S05.E04: Episode Four

[PRgal]

More and more, I'm thinking that Mary's life is turning into Sex and the City. Blake vs. Gillingham is a bit like Big vs. Aidan.

Edited January 29, 2015 by PRgal

[jordanpond]

No Tony didn't use the word "whore." On the contrary, he said that he thought so much of Mary he couldn't accept the idea that she would sleep with someone if she didn't love him and plan to marry him. Sort of the opposite of whore to my way of thinking. He thinks she loves him and something else is wrong that can be fixed.

 

While Mary made it clear to Anna that this was a test drive to her, I didn't get the impression that Tony saw it as anything but a consummation of their  love.

I intrepreted this the exact same way. Prior to the week, Mary told Tony that she loved him. Then when she split up with him in the park, he used the word "lady" to describe her, and said that because she was indeed a lady, and thus wouldn't sleep with a man unless she were sure that he was the one, she must really think he is the one. That is why he didn't accept the breakup; he saw her as someone who thought he was the one (and he clearly thinks she is the one). So this was just a problem for a couple in love to get through.

 

He didn't say or even imply "you shouldn't have slept with me if you didn't love me" but rather that "you must love me because you're too much of a lady to have slept with me if you didn't."

[ZoloftBlob]

So wait...Mary thought she was into Gillingham and then decided she wasn't, and in the meantime, she slept with him. But somehow she's done something wrong? Because that doesn't happen to everyone, often more than once? It's just more acceptable now. Mary had sex with him and then dumped him. Welcome to the world. Maybe it was bad. Maybe she didn't feel anything special for him while doing the deed.

 

I don't think she was wrong to change her mind, but based on expression alone, she clearly decided against him at the end of Sex Week, and let him pretty much start planning their wedding for about a month afterward, all while not telling him, but telling Blake, that she was pretty much done with him.

 

She's allowed to change her mind, of course, but how she is handling dumping Tony is a bit cold and callous considering he has spent two years pursuing her.

[ShadowFacts]

Mary has never been full speed ahead with Tony.  She told him a while ago that she was not ready to move on.  But then some time passed and she seemed to warm up and she said she loved him.  So he had his hopes up.  Now his hopes are dashed. Unmarried people have been doing the deed since time immemorial.  It was not sanctioned, so to speak, by the norms of the day, but hardly unheard of.  Tony just thought Mary's willingness to have sex meant more than it did.  He thought their engagement would be a sure thing, but she was still stuck at "I love you in my cold way."   I do think she seriously miscalculated what his reaction might be. 

[jordanpond]

I think the "poor" characters have so many sympathetic figures among them on the show - Anna, Mrs. Hughes, Carson, Mrs. Patmore, Daisy, Bates, Tom (when he was Branson), etc. etc. - that I can't see a "evil poors vs. blameless rich" dichotomy. I think it's refreshing that the rich AREN'T portrayed as heartless evil slavedrivers for a change.

I don't think the dichotomy that has been presented on Downton Abbey lately is "evil poor vs. the blameless rich" but rather "the evil people who don't love the aristicracy vs. the good people (rich or poor) who support it." I don't think this dichotomy was there in seasons one and two, when I thought the show was much more balanced, but I think it has become extremely pro-aristocracy and pro-rigid-heirarchy in the last three seasons. That is why I think Miss Bunting is presented as extraordinarily poor-mannered. I think it is no coincidence that the person far most critical of the aristocracy that this show has presented in years is also by far the most annoying and rude.

 

The fact that Anna, Mrs, Hughes, etc. are so nice actually reinforces - rather than negates - the idea that this show is becoming increasingly nostalgic for a rigid hierarchy. Even the servant who is perhaps the most vocal critic of the family, Mrs. Hughes, is rather gentle in her disapproval and limits her remarks to Mr. Carson. And she twice turned down marriage to a man whom she loved in favor of working at Downton. Yet Downton is a place where even she and Mr. Carson, the most prestigious of the servants, live in a rather unpleasant place; their job duties are so time-consuming that they can not even live away from Downton; each lives in a cramped room in the stuffy attic; they can expect for their privacy to be invaded at any time, even in their bedrooms; they must repeatedly engage in such demeaning language as saying "my lord" or "my lady." Mr. Carson is addressed by the aristicrocacy by the demeaning practice of calling him by his last name only. And he thinks this system is great! 

 

Daisy had the opportunity to leave Downton 4 years ago to live with her loving father-in-law but hasn't done so. And those who did leave on their own accord to pursue other careers, Gwen and Alfred, both made sure to state that there was nothing wrong with Downton Abbey.

 

Even miserable, never-satisifed Thomas never questions the hierarchy at Downton Abbey. HIs only grumble was having to refer to Tom Branson as "sir" (because Tom was a "lowly" former servant.) Yet he has never once complained about the far more deferential --even demeaning -- practice of calling the family "my lord" and my lady."

 

Although there was a much wider range of opinion in seasons one and two, the whole tone of recent seasons of Downton Abbey is that the family thinks that they are generous in employing these people in servitude -- and that the servants agree how lucky they are to work in such time-consuming, often demeaning, and low-paying jobs. (I don't mean that cooking, etc. is demeaning -- but the way they are treated as social inferiors and, sometimes, as inanimate objects is.)

 

Almost entirely all of the challenges to this way of thinking in the past two seasons have come in the person of Sarah Bunting, and I feel it is no coincidence that almost all of the rudeness of these last 2 season has been embodied in her as well. I think it is the writer's version of aversion threapy for the audience. He has made Miss Bunting so utterly insufferable that he seems to want us to find her hierarchy-challenging ideas as repulsive as her behavior.

 

I miss the days when this show presented a much more balanced view of the aristocracy in particular, and the rigid social hierarchy in general.. The most gentle challengers to the system, Sybil and Matthew, are now deceased. And two others, Isobel and Tom, have become so much less vocal (Tom particlularly so) that each has expressed how grateful they are to the Crawleys.  For all the talk of how much times are changing, most of the change is directed at having the Crawleys make whatever changes are necessary to keep them at the top of the hierarchy. The writing has wrapped the only real recent challenger to that way of thinking in a particulary unpleasant package. All the "nice" poor still feel lucky to be in servitude, and even members of the middle class, such as Mrs. Drewe still refer to Edith as "My Lady," and her children stop eating their lunch to stand at Edith's arrival, and stay standing until Edith decides to sit.

 

So, no, I don't think Downton Abbey presents the poor/ middle class as evil, but it has been increasingly presenting those opposed to a rigid social hierearchy that way.

Edited January 29, 2015 by jordanpond

[Kohola3]

Beautifully articulated, jordanpond!  I totally agree.

[ShadowFacts]

 

I miss the days when this show presented a much more balanced view of the aristocracy in particular, and the rigid social hierarchy in general.. The most gentle challengers to the system, Sybil and Matthew, are now deceased. And two others, Isobel and Tom, have become so much less vocal (Tom particlularly so) that each has expressed how grateful they are to the Crawleys.  For all the talk of how much times are changing, most of the change is directed at having the Crawleys make whatever changes are necessary to keep them at the top of the hierarchy. The writing has wrapped the only real recent challenger to that way of thinking in a particulary unpleasant package. All the "nice" poor still feel lucky to be in servitude, and even members of the middle class, such as Mrs. Drewe still refer to Edith as "My Lady," and her children stop eating their lunch to stand at Edith's arrival, and stay standing until Edith decides to sit.

 

It's only by accident of birth that these lords and ladies have people fearing them and their power to make their lives unpleasant.  I wonder if Edith ever reflects on this regarding Marigold.  Not only is she unable to acknowledge her child and live with her, but her child is in an inferior social position where she will have to act in this subservient way, irrespective of whether she is a godchild to the lady (refuse to capitalize). 

[izabella]

It's only by accident of birth that these lords and ladies have people fearing them and their power to make their lives unpleasant.  I wonder if Edith ever reflects on this regarding Marigold.  Not only is she unable to acknowledge her child and live with her, but her child is in an inferior social position where she will have to act in this subservient way, irrespective of whether she is a godchild to the lady (refuse to capitalize). 

 

THIS, so much this.  Edith took him from the nice Swiss family to give her to a pig farmer's family.  Marigold will always be the pig farmer's daughter in those circumstances.  Maybe the Swish family were also pig farmers, but at least Marigold wouldn't have to be the pig farmer's daughter who grows up having to bow down to the Lady of the Manor Secret Mom. 

 

And we don't know anything about the Swiss family.  Maybe they were bankers and Marigold would have grown up in the lap of luxury.

[Constantinople]

Mary didn't change her mind about Gillingham.

 

She never thought she'd have to break up with him because she expected to be reading headlines like "Viscount found dead in Liverpool hotel"

[helenamonster]

I don't think she was wrong to change her mind, but based on expression alone, she clearly decided against him at the end of Sex Week, and let him pretty much start planning their wedding for about a month afterward, all while not telling him, but telling Blake, that she was pretty much done with him.

 

She's allowed to change her mind, of course, but how she is handling dumping Tony is a bit cold and callous considering he has spent two years pursuing her.

 

But see, that one's on him. He began to pursue Mary pretty soon after Matthew had died, even leaving his fiancee when Mary showed no signs of being ready to marry again. He didn't back down when she kept telling him no, he didn't back down when she basically told him he'd have to fight with Charles Blake to prove who would be the worthier husband, and he's not backing down no. If he wants to keep deluding himself into thinking that a marriage between him and Mary will work, let alone happen, that's on him. He's the one that wasted his time panting after her.

 

That being said, I do agree that both Mary and Tony are at fault here. There was definitely a miscommunication. Tony assumed that Mary would marry him after Sex Week, she just needed "convincing" (bleh). Mary thought she would want to marry Tony, she just needed to be sure. It's splitting hairs, but I think those two objectives are pretty different. Either way, Tony did not convince her and Mary did not become sure. Why Tony would want to marry her when she's now showing such resistance to the idea is beyond me, but Mary definitely shouldn't have been skipping around England telling everyone and their lady's maid that she was gonna dump him.

[CleoCaesar]

they must repeatedly engage in such demeaning language as saying "my lord" or "my lady."

 

Mr. Carson is addressed by the aristocracy by the demeaning practice of calling him by his last name only.

 

Yet he has never once complained about the far more deferential --even demeaning -- practice of calling the family "my lord" and my lady."

 

I think you might be transposing 2015 attitudes onto 1924 reality. Today we might see calling a superior by deferential titles as "demeaning" (well some do), but would it really have been seen that way at the time? They were lords and ladies. Nowadays calling people "sir" or "ma'am" is a little out of fashion (except maybe in the South?) but it's hardly demeaning.

 

All the "nice" poor still feel lucky to be in servitude

 

For their socio-economic stations, they were pretty lucky. Would Anna rather help a lady get dressed and brush her hair or work in a factory for 14 hours a day? Would Bates prefer helping Lord Grantham on his travels or doing backbreaking labor?

[SusanSunflower]

People were leaving service (and the agricultural sector) and had been leaving service in significant numbers to go work in the factories where they ONLY had to work 12 hours a day and had some privacy and control over their lives and the freedom to quit one job and take another better one as their skills increased. They were happy for the freedom to live in bare-basic housing, have lovers, get married, have babies, free to eat their own cooking or dine at the pub (and drink at the pub) as long as they could pay.  I'm guessing some balked at going back into harness after the war. See: Gaskill's North and South much earlier.  The shortage of trained and/or qualified applicants has been mentioned, even at a grand house as Downton. 

Edited January 29, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[ZoloftBlob]

But see, that one's on him. He began to pursue Mary pretty soon after Matthew had died, even leaving his fiancee when Mary showed no signs of being ready to marry again. He didn't back down when she kept telling him no, he didn't back down when she basically told him he'd have to fight with Charles Blake to prove who would be the worthier husband, and he's not backing down no. If he wants to keep deluding himself into thinking that a marriage between him and Mary will work, let alone happen, that's on him. He's the one that wasted his time panting after her.

 

True - and that Tony is a little obsessed definantelty comes into consideration, but Mary was full on considering him for marriage before the Sex Vacation and was done after... but didn't tell him he was no longer under consideration for what appeared to be a month or two, so that made me think she could have spared him a *little*.

 

That Tony has always seemed a little creepily fixated on Mary just makes me wonder where he was the night Matthew *accidently* wrecked his car....

[dustoffmom]

 

Nowadays calling people "sir" or "ma'am" is a little out of fashion (except maybe in the South?) but it's hardly demeaning.

Not demeaning in the slightest, although it sometimes seems so to the recipients.  I am a Yankee born and bred who nowadays chooses to live in the South in my later years.  It was absolutely drilled into me as a child, this thing called manners, that anyone my 'superior', be it either by age or position, should be addressed as sir or mam.  A habit I could never break, nor would I want to do so.  Over the years I have had many a supervisor or boss who was my junior in years perhaps but nonetheless they always, always got a sir or mam from me.  Some of them were uncomfortable with it and would jokingly tell me to not answer them so.  I always explained to them that it was simply a matter of etiquette and manners, no matter their age next to mine they were, in fact, my supervisor and as such deserved my respect.  And I could no more NOT offer them this courtesy than rise and fly.  Proper manners is not a question of the times people...it is just mannerly.  I will correct a child in a heartbeat who presumes to call me by my first name, as pleasantly as possible but clearly.  I am an adult, you are a child, my name is Mrs. whatever.  Children these days are not taught such things.  Simple civility requires it.  JMO of course.

[jordanpond]

1.) I think you might be transposing 2015 attitudes onto 1924 reality. Today we might see calling a superior by deferential titles as "demeaning" (well some do), but would it really have been seen that way at the time?

 

2.) They were lords and ladies. Nowadays calling people "sir" or "ma'am" is a little out of fashion (except maybe in the South?) but it's hardly demeaning.

 

 

 

3.) For their socio-economic stations, they were pretty lucky. Would Anna rather help a lady get dressed and brush her hair or work in a factory for 14 hours a day? Would Bates prefer helping Lord Grantham on his travels or doing backbreaking labor?

CleoCaesar, I hope you don't mind, but I was having trouble on this computer breaking your post into pieces, so I inserted numbers, which I'll use below.

 

1.) It's not a case of transposing 2015 values to the early 20th century. To give an example of a show that addresses a similar time period in England, the way people address eachother on "Mr. Selfridge" is far more respectful. All 2000 of his employees know that Mr. Selfridge is their boss, and that their postions range from somewhat lower than his to extremely lower than his. Yet  he and his employees address each other usuing reciprocal terms: they call him "Mr. Selfridge" and he calls everyone "Mr. Grove," "Miss Mardle," etc. The workplace has quite a detailed hierarchy as far as job levels, but as individual people, the names he and his employees call each other indicate mutual respect.

 

2.) Being called "Lord" and "Lady" is a lot different than "sir" or "ma'am." In fact "sir" and "ma'am" are sometimes reciprocal. And someone who calls others "sir/ma'am" while working might on the next day be addressed as "sir/ma'am," for example, when checking into a hotel.

 

3.) But that's just the point-- the show wants us to view Downton's servants as lucky because people of their socio-economic status could have it worse. But not being as bad off as someone else doesn't mean that you actually have it good. Further, the view of Downton's servants as being lucky members of their socio-economic status implies that their social class is and should should be permanent, by virtue of their birth.

 

For his class, Tony is considered "unlucky" because his family rents out their castle while they still get to live in the presumably large and comfortable dower house, while Mr. Molesley is considered "lucky" because he got a job as footman last season. But whose life is actually "luckier?" If given the choice, whose life would we prefer to have? Tony's is incredibly luckier. Yet the postion this show takes -- on the part of the aristocracy and their servants -- is that Tony is unlucky and Mr. Molesley is lucky because Downton Abbey measures one's life in comparison to how one was born. In my opinion, the more accurate way to measure how fortunate one is to compare that person to all positions in that society. And my way of thinking is not limited to 21st century: history shows that many people felt this way 100 years or so ago. It's just that on the last two season of Downton, practially the only person of any social class who has voiced a similar opinion is the rude and annoying Sarah Bunting.

[CleoCaesar]

Thanks for the interesting posts, jordanpond!

[millennium]

 I do think that just telling her, "no, we'll work through this until you change your mind" is a bit possessive, but as long as Mary doesn't give in to it, who cares?

 

She did appear to give in to it.   She hesitated, then walked off with him like a chastened schoolgirl.    I found it very uncharacteristic of her, and a bit worrisome.

[millennium]

I don't think the dichotomy that has been presented on Downton Abbey lately is "evil poor vs. the blameless rich" but rather "the evil people who don't love the aristicracy vs. the good people (rich or poor) who support it." I don't think this dichotomy was there in seasons one and two, when I thought the show was much more balanced, but I think it has become extremely pro-aristocracy and pro-rigid-heirarchy in the last three seasons. That is why I think Miss Bunting is presented as extraordinarily poor-mannered. I think it is no coincidence that the person far most critical of the aristocracy that this show has presented in years is also by far the most annoying and rude.

 

The fact that Anna, Mrs, Hughes, etc. are so nice actually reinforces - rather than negates - the idea that this show is becoming increasingly nostalgic for a rigid hierarchy. Even the servant who is perhaps the most vocal critic of the family, Mrs. Hughes, is rather gentle in her disapproval and limits her remarks to Mr. Carson. And she twice turned down marriage to a man whom she loved in favor of working at Downton. Yet Downton is a place where even she and Mr. Carson, the most prestigious of the servants, live in a rather unpleasant place; their job duties are so time-consuming that they can not even live away from Downton; each lives in a cramped room in the stuffy attic; they can expect for their privacy to be invaded at any time, even in their bedrooms; they must repeatedly engage in such demeaning language as saying "my lord" or "my lady." Mr. Carson is addressed by the aristicrocacy by the demeaning practice of calling him by his last name only. And he thinks this system is great! 

 

 

I wish you'd been in my British Lit class.  

[SusanSunflower]

I'm trying to remember.  I think each of the servants individually is beholden to Robert and Cora and Violet ... let me count the ways .... Bates, because Grantham hired him and kept him on despite (too numerous to count) ... Thomas ditto to the too numerous to count nth power ... Moseley would have gone to war had it not been for Violet and he was forgiven the incident with the wine (he's mostly beholden to Carson), Mrs. Pattimore received her eye operation, Baxter lied about a criminal past and was forgiven. Tom was "accepted" despite seducing and marrying the Earl's daughter. 

 

I think that Carson, Mrs. Hughes, Anna and Daisy have neither been forgiven or received upstairs generosity (at least as far as I can remember.).

[RedHawk]

I've re-watched the scenes in the Liverpool hotel, the discussion Mary had with Anna about wanting to be sure, and Mary and Tom's discussion where she admits she doesn't want to marry Tony. My conclusion is that she had sexual desire for Tony but once it was more or less satisfied and she spent time with him, she discovered that she didn't feel a deep bond or wish to actually live with him as his wife. She said to Tom that she had found they had little in common. That's a relationship killer for sure.

 

I went from thinking she had little sexual feeling for him (or any feeling at all, for that matter) to understanding that she thought the sexual desire might be clouding her overall judgement of whether she and Tony were truly suited for one another. It becomes much clearer if you listen to her discussion with Tom. So to bring it to this episode, when Tony and Mary go their separate ways in Liverpool he actually says "Now we're certain, we just have to make arrangements." He clearly thinks they will marry, especially considering what she said at breakfast that morning about announcements and doing the wedding properly and all. 

Mary doesn't contradict him there, and perhaps she should have made it clear that morning, but she did realize it was going to hurt him terribly when she did tell him she'd sampled the goods and decided not to purchase. She then goes home and Tony surprises her there during the Russians' visit. Yes, she let him continue to think they were engaged and would be planning the wedding, but I think she was just getting up her courage to tell him, and deciding what to say. He was the one pushing so I don't blame her and yet I can't blame him for his anger either, even though he takes it a bit too far. As long as we learn that he has stepped aside and taken her "no" like a gentleman, then I'll forgive him.  

 

I've noticed that education is the common denominator among those of the "lower orders" who are openly questioning the system and their place in it. Even going as far back as Gwen secretly learning how to type so she could get a better job and leave service. Sarah and Tom are educated middle class people, and Daisy wanted to learn maths because she saw she would need to know more than cooking (a fine trade in itself) if she decided to manage the farm. 

Edited January 30, 2015 by RedHawk

[MaryHedwig]

I think that Carson, Mrs. Hughes, Anna and Daisy have neither been forgiven or received upstairs generosity (at least as far as I can remember.).

To add support to your premise, they did keep on Anna after she married Bates and allowed them to live outside of the Abby.  Also, they pulled off a wedding for Daisy and let them use an upper room.  Right now, they are allowing Daisy to be tutored.

Edited January 30, 2015 by MaryHedwig

[ZoloftBlob]

Carson was also forgiven the grave transaction of having worked on the stage (and that actually was kind of a big no no)

[helenamonster]

That Tony has always seemed a little creepily fixated on Mary just makes me wonder where he was the night Matthew *accidently* wrecked his car....

 

Oh, come on now, we all know Bates cut the brakes before leaving for Scotland. ;)

Edited January 30, 2015 by helenamonster

[ZoloftBlob]

Oh, come on now, we all know Bates cut the breaks before leaving for Scotland. ;)

 

Yes yes, but Tony probably slipped him a few quid to do it. And see, Greene got wise to it, and that's why Greene had to die.... not because he raped Anna but because he was going to reveal that Tony paid Bates to kill Matthew! :)

 

 

[Avaleigh]

I'm trying to remember.  I think each of the servants individually is beholden to Robert and Cora and Violet ... let me count the ways .... Bates, because Grantham hired him and kept him on despite (too numerous to count) ... Thomas ditto to the too numerous to count nth power ... Moseley would have gone to war had it not been for Violet and he was forgiven the incident with the wine (he's mostly beholden to Carson), Mrs. Pattimore received her eye operation, Baxter lied about a criminal past and was forgiven. Tom was "accepted" despite seducing and marrying the Earl's daughter. 

 

I think that Carson, Mrs. Hughes, Anna and Daisy have neither been forgiven or received upstairs generosity (at least as far as I can remember.).

 

During the cancer scare of Mrs Hughes Cora said that the family would take care of her and that she'd be able to stay on at Downton. Mrs Hughes was very touched and I think she's felt more loyalty to the family ever since.

[Tetraneutron]

Carson was also forgiven the grave transaction of having worked on the stage (and that actually was kind of a big no no)

And for stealing food. Mrs Hughes doesn't get her criminal acts overlooked, but Cora tells her they'll take care of her when she had her cancer scare. Thomas was forgiven for recommending a woman he knew to be a criminal work for Cora as well as for kissing another servant, selling black market goods, and generally being an ass (although he did save Edith's life and stop Sybbie from being abused), Bates was given chance after chance, backed out of going with Lord Granthan entirely on a whim (justifiable to the audience but Lord G never knows why), they stood by him when he was accused of murder, and then accused of murder a second time (he did, in Robert's view, save the Prince so there's that). Anna was accused of murder as well and got the full support of the Crawley family. (Although again, they owe her too). Not to mention all the help the Crawley's give. They support Gwen becoming a secretary, even driving her to interviews, same with Alfred being a chef and Daisy getting tutoring.

 

On the whole, they're very generous employers. Probably why they get servants willing to commit criminal acts for them. Makes you wonder why Violet is stuck with an ass like Spratt.

[MaryHedwig]

Yes yes, but Tony probably slipped him a few quid to do it. And see, Greene got wise to it, and that's why Greene had to die.... not because he raped Anna but because he was going to reveal that Tony paid Bates to kill Matthew! :)

My mind is making up stories like this as well; oh God, am I ready for the next episode.

[RealityTVSmack]

Just to clarify: No, Mary was not wrong to change her mind. I just think she shouldn't have faked to be happy for him and then go around telling everyone but him that she was going to dump him. THAT was not nice and honest. She should have told him honestly in Liverpool.

 

I was just surprised that everyone seems to see Tony as "shady" and "Mr. Hyde" just because he was angry. For me his anger was justified and normal. He will get over it. His "we will work through this" is just pathetic and will never work, but I don't see him as shady or evil because of that little outburst. He is just disapointed.

I agree, it showed that Mary was not discreet nor respectful when she had a change of heart about marrying Tony. When sitting at dinner with Charles, he mentions that he got over her rejection, he didn't die.  She says she hopes Tony feels that same way (when breaking up with him).  Wouldn't a trustworthy discreet person keep that information to herself until she talked to the involved party.  Especially in light of her intimate week with Tony. 

 

I cut Tony some slack for trying to hold on to Mary...especially because she seems to have taken Tony away from his ex-fiancée, Mabel Fox. Maybe he was feeling bad for dumping Mabel for Mary only to find out she was rejecting him.  In addition, he believed he had an obligation to marry the woman (lady) he had intimate relations with. 

Edited January 30, 2015 by RealityTVSmack

[DeepRunner]

I don't think she was wrong to change her mind, but based on expression alone, she clearly decided against him at the end of Sex Week, and let him pretty much start planning their wedding for about a month afterward, all while not telling him, but telling Blake, that she was pretty much done with him.

 

She's allowed to change her mind, of course, but how she is handling dumping Tony is a bit cold and callous considering he has spent two years pursuing her.

 

Mary? Cold? Callous? I am shocked--SHOCKED-- that she would be that way...

 

As far as Blake goes, last season he seemed something of a worthy rival, although I couldn't see Mary the Mudwrestler with him. This episode, he seemed like a used car salesman, without the charm. It was good, though, that he had Mabel Lane Fox with him. She made Mary uncomfortable, and it's always a bit enjoyable seeing Mary squirm.

[Andorra]

 

This episode, he seemed like a used car salesman, without the charm.

 

That's a good description. I don't like him and find him utterly uncharming. I don't like Tony either. They shall both go away, please.

[JudyObscure]

When sitting at dinner with Charles, he mentions that he got over her rejection, he didn't die.  She says she hopes Tony feels that same way (when breaking up with him).  Wouldn't a trustworthy discreet person keep that information to herself until she talked to the involved party.

That's got me wondering if this was Mary's way of letting Blake know he was back in the running.  Possibly Blake will take it that way whether intended to or not.  We can't have Mary without a string of ardent suitors with Valentine's Day coming up. 

[RedHawk]

I definitely read it as Mary letting Blake know the game wasn't over yet and she was a free agent. The way she smiled at him across the room and chatted with him, as well as accepting the dinner invitation -- she want him.

[Zahdii]

Does she really?  Does she want him, or just wants another suitor lined up for when she's free from what's his name?  I don't feel I know the character enough to think that I know if she's consciously trying to keep men lined up for her for the power and ego boost, or if she's doing it without realizing it.

 

She might be completely cold, or she might be a 'still waters run deep' kind who is waiting, consciously or not, for a man to come along and stimulate her mind and make her tows curl.  She might have to wait awhile for that to happen, but she's in a position to wait as long as it takes.  It's a shame that she's not in a time where she could admit that until The One comes along, anyone else is just a pleasant distraction, and if they're really looking for a commitment they should keep on looking - elsewhere.

[jordanpond]

Thanks for the interesting posts, jordanpond!

Thank you. I'm finding the variety of opinions expressed in this thread very interesting and enjoyable to read!

 

A few things I don't think anyone's mentioned yet about this epsiode:

 

The good:

 

I thought the delightfully charming proposal scene was also physically quite beautiful at the end. When he came over to sit at the opposite of the couch as Isobel, the couple was framed by the big picture window with a view of Isobel's garden. The ending scene of Tom, Mary, and Robert was lovely as well. I loved that little bridge they crossed, and after all these years we got to see the village from yet another angle, this time from across the field. There is no end to the beauty of this show!

 

I am just loving how many middle aged to "golden aged" women are the objects of romantic interest this season: Miss Baxter (I assume her character is about 40, although in real life the actress looks much younger), Cora, Isobel, and even Violet. Although there is no hint yet that her prince is still romantically interested (and I hope he isn't if he is still married), he stated this epsiode that he still sees the attractive young woman he saw half a century ago. The best thing about all this romantic admiration focused on these women is that I find every single story line quite believeable.  I think this season in general and this episode in particular has done a marvelous job with these stories.

 

The Bad:

 

The ridicluous and entirely out of character (for Mrs. Hughes in particular) heaping of shame on Mr. Molesley. I've always found Mr. Carson a little on the crusty side, but his glee at humiliating and taunting Mr. Molesley since last season has been unusually mean- spirited. I almost feel like the writer was accused of being sexist by his non-stop picking on Edith, so he made a male, downstairs version of Edith in Mr. Molelsey. The fact that even Daisy felt free to jump on the "telling off Mr. Molesley" bandwagon was bordering on completely unbelievable. They really have made him like Edith, a real punching bag. This was especially disappointing for me because they gave him some wonderful moments with Miss Baxter last season and this -- offering support, standing up to the intimidating Thomas, giving really helpful advice, and then, upon learning the truth about her past, desperately grasping for some reason why it might not be quite as bad as she said it was. I was so touched by his tearful realization of how bad it indeed was; yet even then, he didn't reject her. All that insight to his character and all the revelation of both his tenderness and strength --and now they have reverted to making him, once again, a fool to be ridiculed by anyone and everyone. Sigh. What a shame.

Edited January 30, 2015 by jordanpond

[Zahdii]

Total agreement on Molesley.  He's out of step with everyone else, but he's trying so hard to fit in.  Stop with the bullying!

[Andorra]

Interestingly the scene with Mrs Hughes and Molesley was not in the UK version. Here we only had Carson torturing Molesley and Mrs Hughes took no part in it. I've seen the scene and I think it was good that they cut it in England, because - as others here - I found it out of character for Mrs Hughes.

[jordanpond]

Just curious, Andorra, did they show the scene of Daisy telling him off in this episode, too, as they did here in the US?

[talula]

That's got me wondering if this was Mary's way of letting Blake know he was back in the running.  Possibly Blake will take it that way whether intended to or not.  We can't have Mary without a string of ardent suitors with Valentine's Day coming up.

I definitely read it as Mary letting Blake know the game wasn't over yet and she was a free agent. The way she smiled at him across the room and chatted with him, as well as accepting the dinner invitation -- she want him.

You may be right, but IMO you still need to tell the person your breaking up with before you let other suitors know the line forms at the right, lol.

[RedHawk]

You may be right, but IMO you still need to tell the person your breaking up with before you let other suitors know the line forms at the right, lol.

 

 

Quite true, yet she didn't know when she might run into him again, and she couldn't send out a tweet or update her Facebook status 10 minutes after she broke up with Tony, so I guess she took her chance. She's not getting any younger...

 

What would a woman have done in those days, other than wait for word to get around? It wouldn't have been proper to write or telephone Blake directly and say, "Hey, don't know if ya heard but I dumped Tony, so if you're up for it, I'm doing dirty weekends with all my prospects and you're next. Ready to pack a bag?"

[Diane M]

Miss Baxter (I assume her character is about 40, although in real life the actress looks much younger)

 

Actually, the actress just turned 47, and I think Baxter is probably about the same age.  

[SusanSunflower]

For no reason at all, I feel certain that Blake will have told several people -- there were telephones and Blake is a social butterfly -- so even after that oh-so public dinner with Mary (after that oh-so public run-in at the fashion show) -- I suspect he'd be eager to spread the news that Tony was a bad lay ... and Mary was sick of him.  Tony may just be one of those 'principled' men who do not accept defeat as a point-of-honor but more likely a competitive person who feels humiliated to have failed to win the prize anyone-and-everyone who knows him knew he was seeking. Mary is cold and pretty much heartless ... but he and we knew that. 

[Calamity Jane]

She did appear to give in to it.   She hesitated, then walked off with him like a chastened schoolgirl.    I found it very uncharacteristic of her, and a bit worrisome.

Yes!  I too fastened on that moment as a point of concern about her ability to handle an out-of-control angry Tony.  It would have been much more in character for her to have stood stockstill, refusing to budge and sending him off with a sharp piece of her mind after he shouted at her so disrespectfully.  

[talula]

Quite true, yet she didn't know when she might run into him again, and she couldn't send out a tweet or update her Facebook status 10 minutes after she broke up with Tony, so I guess she took her chance. She's not getting any younger...

 

What would a woman have done in those days, other than wait for word to get around? It wouldn't have been proper to write or telephone Blake directly and say, "Hey, don't know if ya heard but I dumped Tony, so if you're up for it, I'm doing dirty weekends with all my prospects and you're next. Ready to pack a bag?"

Lol, Mary is a tough cookie IMO she'd get the word out she's available. Earlier in the day, at the fashion show, she notices that Charles is sitting with a attractive woman he introduces to Mary. Non other than Tony's ex-fiancé Mabel Fox who isn't happy to meet the woman who stole her betrothed. Not sure if that was good for Charles to do...I don't think he cared cause he was no longer into Mary.

At their dinner he tells Mary, "that he's not one to die of a broken heart". Then she adds that she hopes Tony feels the same way. IMO she comes across as crass for sharing that info. I didn't feel she was interested in Charles at all...he offered to help her get rid of Tony after that...but I saw nothing that would tell me Charles was next or even on her dance card.

Will Mary be looking for fresh meat...I wouldn't be surprised...she loves the chase? What guy is she going to steal from his fiancé next? :D :D

[wlk68]

She did appear to give in to it.   She hesitated, then walked off with him like a chastened schoolgirl.    I found it very uncharacteristic of her, and a bit worrisome.

This right here. She breaks up with him, he says he doesn't accept it and instead of saying tough shit and leaving him there, Mary just sort of goes 'okay' and they walk away together all cozy? That struck me as extremely odd.  

 

Thomas was forgiven for recommending a woman he knew to be a criminal work for Cora as well as for kissing another servant, selling black market goods, and generally being an ass (although he did save Edith's life and stop Sybbie from being abused),

 

 

He also 'found' Isis when the dog went missing. Granted he was the one who hid her in the first place but Robert didn't know that and was very appreciative.

Edited January 30, 2015 by wlk68

[SusanSunflower]

Tediously, Blake may be back on her dance card (temporarily) if Mary goes into full Scarlett O'Hara mode being unable/unwilling to accept that he's not that into her. Her look of surprise and abandonment in E4 (I think) when Blake declared he was off to bed was priceless. However, I think the idea of Mary pursuing an uninterested Blake is unlikely to be developed by Fellowes as both unthinkable and unflattering to his precious. I think there will be someone else ... where/when I have no idea. (totally unspoiled in this regard). I'd really hate for Mary to get her into any sortof romantic relationship with Tom ...that Mary-Daddy-Mary's Man triangle would be even more fraught for Tom than it was for Matthew (who had no child in the game). 

Edited January 30, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[Too Late Kev]

This right here. She breaks up with him, he says he doesn't accept it and instead of saying tough shit and leaving him there, Mary just sort of goes 'okay' and they walk away together all cozy? That struck me as extremely odd. 

 

He got a little bit loud when he was talking about how she slept with him w/o being married to him. I felt like she didn't want to say anything more at that point in case his response would be heard by others and word would get around. Also, Mary knew he wouldn't take it well, but she didn't realize he was going to reject the breakup entirely...she probably needs to regroup before she can figure out what to do.

[DHDancer]

I'm not understanding how you all are seeing a Mary-Tom "ship".  That is so not going to happen.  They are close as in brother-sister / close work colleagues.  I think she is very happy that Tom has supported her growth into a business woman, helping her take control of the fate of the Downton estate and legacy, and for supporting her increasing competency with Robert.  A mentor, if you like.  They have both grown together into competent business people and they share the role of parents of Downton's next generation.  I don't see the relationship as any more than that.

 

I swear, in reading much of the supposition in these threads, that I'm watching a very different program.  Maybe that's because I've grown up and lived in multiple cultures (with a very heavy foundation in "British" sensibilities)

[Zahdii]

Yes. I thought that Mary decided that she'd better get him off the street if he's going to get loud and start talking about things like Sex Week in public.

[millennium]

Yes!  I too fastened on that moment as a point of concern about her ability to handle an out-of-control angry Tony.  It would have been much more in character for her to have stood stockstill, refusing to budge and sending him off with a sharp piece of her mind after he shouted at her so disrespectfully.  

 

Tony has the upper hand, for the moment.   Mary can reject him, but he can utterly destroy her reputation.   Mary Crawley's honor has taken a serious hit already; she can't likely sustain another scandal and come out smelling like roses again.   I heard a very big unspoken threat in Tony's tirade.   What was it he said?

 

 

 

I refuse to believe that a woman like you, a lady, could give herself to a man without first being certain that he was the one.

 

So which is it, Mary?   Are you a lady who gave yourself to a man you were certain you were going to marry?   Or are you some high society harlot who'd go off with a gentleman under the pretense of engagement to partake in a week of carnal abandon, then cut the legs out from under the poor chap by proclaiming everything you said you felt was a lie?  

 

If you're a lady, you'll have to marry me.

 

If not ...

 

That is what Tony seems to be saying.

Edited January 30, 2015 by millennium

[RedHawk]

Also, Mary knew he wouldn't take it well, but she didn't realize he was going to reject the breakup entirely...she probably needs to regroup before she can figure out what to do.

 

 

I wasn't even sure they were actually broken up after she walked away with him, but then didn't we see a later scene in which she made it clear that she at least believes herself single again? Don't know how Tony's going to act and hope we've seen the last of him...

Edited January 31, 2015 by RedHawk