S05.E07: Episode Seven

[ElectricBoogaloo]

I hope that was just a nice Robert/Tom conversation and nothing more. He did mention that all he would wish in Tom's wife was she be friendly with the family, not that she shares their values.

Wasn't it just two episodes ago when Robert angrily told Cora that he wouldn't let Tom take his granddaughter away from Downton? Yet now he's acting like he would be okay with Tom leaving as long as he finds a nice wife? I mean, I don't want to see a huge family fight (aka Robert yelling at the entire family about how Sybbie is not going to America under any circumstances) but it seems like quite a change in attitude.

Speaking of America, it was hilarious when Edith told Cora and Rosamund she had considered going to America with Marigold and Rosamund was completely dismissive of it so Cora reminded her that Edith is half American.

[ZulaMay]

Wasn't it just two episodes ago when Robert angrily told Cora that he wouldn't let Tom take his granddaughter away from Downton? Yet now he's acting like he would be okay with Tom leaving as long as he finds a nice wife? I mean, I don't want to see a huge family fight (aka Robert yelling at the entire family about how Sybbie is not going to America under any circumstances) but it seems like quite a change in attitude.

Speaking of America, it was hilarious when Edith told Cora and Rosamund she had considered going to America with Marigold and Rosamund was completely dismissive of it so Cora reminded her that Edith is half American.

I don't think he is going to go to America in the end, not forever anyway.  Robert's change in attitude is to show that if Tom decides to stay it will be because he WANTS to and not because he was pressured or guilted by the Crawleys.  They can't make Tom look any more accommodating than he already does.  He just now got back part of his spine.

[Glade]

I was so disappointed that Edith didn't go to America or just stay in London and lead her independent, professional life.  Why give up a chance for real freedom in favor of living a life of fraud and hiding amongst people who really dislike. disregard, and disrespect you at that horrible house?  And there is a huge flight risk in giving Marigold back to the Drews, especially giving Mr. Drew money and putting him on a train out of town...she might never see her daughter again. 

 

And now it looks like Isobel won't be able to have her happy new life either because all of the action and characters has to stay in the tediously dull 'downton triangle' or perish.  Honestly, I'd love to see Daisy already living with Mr. Mason, I'd love to have seen Sybil's life in Ireland and Edith's trip to Switzerland, or her married life with Stralland, etc.  A better show would have been able to give us these storylines.  I hate what burdens that unimaginative limitation  puts on these characters and stories.  If both Edith and Branson went to America, there could even be a spinoff, starring Shirley Mclaine. 

 

Meanwhile, we apparently have another tedious and obtuse conclusion to a deflated murder mystery involving the Bates'.  I certainly didn't want that to drag out any longer, but then I fear it will anyway.

 

For the record, Merton's son's were most certainly sent away as young as 5 years old to boarding schools rife with beatings and other forms of abuse, and then they went through the traumas of the war. So while they were dickish, and screwed over by their parents and people like them, they probably didn't spend much time with their parents at all and might have very good reasons for resentment. 

Edited November 3, 2014 by Glade

[kpw801]

I think the little actress that plays Sybbie is incredibly good.  She's a little Maggie Smith in the making. The second "why?" she directed toward Tom on the bridge was just priceless.  Lord Grantham is so worried about Tom ripping Sybbie away, if she continues with her innocent don't fix it if it ain't broke little attitude, I don't think Tom will be able to take her away,.  I know he has "his principles" but his future in America is not written in stone and Sybbie has a lot of loving family and some advantages where she is - unless of course, he has managed to put away a tidy sum to get them set up but even still any relatives there are distant cousins and not immediate family and it would be wrenching for the child.  She is a great little actress and I will miss her - when she has dialogue she is a scene stealer!

 

Speaking of Maggie Smith, it has really been nice seeing her given a chance to show the range of emotions she has been able to show these past few episodes.  She was absolutely heart breaking when she opened herself up to Mary about how she really feels about losing the constant companionship of Isobel.  Sure the new Lady Merton would still be in the county but those long afternoons of playing cards and working jigsaw puzzles would have to give way to providing her new husband with the companionship they spoke of so humorously not too long ago.  I don't know if Fellowes was playing to his outraged audience or if he was planning all along to reveal Mary's utter and unreasonable contempt for her sister.  Now the next one who needs to be given a wake up call is the Earl.  I sort of get tired of the "it's not my secret to tell" business all the time.  I'm sorry that is just bogus to me.  There are certain times when it is unrealistic and more of enabling harmful behavior than keeping a confidence.

Edited November 3, 2014 by kpw801

[DianeDobbler]

Quote

And now it looks like Isobel won't be able to have her happy new life either because all of the action and characters has to stay in the tediously dull 'downton triangle' or perish.  Honestly, I'd love to see Daisy already living with Mr. Mason, I'd love to have seen Sybil's life in Ireland and Edith's trip to Switzerland, or her married life with Stralland, etc.  A better show would have been able to give us these storylines.

 

 

Oh I feel that! When I first started binge/catching up watching, I'd heard so much about the show, although I KNEW nothing of the show but Maggie Smith was on it. I assumed with all of these characters that storylines such as you describe would be the norm. It wasn't long before I realized that most story directions were dictated by keeping the main characters in the main house (save for the satellites of Crawley and Dowager), so anything that seemed to move the characters in different directions or locations was never going to happen. When I got to Thomas's storyline (the one where O'Brian seemed to get him sacked sans reference) I worried til I realized - oh, it'll be fine - they can't have Thomas leave the house.

[brisbydog]

Julian Ovenden (Blake) has another career as a musical theatre performer so I imagine he has a lot of other opportunities. I prefer listening to him sing than watching him act opposite Dreary Mary.

 

Can I request a hot bi curious butler to replace Spratt next year? Thomas is secretly my favourite and I want to see him get some action

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Loved Tom and Sybbie playing Pooh sticks!

[Eolivet]

I think "going to Poland" is code for "the actor was busy with another project so they sent him away for a while, leaving open the possibility of his returning in the CS or S6 just as Mary is getting involved with someone else."

 

He's supposed to be in Poland for a year -- has the CS ever skipped a year? Maybe S3, but I thought they were slowing down time again after racing through it for the first couple of years.

 

Not only does Ovenden have a musical career, per the above poster, but he seems almost as desperate as Dan Stevens to have an American career. He's been in "Smash" and the failed ABC series "The Agency" (about the KGB) just in the last year. I think this is fun and all for him, but if he gets a U.S. Pilot, Fellowes is ready, willing and able to Gregson-ize him and have Mary move on.

[ZoloftBlob]

Not only does Ovenden have a musical career, per the above poster, but he seems almost as desperate as Dan Stevens to have an American career. He's been in "Smash" and the failed ABC series "The Agency" (about the KGB) just in the last year. I think this is fun and all for him, but if he gets a U.S. Pilot, Fellowes is ready, willing and able to Gregson-ize him and have Mary move on.

 

Is it really awful and wrong for an English actor to want an American career? I've seen some of Dan Steven's latest films.... he probably wasn't wrong to leave when he did, and he certainly has made a point of doing different roles and indy stuff.

 

More importantly - doesn't Fellowes talk to the actors he's casting as Mary's potential new husbands to see if anyone is actually willing to commit to the role before he casts them? Because really - whats the point in getting invested in the relationship if Blake is just going to disappear to the Island of Lost Gay Boys?

 

More imp

[Brn2bwild]

Oh God. Well someone I know (a former actress, yet) - declared months ago she figured it would be Tom and Mary in the end. You know despite her being a Grade A1 bitch and snob Fellowes has taken pains to trot out her liberalism in other aspects - such as Jack and Rose, such as her attitude towards Tom, which goes way back to when she applauded Matthew announcing Tom as his best man in front of everyone at the dinner table. And now they appear to be rushing the only other obvious "tie it neatly up in a bow" option for Tom - Rose - into a marriage with her opposite number (Atticus). "Tie up neatly in a bow" = keep all the key characters living in that house. That's what it means for Fellowes. I HOPE this is not the case but Fellowes just got rid of the Identikit suitors and certainly Mary can't exist without prospects.

 

I actually think that's the one thing that could reintroduce tension to the show if done right (ha!).  If Tom regained some of his old swagger, or Mary constantly compared herself to Sybil and found herself inferior.

 

 

Just restating how I loved Maggie Smith's playing of the scene with Mary, talking about Isobel. I love how Mary's view of the friendship was Isobel looking up to/admiring Violet, and Violet tutoring/role modeling for Isobel the ways of the county and the ways of "our kind". And here is Violet, so clearly impacted by "losing Isobel", looking straight at Mary and saying she doesn't believe Isobel has EVER looked up to or admired Violet. You can't make a stronger declaration of pure friendship than that. There's no "advantage" of that sort Isobel sees in being friends with Violet, and no ego boost to Violet. I think the "we have a lot in common" was one of the most moving things Violet ever said - it was so genuine and not soppy. It's clear she's come round to facing the value this friendship has for her and isn't embarrassed by it, but ITA, DID regret telling Mary, specifically, as it was all wasted on Mary.

 

It also shows that Mary and Isobel have zero relationship, or Mary would have realized this about Isobel long ago.

[ZulaMay]

I actually think that's the one thing that could reintroduce tension to the show if done right (ha!).  If Tom regained some of his old swagger, or Mary constantly compared herself to Sybil and found herself inferior.

 

 

It also shows that Mary and Isobel have zero relationship, or Mary would have realized this about Isobel long ago.

The problem is that Mary is in fact inferior to Sybil in terms of spirit, charm, heart and beauty.  And if Tom DID regain his swagger he would never go for someone like Mary.  The irony is he is the one who would be settling for her, not the other way around.  No matter how hard he tries, Fellowes is never going to sell me some bullshit about Mary being as lovable as her sister way in any way or able to give Sybil's widower back some of the happiness he lost.  

 

YMMV.

Edited November 4, 2014 by ZulaMay

[penelope79]

Poor little Isis... I definitively had something in my eye when Robert lain her on the bed between him and Cora. That said:

 

Re: Robert's care of Isis and neglect of his daughter - I've found that to be true of a lot of pet owners I know.

 

Heee, me too!!

 

Re: Rose/Atticus, as much as it's rushed, the fact that they keep pointing out over and over that he's Jewish suggested me that that would be the real trouble in their marriage. If the show will go on for another season (or even 2), I can't see Fellowes not touching at least the beginning of WWII. What year is it? 1924? Robert and Cora discussed a young Hitler just a couple of episodes ago. If in show it's 1924, Hitler is in prison and about to write the Mein Kampf, and he will be out soon with all the tragic consequences we all know... 

I don't know, that's been my impression since the very first moment Atticus (as a Jewish character) has been introduced.

 

Wow, Maggie Smith is amazing. No news here of course, I always love her, but sometimes there are episodes like this one where just a little scene is enough to remind me how much I adore her!

 

Re: Tom, I have to admit I always thought he would've ended up re-married to either Mary or Edith. And not because I am a shipper (I am not), but mostly because back then it was not so uncommon that in-laws married between each other, if widowers. In my country (Italy) it happend at least until 40s. Sure, that was not the rule but, as I said, not so weird either (of course, now it would be inconceivable).

Now, this case is a bit unique, because of the Crawley's status. But I can see Tom ending up with Mary or Edith. Mary is the heir of Downtown, it would only makes sense for her next husband to care for Downtown almost as much as she does, and Tom would match the description perfectly. OTOH, as Mary so sweetly pointed out last episode, Edith will have a hard time now to find a man willing to grow up a child who is not his (because of course everybody will soon find out that Marigold is actually Edith's daugther, otherwise I can't see why Fellowes keeps bringing Anna and Mrs Hughes in this). Not only Tom would probably be the only one, but they could potentially run the magazine together too (since Tom has a journalist background as well).

And to be honest, if I have to pick for Tom one of the Crawley sister, it would definitively be Edith rather than Mary. I think they would be better suited for each other.

 

But who knows. I doubt Mary has run out of suitors, so maybe she'll find someone by the end of the season, since now even Blake seems out of the equation.

 

 

 

 

[kpw801]

Poor little Isis... I definitively had something in my eye when Robert lain her on the bed between him and Cora. That said:

 

 

Heee, me too!!

 

Re: Rose/Atticus, as much as it's rushed, the fact that they keep pointing out over and over that he's Jewish suggested me that that would be the real trouble in their marriage. If the show will go on for another season (or even 2), I can't see Fellowes not touching at least the beginning of WWII. What year is it? 1924? Robert and Cora discussed a young Hitler just a couple of episodes ago. If in show it's 1924, Hitler is in prison and about to write the Mein Kampf, and he will be out soon with all the tragic consequences we all know... 

I don't know, that's been my impression since the very first moment Atticus (as a Jewish character) has been introduced.

 

Wow, Maggie Smith is amazing. No news here of course, I always love her, but sometimes there are episodes like this one where just a little scene is enough to remind me how much I adore her!

 

Re: Tom, I have to admit I always thought he would've ended up re-married to either Mary or Edith. And not because I am a shipper (I am not), but mostly because back then it was not so uncommon that in-laws married between each other, if widowers. In my country (Italy) it happend at least until 40s. Sure, that was not the rule but, as I said, not so weird either (of course, now it would be inconceivable).

Now, this case is a bit unique, because of the Crawley's status. But I can see Tom ending up with Mary or Edith. Mary is the heir of Downtown, it would only makes sense for her next husband to care for Downtown almost as much as she does, and Tom would match the description perfectly. OTOH, as Mary so sweetly pointed out last episode, Edith will have a hard time now to find a man willing to grow up a child who is not his (because of course everybody will soon find out that Marigold is actually Edith's daugther, otherwise I can't see why Fellowes keeps bringing Anna and Mrs Hughes in this). Not only Tom would probably be the only one, but they could potentially run the magazine together too (since Tom has a journalist background as well).

 

The journalist background was one I was thinking about as well.  Sometimes it seems as if Fellowes has a long term arc for how he will have fate treat his characters - Lady Anstruther for instance.  We heard about her from the moment Jimmy came onto the scene and she was his eventual door out of the series.  I think there have been subtle clues throughout about Tom and Edith as well.  A couple of episodes ago Tom asked Mary if she thought Edith was looking a bit distracted.  In the last episode, Rose made the comment that she thought the reasons for taking Marigold in were "a bit feeble" and Tom replied, "Even looking at these two?" - referring to Sybbie and George.  He only was interested in Sybil because she was a toff but not quite.  He knew she wanted more from life than a lady such as Mary or Rose, Edith has been cut by fate from a different cloth but she is a modest heiress and she is interesting.  She still writes her column and Tom is a bit of a knight in shining armor.  I think he is the type to root for the underdog and he likes to come to the rescue.  I don't think he would take kindly to seeing a child mistreated and you can bet Mary will be snooty to the little girl.  Tom is intuitive and he figured out what happened on Mary's sketching trip.  He will put two and two together about that child and I think he needs to be needed as a man and as a member of the family.

 

Sybbie wouldn't be the odd child out as the daughter of "an uppity chauffeur" only.  If he marries Edith, he will be an official son-in-law again.  Marigold could be adopted by Tom and therefore rather legitimized and Sybbie would have a sibling of equal rank and they both would have some kind of future.  Sybbie as the grandchild of the Earl and Marigold as a newspaper heiress.  I am sure Tom and Edith together will keep the paper going and build something that will last.  If Fellowes allows it.

 

And to be honest, if I have to pick for Tom one of the Crawley sister, it would definitively be Edith rather than Mary. I think they would be better suited for each other.

 

But who knows. I doubt Mary has run out of suitors, so maybe she'll find someone by the end of the season, since now even Blake seems out of the equation.

[Andorra]

My problem with Edith/Tom is the lack of passion. They just don't seem to have any sexual chemistry and I find the thought incredibly depressing, that they would both would settle for the consolation prize, because they couldn't have their one big, true love.

 

I could see Tom being a wonderful husband for Edith and a loving dad for Marigold, because that's just the kind of person he is. In this family of emotionally sick personalities, he's the one bright light of a normal, compassionate and intuitive character. She wants to be loved and I think Tom would not let her down. He would care for her and be good to her.

 

But the other way round? I'm sorry, but I would always think of it as a pity marriage and that's not what I want for Tom. I want him to really fall in love again, with passion and all. He deserves it and I think he is the kind of person who needs it, too.

Edited November 4, 2014 by Andorra

[shipperx]

I have agree with not wanting Tom with either sister. Tom/Edith could perhaps have a functional and even kind relationship, but I see no passion there either. For Tom, Edith might someday be a 'comfortable' spouse but she would not be Sybil nor capable of competing with Sybil. It would be his 'settling' and that would be just so sad for both of them. He needs someone who inspires his passion and she needs someone who sees her as something other than a consolation prize. I'm all for Tom/Edith being friends and quasi-siblings. For them to marry would make me sad.

Tom/Mary would actively aggravate me. It would never cross Marys mind that someone might see her as a step down from Sybil. To her she'd be a step up... And that right there says just about everything. For Mary Tom is someone she can shed artifice with but she is class conscious in a way that Sybil never was and even more so than Edith (who isn't devoid of it but has demonstrated that where her heart is concerned it's not paramount). Mary sees Tom as a friend and worthy individual, but as a spouse it would be like with Richard. Somewhere inside she'd be aware of the lack of prestige and consequence and Mary is always very aware of her OWN consequence. I find it difficult to buy she'd sacrifice it for passion... If she were to experience romantic passion in the first place, which is something of a tall order. Even with Matthew she was more likely to be ruled by her head than anything else. If she ever married Tom, it would be for her convenience not because she was deeply in love. And as far as Tom goes, regal Mary is a far cry from warm unconventional Sybil. Sorry, Mary, but for Tom MARY is the 'lesser' sister (when compared to Sybil). And Mary is constitutionally incapable of wrapping her head around the emotional truth of that. In their case a marriage could be potentially more than sad. It would have the probability of becoming actively unhappy.

Edith needs someone who thinks she's admirable and lovely (Michael actively did that). Mary needs someone she perceives as an equal who isn't so bowled over by her that he rolls over for her to do her bidding. She needs someone to see her as she really is, and be okay with that (as opposed to simply enabling it). And Tom needs someone who can share in his beliefs and isn't bound by convention.

I like the interplay with the characters but I have no desire to see either pairing marry.

Edited November 4, 2014 by shipperx

[Andorra]

 

Edith needs someone who thinks she's admirable and lovely (Michael actively did that). Mary needs someone she perceives as an equal who isn't so bowled over by her that he rolls over for her or subservient to her. And Tom needs someone who can share in his beliefs and isn't bound by convention.

 

That sums it up nicely IMO!

[DianeDobbler]

Mary also needs someone who will more actively bring out her sense of humor, and sort of steamroll over her more unpleasant characteristics. Mary's hauteur and froideur is only effective vis a vis people who put up with it. Or maybe it's only effective/hurtful vis a vis certain women (Anna and the device, Edith and everything) and not men. Gillingham was all - eh, we're not breaking up - and Mary had no answer. Charles Blake was all "We're doing this, then that, oh please with you and that other thing, now go there." and Mary was all "Okay." I don't mean she needs someone to order her about, but she needs someone who doesn't take her as terribly seriously as she presents herself. I also think Cora could kick her ass and just chooses not to.

 

Tom actually does have a sense of humor, but I do agree that they lack romantic chemistry, same as he lacks it with Edith. The guy who played Gregson did a smashing job of being in love with Edith.

 

I still do want Rose for Tom, truth to tell.

 

ZulaMay,

do you have a link to that screen cap of Atticus and the Lady of Uncertain Virtue? That would be crazy - if they introduced Atticus, rushed him and Rose into an engagement, rushed the marriage and in the same episode as the marriage it's revealed that he's kinky/nonperforming/unfaithful and Rose is rushed into an anulment of the marriage. Or maybe it's just his dad setting up a scenario for Rose to find so that his son doesn't marry a Christian. All accomplished in three episodes, the entire arc. Sounds like Fellowes.

 

 It also shows that Mary and Isobel have zero relationship, or Mary would have realized this about Isobel long ago.

^Oops- initially read "Isobel" as "Violet" and wrote this whole thing that I had to delete.

Mary is oblivious. I could see her having no instinct/insight about Violet's feelings, and taking Violet purely on surface. But she's spent time with Isobel, and still believes Isobel would be Violet's "protoge?" That's just absurd. That takes a willful ignoring who Isobel has presented herself to be, and seeing her only as a social class. You don't even need a relationship with Isobel to know she can't possibly be Violet's protoge. Isobel has spoken up at the dinner table, taken contrary views to Violet's, was the first to challenge Violet's annual, predetermined wins at the flower show (which Mary witnessed), and has bravo'd all kinds of unconventional behavior from all kinds of people. Violet and Isobel's friendship grew over the course of locking horns. Isobel's  also been extremely strong and generous regarding Matthew's loss and Mary's future love life.

 

I agree Maggie Smith was so moving in this episode, but she also used what little dialogue she had in previous episodes to set up that wonderful scene. I particularly remember her saying "You'll come?" to Isobel - there was so much in that line. An expectation that Isobel WOULD come, pleased that she could have the expectation, while making certain not to be SEEN to be assuming, making sure she showed decent respect, and so requesting confirmation, and also wanting her to come. Very affecting, and two damn words!

 

I get a kick out of what Smith did, because I've loved her for years, and we all know she could do Downton in her sleep. She does almost no publicity for the show and doesn't watch it, she says. It appears to me it's just an easy paycheck, and why not. Sometimes the inevitable Countess Violet "witticism" appears to fatigue even her, if it's just done as a rote thing, and sometimes it appears in the script only because the script is pandering to the expectation she'll get off a zinger. That she spots not just the depths of her major scene, but the small stuff in the previous episodes leading up to it, and gives it full value, is really touching.

[Avaleigh]

Tom/Mary would actively aggravate me. It would never cross Marys mind that someone might see her as a step down from Sybil. To her she'd be a step up... And that right there says just about everything.

 

 

I haven't seen any evidence on the show that Mary would see herself as a step up from Sybil. Mary seemed to love and appreciate the kind of person Sybil was. I never got the impression that Mary saw herself as a better person than Sybil was. I don't see why it would have to be a contest anyway since there are different kinds of romantic love.

 

I personally wouldn't see it as a step down I would just view them as very different relationships. I certainly wouldn't see it as Tom or Mary settling but of course it would depend on how they would play this hypothetical romance. So far they seem to be good friends who care very much about one another and IMO that's a healthy start. The writing for Tom also seems to have changed (it was never all that consistent anyway) and I think he's becoming closer to somebody who could become compatible with Mary.  

 

Tom likes Mary, he recognizes her good qualities, they seem to work well together, they've shown they can be honest with each other about personal matters, they're both attractive, their children are virtually being raised as siblings, etc. I think there are a lot of positive areas to draw from if the show really wants to make a romance between the characters work.

 

If she ever married Tom, it would be for her convenience not because she was deeply in love.

 

 

I feel the opposite way. I think the only way she'd marry Tom would be if she'd fallen in love with him. I think Mary could bring herself to marry a rich peer who still has his land and houses without needing love to be apart of the equation but I can't see her marrying a guy like Tom unless she loved him. 

 

Re: Tom, I have to admit I always thought he would've ended up re-married to either Mary or Edith. And not because I am a shipper (I am not), but mostly because back then it was not so uncommon that in-laws married between each other, if widowers.

 

 

Yeah, we can definitely point to real life examples from their time and class so I don't see the in-law thing as being a huge barrier at all.

Edited November 4, 2014 by Avaleigh

[Andorra]

 

I feel the opposite way. I think the only way she'd marry Tom would be if she'd fallen in love with him. I think Mary could bring herself to marry a rich peer who still has his land and houses without needing love to be apart of the equation but I can't see her marrying a guy like Tom unless she loved him.

 

I agree here and although it is an unpopular opinion, personally I could see Tom/Mary rather than Tom/Edith. I think it would be a very different marriage for both, but I do see a very deep friendship and understanding between them. Mary has been more open and more honest with Tom than with any other person this series. I'm not sure it is significant, but I definitely noticed it.

 

I think class and status matters to Mary though and she would have not much tolerance for Tom's politics or views as soon as they would interfere with her vision of Downton. Also I think Downton and George would always come first for her.

 

On the other hand, I also think that Sybbie would always come first for Tom even if it was for different reasons. Mary sees her son as the heir and wants to protect his inheritance for him. Tom is just the kind of father who would set the love to his child above everything.

 

I don't really know how Tom sees Mary. He likes her very much and he sees through her in a way. I thought the "you know you're much nicer than most people think" sentence was a little bit like Matthew's "I see the real Mary" and it made me think of a "Brary" possibility, too.

 

But both the actors and Julian Fellows have denied, that it is in the books for them. Julian Fellows has said he would be reluctant to let go of that beautiful friendship Tom and Mary have established. 

I also know that the idea of them is widely hated in the fandom.

[ZoloftBlob]

I feel the opposite way. I think the only way she'd marry Tom would be if she'd fallen in love with him. I think Mary could bring herself to marry a rich peer who still has his land and houses without needing love to be apart of the equation but I can't see her marrying a guy like Tom unless she loved him.

 

I think the problem is that historically Mary couldn't commit to Matthew, the nicest guy in the world who she was genuinely in love with, because as a middle to upper class lawyer, he wasn't bringing enough status to the table if he wasn't heir to the earldom.

 

The writing would need a SEVERE character change for Mary to suddenly consider a man who is not just her dead sister's husband but much lower on the class totem pole than Matthew was when she was deeming Matthew not good enough.

 

Thats not to say I think its impossible for Mary and Tom to fall in love - Tom and Matthew were very similar men when it came right down to it... but I would have a problem with a sudden magical moment without acknowledging the class difference issue.

 

 

[shipperx]

I don't think that Mary would believe that she was looking down on Sybil. I think she loved Sybil. But Mary thinks very highly of herself. She's a doyenne of society and chatelaine of an estate. And Sybil was neither of those (nor did she wish to be). This is how the sisters differed and it is/was how they think, so I believe Mary would see herself as a 'step up', not because of anything about Sybil but just in the way that Mary looks at the world. Things in which she places value. To her this would be not judgement but self evident. These issues matter to Mary.

This is why I think that Mary can look at Tom and see him as an admirable person of many virtues while at the same time realizing that marrying him would impact her own consequence...because it would. Mary hesitated over whether to marry Matthew over the issue of whether or not he would become an EARL. While perhaps she learned her lesson from that, Matthew was still a gentleman and a college educated solicitor, related to an aristocratic family. Tom is an Irish-Catholic land steward. That's an order of magnitude greater social leap. And while Mary does not use this to look down on Tom, I have a difficult time imagining her lowering her own consequence such that she becomes the wife of her son's land steward (which is what Tom would become upon Robert's death). I think Mary respects Tom, but I don't think she'd sacrifice her own place in the social pecking order to such a degree, because regardless of how she thinks of Tom, that is what society would judge of her.

Edited November 4, 2014 by shipperx

[Avaleigh]

The writing would need a SEVERE character change for Mary to suddenly consider a man who is not just her dead sister's husband but much lower on the class totem pole than Matthew was when she was deeming Matthew not good enough.

Thats not to say I think its impossible for Mary and Tom to fall in love - Tom and Matthew were very similar men when it came right down to it... but I would have a problem with a sudden magical moment without acknowledging the class difference issue.

 

 

I feel like something would have to change for Tom and Mary to start to see each other in a different way. Some sort of additional bonding experience would be necessary I think in order to change up the dynamic. I can't think of what that would be though. I definitely don't want any sort of crisis with the children. Maybe some sort of crisis with the land or something that forces them to interact more than they normally would.

 

Something like the pig scene might have worked but I think in season 4 it would have felt too soon for viewers so I can see why if they are going to do Tom/Mary why they wouldn't choose that season or even this one. Do I think they've laid potential groundwork though by giving them these quiet scenes alone together? Definitely. They also had three or four scenes from last season and those were the ones that first got me wondering about the possibility.  

 

Losing Robert could bring them together depending on how it's done. Mary would probably want Tom's help more than ever after that.

 

I also think that the conversation that Tom and Sybbie had in this episode was an indication that they're going to end up staying. Tom had no answer for Sybbie when she twice asked him why so I think that's a big part of why they'll end up staying. If they're still planning on keeping Tom around I can't help but think that there must be some sort of longterm plan. Otherwise they could just have a line about how they're hiring somebody new to replace Tom since he's definitely going to go. I feel like they wouldn't really bother with the will he won't he if he were really going.

 

Mary hesitated over whether to marry Matthew over the issue of whether or not he would become an EARL.

 

 

I got the impression that Mary was leaning towards accepting Matthew but became undecided after Rosamund told her that she'd be a fool to think that she could be happy as the wife of a country solicitor. Mary was the one who was talking Matthew up saying that he might become Lord Chancellor and telling Rosamund how well they get along and all this seemed to indicate that Mary was considering that it might well be worth it to take the leap. Unfortunately for Mary she ended up not getting the chance to accept or refuse him that season. 

 

 

I think Mary respects Tom, but I don't think she'd sacrifice her own place in the social pecking order to such a degree, because regardless of how she thinks of Tom, that is what society would judge of her.

 

 

As far as JF and his writing one thing that comes up in his work again and again is the daughter of a peer who is confident and content enough to be Lady First Name-Last Name without necessarily wanting a different/better title through marriage to a peer. An example of this type of character can be found in his two novels and in Gosford Park. (JF is a big fan of Trollope and this reminds me of the character of Glencora from the Pallisers saying that being "Lady Glencora" was good enough for her when she was being pushed to marry the future Duke of Omnium.) Mary wanted a title, she probably still wants one in some ways, but she'll also always be an earl's daughter and I think she could be content with that if she ended up marrying a man without a title like Tom. 

[shipperx]

Followes did have a lady flout expectations and marry a commoner--Sybil did it.

The point is though that Mary caviled at the idea of marrying a college-educated country solicitor with aristocratic connections. And they had played up that romance for a very long time.

It would take immense effort to subsequently sell that specific character marrying an Irish Catholic land steward and former servant (a far more radical move than genteel solicitor) in one season's worth of story. The build-up/character evolution to sell that particular story with Mary would be a big haul, I think. Mary would need to change a lot to adequately sell that.

Edited November 4, 2014 by shipperx

[Glade]

The idea that Mary alone has endless opportunities, that even despite her past scandals and family problems, she can flout three suitors but still be guaranteed a husband despite the shortage of upper class males after the war is ludicrous.  Fellowes wants us to agree that Mary has such singular beauty, status and charisma that it's not possible she could ever wind up unhappy, which the audience hardly sees and history shows to be false.  I don't care who she marries, but I hope that Edith and Tom get away from the estate and find a better life.

Edited November 4, 2014 by Glade

[ZoloftBlob]

Unfortunately for Mary she ended up not getting the chance to accept or refuse him that season.

 

Which is a bit of a rewrite of history - Mary was given ample time to make a decision to refuse or accept Matthew, months, and she told him specifically she would give him an answer after her return from London... which she didn't. Mary had plenty of chances to say yes or no, and plenty of time to make a decision. Matthew didn't rescind his offer on a whim, he rescinded it after she was clearly refusing to make a decision until she knew how the money and position would shake out, and he gave her plenty of opportunity to make a decision. To say she ended up not getting the chance to accept makes it sound like he asked the question and then promptly threw a hissy when she said she needed time to think.

[Avaleigh]

To say she ended up not getting the chance to accept makes it sound like he asked the question and then promptly threw a hissy when she said she needed time to think.

 

 

Sorry, that wasn't what I was trying to imply. I was trying to say that Mary didn't answer either way about Matthew's proposal so if they'd finally had the conversation when she was ready we don't know for sure what she would have said. Matthew gave her plenty of time and she weighed her options. She consulted other family members including Violet and Rosamund. Violet told her to say yes and to then have long engagement so that they could wait and see if Robert and Cora have a boy or a girl. Mary doesn't want to go along with this plan and actually tells Matthew about the idea because she doesn't think she has it in her to do that to him. While they're having this conversation Mary tells Matthew that he can't be sure that she was going to refuse him. Matthew was upset over her hesitation because he felt that the indication was that she might not really love him and I can understand why he would feel that way. Mary screwed up but I thought it was because of her hesitation not because of actually refusing him. She never got to do that. He basically dumped her and she seemed to understand why she was the one to ruin it all.

[ZulaMay]

I have agree with not wanting Tom with either sister. Tom/Edith could perhaps have a functional and even kind relationship, but I see no passion there either. For Tom, Edith might someday be a 'comfortable' spouse but she would not be Sybil nor capable of competing with Sybil. It would be his 'settling' and that would be just so sad for both of them. He needs someone who inspires his passion and she needs someone who sees her as something other than a consolation prize. I'm all for Tom/Edith being friends and quasi-siblings. For them to marry would make me sad.

Tom/Mary would actively aggravate me. It would never cross Marys mind that someone might see her as a step down from Sybil. To her she'd be a step up... And that right there says just about everything. For Mary Tom is someone she can shed artifice with but she is class conscious in a way that Sybil never was and even more so than Edith (who isn't devoid of it but has demonstrated that where her heart is concerned it's not paramount). Mary sees Tom as a friend and worthy individual, but as a spouse it would be like with Richard. Somewhere inside she'd be aware of the lack of prestige and consequence and Mary is always very aware of her OWN consequence. I find it difficult to buy she'd sacrifice it for passion... If she were to experience romantic passion in the first place, which is something of a tall order. Even with Matthew she was more likely to be ruled by her head than anything else. If she ever married Tom, it would be for her convenience not because she was deeply in love. And as far as Tom goes, regal Mary is a far cry from warm unconventional Sybil. Sorry, Mary, but for Tom MARY is the 'lesser' sister (when compared to Sybil). And Mary is constitutionally incapable of wrapping her head around the emotional truth of that. In their case a marriage could be potentially more than sad. It would have the probability of becoming actively unhappy.

Edith needs someone who thinks she's admirable and lovely (Michael actively did that). Mary needs someone she perceives as an equal who isn't so bowled over by her that he rolls over for her to do her bidding. She needs someone to see her as she really is, and be okay with that (as opposed to simply enabling it). And Tom needs someone who can share in his beliefs and isn't bound by convention.

I like the interplay with the characters but I have no desire to see either pairing marry.

I don't think Mary would see herself as better than Sybil in general.  They were very different and she knows that, but she loved her and I think admired her.  She told Matthew "she was the strong one (Sybil)."

 

Personally I find Sybil the superior one in terms of spirit, heart, etc.  But more importantly TOM found her to be so.  There is a reason why he fell for her and not for Mary.  I realize they have both changed and are close now, but Mary is still fundamentally the same person and so is he.  She does care about status and wealth.  She has been bred to marry a titled man and that is still how she envisions her life.  Tom might be helping her run the estate, their kids might be growing up like siblings, but that doesn't mean he meets her criteria for a husband.

 

She would have to change drastically to be right for him, way too drastically for me to ever buy it.  After four years of friendship I feel the dynamic is established. He is her brother-in-law, friend, and employee.  She respects him and even loves him.  But in many ways he is only a step above Anna in her pecking order.  She is still "above" him.  After all, she is warm and close and loyal with Anna too.  That doesn't mean she thinks Anna is her equal.

 

And if they were going to be attracted to each other or emotionally drawn to each other in a romantic way, I think it would have happened already.  I could have seen an affair of some sort in their mutual state of grief after Matthew died, but the time for that has passed.

 

I just don't see Tom having his emotional needs met in marriage to her, at all.  She is warm with him but as a friend.  As a wife she would not give him the kind of warmth and affection that Sybil did.  And can't see him ever adoring her and finding deep fulfillment with her like he did with Sybil.  And he wouldn't meet her need for status.  As for Tom and Edith, I  don't think they'd meet each others needs either.  Perhaps Edith would get more out of it than Tom would because he would be loving and supportive.  But he couldn't show her the passion that Michael did, and IMO she needs and deserves that.  Now she knows how it feels.  She would also feel forever in Sybil's shadow, just as she has felt in her sisters' shadows her whole life.  That would be a big problem.

 

I think Tom/Edith make more sense as partners in terms of priorities and interests.  Sure, Tom runs the estate with Mary but that's a job, not a passion.  He was a journalist because he wanted to be.  He didn't just fall into it because he needed a job.  But I still don't see them as spouses.  A lot would have to change.  Not as much as with Mary IMO, but too much.

[darkestboy]

I think I can't wait for this series to end now.

Just when it feels like we made progress with Edith's storyline, another nonsensical plot gets thrown into the mix just to drag out the angst that much further.

We know that Anna and Bates didn't kill Green, so can Fellowes just wrap this plot up, now please?

Mary and Blake have chemistry mostly but that kiss kind of fell flat even if it served to give Gillingham the hint.

Rose is clearly being written out and I get the feeling that Isobel might not go through with marrying Merton.

Aww at Violet though the way she talked about her and Isobel's friendship.

The Isis bits got to me though, 6/10

[saki]

Some thoughts - 

 

Mary's conversation with the Dowager was hilarious - I can't believe that she seriously thought Isobel looked up to her and was seeking her advice! - it made me realise that something that has been clear all through the series is that Mary doesn't really get female friendship.  She has no female friends and it doesn't sound like she ever has had. She's fine with women who are somehow beneath her - like Sybil, who was younger, or Anna who is her maid - but she has no interest in her peers.

 

I really enjoyed Cora this episode and, actually, this whole season has been good for her.  She has a quiet dignity about her.

 

Rose/Atticus is very rushed but I think that rings true for her personality.  She is impulsive and I like that Attticus seems the same way, they both seem to have giddy, sunny personalities.

 

The Mary/Gillingham/MLF stuff was just bizarre.  It seemed like they were trying to say that, of course, Gillingham was still into Mary but that Mabel was ok with that and was happy to be second choice.  It just didn't seem very believable - I could buy that Mabel still loved him but not that she had so little self respect that she would tell Mary how sexy and fashionable she was, etc, etc.

 

The Merton boys were just over the top - would they really say those things in public?  On a similar note, why were the family discussing Edith's disappearance in front of Gillingham, Blake and Mabel?

 

The actress playing Baxter is incredibly compelling, she has such gravitas in the role.

 

I hope Edith continues to run the newspaper business and that we get to see some scenes of her doing it.

 

As ever, Mary was a bitch.  

Edited November 8, 2014 by saki

[kpw801]

Some thoughts - 

 

Mary's conversation with the Dowager was hilarious - I can't believe that she seriously thought Isobel looked up to her and was seeking her advice! - it made me realise that something that has been clear all through the series is that Mary doesn't really get female friendship.  She has no female friends and it doesn't sound like she ever has had. She's fine with women who are somehow beneath her - like Sybil, who was younger, or Anna who is her maid - but she has no interest in her peers.

 

I really enjoyed Cora this episode and, actually, this whole season has been good for her.  She has a quiet dignity about her.

 

Rose/Atticus is very rushed but I think that rings true for her personality.  She is impulsive and I like that Attticus seems the same way, they both seem to have giddy, sunny personalities.

 

The Mary/Gillingham/MLF stuff was just bizarre.  It seemed like they were trying to say that, of course, Gillingham was still into Mary but that Mabel was ok with that and was happy to be second choice.  It just didn't seem very believable - I could buy that Mabel still loved him but not that she had so little self respect that she would tell Mary how sexy and fashionable she was, etc, etc.

 

The Merton boys were just over the top - would they really say those things in public?  On a similar note, why were the family discussing Edith's disappearance in front of Gillingham, Blake and Mabel?

 

The actress playing Baxter is incredibly compelling, she has such gravitas in the role.

 

I hope Edith continues to run the newspaper business and that we get to see some scenes of her doing it.

 

As ever, Mary was a bitch.  

Amen.  Now what I want to know is would it have been considered "vulgar" for Lord Merton to have stood up and said right then and there, that this is the woman I love and so on and so forth...

 

I mean it was obvious that he was mortified but Isobel was totally humiliated in public and I don't think it was enough that he said to her out of everyone elses hearing that "we laugh about this one day".  I think it was a cop out that the "boys take after their mother in every possible way."  It seems to me that he never holds them accountable for their monstrous behavior and probably never held his wife accountable for her behaviour.  It is obvious that she was just as vile since when Lady Shackleton was talking about her she told the DC, she would have been glad to get rid of her if she had been Lord Merton.

 

Does anyone know - is Edith wealthy now?  I suppose JF has been setting it up that she would be because she kept saying to Lady Rosamund that if he were dead and she inherited anything she wanted to make sure his child had her share.

Edited November 8, 2014 by kpw801

[DianeDobbler]

I also agree with saki about the episode, and about it being a good season for Cora, of all people. I've never had much respect for Elizabeth McGovern's acting but she's been very effective this season. I believe her story points. 

 

The Merton sons were ludicrous. They'd be a county scandal, no matter how rich, if they acted out that way in public. Opposition to marriages occurred behind the scenes - they'd work on dad and if they succeeded, Isobel would hardly know what was said that left her without a husband-to-be. This blatant sneering at not just Isobel, but the whole Crawley family wasn't believeable. I believe Lord Merton might be weak when it comes to his sons, but not how it played out.

 

I agree Rose/Atticus is rushed, and moreoever I don't feel I know him at all, which makes me feel that if this relationship is meant to be the real deal, Fellowes really doesn't care and is just rushing her off. But then, we really didn't know Tony and Charles either. They just talked about Mary. Matthew talked about a lot of stuff besides Mary, especially in the beginning.

 

I didn't get the impression that Mabel was second choice, just that there was some massive re-write/shift tone with Gillingham. When Mary tried to dump him (and nobody should have to "try" to dump somebody, it's not something that takes two), his response was obnoxious, including challenging her about his prowess in the sack. FF to THIS episode, and Gillingham appears to want to be with Mabel, "can't" break up with Mary because it "wouldn't be honorable" and because she's sending mixed signals about whether she wants him to go away. Enter Charles who explains Gillingham is confusing Mary's wish with her instincts. Mabel/Gillingham were played as a sophisticated duo who preferred each other but Gillingham had gotten himself into this Mary situation. He was still not extricated from this Mary situation when Blake/Mary and Gillingham/Mabel encountered each other at the cinema. It's like Gillingham went ahead started re-dating Mabel while waiting for the Mary situation to sort out. So strange. Too bad. As soon as Mabel entered the picture Gillingham became a much more attractive character. It's amazing how that works. He even had charm! But not so I wish he'd stick around for Mary (nor do I wish that of Charles Blake either). No romantic chemistry. The Gillingham story went in one big nonsensical circle. Ostensibly he dumped Mabel for Mary, but when we meet Mabel Gillingham feels sort of "obliged" to stick around for Mary even though he bends towards Mabel. So why dump Mabel in the first place.

 

My impression is Edith isn't Earl of Grantham wealthy, but financially independent. She's got grandpa's money, her column (which is money she earns) and now she owns a business. It appeared fairly prosperous to me in the scene we saw, several employees, not a shoe-string, fairly busy. While I've said I don't think any of the actresses who've played the daughters are any great shakes in the acting department, I thought Laura Carmichael sort of gave a key to Edith in the way she particularly focused on "Papa" about Marigold. It wasn't just hoping he'd give permission; it was nakedly hoping for his approval in the way she said the line.

Edited November 8, 2014 by DianeDobbler

[vesperholly]

I believe Lord Merton might be weak when it comes to his sons, but not how it played out.

 

And that's total character assassination of LM, btw. I've been rewatching the series and have just finished S2. LM was outraged and furious when his son was outed as the person who spiked Tom's drink at dinner. He berated his son and ordered him to leave the table and wait in the car. Fairly effective discipline even if it unfortunately had to be applied many years too late.

[kpw801]

After watching this episode for the umpteenth time, I have to say I agree about Laura Carmichael's acting.  She was devastating with the "Can I take her Papa" business.  Contrary to what I was thinking earlier about the fact that the dog was getting so much attention compared to Edith, I think that was how Julian Fellowes wanted it so that the Earl was so wretchedly distracted with his dying pet that he would have given anyone anything at that moment.  Mary was as contemptuous as usual but they were all too subdued by the Earl's impending loss to say much more about it.

And that's total character assassination of LM, btw. I've been rewatching the series and have just finished S2. LM was outraged and furious when his son was outed as the person who spiked Tom's drink at dinner. He berated his son and ordered him to leave the table and wait in the car. Fairly effective discipline even if it unfortunately had to be applied many years too late.

That's what I thought too.  He didn't even know Tom in season 2 yet he stood up and shouted his son down that night.  But here is this woman he has made such a strong declaration of love to and he sits there like a neutered pony while his son rips her to shreds in front of no only the Crawleys but in front of Atticus Aldridge as well.  Not sure what kind of people bankers are but if they are so disrespectful I don't see how they could have success in business - no wonder Sybil wasn't "keen" on Larry.  I wan't Isobel happy but I don't see it with Merton unless he grows a pair and soon.

Edited November 9, 2014 by kpw801

[Avaleigh]

I thought Laura Carmichael sort of gave a key to Edith in the way she particularly focused on "Papa" about Marigold. It wasn't just hoping he'd give permission; it was nakedly hoping for his approval in the way she said the line.

 

I didn't see it as Edith wanting his approval so much as I saw it as her hoping that he wouldn't put his foot down and stand in her way so that she'd have to tell him the truth about why she's really so determined to do this. She doesn't want him to know and I feel like her reaction here is very, very similar to Mary's own thoughts about Robert finding out about Pamuk. Mary says to Cora that she "couldn't bear the way [Robert would] look at [her]" if her were to be told about Pamuk and I feel like Edith has the same fears. Robert still has the sensibilities of a Victorian man, so I can totally understand the reactions of Mary and Edith here. They fear being slut shamed and want to prevent that from happening. I think Cora is right in her opinion that Robert could be trusted with the truth and that he'd treat Edith kindly but Edith unfortunately is convinced otherwise even though each member of her family who has found out the truth has treated her with warmth, protection, and kindness.  I'm really keeping my fingers crossed for a touching Robert/Edith scene at some point and maybe this could help Edith get over her feelings of being the red headed stepchild of the family.

 

I think that was how Julian Fellowes wanted it so that the Earl was so wretchedly distracted with his dying pet that he would have given anyone anything at that moment.

 

 

This was how the scene came across to me too. He was having a very low moment so the timing was actually perfect for Edith to ask despite what she might have thought given her obvious nervousness.

 

it made me realise that something that has been clear all through the series is that Mary doesn't really get female friendship.  She has no female friends and it doesn't sound like she ever has had. She's fine with women who are somehow beneath her - like Sybil, who was younger, or Anna who is her maid - but she has no interest in her peers.

 

 

Unfortunately, we've never been able to see Mary, Edith, or Sybil interact with female friends around their own age and class. Rose at least was shown with Madeline and we were able to see that Rose is the kind of girl who is genuinely friendly and it's easy for her to get along with everyone. (Everyone but Susan anyway.) We've heard Mary mention having friends but we never actually see her spending time with any of them. She has a friend that she trusts enough to cover for her during her week with Gillingham so I can't believe that this woman was some casual acquaintance. She mentions to Tom that she was friends with the woman whose family's house ended up getting burned down by Irish protesters. I can't think of Edith or Sybil making any mentions of female friends but maybe there's something I'm forgetting.

 

It's a drawback that I've commented on before. Even though the show wants to keep the action in Downton as much as possible to me there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to bring more characters to the house. I don't doubt that everyone in the house has friends but based on what we've seen Rose, Violet, and maybe Mary if we count the references I mentioned are the main upstairs characters who seem to have friends outside of the house. Robert seems genuinely friendly with Shrimpy and he has his club and other opportunities where he's made to interact with his peers. Cora doesn't seem to have any female friends or close acquaintance. Tom's only friend was Sarah Fucking Bunting. Apart from that he isn't shown to have any friends outside of the family unless we count Isobel and Mrs Hughes... (Jeez, this post just made me realize that in general I really just want to see Tom have a good time already. It's been way too long and he hardly ever interacts with guys his own age.) Edith, I can't recall her having any friends or making mention of them. Like Rose, Sybil was a person anyone could get along with so it was always unfortunate to me that we couldn't see her interact with people her own age once or twice in the first two seasons.

[vesperholly]

It's a drawback that I've commented on before. Even though the show wants to keep the action in Downton as much as possible to me there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to bring more characters to the house. I don't doubt that everyone in the house has friends but based on what we've seen Rose, Violet, and maybe Mary if we count the references I mentioned are the main upstairs characters who seem to have friends outside of the house.

 

How can there be any room in the budget for friends (or even Edith's lady's maid, who did eventually get a name but never a face) when you have to hire THREE suitors for Mary? Gwen was kind of a stand-in for friends for Sybil, but I agree that the characters' outside lives have been very poorly fleshed out.

[saki]

 

Even though the show wants to keep the action in Downton as much as possible to me there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to bring more characters to the house.

 

I agree - there would have been a circle of upper class families in the area, we've heard them mentioned:   Lord Merton's son said that Isobel wouldn't be able to replace their mother as a leader of county society - which we have never really seen..., the Crawleys were meant to know the former inhabitants of the house that Sir Richard was buying for him and Mary, and the dinner that Mary organised back when the estate was threatened had local aristocrats attending.  Having some of these families on the show would have helped enormously in a variety of ways.

 

I do think, though, that Mary is more prone than other characters on the show to thinking that relationships between people have to be clear about who is superior (Mary) and who is inferior (everyone else), I can't picture her having a female friend who was in any way her equal.  While you're right to point out that we haven't seen friendships for very many of the main characters, I can't imagine any of them failing to understand the concept!

[Tetraneutron]

 

Does anyone know - is Edith wealthy now?  I suppose JF has been setting it up that she would be because she kept saying to Lady Rosamund that if he were dead and she inherited anything she wanted to make sure his child had her share.

The show is all over the place with her writing publishing. First she just has a column, which wouldn't pay much. And it was never mentioned until after she left the show. And did she keep it up when she was in Switzerland for a year? How? And assuming she can run a publishing concern, why is she spending so much time at Downton? And do we even know anything about the magazine? What are its opinions? Who's its audience? Does Edith want to advocate for anything?

 

And I can't imagine she'd be wealthy, because Gregson wasn't. I wish the show would go into period detail about what Sybbie and Marigold can expect growing up. They can live at Downton and have nannies, but then what? What do they do for school? Would they go to some posh girls' school? They wouldn't present at court, but what? Would they be expected to marry well? Become teachers or secretaries? Be a part of Society in any capacity? If the audience knew anything about that, it would inform how they felt about what Tom or Edith chose to do.

 

Add me to the pile of people not getting the basic dynamics of the Mabel/Mary/Boring Tony/Boring Charles quadrangle. So, Mabel's the "beauty of the season" and Tony's lucky to snag her. But he's not into her so he chooses Mary. But Mabel, despite being written as both a catch, and proud, never moves on to another suitor and is fine being sloppy seconds. As for Tony, he refuses to bow out quietly when Mary tells him no, but is happy when Mary stages the public kiss. So, he'd rather be humiliated in public than just move on? Why? And why would Mabel accept being humiliated like this? Meanwhile, Charles is so invested in Mary's happiness that he schemes on her behalf and sticks his nose in, but then he doesn't end up pursuing Mary either, after all that work he did. So after a season of angst and drama and musical chairs, everything ends up exactly as it was before Mary even met them.

[Camera One]

I accidentally watched the first 10 minutes of Episode 8 before realizing I had missed this one.

 

I really liked how Cora reacted to it all.  If they had confided in her, she might have been able to concoct this scheme earlier.  Though really, they've completely forgotten the loose cannon Mrs. Drewe.  What's to stop her from telling the whole village, since she did tell Cora.  I'm glad it worked out for Edith, but it was a whole lot of trouble for such an easy resolution.  

 

I like Anna so I didn't like how they made her so nosy with the baby and Mr. Drewe with the train business.  I suppose she's the one who will spill to Mary eventually?

 

Enough with the Gillingham/Blake shenanigans  Blake seemed so austere and severe last season but now he's playing matchmaker.  At least Gillingham's personality is a little more consistent.

 

More rude guests at dinner.  I must say those scenes always crack me up.  

[Avaleigh]

Followes did have a lady flout expectations and marry a commoner--Sybil did it.

 

 

I kept meaning to address this but got distracted.

 

The ladies I was referring to in JF other stories when I was saying that I think he's borrowing from the way Trollope wrote Glencora are different than Sybil in that they take superficial comfort from their titles. It's partially because they have their titles that they end up having the courage to marry or be with men who don't have one. The characters in these stories still care about being Lady So and So and having the security of the title means something to them whereas Sybil was perfectly content to be Mrs Sybil Branson. Mary though I think might end up having her own Glencora moment if she finds herself falling in love with Tom. 

[photo fox]

Wasn't Sybil still "Lady Sybil" though, by dint of being an earl's daughter?  Mary is still "Lady Mary", even though Matthew was just a Mister.

 

Not refuting your argument; I just can't remember.

[ZoloftBlob]

As I understand it, Mary would always be "Lady" Mary because of her birth but any children would have their father's rank, not hers. And Matthew, as heir apparent, should have been using Robert's highest lesser peerage dignity as his own as a courtesy title, but this might have been awkward as he was not Robert's son.

[Skeeter22]

Matthew was only heir presumptive, so he wasn't entitled to any titles until he actually inherited. Sybil was always a "Lady", but I think she styled herself as Mrs. Branson in Ireland.

[ZoloftBlob]

I'm just going by wiki.

 

The heir apparent of a duke, a marquess, or an earl generally uses his father's highest lesser peerage dignity as his own. Hence, the Duke of Devonshire's son is called Marquess of Hartington. Such an heir apparent is called a courtesy peer, but is a commoner until such time as he inherits (unless summoned by a writ in acceleration).

 

Like I said, I could see this being awkward or unwanted as Matthew wasn't Robert's son and wasn't entirely in love with assuming the role anyway.

[Avaleigh]

Wasn't Sybil still "Lady Sybil" though, by dint of being an earl's daughter?  Mary is still "Lady Mary", even though Matthew was just a Mister.

 

 

Sybil was still Lady Sybil Branson, however in S3E1 when she comes over for the wedding she tells Mary that over in Ireland she goes by Mrs Sybil Branson and Mary tells Sybil not to let Robert find out about that. Mary would still be Lady Mary Branson if she and Tom were to get married.

 

The reason this came up is because some people think that Mary wouldn't be willing to marry Tom because he was once the chauffeur, doesn't have a title, etc and I was saying that maybe it's possible JF could be writing Mary the way he's written female characters in some of his other works.

 

The other common thought is that if Mary hesitated with Matthew then there's no way that she'd go for Tom and IMO Mary has changed since Matthew and I think Tom has likewise changed into the kind of man who might very well end up being compatible with Mary.

[Skeeter22]

I'm just going by wiki.

The heir apparent of a duke, a marquess, or an earl generally uses his father's highest lesser peerage dignity as his own. Hence, the Duke of Devonshire's son is called Marquess of Hartington. Such an heir apparent is called a courtesy peer, but is a commoner until such time as he inherits (unless summoned by a writ in acceleration).

Like I said, I could see this being awkward or unwanted as Matthew wasn't Robert's son and wasn't entirely in love with assuming the role anyway.

Matthew wasn't heir apparent because it was possible for him to be displaced by a future son of Robert's. He, and now George, was the heir presumptive. Cora could drop dead and Robert could remarry and have a son. The son would be heir apparent and be given a courtesy title. A son would always be first in line, while Matthew or George could be bumped down.

[ZoloftBlob]

Ah thanks :)

 

So many nuances :)

[Avaleigh]

The son would be heir apparent and be given a courtesy title.

 

 

If Robert and Cora's son had lived his courtesy title would have been Viscount Downton as that was Robert's title when he first met Cora and his father was still alive.

[maraleia]

 

Rosamund shows up at Downton following Edith's surprise departure. Rose is pleased to introduce Atticus and his parents to everyone. Anna and Bates think about a fresh start, now that that their problems seem to be behind them. Molesley is worried after Daisy becoming disillusioned with her studies. Mary and Blake seize a chance to send Gillingham a strong message.

[The Solution]

Would have liked to have seen someone kill Larry Merton right at the dinner table. Isobel, Violet, Cora, any of them.

 

 

Lady Mary could always appear at his chambers one night and do to him what she did to Mister Pamuk.

[QuinnM]

 

Lady Mary could always appear at his chambers one night and do to him what she did to Mister Pamuk.

I would just like to take a moment to remember Theo James with long wavy hair, dead in the bed.  I don't think Divergent buzz cut is nearly as heart stopping.