Unpopular Opinions

[SusanSunflower]

Lavinia's role in saving her father's fortune (which later saved Downton) means nothing obviously...  source: http://downtonabbey.wikia.com/wiki/Lavinia_Swire

"" During her first visit to Downton Abbey, Lavinia is overheard arguing with Sir Richard Carlisle by Lady Rosamund Painswick. Lady Rosamund, wondering what the argument was about, asks Lady Mary Crawley to look into it. Lavinia confesses to Mary that her father owed Sir Richard a large amount of money and was unable to repay him. When Lavinia went to Carlisle to plead on her father's behalf, he made a deal with her: he would forgive her father's debt if she would deliver to him some papers of state in the possession of her uncle, Jonathan Swire, a Liberal minister. She agreed, stole the papers from her uncle and delivered them to Sir Richard. The publication of information in the papers triggered the Marconi scandal. Mary sympathizes with Lavinia because of her own scandalous secret in the matter of the death of Kemal Pamuk and so Mary decides not to tell anyone in the family about Lavinia's history with Sir Richard."" 

This may be an unpopular opinion (or it may be Lavinia's "bravery" has been forgotten, but Lavinia acted PROACTIVELY and saved her father and thereby saved Downton. 

[Constantinople]

But then Matthew never met the gloriously gorgeous Mr. Pamuk .... even he might have felt a tingle ... 

(Matthew was not "my type" but he grew on me ... and I gave both Dan Stevens and Michelle Dockery high praise for managing to make their stilted dialogue sound real-enough and spontaneous)

Matthew met Pamuk. The evening of the fox hunt, Matthew, Napier & Pamuk attended dinner at Downton. At one point, while Mary, Matthew and Napier were chatting, Pamuk made eyes at Mary, and Mary then rather rudely interrupted Napier mid-sentence and walked over to Pamuk. Matthew & Napier then commiserated.

[Milburn Stone]

I hope Thomas Barrow keeps thinking up ways to torment people, said no one ever.

[SusanSunflower]

Then his being so very understanding is quite understandable. I always wished he had admitted that he and Lavina and done the deed (even more than once).  Mary and Pamuk suggested that the show was going to sizzle with chemistry ... even bodice rip from time to time ... bait and switch to be sure. I'm not fond of sexually explicit TV, but the chasteness of so very many characters for such long periods begs belief -- and is unnecessary -- Thomas might well enjoy trips to London and visiting a friendly bar or staying in a particular hostel, or a friend at another big house (I do remember his stupid blackmail attempt)... The women were stuck with "being good" because of pregnancy, but in Upstairs/Downstairs the relationship between Rose and Sarah hinted at a physical relationship without really suggesting lesbianism in either (as far as I remember) ... Of course even in the 1970's there were probably a lot more viewers who had grown up innocently sharing a bed  than there are now, but I don't really "know" that, but sharing bedrooms was definitely commonplace, so showing that in Eaton Place, London, England where it snows and the bedrooms were unheated, was not particularly "suggestive". 

Edited February 4, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[ZoloftBlob]

but I'm sort of divided on this, because on the one hand it makes little sense for Matthew to just go "ok fine whatever" and that's it, either dramatically or logically, but on the other I couldn't have shipped Mary with him if he'd been a slutshamer

 

My 2015 morals agree with you, because what she did was really no big deal now, but I can see where a guy raised in the 1900s (and who was likely a virgin himself) would be hurt and appalled that his sort of current lady (technically they weren't back together, he was just offering his protection) is actually guilty of what his society views as a terrible misdeed. Considering that Matthew could be quite the obnoxious git about honor, it just seemed off that he shrugged it off like she'd just told him she sneaked a kiss with a boy behind the barn. Then again, he was a virgin... maybe that 's what he thought she meant. ;D

 

Speaking of the wedding, it's yet again unpopular opinion time, in that I don't think Matthew should have ever married Lavinia under any circumstances, since it always seemed perfectly clear to me that she was nothing but a rebound, a failed attempt to get over Mary, whom he was obviously completely in love with the enitre time. For *really* unpopular opinion, I'm going to play: in a way I think she was actually sort of lucky that she walked in on M/M kissing, so she had it in black and white what was going on, since Matthew was clearly too much of a spineless wuss to break up with her.

 

It might be unpopular but I agree. I always had the vibe that Matthew's whole "well, I am in a wheel chair and can never have children so Lavinia, that's it go home and never think of me again!" martyr routine was partly a relief for him in that he finally had a *really good* reason to shake off the nicest girl who ever lived without having to feel bad himself for just not being that into her. And I disliked his decision to then marry Lavinia out of some weird sense of honor because really, good marriages aren't based on "I'm not really into her but she stayed around even when I was soiling myself and not able to fuck her, so I kinda owe her a marriage".

 

I was always surprised Sir Richard never came back after Matthew's death.... he and Mary really were a power couple and honestly, the only real problem there was Matthew being alive.

[MyAimIsTrue]

Rose is pretty, but I can't get over the "cousin Oliver" factor (Brady Bunch) with her. She is even a cousin!

 

That's exactly what I think of Rose, as another cousin Oliver.  If two people have the same opinion can it still be considered unpopular???

[tapplum]

My 2015 morals agree with you, because what she did was really no big deal now, but I can see where a guy raised in the 1900s (and who was likely a virgin himself) would be hurt and appalled that his sort of current lady (technically they weren't back together, he was just offering his protection) is actually guilty of what his society views as a terrible misdeed. Considering that Matthew could be quite the obnoxious git about honor, it just seemed off that he shrugged it off like she'd just told him she sneaked a kiss with a boy behind the barn. Then again, he was a virgin... maybe that 's what he thought she meant. ;D

 

It might be unpopular but I agree. I always had the vibe that Matthew's whole "well, I am in a wheel chair and can never have children so Lavinia, that's it go home and never think of me again!" martyr routine was partly a relief for him in that he finally had a *really good* reason to shake off the nicest girl who ever lived without having to feel bad himself for just not being that into her. And I disliked his decision to then marry Lavinia out of some weird sense of honor because really, good marriages aren't based on "I'm not really into her but she stayed around even when I was soiling myself and not able to fuck her, so I kinda owe her a marriage".

 

I was always surprised Sir Richard never came back after Matthew's death.... he and Mary really were a power couple and honestly, the only real problem there was Matthew being alive.

Yes, that's exactly the problem - logically the characters would hold certain views, except holding these views today makes them ...deeply problematic, shall we say. Matthew certainly would have been more dramatically interesting if he'd been more a child of his time. But lol as you say, perhaps he was too innocent to quite understand what she meant... ("Lust? What is this unfamiliar thing of which you are speaking?")

 

Complete agreement wrt Lavinia. Also, marrying her because she was kind when he was in a wheelchair, while knowing full well he's in love with someone else and does not actually want to marry her, is super cruel to Lavinia. Like, you're a really nice person, so I'm going to express my gratitude by marrying you while pining for someone else, because that's what a good guy would do! The implications are really pretty ugly - either he thinks that he's such a prize that a one-sided marriage with him is still better than marrying someone else, that she couldn't get a suitor who actually wanted her despite how pretty, nice and rich she was, or that his "honour" in keeping his word to her is more important than them both being able to marry people they were mutually in love with. At the very least he should have had enough respect for her to be honest about the situation and letting her make an informed choice.

 

Wow, I hadn't even thouht of that, but it would have been *awesome* for Richard to make a comeback.

Edited February 5, 2015 by tapplum

[ZoloftBlob]

Matthew certainly would have been more dramatically interesting if he'd been more a child of his time. But lol as you say, perhaps he was too innocent to quite understand what she meant... ("Lust? What is this unfamiliar thing of which you are talking?")

 

Yeah, If only because the Pamuk thing, for the angst, did peter out into nothing when with at least Robert should have said something harsh - I mean, really, Mary had job in this family and it was to keep her legs together until marriage, and her behavior *does* reflect on him. As for Matthew, I wouldn't even call it slutshaming or blame him for having some minimal anger if the woman he'd been in love with for years and played all sorts of mind games with him and that he waited for marriage to nail revealed he wasn't going to get to pop her cherry, which held a certain amount of significance at the time, It's a flawed presentation because by 1920 standards, he would have been within his rights to never forgive her and what she did was certainly a marriage deal breaker. Hell, Matthew chastely kissing Mary is deemed a moral failing for Matthew - he cheated on his betrothed, and  his worry about the money inherited from Papa Swire was that the knowledge that Matthew cheated on Lavinia by smooching Mary with maybe a little tongue was that it would *fundamentally* change Papa Swire's opinion of him, that Swire would never ever have left him the money because what he did was morally awful. That makes his response, and Robert's response, to Mary full on fucking the Turk and hiding the body just totally out of place.

 

But again, I think Mary had to pretty much grab hold and take the lead on their wedding night so.... ;)

 

I genuinely don't think Lavinia's feelings ever came into Matthew's decision to marry her. He liked her, they had a thing, then he got hurt and she stood by him even though there really wasn't any hope.... Lets be honest, as soon as he stood up, he was kinda obligated to marry her, and if he didn't, if he dumped the girl he pointedly told to leave him when he was crippled, who stood by him, he'd be the biggest asshole ever. And... there were other factors. Mary *was* marrying Richard, he did like Lavinia, he was obligated to marry anyway and Lavinia seemed into him. He couldn't have Mary so why *not* marry the girl who loved the gay carousal pony ride that was Matthew Crawley? That Lavinia wised up and saw the handwriting on the wall was a good thing for her, because Matthew was never going to admit he didn't want to marry her.

 

Richard popping in after a respectful mourning period really would have been awesome. Only problem I could see there is that Mary genuinely didn't like his lack of concern for the upperclass.

[DeepRunner]

 

Richard popping in after a respectful mourning period really would have been awesome. Only problem I could see there is that Mary genuinely didn't like his lack of concern for the upperclass.

 

Yeah, I agree with you and several others...Carlisle shoulda come back. But he was a plot device to get Mary and Matthew together. As with certain other characters he writes, Fellowes made him totally unsympathetic and many were happy when he got in the car and left the Abbey. I think having him come back, instead of the decent and ever-nice but ever-dull Evelyn Napier, to say nothing of the Greasy Blake or Gillingham, would have been far more entertaining.

[saki]

I think it's more of an UO to think, as I do, that Matthew genuinely loved Lavinia.  He (unaccountably) clearly loved Mary more and preferred her, in the end, but I believe that - when Matthew got engaged to Lavinia originally - he did love Lavinia and wanted to spend the rest of his life with her.  He just changed his mind.  I think this largely because I don't think Matthew was the type of person who would propose to someone he wasn't in love with - he might feel he had to go through with an engagement, having fallen out of love, but I really don't think he loved Mary at the time when he proposed to Lavinia.

 

I also, actually, think that Lavinia would have been a perfectly good Countess - being a Countess is not all about presiding over grand dinners, it's also about making sure that guests are comfortable, developing relationships with tenant farmers and being fair.  I think Lavinia would have excelled at that side of things.

 

Probably not an UO as such but related to the above, I found it profoundly irritating that Isobel shipped Matthew/Mary when she was clearly the sort of person who would despise Mary and prefer Lavinia.

[tapplum]

Yeah, If only because the Pamuk thing, for the angst, did peter out into nothing when with at least Robert should have said something harsh (...) Hell, Matthew chastely kissing Mary is deemed a moral failing for Matthew - he cheated on his betrothed, and  his worry about the money inherited from Papa Swire was that the knowledge that Matthew cheated on Lavinia by smooching Mary with maybe a little tongue was that it would *fundamentally* change Papa Swire's opinion of him, that Swire would never ever have left him the money because what he did was morally awful. That makes his response, and Robert's response, to Mary full on fucking the Turk and hiding the body just totally out of place.

 

I genuinely don't think Lavinia's feelings ever came into Matthew's decision to marry her. (...) That Lavinia wised up and saw the handwriting on the wall was a good thing for her, because Matthew was never going to admit he didn't want to marry her.

 

Richard popping in after a respectful mourning period really would have been awesome. Only problem I could see there is that Mary genuinely didn't like his lack of concern for the upperclass.

Yeah, Robert at *least* totally should have reacted much more strongly, for all the reasons you lay out. Really his chillness beggars belief, and was a huge dramatic letdown. As for Matthew having angst over kiss-cheating on Lavinia but being unconcerned about Mary losing her virginity to Pamuk while she was singel - well, it seems to be all about Fellows doing what he usually does, and having his early 1900s Good Guy characters sticking firmly with early 2000s values. It would take so much more work to make Matthew rootable and sympathetic if he was also period-appropriate sexist.

 

That right there is what sort of makes Matthew a bit of an arsehole after all. He really never did seem to consider things from Lavinia's perspective, much less bother to talk things through with her like an adult. It was all about his angst and his guilt and his honour.

 

As for Richard, I can fanwank that Mary's distate for his nouveau riche-ness was at least partly about her knowing she *ought to* feel distate at it. Especially if Robert/Matthew had actually been appropriately judgemental about Pamuk, I can easily imagine her finding it quite freeing. What I have a bigger issue with his how Richard turned abusive at the end, not unlike Bricker - interesting, flawed but ultimately rootable suitors who weren't meant to be endgame and therefore got a quick character assassination just before being written out.

Edited February 5, 2015 by tapplum

[tapplum]

I think it's more of an UO to think, as I do, that Matthew genuinely loved Lavinia. 

 

I also, actually, think that Lavinia would have been a perfectly good Countess

 

Probably not an UO as such but related to the above, I found it profoundly irritating that Isobel shipped Matthew/Mary when she was clearly the sort of person who would despise Mary and prefer Lavinia.

Eh, sorry about the double post, for some reason my computer won't let me quote more than one person at a time :(

 

Interpretations vary, absolutely, and if one presumes that Matthew at least at one point did genuinely love Lavinia, it certainly makes him less of a douche. I maintain he should have been more honest with her - but it's still a lot less problematic than the situation one winds up with if he never loved Lavinia at all (though probably tried very hard to convince himself that he did), which is that he had no business proposing to her at all.

 

That said, I actually agree that Lavinia would have probably made a perfectly good countess, though certainly a very different one from Mary. 

 

Interesting point about Isobel, in that I always took her shipping M/M as a pretty clear sign that no, Matthew was never interested in Lavinia. As you say, it makes little sense for Isobel to push for Mary when he was actually engaged to Lavinia - unless she knew he wasn't actually interested in Lavinia. I mean, I can't see Isobel rooting for a one-sided marriage that would likely be pretty miserable for both participants (the unloved wife, the guilty pining husband). Since Isobel and Matthew were always depicted as close, I thought she knew what was really up and was sort of speaking for Matthew's repressed actual emotions when she insisted he wanted Mary.

[ZoloftBlob]

Interpretations vary, absolutely, and if one presumes that Matthew at least at one point did genuinely love Lavinia, it certainly makes him less of a douche. I maintain he should have been more honest with her - but it's still a lot less problematic than the situation one winds up with if he never loved Lavinia at all (though probably tried very hard to convince himself that he did), which is that he had no business proposing to her at all

 

I actually thought Matthew did love Lavinia. Not with the same passion? Confusion? that he loved Mary, but had there not been a war, Lavinia would have ended up his wife and he would have been perfectly happy. He was being a bit of a drama queen but that he was pretty genuine in telling her to go away and find someone better rather than tie her down to a crippled eunuch says at the very least he loved her enough to not take advantage of her. A lot of the collapse of Matthew and Lavinia as a couple (and I am extrapolating as we didn't actually see this on screen) is that up until he was wounded, he seemed very happy and content with Lavinia, rebound or not. Once he was wounded, he shoved her away to "save" her from his dreary fate and rarely saw her for close to a year. All while living with Mary, who is cheerfully content with her pending marriage to Richard and her odd, sexless yet warm and affectionate relationship with Matthew. Richard is actually jealous of this, and pretty much realizes that while he can't call it cheating because Matthew can't perform, and Cora realizes that Mary won't move on unless she has to, and conspire to haul poor Lavinia back to basically make Matthew marry her despite his objections. Once Lavinia was back at his side, gamely tending her wounded beloved, Matthew was trapped by societal expectations. Once he got out of the chair, if he didn't marry the girl who professed to love him while he was in it, he was going to be the world's biggest asshole if he didn't marry her.  It's actually a more subtle version of Daisy marrying William not because she wanted to but because everyone was acting like she'd be an utter cold bitch if she didn't. And there's an unpopular opinion, I suspect - I hate that Daisy was bullied into being William's girlfriend and into marrying him, and that then once he was dead, everyone continued to play stupid as why she felt awful about the whole charade.

 

Another unpopular opinion - I hate that after Matthew *died*, Mary and or Isobel not once ever mentioned the fact that Matthew called the relationship cursed. That's an example of Fellowes letting his personal rage at the actor get in the way of a good storyline because yes, in retrospect that comment of Matthew's ends up a lot more significant.

[DHDancer]

Not necessarily an UO, but because people are discussion Pamuk/Mary...    Am I the only one who remembers (and heard it on re-watch) that Pamuk clearly told Mary that they could "do it" without risking her virginity (by that I presume he means not breaking her hymen)?

 

Also, why do people assume Matthew was a virgin?  That's up there with not realizing he was a 30+ man at the start of the show...

[ZoloftBlob]

Am I the only one who remembers (and heard it on re-watch) that Pamuk clearly told Mary that they could "do it" without risking her virginity (by that I presume he means not breaking her hymen)?

 

I remember it, I remember thinking it was typical guy talk along the lines of "you don't get pregnant on your first time" because really, how would *Mary* know what going into a virgin girl feels like?

 

Also, why do people assume Matthew was a virgin?  That's up there with not realizing he was a 30+ man at the start of the show...

 

I think to a certain extent, most of us are teasing but it does come from the fact that he was a 30+ plus man at the start of his show with a career, good looks, and was living with his mom and horrified at the notion that he'd be expected to marry. There's also his total cluelessness with Edith when she was pretty actively flinging herself at him, the relationship with Lavinia where he never touched her, that Mary, Lavinia, and *Robert* were far more upset about how he'd never be a man, and the whole rigid social morays of the time that pretty much said an ummarried gentleman isn't supposed to do it. SInce he took all the other rigid social rules so seriously, it seems likely he saved himself for marriage.... but its his lack of interest or concern about it, coupled with his whole dudley do-right image that makes me think he was a virgin.

 

Or really repressing his homosexuality :)

[DHDancer]

I remember it, I remember thinking it was typical guy talk along the lines of "you don't get pregnant on your first time" because really, how would *Mary* know what going into a virgin girl feels like?

 

 

 

Actually I thought with him being Turkish, and being more creative and experienced, that he was thinking in a different direction completely and he was promising her a different kind of intercourse...   I didn't get the impression he was doing the old male "of course I'll respect you in the morning' guff.

[Avaleigh]

There's also his total cluelessness with Edith when she was pretty actively flinging herself at him

I actually agree with your take on Matthew, ZoloftBob but I disagree with this bit. I thought Matthew was just trying to show that he wasn't interested but didn't know how to do it without hurting Edith's feelings. I thought Edith would have seized on any hint of enthusiasm on his part so Matthew was just trying not to encourage her. I didn't think he was being clueless about the hints she was dropping, I thought he was noticing them and was trying to back up before Edith got the wrong idea.

[ZoloftBlob]

Avaleigh - I don't disagree entirely. It was just so painfully awkward complete with "lets ask mom to come" where I was like "Yeah, Edith totally isn't reading the room correctly but Matthew is like not getting it either".

[Llywela]

I think to a certain extent, most of us are teasing but it does come from the fact that he was a 30+ plus man at the start of his show with a career, good looks, and was living with his mom and horrified at the notion that he'd be expected to marry.

I don't recall him being horrified at the notion that he'd be expected to marry. From my admittedly shaky memory, what he was horrified about was the notion that he would be expected to marry for 'the good of the family' and not according to his own desires - he realised early on that the family wanted him to marry one of their daughters; failing that it would have to be someone else of the right stock, but it was one of the daughters they were always angling for, which is a pretty tiny pool to be limited to. It was losing the freedom to live his life as he chose that bothered him, not the idea of marrying.

[SusanSunflower]

... and to round it out, I thought he married Mary in the end "for the good of the family" and to make everyone happy ... but eyes wide-open about what he was getting into ... the entire family, including his mother, had been through so much and -- with Lavinia gone, Mary forgiven both for being a snob and for Richard Carlisle (ughh, how how could Matthew have forgiven Mary becoming engaged to him!!!) -- he took the plunge.  I always doubted that Carlisle was sort to wait for marriage ... particularly with Mary "damaged goods" which he knew ... whatever ... 

Edited February 6, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[HoodlumSheep]

unpopular opinion - I hate that after Matthew *died*, Mary and or Isobel not once ever mentioned the fact that Matthew called the relationship cursed.

Every time I think of this, I can't help but say, "Way to go, Mary!" with sarcasm of course, because if you believe in superstitions, they technically were cursed. Mary just had to get a glimpse of the groom right before they were married. So Mary doomed their own relationship.

[Andorra]

Every time I think of this, I can't help but say, "Way to go, Mary!" with sarcasm of course, because if you believe in superstitions, they technically were cursed. Mary just had to get a glimpse of the groom right before they were married. So Mary doomed their own relationship.

 

Interesting side not to that: Julian Fellows writes in his scriptbook to series 3, that he didn't write the glimpse Mary gave Mary. He doesn't know if it was Michelle's decision or the directors, but in retrospect it was not bad, because it was some kind of foreshadowing.

[jordanpond]

Hey people, you are not supposed to write your opinions here that are completely popular. That's not fair! You must write your deepest, darkest thoughts here. Things you never dare to mention openly, because the other viewers will kill you!

 

Okay, I will step into my flame-proof suit and accept your challenge. I don't give a hoot about Isis! I think including a cute dog on a show is a lazy way to gain audience interest. I don't want anything bad to happen to her, I just don't want to see her. I think the show has devoted more time to the "Robert likes Isis more than he likes people" story than they have spent accusing Mr. Bates of murder, and that's an awful lot of time! I feel like every line of dialogue about the dog is a line that could have been better spent on one of the people.

 

And if we had an "unlike" button, I realize I would break the world record for the number of "unlikes." But that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it! 

[jordanpond]

Also, I'm not sure whether this is unpopular, but it may have been since she was an obstacle to Mary and Matthew---I absolutely loved Lavinia. 

Would you believe I actually said "Amen, sister!" when I read this? Then I realized your name was "amensisterfriend." Perfectly chosen username!

 

That reminds me of an unpopular opinion: although Matthew, Mary, and numerous posters have all said that Matthew brought out a softer side of her, I never saw it.  Ever. The only person I ever thought brought out a softer side to Mary was Lavinia.

[DeepRunner]

Once he got out of the chair, if he didn't marry the girl who professed to love him while he was in it, he was going to be the world's biggest asshole if he didn't marry her.  It's actually a more subtle version of Daisy marrying William not because she wanted to but because everyone was acting like she'd be an utter cold bitch if she didn't. And there's an unpopular opinion, I suspect - I hate that Daisy was bullied into being William's girlfriend and into marrying him, and that then once he was dead, everyone continued to play stupid as why she felt awful about the whole charade.

 

Another unpopular opinion - I hate that after Matthew *died*, Mary and or Isobel not once ever mentioned the fact that Matthew called the relationship cursed. That's an example of Fellowes letting his personal rage at the actor get in the way of a good storyline because yes, in retrospect that comment of Matthew's ends up a lot more significant.

 

I concur with your assessment on Daisy and William. Daisy didn't want to marry him when he was well, she didn't even want to be his girl when he went off to the front. Mrs. Patmore was too busy trying to make things easy on William that she didn't consider Daisy and her conscience. And everyone talking to her in the episode that featured The Return of John Bates (still the coolest character then, and now--I won't ever break from that POV) as though William was her beau, to use Edith's word, only compounded things. The whole storyline was sloppy. William's unrequited feelings for Daisy in S1 was a good story to watch, with Thomas the Vampire living to crush William at every opportunity. The whole thing in S2 seemed like Fellowes was grasping, and there was no payoff. A popular character was killed off, there was a rushed wedding (with Violet administering a major verbal b****-slap beat-down on poor old Travis, one of the best set of lines she ever had), and Daisy was a widow of a man she really didn't love.

 

As far as Matthew and Lavinia go, Mary did try to do the noble thing initially. She could see that Matthew loved Lavinia, but everyone kept pushing her to state her case and make her move--Violet, Rosamund, Carson particularly. OF COURSE she was going to end up with Matthew, because it was what Fellowes and most if not all of Downtonia wanted. But Mary showed some humane behaviors at the start. AS much as I dislike her character, S2 humanized Mary.

[moonb]

Pamuk was the only "love" interest I really bought with Mary - it went downhill from there, in my opinion. I could see why an angry 20-year-old like S1 Mary would end up sleeping with him. The rest of her love interests seemed more informed by everyone else on the show than shown by acting chemistry or writing. 

 

Like others, I thought that Mary/Matthew could have equally well served by being a brother-sister relationship like Mary/Tom, with different writing/acting direction. The middle-class distant cousin comes to inherit, and shakes up the family but doesn't marry into it.  Although he and Tom could end up living together as confirmed bachelors and I would have bought that in a minute :)

 

Tom as a character has never made that much sense to me, even before his marriage to Sybil and becoming estate manager. He's definitely warm and caring with everyone else in the family, but as for his background and what he's supposed to be DOING in the story, even his earlier socialism - it just didn't work for me. 

 

In spite of its ludicrousness, I'm still curious about how the Green story will end and who killed him. Gillingham and Green are a pretty fascinating and possibly creepy pair.

Edited February 8, 2015 by moonb

[LaChavalina]

Here's my contribution to the thread: I don't think much of Mrs. Drewe at all and I'm glad Edith scooped up Marigold. She was downright rude to Edith, who never seemed to be really getting in the way, and as a farmer's wife you'd think she would be thrilled that this lady took an interest in one of her children and wanted to secure her future-- Not to mention the free babysitting once in a while. The decision to rebuff Edith didn't seem in Marigold's best interest. Mrs. D's lines about Edith treating Marigold as a plaything also seemed misplaced, given that Edith persisted in trying to see her and was obviously distressed by Mrs. D's constant rudeness. The woman came off like a bully and possibly unhinged. I wasn't sorry to see her lose Marigold in the end, and I hope we've seen the last of her.

[kpw801]

Okay this would be really interesting.  Remember Daisy said she didn't really have a family when she first went to the farm to see Mr. Mason?  She could be the illegitimate love child of an American tourist and a farmers daughter.  They could bring Jim Nabors from the US to play the rich country American that knocked up her mother and he is childless and wealthy and wants to reconnect with his love child.  I swear Daisy looks like Gomer Pyle!

[HoodlumSheep]

UO: I thought Mary was pretty awesome this past episode (the one with the horse racing).

[Avaleigh]

I thought she was extra with comment about Edtih ruining everything but otherwise I agree that I thought Mary was fun in this episode and I enjoyed watching them ride. I didn't roll my eyes either that she won. 

 

Another UO--I don't think Julian Fellowes thinks of Edith as the upstairs butt monkey as is so often stated. 

[Eolivet]

Another UO--I don't think Julian Fellowes thinks of Edith as the upstairs butt monkey as is so often stated. 

 

If this means that I don't think Julian Fellowes gleefully comes up with ways to torture Edith and cackles maniacally at her constant misfortune, I agree with you.

 

But he has stated that in terms of Edith, "Some people are just unlucky." I think he sees her as the unfortunate middle sister of two prettier and more accomplished sisters. A sister with a string of pretty rotten luck. But again, that Simon Cowell phrase about Americans and underdogs that always comes to mind: Only Americans root for the underdogs, whereas the rest of the world likes to see the most qualified person succeed.

 

Do I think Fellowes derives joy out of it? No. Do I think he'll ever feature some plot where Edith wins and Mary loses? Never. If Mary will likely end up blissfully happy, I think Edith will end up "happy enough" -- and I do believe that's enough for Fellowes (who in turn thinks that will be enough for Edith).

Edited February 10, 2015 by Eolivet

[mightycrone]

I don't know if this is popular/unpopular, but I was sorely disappointed in Rose's former fling, the jazz singer, not for the relationship that could not be, but for the fact that I just didn't think he was that good of a singer.  I love music from that time, and was a bit prepared to have my socks knocked off . . . nope, socks still very much on.

[Constantinople]

It would have been more interesting if Matthew had been attracted to Edith rather than Mary.  At the very least, it would have taken the Mary-Edith relationship to DEFCON 1.

 

Sybil should have married someone more like S4 Blake and developed into a young Beatrice Webb.  I did not find it particularly interesting, or liberating, to watch Sybil learn how to bake a cake.

[saki]

I think Mabel Lane Fox is a missed opportunity.  It made me realise how great it would be if Mary had a proper nemesis - someone who was her equal and who actually won some of the time.  Instead, we have a character who appears to be Mary's equal but who takes her left-overs (Gillingham) and can't even beat her in a minor thing like a horse race.  It's a bit pointless dramatically.

[JudyObscure]

But he has stated that in terms of Edith, "Some people are just unlucky." I think he sees her as the unfortunate middle sister of two prettier and more accomplished sisters. A sister with a string of pretty rotten luck. But again, that Simon Cowell phrase about Americans and underdogs that always comes to mind: Only Americans root for the underdogs, whereas the rest of the world likes to see the most qualified person succeed.

 

I'm not sure if I agree with Simon on that.  I can think of lots of English literature where underdogs won. Fanny in "Mansfield Park," Jane Eyre, "Chariots of Fire," etc.  Even in Simon's narrow world the English embraced Susan Boyle. 

 

Yet, even if that's truly the case I don't see that Edith is less "qualified," than Mary.  Mary may be prettier to some people's taste but It's not an obvious case of one actress being a ten and the other a four.  Edith's nose is a little too prominent but Mary's eyes are too small and close set and Edith has the most striking hair color.  It wouldn't be illogical for a few men to find Edith the most attractive.  As for "accomplishments,"  Mary is a good rider and Edith is a good writer who reads the newspapers and might actually be an interesting person to talk with after dinner. 

 

I think this is where JF's writing really fails for me.  His view of Mary seems very much like the high school boys who all look to each other to decide which girl is "hottest," because they lack the confidence to go against the crowd mentality.  He writes Mary as the woman everyone admires even as she speaks lines that make her seem self-centered and mean-spirited.   Her tendency to kick Edith when she's down, her wanting to "show Tony what he's missing" even after she's already hurt him, all seem like thirteen year-old mean girl stuff to me, far beneath an adult woman.  I picture Fellowes, after Mary says these things, giggling and saying, "Isn't she wonderful!"  No, it isn't wonderful to most adults.  "Outspoken," is only brave and admirable when it has a purpose, like standing up for the oppressed or correcting a wrong. It doesn't take courage to say mean things to your younger sister when you know your family won't think less of you for it and will defend you if she fights back. I think, when Fellowes writes these lines for Mary, he reveals himself as the nerdy kid hiding just behind the bully and getting vicarious pleasure from being his friend.

[Llywela]

I'm not sure if I agree with Simon on that.  I can think of lots of English literature where underdogs won. Fanny in "Mansfield Park," Jane Eyre, "Chariots of Fire," etc.  Even in Simon's narrow world the English embraced Susan Boyle.

Agreed - rooting for the underdog is a very typically British attitude. Did Cowell really phrase it that way round, or has the OP got the quote wrong? Because I'd have thought, in fact, the opposite was true, and that Americans like to back a winner while the Brits will always root for the underdog.

Edited February 11, 2015 by Llywela

[Kohola3]

This American always goes for the underdog.  But can't speak for the rest of my fellow citizens.

[Llywela]

This American always goes for the underdog.  But can't speak for the rest of my fellow citizens.

In truth, generalisations are always bad! We'll find examples of both on either side of the Atlantic!

[Eolivet]

Did Cowell really phrase it that way round, or has the OP got the quote wrong?

 

I've been using that quote for years -- it was from Time magazine. It might've been about Ruben and Clay -- that he thought Americans would be happy simply watching the most talented person win, but they weren't because they preferred watching an "underdog" win. He implied that wasn't true in the rest of the world -- that America in particular delighted in knocking down a "favorite" in favor of an "underdog."

 

I was reminded of it because it seems to be Fellowes' exact attitude toward Mary and Edith. There is no "triumph of the underdog" on Downton Abbey, and I don't think there ever will be.

 

Edith is a good writer who reads the newspapers and might actually be an interesting person to talk with after dinner.

 

Fellowes' poor writing is equal opportunity, apparently...Edith couldn't write a lick until Sybil got married. Then he just co-opted Sybil's sense of social justice and transposed it onto Edith when Sybil died. Edith was the good manager during the war -- the writing came completely out of left field. Sybil is the one who should be writing columns about women's equality, since she actually cared about women's equality. All Edith ever wanted to do was get married (which was remarkably similar to Mary).

[Andorra]

The interesting thing about Fellows and Edith is, that he said in an interview that he always was "the Edith" in his family. The outsider and the weird one, who wanted to become and actor. And that his luck only changed when he met his wife. He still doesn't have a good relationship with his siblings as far as I know. I've read somehwere that they are civil, but not good friends.

 

So Fellows is truly sympathetic to Edith. Because of that I'm convinced that she will have luck in the end and get a happy ending.

[JudyObscure]

I swear Daisy looks like Gomer Pyle!

Shazaam.

 

...Edith couldn't write a lick until Sybil got married.

Well she did compose an eloquent letter to the Turkish embassy while she was still a teenager.

I don't really think social conscience and good writer automatically go together. Edith is able to put her thoughts on paper. Sybil might have been more inclined to put her thoughts into practical action. We know that Edith's first letter to the editor was about the treatment of soldiers after the war and that she wrote letters to their families for them when they were too ill to do it for themselves during the war.

Edited February 12, 2015 by JudyObscure

[Avaleigh]

Well she did compose an eloquent letter to the Turkish embassy while she was still a teenager.

I don't really think social conscience and good writer automatically go together. Edith is able to put her thoughts on paper. Sybil might have been more inclined to put her thoughts into practical action.

Edith was in her twenties when she wrote the letter. When the show starts she and Mary are 20 and 21 respectively so Edith would have been about 21 when she wrote the letter.

 

I remember season 1 Edith sounding kind of disdainful of the suffragettes and it was Sybil and Anna who thought the women were brave. I think that scene actually says a lot about the characters of the three sisters. In that scene we had Edith snarking at both sisters without any provocation and we also saw the servant dynamic between the four women. Sybil and Anna seem like they're in sync when it comes to the suffrage movement, Mary is interested in hearing Anna's opinion, and Edith is making comments implying that Mary doesn't read newspapers and that Sybil is gaining weight. 

 

No wonder I was giving Edith the side eye in the early days of the show. 

 

I agree that Edith took on some of Sybil's characteristics when Sybil died and Mary did too on some level. I think with Edith it's through the paper and wanting to be a more useful person and with Mary I think it's through her being one of Tom's chief defenders these days.

[JudyObscure]

Edith was in her twenties when she wrote the letter. When the show starts she and Mary are 20 and 21 respectively so Edith would have been about 21 when she wrote the letter.

Thanks for that, I've always been curious as to their exact ages. Recently, I've seen several people say Mary was twenty when the show started so I took that on trust and thought Edith as her younger sister would have been 19 at the oldest. I also thought the Pamuk thing happened early on so they would have still been those ages. My brain was probably omitting great lengths of time when not much happened.

[Andorra]

We know Mary's age very accurately, because in scriptbook 1 she is said to be 21 in her very first scene. So, since the show starts in 1912,  she was born 1891. Edith was probably born 1892 or 1893 and we have Sybil's tombstone to know her exact age: She was born 1895.

[JudyObscure]

I think this is a very unpopular opinion:  I don't like Mable Lane Fox.  Oh she's cute and sassy but I cringe to see her considering taking Tony back or even being flirtatious with him.  It's no secret that he broke their engagement simply because he wanted to try his luck, trotting after Lady Mary Crawley.  Any self-respecting woman would be looking straight through him, pretending bored disinterest. I can't believe she would want to be his second choice, every woman deserves better.

[ZoloftBlob]

Not unpopular, or at least I share it, Judy. Mabel Lane Fox is another Mary. And Tony is certainly no prize - he's broken his engagement with her to chase after Mary for an entire year.... You'd think Mabel, the catch of the season, would have moved on.

[amensisterfriend]

You mean I'm not the only one who's utterly meh on Mabel Lane Fox? Table for three, please! 

 

How's this for unpopular: I found Sir Anthony Strallan to be easily among the most appealing and likable male love interests on this show. 

 

I don't get all gooey over Sybbie like pretty much everyone else does. And the cutesy nickname "Sybbie" annoys me. 

 

I prefer Isis to a solid 99% of the human characters. 

 

The Team Edith vs Team Mary fan wars exhaust me.

 

For all the complaints about Robert, I still enjoy him, think the actor is phenomenal, feel his views and reactions are more representative of the era than the vast majority of DA characters, and despite/because of his flaws would put him on the very, very short of  list of characters who I can't imagine the show without. 

[ZoloftBlob]

I actually agree with you on a lot of that, amensisterfriend. I'm just not a dog person so the caterwauling over Isis to me is like "The dog is supposed to be at least ten, what do you *think* happens to older dogs??"

 

Team Edith vs Team Mary can have interesting conversations. The problem is that Team Edith can't win because of the writing and the era the show is set in.

 

I agree completely about Robert, and I also agree that I could go the entire season without hearing or seeing Sybbie.

 

And I'll say it - as much as I miss Matthew, I will take the unpopular opinion and say I think Dan Stevens got out at the exactly right time.

[SusanSunflower]

My unpopular opinion is that this last episode Season 5 Episode 6 was the most irritatingly disappointing I can remember since Matthew got up and walked ... Edith finally "makes her break" and there's no victory to be seen ... just Mrs. Drewe's caterwauling in the background (and I'm sympathetic to Mrs. Drew). I did want Edith to somehow end up in custody of her little girl and away from Downton, but instead got lonely, unloved Edith, alone again naturally. Even in a 2-1/2 hour movie so much time spent on Mary, Mary's haircut, Mary's equestrian adventures and fending off the boyfriends was more than enough for a scene in which as far as I can recall nothing happened. Equestrian eye candy, Ralph Lauren clothes tie-in, and more they-do-things-differently-over-there because they're British and it's the 1920's. 

 

Handsome as he is, nobody liked Gillingham much (either on the show or in comments), so his refusal to stay "gone" is just more filler that might well be put to better use setting up the end of this season and the farce that will be season 6 if indeed it's the last (which at this point I think Fellowes would be wise to make-it-so).  Despite amusing forays into displaced Russian aristocracy (and Violet's little flirtation) and Cora's little Bricker flirtation and the end (oh please) of Gilligham and the triangle that was Mary-Blake- Gillingham and apparently marrying off both Rose and Isabel and the departure (again none-too-soon) of  Miss Bunting -- the end of Season 5 fast approaching -- will leave us much the poorer for "fresh air" with everyone and the dust settling back into whatever they were doing before ... Next season, I think, might bring the stockmarket crash (1929) but it would be a rush, but I think we all want to be spared most of the next 8 tedious years unless something interesting happens (and illness, dog or human, does not count, not something I'm going to watch a whole season of -- even Violet or Robert or Cora's final gasping breaths - perish the thought). 

Edited February 14, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[ZoloftBlob]

My unpopular opinion is that this last episode Season 5 Episode 6 was the most irritatingly disappointing I can remember since Matthew got up and walked

 

And my unpopular opinion is that I thought that episode was fucking hilarious and I am genuinely shocked that no one seems to have seen it coming. As soon as I heard "spinal injury" I was like "yeah right, we're not leaving the male lead in a wheel chair. There was no graceful way out of that mess. That said -

 

Even in a 2-1/2 hour movie so much time spent on Mary, Mary's haircut, Mary's equestrian adventures and fending off the boyfriends was more than enough for a scene in which as far as I can recall nothing happened. Equestrian eye candy, Ralph Lauren clothes tie-in, and more they-do-things-differently-over-there because they're British and it's the 1920's.

 

 

Honestly, this has been a problem all season. Nothing is really happening, at least nothing new or unexpected. I mean damn, at least Matthew getting up out of the wheelchair was interesting. Oh look, an entire season of Edith moping, and Mary changing her clothes and dating two guys, and Rose meeting a potentially unacceptable boy - really, wasn't this season four?