite being married and now he's offering her shots? That she's accepting? WTF? The scene with the toast made me think of Peggy being offered her first whisky on Mad Men--but there it was in character for everyone.

Yes, but Mad Men happened in 1960ies.

This series happened in the time when women left the dinnner table before men begun to drink strong liquers. 

5 minutes ago, iMonrey said:

This story could have been written much better. In fact it wouldn't have taken much, just a few lines of dialogue here and there and an extra scene or two. As it stood, it was impossible to tell why Oscar put so much trust into this strange man whose business operation and position were never adequately explained. If George Russell had never heard of this company before then nobody had. What made Oscar think it was legit if nobody ever heard of it before? Just Maud going into an office and signing some papers made him think it was worth putting his entire fortune into it, without even asking around if it was a good bet? Really?

The show just wanted to skip to the desired result without putting in the work. Lazy, sloppy writing.

Actually Oscar had no need to more money if he was going to propose to Maud. Was his aim to show her that he was no fortune hunter?

[Jodithgrace]

There was a real life counterpoint to Maud Beaton. Her name was Cassie Chadwick and she claimed to be the illegitimate daughter of Andrew Carnegie. She didn’t have the Sucker Pacific Railroad, however. She just made about $8 million by taking out huge bank loans and otherwise racking up massive expenses on the grounds that dear old “dad,” was going to leave her a huge fortune. People apparently trusted her, and would never have mentioned her to Carnegie, as that just wasn’t done. 

[Roseanna]

55 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

but I suppose they could come up with some unknown relative who suddenly dies after him.

Luke can have inherited only a relative who had died before he died.

But of course the relative can have lived somewhere far away and the news of it only comes weeks later.

[sistermagpie]

12 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

Yes, but Mad Men happened in 1960ies.

This series happened in the time when women left the dinnner table before men begun to drink strong liquers. 

Exactly! On Mad Men it was perfectly in character for everyone and for the time period. Here it was like taking something that would happen then and having this guy do it as if it were normal. There's no reason he'd do it or that Peggy would feel the slightest pressure or desire to accept, imo. I'd think she'd be especially wary after kissing him.

9 minutes ago, Jodithgrace said:

There was a real life counterpoint to Maud Beaton. Her name was Cassie Chadwick and she claimed to be the illegitimate daughter of Andrew Carnegie. She didn’t have the Sucker Pacific Railroad, however. She just made about $8 million by taking out huge bank loans and otherwise racking up massive expenses on the grounds that dear old “dad,” was going to leave her a huge fortune. People apparently trusted her, and would never have mentioned her to Carnegie, as that just wasn’t done. 

Which makes a lot more sense. 

8 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

Luke can have inherited only a relative who had died before he died.

But of course the relative can have lived somewhere far away and the news of it only comes weeks later.

Yes, I figured it would have to be something convoluted that way, so anything would be possible if they wanted to do it. And it's not as if the show sticks to any sort of legal details. Just look at the patent stuff and Oscar writing a check that signs over his whole fortune for nothing.

[RachelKM]

 

15 hours ago, quarks said:

I mean, sure, yes, everyone in his social circle just accepted Maud Beaton without asking too many questions, but this is the same social circle that also just accepted Mrs. Russell's former maid into their inner circle - someone Oscar knows did not exactly enjoy a high social standing just last season. That is, pretty recently, strongly suggesting that no one in New York society is exactly going out of their way to vet anyone. (Which makes Mrs. Russell's struggle last season to get socially accepted even less plausible, but I digress.)

It appears Maud and her partner(s) created a back story through whispers and the proper appearance.  Clothes and other obvious trappings of wealth were extremely expensive.  It wouldn't occur to most people of their class that someone dressed and styled appropriately could be anything other than wealthy.  

And since most confirmations of people's backgrounds were through either introductions or gossip, it's not inconceivable that seeding the gossip the right sort of connections with just enough of a hint of scandal to both explain a certain degree of secrecy and removal from society and also provide fuel for it's spreading would eventually become the type of thing everyone has heard but can't recall from whom first. 

As for Bertha, her struggles are because there is NO secrecy about her background. She has the right clothes, even better than some of the old money; but they know she wasn't raised like them and does not have their pedigree.

4 hours ago, ofmd said:

Yeah, but as a banker, Oscar should have double-checked the business he was so eager to invest in... and leave the family money well alone. (That said, maybe he has no personal money at all, just a generous allowance?) He is an idiot imho, but Agnes isn't necessarily.

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

This story could have been written much better. In fact it wouldn't have taken much, just a few lines of dialogue here and there and an extra scene or two. As it stood, it was impossible to tell why Oscar put so much trust into this strange man whose business operation and position were never adequately explained. If George Russell had never heard of this company before then nobody had. What made Oscar think it was legit if nobody ever heard of it before? Just Maud going into an office and signing some papers made him think it was worth putting his entire fortune into it, without even asking around if it was a good bet? Really?

The show just wanted to skip to the desired result without putting in the work. Lazy, sloppy writing.

This bothers me the most.  Maud was complaining about having to deal with the business part of her wealth and Oscar offered to help.  One would think that, if he were genuinely trying to help her, and it seemed that he did like her and wanted her to succeed (for both their sakes), he would have done investigation on her behalf.  He certainly read everything she gave him.  He quoted from it.  But all of that came from the people already advising her.  What was his role in his head?  Just to synthesize what was allegedly prepared for her? No double checking at all... like even bringing it up to his friends or co-workers to get their thoughts on the prospects?

So weird.

2 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

Also, agreed ono the editor giving Peggy whisky to drink to celebrate something. This guy is just all wrong, and it's hard to tell whether it's a hint or just him being anachronistic. He kisses her while hiding from a lynching, answers doors shirtless, keeps trying to work with her despite being married and now he's offering her shots? That she's accepting? WTF? The scene with the toast made me think of Peggy being offered her first whisky on Mad Men--but there it was in character for everyone.

Ugh, remember when I thought Fortune was hot?  I barely do. I cringe during all of their scenes now. 

Quote

It's true that the Reverend's financial situation should be known, and it seems like he's just been a guy who took care of his mother in a modest way for years, but I suppose they could come up with some unknown relative who suddenly dies after him. Or there's Marian's "worthless" stocks. Something to tide her over before she gets with Larry.

Ada wasn't a debutante and she had no fortune of her own to protect.  Revered Even More Dead Poet had an obvious source of income and a guaranteed home as part of his vocation.  There was really no need to and no one who would vet him. He could easily have come from a bit of money that he chose not to use relying instead on his income as a rector. 

Quote

And I do think that moment with Larry was a good way to show she's meant to be with him. They're not an exciting couple, but they seem to find comfort in the other's blandness and they can trust each other. It's a better foundation than most other couples we've seen on the show, save Ada and Luke.

I think it was the most overt sign scene to date.  It's been obvious from the start that they were intended to be together eventually.  But the last three scenes together have each veered slightly more toward showing their interest in as well as their comfort with one another.

Larry still needs to mature a bit.  I think they are starting to try by having him do more work on behalf of his father.  But I'll need to see more to buy he's ready for a serious commitment to anyone. 

Edited December 11, 2023 by RachelKM
Typos

[MartyQui]

13 hours ago, AntFTW said:

Maud telling Oscar about her "business" and saying how much she doesn't want to be part of it didn't seem like scam behavior to me. Maud didn't imply or hinted that she needed Oscar's help or his money. Maud didn't imply or hint that she even wanted Oscar to go to their office. Oscar invited himself to that office with no pressure from anyone to do so; Oscar offered his money with no pressure from anyone to do so. No one asked Oscar to write a check, or two checks. Oscar led himself to the slaughter, and refused to take 'no' for an answer. Maud Beaton, quite literally, didn't have to convince or lure or pressure Oscar to do anything. That's what kept me on the fence about whether it was a scam.

Classic grifter technique.  That way when the conned tries to get their money back, the grifter can say "I didn't ask, you forced your money on me".

Re: mourning.  The Reverend only died hours ago (Larry is still in his evening wear from the night before).  Marian will change her clothes after her walk, and a nice nap. She's worn the outfit with the black trim before, it's strictly a style choice.

[AntFTW]

56 minutes ago, iMonrey said:

This story could have been written much better. In fact it wouldn't have taken much, just a few lines of dialogue here and there and an extra scene or two. As it stood, it was impossible to tell why Oscar put so much trust into this strange man whose business operation and position were never adequately explained. If George Russell had never heard of this company before then nobody had. What made Oscar think it was legit if nobody ever heard of it before? Just Maud going into an office and signing some papers made him think it was worth putting his entire fortune into it, without even asking around if it was a good bet? Really?

The show just wanted to skip to the desired result without putting in the work. Lazy, sloppy writing.

A MILLION HEARTS!

Edited December 11, 2023 by AntFTW

[ahpny]

3 hours ago, chaifan said:

"Technically, there is no requirement for patent requests to come from the guild members, but as a practical matter they give our members high deference and tend to reject any that aren't from us."  I think we all could buy something like that

Not all of us would buy that. Had the writters wrote in something like this proposed comment, we would, however, recognize an effort - however feabile - to "try" to look somewhat more realistic. But such an effort would still be without even a tenuous connection to reality. Even during past times with less transparency and more corruption, the Patent Office has never preferred particular inventors over others based on membership in some guild or club. 

Edited December 11, 2023 by ahpny

[Affogato]

If there are 8 episodes it seems to me there should be heavy emphasis on wrapping up the (not at this point very interesting to me) opera storyline in the next and final episode of the season. Isn’t it time for that gala event? In any case a lot of stories must be left dangling. 

[meep.meep]

15 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

I honestly feel like I've already watched all this happen!

That's because he is rehashing plots from Downton Abbey.  And becoming predictable.

We can thank our lucky stars that no plucky servants have been accused of murder yet.

[AntFTW]

55 minutes ago, Jodithgrace said:

There was a real life counterpoint to Maud Beaton. Her name was Cassie Chadwick and she claimed to be the illegitimate daughter of Andrew Carnegie. She didn’t have the Sucker Pacific Railroad, however. She just made about $8 million by taking out huge bank loans and otherwise racking up massive expenses on the grounds that dear old “dad,” was going to leave her a huge fortune. People apparently trusted her, and would never have mentioned her to Carnegie, as that just wasn’t done. 

I think that's much better scam for TV, but I understand from several people here on this thread that the writing is pretty lazy.

[AntFTW]

53 minutes ago, RachelKM said:

It appears Maud and her partner(s) created a back story through whispers and the proper appearance.  Clothes and other obvious trappings of wealth were extremely expensive.  It wouldn't occur to most people of their class that someone dressed and styled appropriately could be anything other than wealthy.

It's funny that Ada said they should ask Mrs. Fish's husband because his grandmother was a Stuyvesant, and no one took her up on that.

[RachelKM]

On 12/11/2023 at 11:22 AM, meep.meep said:

That's because he is rehashing plots from Downton Abbey.  And becoming predictable.

We can thank our lucky stars that no plucky servants have been accused of murder yet.

Downton Abby itself was a string of tropes.  I only watched half of the first season of DA and otherwise heard about plot points from friends who stuck with it and the outline alone confirmed this. I also watched Belgravia which was more of the same. 

I wouldn't mind if it was done better.  Tropes are tropes for a reason and general predictability is a hallmark of Soaps, which this is, and romances, which this at times emulates.

The problem is in the execution. This show, from what I know DA, and Belgravia have all felt shallow, like the skeleton of a story wrapped in finery but no flesh.  Witty quips and the talent of people like Maggie Smith, Hugh Bonneville, Harriet Walter, Philip Glenister, Christine Baranski, and Cynthia Nixon, et al. act more as glittering gems on that finery distracting from the absence of connective tissue between the various story beats.  (Okay, that was a lot of body part based simile/metaphor - sorry, but its the most accurate way I can get that thought out of my brain.)

So it's not just that we saw the death of Reverend Dead(est) Poet and Agnes's money being lost coming or the inevitability of Larian.  It's that it's so very color by numbers with a pallet made exclusively of the Crayola 8 pack. 

Edited December 12, 2023 by RachelKM
clarification

[buttersister]

I’m looking forward to the next season of Ada Knows Best. 

[Charlemagne]

17 hours ago, AntFTW said:

Being a banker doesn't mean you stop making bad or stupid investments, but there usually is some amount of due diligence. Whether that due diligence is sufficient or not is a separate question but Oscar conducted none.

Many scams are based upon going after people who do due diligence... in order to find the one who didn't "this one time."

That's the point of con artists going through "elaborate" ruses in order to make the Mark feel secure - like setting up an office in an empty rental space and embedding a member of the con team amongst Society to befriend them. 

Oscar was so arrogant that he was the Player that he didn't see that he was being played. Happens all the time in the world of finance.

Edited December 11, 2023 by Charlemagne

[Tango64]

I want more Mrs. Fish.

[chaifan]

23 minutes ago, Charlemagne said:

Many scams are based upon going after people who do due diligence... in order to find the one who didn't "this one time."

That's the point of con artists going through "elaborate" ruses in order to make the Mark feel secure like setting up an office in an empty rental space and embedding a member of the con team amongst Society to befriend them. 

People will also do due diligence for their job, when it's someone else's money, but "go with their gut" when it involves their own.  Weird, counterintuitive, but it happens.

Also, the banker guy did the "oooh, you musn't tell anyone about this, this is our little secret!" thing.  OK, paraphrasing here, but he did tell Oscar he couldn't say anything.  For me, that's when the red light really started flashing "scam alert!"  In those days, you couldn't really do due diligence without talking to other people.  

[AntFTW]

53 minutes ago, Charlemagne said:

Many scams are based upon going after people who do due diligence... in order to find the one who didn't "this one time."

That's the point of con artists going through "elaborate" ruses in order to make the Mark feel secure - like setting up an office in an empty rental space and embedding a member of the con team amongst Society to befriend them. 

Oscar was so arrogant that he was the Player that he didn't see that he was being played. Happens all the time in the world of finance.

23 minutes ago, chaifan said:

In those days, you couldn't really do due diligence without talking to other people.  

That's the thing that doesn't make sense to me. Due diligence doesn't have to this thing that's only reserved for people that have access to the best information, like a bank would, or compiling a ton of research but it could be just as simple as asking around.

As @chaifan mentioned, it was difficult to do due diligence without talking to people at that time. It was much easier to move money or conceal your identity without leaving a paper trail. It was hard to conduct background checks on people. The fact that all Oscar had to do was walk across the street to his mother's neighbor who is a railroad tycoon, and that would been something, as opposed to nothing, that's mindblowing to me.

That also makes me wonder why he's never offered to become a small investor with George. George is wealthy, but even he has to raise capital from other people.

Edited December 11, 2023 by AntFTW

[amarante]

Oscar was easily swindled because he wasn't really a banker or a finance person.

He was a "gentleman" in the same way someone is a gentleman farmer. 

He managed the family money and perhaps because of that had an "office" in the bank that actually employed "crass" people who actually understood finance.

He was meant to contrast with someone like Russell who as a self made financial genius who not only knew that the railroad was non-existent but also made it his business (no pun intended) to understand "businesses". Even though his specialty was railroads, he would have had a keen understanding of other industries because of the impact on his own businesses.

Downton Abby's Lord Grantham was similarly swindled out of all of his wife's dowry and was only saved because he was allowed access to the entailed estate so long as he agreed to run it in a more businesslike manner.

Not that people aren't still snookered by scams and schemes today, but theoretically there are some regulations so that the worst of the stock abuse is rarer than it was - still you have Enron, Wework, Theranos, FTX and Madoff to mention the largest and most notorious of recent history. 

[Charlemagne]

18 hours ago, AntFTW said:

The fact that all Oscar had to do was walk across the street to his mother's neighbor who is a railroad tycoon, and that would been something, as opposed to nothing, that's mindblowing to me.

That was part of the con. The fictional railroad was in competition with Russell's. Going to him to ask about the investment would be like warning him, in a way, of a competing move that meant money for Oscar and less money for Russell (theoretically.)

You don't walk across the street to ask a neighbor about something when you have a grudge against them (the whole Gladys humiliating rejection thing) and when you have been making moves that would adversely affect said neighbor financially. That was part of Oscar's motivation for reckless behavior, by the way. Not just greed but to also become a tycoon on equal footing with the man who humiliated him.

Think back to the moment when Oscar went to say, "Hello," to George Russell. That was him doing a victory lap (in his mind.) The investment was done (so he thought) and now all that was left was to rub it in George's face - albeit in the manner of polite society.

But it blew up in Oscar's face.

Edited December 12, 2023 by Charlemagne

[AntFTW]

3 minutes ago, Charlemagne said:

You don't walk across the street to ask a neighbor about something when you have a grudge against them (the whole Gladys humiliating rejection thing) when you have been making moves that would adversely affect said neighbor financially.

It didn't stop him in this episode.

[Charlemagne]

Just now, AntFTW said:

It didn't stop him in this episode.

Yes, it did,-  because that's not why he crossed the street.

He crossed the street after he thought the investment was done and wanted to rub Russell's face in the fact that he (Oscar) was now also a "Railroad Man."

The excuse about saying, "Hello," was just that - an excuse to parade his new investment in front of George.

[RachelKM]

On 12/11/2023 at 1:25 PM, Charlemagne said:

You don't walk across the street to ask a neighbor about something when you have a grudge against them (the whole Gladys humiliating rejection thing) when you have been making moves that would adversely affect said neighbor financially. That was part of Oscar's motivation for reckless behavior, by the way. Not just greed but to also become a tycoon on equal footing with the man who humiliated him.

Think back to the moment when Oscar went to say, "Hello," to George Russell. That was him doing a victory lap (in his mind.) The investment was done (so he thought) and now all that was left was to rub it in George's face - albeit in the manner of polite society.

Perhaps I'm just missing a fact or a scene or just not particularly experienced with this, but what had changed vis-a-vis Oscar and George since completing the investment?  It had been days and I don't recall Oscar receiving any notices that have indicated whatever project he thought he was buying in to take advantage of was complete.  

So what was different on May 24, 1883, that had not been true on May 21 or 15? Oscar's "moves" hadn't actually done anything yet. 

Edited December 12, 2023 by RachelKM

[Charlemagne]

8 minutes ago, RachelKM said:

Perhaps I'm just missing a fact or a scene or just not particularly experienced with this, but what had changes vis-a-vis Oscar and George since completing the investment?  It had been days and I don't recall Oscar receiving any notices that have indicated whatever project he thought he was buying in to take advantage of was complete.  

So what was different on May 24, 1883, that had not been true on May 21 or 15? Oscar "moves" hadn't actually done anything yet. 

It was implied - much like it's implied that people go to the bathroom on this show but we never actually see it.

When Oscar delivered the Big Check, that was our narrative indication that the investment had "gone through." That was Oscar's "move" - writing and handing over the check. In his mind, he was now a Tycoon (or, well on the way to being one.) A con man who goes through the trouble of decorating a pretend office is also going to have prepared "official papers" for Oscar to sign.

It's a common narrative shortcut. Like when we see someone arrive in a carriage, it is implied that they got on to that carriage at some other location. (Or vice versa) We didn't need to see it.  

Seeing Russell across the street as he was passing by was just the first opportunity to organically have an excuse to crow about it. He couldn't even wait until the first social occasion. He wanted to let Russell know that he (Oscar) was now a real Player in the game of Monopoly. His whole, "I hope that it won't be awkward..." opening line was just his cover story for sticking it to Russell with his big news.

Edited December 11, 2023 by Charlemagne

[AntFTW]

17 minutes ago, Charlemagne said:

Yes, it did,-  because that's not why he crossed the street.

He crossed the street after he thought the investment was done and wanted to rub Russell's face in the fact that he (Oscar) was now also a "Railroad Man."

The excuse about saying, "Hello," was just that - an excuse to parade his new investment in front of George.

I don't think that's much different from what you said previously in Oscar trying to acquire a railroad. Had Oscar actually acquired a railroad, that would make them competitors and still be adverse to each other. It seems when you move to the next step from attempting to acquire a railroad to owning a railroad, that adverse financial effect is still there, no?

Edited December 11, 2023 by AntFTW

[Charlemagne]

6 minutes ago, AntFTW said:

I don't think that's much different from what you said previously in Oscar trying to acquire a railroad. Had Oscar actually acquired a railroad, that would make them competitors and still be adverse to each other. It seems when you move to the next step from attempting to acquire a railroad and owning a railroad, that adverse financial effect is still there, no?

The difference being that your place is now secure as a founding investor. There is nothing for Russell to derail. (Pun intended.)

For example, had Russell known about it beforehand, Russell could have swooped in and offered a bigger investment in order to shut Oscar out. That's just one scenario. And if George wanted to buy out the fictional railroad in order to acquire a competitor to shut it down, that would mean a big payday for Oscar since he was an initial huge investor.

So, Oscar thought that he was putting one over on Russell. It was another example of Oscar's hubris. The very thing that the Con Artists targeted.

Edited December 11, 2023 by Charlemagne

[RachelKM]

4 minutes ago, Charlemagne said:

It's a common narrative shortcut. Like when we see someone arrive in a carriage, it is implied that they got on to that carriage at some other location. (Or vice versa) We didn't need to see it.  

Seeing Russell across the street as he was passing by was just the first opportunity to organically have an excuse to crow about it. He couldn't even wait until the first social occasion. He wanted to let Russell know that he (Oscar) was now a real Player in the game of Monopoly. His whole, "I hope that it won't be awkward..." opening line was just his cover story for sticking it to Russell with his big news.

I understand narrative shortcuts.  But I asked what was different for Oscar vis-a-vis George. As @AntFTW, all that had happed was handing over a check.  I suppose if it was literally meant to be an "I'm a player now too" thing... I guess. 

[Charlemagne]

6 minutes ago, RachelKM said:

I understand narrative shortcuts.  But I asked what was different for Oscar vis-a-vis George. As @AntFTW, all that had happed was handing over a check.  I suppose if it was literally meant to be an "I'm a player now too" thing... I guess. 

I mean... yeah. That's it. It wasn't any more complicated than completing a financial transaction (or thinking he had). One second, he didn't have leverage/sway. The next, he thought he did.

Edited December 11, 2023 by Charlemagne

[sistermagpie]

48 minutes ago, amarante said:

Oscar was easily swindled because he wasn't really a banker or a finance person.

He was a "gentleman" in the same way someone is a gentleman farmer. 

He managed the family money and perhaps because of that had an "office" in the bank that actually employed "crass" people who actually understood finance.

He was meant to contrast with someone like Russell who as a self made financial genius who not only knew that the railroad was non-existent but also made it his business (no pun intended) to understand "businesses". Even though his specialty was railroads, he would have had a keen understanding of other industries because of the impact on his own businesses.

Downton Abby's Lord Grantham was similarly swindled out of all of his wife's dowry and was only saved because he was allowed access to the entailed estate so long as he agreed to run it in a more businesslike manner.

Lord Grantham was an actual gentleman. He didn't work in a bank. Oscar offered to look over the financial documents because he does know something about it. He's not George, but he's not somebody playing dress up and sitting at a play desk. One of the main points of The Gilded Age is that it's in the US, not the UK. There's plenty similar things, but Oscar's not a lord whose experience is running a country estate he inherited.

 

 

39 minutes ago, Charlemagne said:

Yes, it did,-  because that's not why he crossed the street.

He crossed the street after he thought the investment was done and wanted to rub Russell's face in the fact that he (Oscar) was now also a "Railroad Man."

The excuse about saying, "Hello," was just that - an excuse to parade his new investment in front of George.

 

33 minutes ago, RachelKM said:

Perhaps I'm just missing a fact or a scene or just not particularly experienced with this, but what had changes vis-a-vis Oscar and George since completing the investment?  It had been days and I don't recall Oscar receiving any notices that have indicated whatever project he thought he was buying in to take advantage of was complete.  

So what was different on May 24, 1883, that had not been true on May 21 or 15? Oscar "moves" hadn't actually done anything yet. 

 

20 minutes ago, Charlemagne said:

The difference being that your place is now secure as a founding investor. There is nothing for Russell to derail. (Pun intended.)

For example, had Russell known about it beforehand, Russell could have swooped in and offered a bigger investment in order to shut Oscar out. That's just one scenario. And if George wanted to buy out the fictional railroad in order to acquire a competitor to shut it down, that would mean a big payday for Oscar since he was an initial huge investor.

Like others, I don't get what's changed. If it's bad for Oscar to "warn" Russell that he's thinking of investing, what's the other guy warning Oscar about doing? Because it hardly matters to him if Russell decides to jump in and invest more. I thought the warning was supposed to be about Russell stepping in and doing something to derail whatever this new company is doing, in which case, Oscar telling him now is exactly what he's not supposed to do. Don't mention anything to anybody else until you've given me all your money is a pretty big red flag. Don't tell anybody what we're up to until we've done it is at least a little smaller a red flag. As a big investor, why would he want to warn Russell that this company is up to something big before it's done anything besides take his money? "I've invested in a railway company" isn't much of a flex.

Not that he had to ask Russell. He could have tried someone else.

 

Edited December 11, 2023 by sistermagpie

[AntFTW]

1 minute ago, sistermagpie said:

Like others, I don't get what's changed. If it's bad for Oscar to "warn" Russell that he's thinking of investing, what's the other guy warning Oscar about doing? Because it hardly matters to him if Russell decides to jump in and invest more. I thought the warning was supposed to be about Russell stepping in and doing something to derail whatever this new company is doing, in which case, Oscar telling him now is exactly what he's not supposed to do. Don't mention anything to anybody else until you've given me all your money is a pretty big red flag. Don't tell anybody what we're up to until we've done it is at least a little smaller a red flag. As a big investor, why would he want to warn Russell that this company is up to something big before it's done anything besides take his money? "I've invested in a railway company" isn't much of a flex.

Not that he had to ask Russell. He could have tried someone else.

 

Yeah. Oscar was instructed to stay silent about the deal to prevent derailing the deal. We never saw that it was a done deal. No one indicated that it was done, but I guess we were supposed to assume that.

[Charlemagne]

8 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Like others, I don't get what's changed. If it's bad for Oscar to "warn" Russell that he's thinking of investing, what's the other guy warning Oscar about doing? Because it hardly matters to him if Russell decides to jump in and invest more. I thought the warning was supposed to be about Russell stepping in and doing something to derail whatever this new company is doing, in which case, Oscar telling him now is exactly what he's not supposed to do. Don't mention anything to anybody else until you've given me all your money is a pretty big red flag. Don't tell anybody what we're up to until we've done it is at least a little smaller a red flag. As a big investor, why would he want to warn Russell that this company is up to something big before it's done anything besides take his money? "I've invested in a railway company" isn't much of a flex.

Not that he had to ask Russell. He could have tried someone else.

 

The difference is that the deal is done (or so he thinks.)

It's the difference between knowing a hot stock tip before you secure your position and keeping that tip secret so no one else invests and then telling people that you invested after the fact.

The thing that changed was this: at one point he wasn't an investor... and then at another point he thought that he was an investor.

A big enough investor that he saw himself as approaching the same level as George Russell (or on the way to it.) This was about Oscar's pride as much as his greed.

And, yes, all those things that you mentioned are, indeed, red flags. Con artists deliberately look for people who ignore red flags - for whatever reason. Cons don't work on everyone. They just need to work on someone.

Edited December 11, 2023 by Charlemagne

[amarante]

5 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Lord Grantham was an actual gentleman. He didn't work in a bank. Oscar offered to look over the financial documents because he does know something about it. He's not George, but he's not somebody playing dress up and sitting at a play desk. One of the main points of The Gilded Age is that it's in the US, not the UK. There's plenty similar things, but Oscar's not a lord whose experience is running a country estate he inherited.

 

 

Based on my knowledge of New York social history of this time, Oscar is the equivalent of a Lord and not having actual financial expertise but is essentially handling his mother's estate in the same way that Lord Grantham was managing his inheritance.

That is large the point of the antagonism between the Old Money who largely looked down upon the new generation of Robber Barons who had acquired their "new money" based on their talents.

New York City in particular has always had this kind of dichotomy until all the barriers between Old Society and New Money collapsed in the past decade or so.

Never has the show depicted Oscar as actually working at his profession and attempting to increase the size of it - except here where he speculated in the most hair brained of ways.

New York City was always a bit unique - the South preserved the genteel ruling classes after Reconstruction ended; Boston was always old money where the Cabots spoke only to the Lodges and most of the other American Cities didn't have old money - Chicago didn't have any kind of old money society

        Hog Butcher for the World,
        Tool maker, Stacker of Wheat,
        Player with Railroads and the Nation's 
             Freight Handler;
        Stormy, husky, brawling,
        City of the Big Shoulders:

 

[chaifan]

35 minutes ago, Charlemagne said:

Seeing Russell across the street as he was passing by was just the first opportunity to organically have an excuse to crow about it. He couldn't even wait until the first social occasion. He wanted to let Russell know that he (Oscar) was now a real Player in the game of Monopoly. His whole, "I hope that it won't be awkward..." opening line was just his cover story for sticking it to Russell with his big news.

I saw it exactly like this, too.  Also a little of "Don't you wish you let your daughter marry me now" in there. 

Edited to add:  I'll concede that there are plot holes.  I'll chalk some of that up to time constraints.  And Fellowes not being known as a stickler for details in plots like this. 

Edited December 11, 2023 by chaifan

[sistermagpie]

8 minutes ago, AntFTW said:

Yeah. Oscar was instructed to stay silent about the deal to prevent derailing the deal. We never saw that it was a done deal. No one indicated that it was done, but I guess we were supposed to assume that.

 

6 minutes ago, Charlemagne said:

The difference is that the deal is done (or so he thinks.)

 

So the deal we're talking about is whatever the fake railroad company was doing, right? And Oscar just for some reason now assumes that it's done? Nothing to do with Oscar himself being an investor? 

Because if the point is that the deal is already done and Oscar just wants to get in first, the guy taking his money has no reason at all to want him to keep quiet about it. 

2 minutes ago, amarante said:

Based on my knowledge of New York social history of this time, Oscar is the equivalent of a Lord and not having actual financial expertise but is essentially handling his mother's estate in the same way that Lord Grantham was managing his inheritance.

 

Sure, I get that he's not a real businessman in that sense. But the very fact that he's expected to work in a bank says this is not just Lord Grantham with a different accent.

Oscar knows what a weekend is and has daily dealings with people Grantham wouldn't. Like George Russell.

What I'm seeing as the common demonimator here is Julia Fellowes, not them both of them regarding money and investing the same way.

Edited December 11, 2023 by sistermagpie

[Charlemagne]

8 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

 

So the deal we're talking about is whatever the fake railroad company was doing, right? And Oscar just for some reason now assumes that it's done? Nothing to do with Oscar himself being an investor? 

Because if the point is that the deal is already done and Oscar just wants to get in first, the guy taking his money has no reason at all to want him to keep quiet about it. 

It is a natural assumption that after Oscar handed the Big Check over, he signed some papers (which would have undoubtedly been fake.) But, in Oscar's mind, that's it.

His particular deal is done as far as he is concerned. Payment is given, the thing of value is received.

From our perspective, he is a dumbass, yes. Absolutely.

But we are witnessing right now the collapse of NFTs and Crypto. How many otherwise intelligent and competent people were scammed by those? Oscar's situation seems 100% realistic to me.

Edited December 11, 2023 by Charlemagne

[chaifan]

4 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

So the deal we're talking about is whatever the fake railroad company was doing, right? And Oscar just for some reason now assumes that it's done? Nothing to do with Oscar himself being an investor? 

Because if the point is that the deal is already done and Oscar just wants to get in first, the guy taking his money has no reason at all to want him to keep quiet about it. 

Yes, the deal is the (fake) railroad company.  I see it as @Charlemagne does... that Oscar was very proud of himself for "finding" this investment opportunity, and supposedly being among an elite few who are in on this.  His check to the "banker" sealed the deal, and he now considered himself to be a future railroad magnate.  If I recall correctly, there was a "how much more do you need" type of line, which implied that Oscar would be the last investor.  So in his eyes, no need to keep it hush hush any more, no one else can get in on the deal. 

As I said above, there are some plot holes, but this is the basic gist of where Oscar was at - if he were a cartoon character he'd be jumping around screaming "I'm rich! I'm rich!".  And why he had the brief chat with George when he did.