Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
ElectricBoogaloo

S06.E02: Season 6, Episode 2

Recommended Posts

I don't think she's shown courage or responsibility at all.  Courage and responsibility would have been to have addressed the situation head-on as soon as it happened.  She could either have stood up to society, who cares what people think, etc.  Or she and her parents could have crafted a story that she and Gregson were married abroad.  There was no internet in the 1920s and it would have been a lot harder for any nosy busybody to uncover the truth.  And that's assuming anyone cared enough about Edith to even bother, and the way Edith has been portrayed, she has been this lifelong sad sack also-ran to her beautiful and glamourous sister.  Nobody cares about Edith.

 

Courage and responsibility would have been to tell her entire family the truth immediately.  Not to just tell her aunt and hide the truth from her parents and sister.  Then when she returned from abroad, and then says she has this child of a dead friend that she wants the pig farmer and his wife to take care of... I'm sorry, but that's not courage and responsibility to me.  She was just spinning more and more lies.  I don't find the act of taking her child back anything to applaud when she should have owned up to everything in the first place.

 

Was there evidence that Mrs. Drewe was neglecting her other children?  If there was any mention of them not being fed and clothed or taken to school, I missed it.  Just because she loved Marigold and missed her doesn't necessarily mean she ignored her other children.

 

Courage is shown in many ways and it's necessarily connected with responsibility and honesty. To sleep with a man outside wedlock showed Edith's ability to take a risk because of love. 

 

I think you completely forget the age. A girl didn't tell parents that she had "failed" them by bringing the family "shame" but tried to find another way. F.ex. Dorothy Sayes never told her parents nor anyone else during her whole life.

 

No doubt Mrs Drewe has done the outer duties to her children, but children need also mental things. If the mother is grieving for months as excessively as Mrs Drewe, her mind is constantly in the child she has lost, not in children she has and they can't help noticing it and it doesn't do them good. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Mary "handling" the blackmail failed to handle the blackmailer ... who simply and successfully went around her to her father ... who wrote a check ... Robert's a known idiot but (first) to have paid and then (second) to think Mary showed "true grit" ... I was stunned. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think the "grit" Robert perceived was that Mary refused to give in and pay off the blackmailer. She was prepared to let the woman tell/sell the story and face the social consequences.

That's a very different approach than when she was willing to marry Carlisle in exchange for keeping her secret. And it's true that a widowed 30-something woman would elicit a different response than an unmarried teen/20-year-old who had a guy die in her bed. And also, it never occurred to her that Tony and Mabel might get caught in the fallout.

But I think the principle of it -- standing up to a blackmailer and risk having her secret told -- was rather bold for a woman of that era.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Just say "no" ... it just doesn't take any skill nor did it "solve" her blackmailer problem or Tony Gillingham's ...

It's like Mary helping Carson and Hughes -- It will be in the grand hall. Or Anna -- I'll make the appointment, pay for it and go with you.  Just do what I tell you! 

 

It's like Robert -- But railroads are safe as houses and don't go broke so I don't have to follow my investment or my consultant's advice...

or Edith -- I've decided to keep Marigold afterall ... Run along now. 

 

Not "managing" -- just giving other people direct orders to do what you want! What a skill.  It just made me laugh. 

Share this post


Link to post

Oh Mary you went to a week-sex trip with some man and now someone want to blackmail you and you say no.....excellent...you clearly show me that you are perfectly capable about what we are going to farm the next year, to who and to what price we are going to sell, how to collect the money from the tenants, how to direct the 200 or 300 who works in the estate, know who are going to hire. 

 

Please, have note that is said for the same man who invested all the money in one single thing and wanted to invest another money with Charles Ponzi....

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I dislike Edith way too much for a fictional character.

 

Yeah, I'm almost looking forward to Downton ending just so that I can spend less energy disliking someone who is totally 100% made up. I'm at the point where I fear if on the off chance I ever bumped into Laura Carmichael all I'd be able to say was that she looked really good in the '20s-clothes. I still like her as an actress for the most part but if she's trying to make Edith in any way likable right now it's really missing the mark for me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

yes, and Edith is failing to accept the reality that Mrs. Drewe is, in fact, not okay with the current situation and is not reliably going to help Edith keep her secret ... Edith is still more worried about Mary finding out the truth (and losing face with Mary) than with protecting Marigold ...Arrive at the livestock show, see Mrs. Drewe, turn around and LEAVE ....

I totally disagree. It's one thing to try to avoid her but your solution would have her just rushing away whenever she spies Margie.l.a t the shop, the dentists? Please. Edith going out in public with Marigold is not bad custodial behavior. There needn't be a scene if Margie would control herself.

 As for crying over fostering pets..l I too am a foster failure and adopted the two cats I fostered.

But that does not make fostering a bad thing. It's a good thing, it gets animals out of shelters while they wait for heir forever homes. Ditto children (sometimes even getting out of shelters,)

If you or anyone cries a lot and feels heartbroken when a fostering turns into an adoption by someone else you should not foster. But it does not make the system cruel.

Maggie's tragedy is that she didn't know she was fostering, but she's had the better part of a year to know and accept it. And it's no more cruel for marigold to go back to edith than it is for any fostered child to go back to a parent. And again.l. Marigolds very young.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I used to like both sisters, but by now my reaction to everything Edith says is pretty much similar to Mary's. She's getting on my nerves with her constant "I'm such a poor, poor Edith" attitude. She has everything she wanted now. Her daughter is at Downton, she has a newspaper, a great flat in London and she is still moping around "am I happy now?". And then she turns around and is SO unfeeling about others than herself. But she is the poor victim, she has a right to be so, because everyone has always been so mean to her. Poor, poor Edith. Give me bitchy Mary any time over that self pitying washcloth Edith. 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

I don't really remember Edith being written as wanting anything in the early seasons except to be married and equal to her sisters (in the eyes of her family, the community, society, I guess?). I'm really only going by what she says on her wedding day to Strallan. She only picked up writing after that went under, from what I remember. But running a magazine (which isn't the same as writing for one) and owning a flat aren't exactly things she was wishing for all this time. They just fell in her lap through unfortunate circumstance.

 

I would have liked if both Mary and Edith were written at the end as developing past what they grew up to believe--that marriage was their ultimate raison d'être--and surviving, happily, alone, but that doesn't look to be what we're getting. I don't think either character will be happy until they're married (in Fellowes' world). But I guess that makes sense for the time period.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I used to like both sisters, but by now my reaction to everything Edith says is pretty much similar to Mary's. She's getting on my nerves with her constant "I'm such a poor, poor Edith" attitude. She has everything she wanted now. Her daughter is at Downton, she has a newspaper, a great flat in London and she is still moping around "am I happy now?". And then she turns around and is SO unfeeling about others than herself. But she is the poor victim, she has a right to be so, because everyone has always been so mean to her. Poor, poor Edith. Give me bitchy Mary any time over that self pitying washcloth Edith. 

 

Edith "has everything she wanted now" although it's only nine months when she learned of her lover's murder? Mary has much more, but she isn't clearly happy even if she lost Matthew 3,5 years ago. 

 

It makes no difference to Mary if Edith has real causes to grieve or not - she is just as nasty towards her. Instead, Edith was emphatic towards Mary when Matthew was MIA and after he died.

 

Insensitivity is Mary's general attitude towards people except those few she likes. Instead, Edith has been insensitive only towards those people with whom she had opposite interests.

 

It seems that Edith gets on Mary's nerves, whether she is unhappy or happy. That shows that it's not Edith who "annoys" Mary but something that is actually inside Mary and that she can't admit but must project on Edith.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

I don't really remember Edith being written as wanting anything in the early seasons except to be married and equal to her sisters (in the eyes of her family, the community, society, I guess?). I'm really only going by what she says on her wedding day to Strallan. She only picked up writing after that went under, from what I remember. But running a magazine (which isn't the same as writing for one) and owning a flat aren't exactly things she was wishing for all this time. They just fell in her lap through unfortunate circumstance.

 

I would have liked if both Mary and Edith were written at the end as developing past what they grew up to believe--that marriage was their ultimate raison d'être--and surviving, happily, alone, but that doesn't look to be what we're getting. I don't think either character will be happy until they're married (in Fellowes' world). But I guess that makes sense for the time period.

 

 

I think it's more a convention of the genre which Fellowes followes too much. He can't allow main characters have an unhappy marriage even if it would likely in the case where a titled man marries an American girl for her money.

 

Mary and Edith grew up in the period where happpiness wasn't the most important thing in the world, but doing one's duty. That changed after the WW1 which is shown in Rose who is a "flapper girl" of the jazz age. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

And then she turns around and is SO unfeeling about others than herself. But she is the poor victim, she has a right to be

My mother calls it the insensitivity of sensitive people.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

Continuing:

 

There is nothing wrong in such to write a story that ends in marriage. Jane Austen did it superbly. But that was only the plot. In order to have a "happy end" Austen's heroine had to grow up, and usually the hero also. Only after that they could form a good relationship.

 

Instead, Fellowes seems to have a very different view: Mary is unhappy, ergo, she must just find "the right man" and marry him and then she  automatically becomes happy. No character development is needed.

 

As for Edith, she is already a different woman she was in S1 and after being jilted by Strallan. The old self-image and behavior patterns learned in childhood still influence on her behavior but mostly within her family. 

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

It seems that Edith gets on Mary's nerves, whether she is unhappy or happy. That shows that it's not Edith who "annoys" Mary but something that is actually inside Mary and that she can't admit but must project on Edith.

I agree. I remember a scene about six months after Matthew's death. Edith is walking up the stairs, happily holding a valentine she had just received, Mary is going down and snipes something about how she didn't get a valentine. Edith is happy and Mary hates her for it six months after her husband's death. But if Mary is gaily showing off her new hairdo one day after Edith's best friend's death then Edith is expected to applaud with the rest of the family or be called a Debbie Downer.

I would have liked if both Mary and Edith were written at the end as developing past what they grew up to believe--that marriage was their ultimate raison d'être--and surviving, happily, alone, but that doesn't look to be what we're getting. I don't think either character will be happy until they're married (in Fellowes' world). But I guess that makes sense for the time period.

I think that holds true for a lot of people in any time period. I know that these days we're all told we don't need marriage to be happy and I'm sure there are many people with wonderful, satisfying careers and warm networks of friends, who don't need or want marriage and children, but I also think, if we are honest with ourselves, that the majority of us still look for a mate to share our lives and feel a loss if we never find it.
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

I remember a scene about six months after Matthew's death. Edith is walking up the stairs, happily holding a valentine she had just received, Mary is going down and snipes something about how she didn't get a valentine. Edith is happy and Mary hates her for it six months after her husband's death.

 

I just watched the the former episode (S4 Ep1) and Mary didn't actually snipe. Edith had a Valentine card in her hand and when Mary ask what it is, she says "nothing", obviously to spare Mary's feelings. Mary then remembers t's Valentine's day but she says it wearily and in the same tone she wishes Edith "happy time in London". It's evident that Mary is so deep in grief that she has no ability nor will to be mean.

 

It seems that Fellowes "forgot" the sibling rivalry for most part for a long time but started the theme again after the theme "Mary's suitors" failed in S5.  

Share this post


Link to post

I think that holds true for a lot of people in any time period. I know that these days we're all told we don't need marriage to be happy and I'm sure there are many people with wonderful, satisfying careers and warm networks of friends, who don't need or want marriage and children, but I also think, if we are honest with ourselves, that the majority of us still look for a mate to share our lives and feel a loss if we never find it.

 

I am not at all against wanting marriage, only that already Jane Austen presented it more realistically.

Edited by Roseanna
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Quote

    I would have liked if both Mary and Edith were written at the end as developing past what they grew up to believe--that marriage was their ultimate raison d'être--and surviving, happily, alone, but that doesn't look to be what we're getting. I don't think either character will be happy until they're married (in Fellowes' world). But I guess that makes sense for the time period.

 

I think that holds true for a lot of people in any time period. I know that these days we're all told we don't need marriage to be happy and I'm sure there are many people with wonderful, satisfying careers and warm networks of friends, who don't need or want marriage and children, but I also think, if we are honest with ourselves, that the majority of us still look for a mate to share our lives and feel a loss if we never find it.

 

 

I think it is understandable that Edith would want to experience acceptance and love that might lead to marriage, because she has been thwarted.  Mary, having had a happy marriage, then some misfires with subsequent men, recently told her father than no one may ever meet her standards and she seemed all right with that.  Then there's Isobel, who really seems perfectly fine without another marriage even though she's had two decent opportunities.  So I think we're seeing the gamut of how women in the fictional time and place of the 20s and aristocratic England might view the need to be married.  I don't think in any era, every single woman wanted to be married, some probably did so out of a sense of duty or following what was expected.  Obviously it's never a guarantee of happiness.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I think it is understandable that Edith would want to experience acceptance and love that might lead to marriage, because she has been thwarted.  Mary, having had a happy marriage, then some misfires with subsequent men, recently told her father than no one may ever meet her standards and she seemed all right with that.  Then there's Isobel, who really seems perfectly fine without another marriage even though she's had two decent opportunities.  So I think we're seeing the gamut of how women in the fictional time and place of the 20s and aristocratic England might view the need to be married.  I don't think in any era, every single woman wanted to be married, some probably did so out of a sense of duty or following what was expected.  Obviously it's never a guarantee of happiness.

 

In irl Edith, having a child outside of wedlock, couldn't have a possibility to marry, at least with a man of the same social class and she would clearly know it.

 

As for Mary, she is a widow in the middle of thirties, has a son and her fortune is tied to the estate. In irl she couldn't just pick and chose for most men in her social class would prefer younger single women, preferably a heiress. 

 

Of course in a soap could happen anything.

Share this post


Link to post

I think you're right, Roseanna, but even in the past there have always been trade offs. Edith Wharton wrote her novels around the turn of the last century and from the point of view of that class. In "This House of Mirth," her protagonist, who was past her sell by date and talked about a little, was still a prime marriage candidate to a wealthy Jewish gentleman looking to step up in society. That was before her reputation was completely shot and her chance of inheritance gone. Lily wasn't titled though. Social climbers will overlook a lot for a title.

(I can't wait for tonight when we have new stuff to argue about!)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Ha! got this on the 3rd watch...

Anna & Mary are going to London 'for shopping and errands'

 

Bates 'Try to put your feet up'

 

Anna 'yes, I'll  be putting my feet up'

 

 

(first two times I took it as sarcasm regarding Mary running her ragged in London & not a stirrups thing at all)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Mary would still be a great catch for a second son who wouldn't be inheriting his own estate. Their children would still be aristocrats and have all the benefits of same, with the potential of inheriting from the father's side if the first son died or didn't have kids.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
(I can't wait for tonight when we have new stuff to argue about!)

 

Amen to that. Please, God, no more Drewes or Mary/Edith conflict so we don't have to resurrect crap from years ago.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Amen to that. Please, God, no more Drewes or Mary/Edith conflict so we don't have to resurrect crap from years ago.

I think the Drewes are out of the picture, but Mary/Edith conflict will never die.  Mary has yet to figure out she really is an auntie, so there will be that.  Plus their lifelong patterns are here to stay! 

 

I will really miss our (sometimes circular) discussions here.  It's all enjoyable for me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

One thing that I do find interesting about the Edith/Marigold/Drewes story is that it seems to be the greatest example this show has ever had of how dramatically one's position can vary between different hierarchies. We are used to viewing Edith within the hierarchy of the Crawley family, in which she is at the bottom. However, with this particular story line, we see Edith as part of the whole system, as part of the family that is clearly at the top of the larger social hierarchy. That's why I find some of the scenes of Edith's utter lack of regard for the feelings of the Drewes to be so interesting. In this episode, Edith was really portrayed in her role as a member of the family at the very top of the hierarchy. We're used to seeing EDITH Crawley at the bottom of the Crawley system; seeing Edith CRAWLEY so prominently featured in her place at the top of the larger social system is so interesting to me because it really demonstrates how very formidable the power at the top is. Whether in the outright conflict of this episode, or in the somewhat friendlier interactions of the past, a family like the Drewes doesn't stand a chance against a family like the Crawleys, even against its evidently least cherished member.

Edited by jordanpond
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

And as someone mentioned wrt the Cologne New Years Eve Miscreants, suffering does not automatically make people more compassionate and may have the opposite effect, by leaving a residua of abiding anger and resentment, encouraging the opposite ... and yet, we expect Edith, due to her low status, to have more rather than less compassion towards the Drewes (as well as gratitude for helping her out in a crisis, granted a poorly thought out faux fix).  I was startled by Edith's absolute sense of entitlement (and lack of guilt or regret wrt how this worked out for the Drews) probably "realistic" enough -- might makes right. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Is Mary objecting to being referred to as an aunt or was it just the term "auntie?" She is Sibyl's natural aunt, and I don't recall her reluctance to accept that role.

Edited by guilfoyleatpp

Share this post


Link to post

Is Mary objecting to being referred to as an aunt or was it just the term "auntie?" She is Sibyl's natural aunt, and I don't recall her reluctance to accept that role.

I think she was objecting to the idea of being called 'aunt' by a child she believes to be a mere foundling, a farm girl who got lucky, in effect.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Guys, we've hidden a few posts in here that came off as arguing that either biological or adoptive mothers are more "real" or important.

 

Let's stay away from that kind of argument, please.  Remember that your fellow posters may be birth mothers, foster mother, or adoptive mothers, and so your words will have extra weight with them.

 

Every mother is "real", no matter her role.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

With all that Mary and Edith don't get along, they did share a look of "Dad doesn't have a clue" when he suggested that Carson and Mrs. Hughes get married in the servant's quarters.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

With all that Mary and Edith don't get along, they did share a look of "Dad doesn't have a clue" when he suggested that Carson and Mrs. Hughes get married in the servant's quarters.

 

As one of three sisters myself, I recognized that look immediately!

Share this post


Link to post

I missed last weeks episode, so had to wait until last night to watch the one repeat. 

 

IMO, had Mrs. Drewe been able to readily accept that Edith, who had no husband or child of her own (at least by all appearances), wanted to be a regular presence in the life of a seemingly orphaned girl, and assist with money, opportunities, etc., things might have worked out well for everyone.  But it did seem from the beginning that Mrs. Drewe became overly attached to and possessive of Marigold and didn't seem willing to 'share' her with anyone, which I understand is a bit unusual for that time frame.  The more Mrs. Drewe pulled Marigold away from Edith, the more Edith was determined to pull Marigold closer to her, which resulted in the circumstances of taking Marigold completely away from the Drewes. 

 

So I kindof blame the result on Mrs. Drewe, who probably should have allowed Edith to fawn a bit over the girl.  But agreed that we don't know whether there was some issue in Mrs. Drewe's past that contributed to her emotional state, a lost child, a lost daughter, some prior problem with Edith personally.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

and the Drewe's story is now officially over (I think) so we will never know if she was "touched" by mental illness or grief or just strangely obstinate in some unlikely passive way. We will never know.  (I loathe "she must be crazy to act that way" story lines because, in my experience, even crazy people have explanations, reasons for their behavior, bizarre as they may be to the rest of us. )

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Mr. Drewe tried to save the Downton family from disgrace and is rewarded with losing the farm his own family has worked for generations. Not to mention his wife has lost her mind.

 

Not only that, the Crawleys pride themselves on having led Mr. Drewe to make the "right decision."   The Drewe family managed that farm since "before Waterloo" (1815) and in a single episode they are deprived of it and sent away to face a very uncertain future, and for what?   The Crawleys' peace of mind!   God forbid the Crawleys ever worry about anything more than the changing times.   The way Robert prevailed upon Mr. Drewe to consider giving up the farm reminded me a lot of the way Tony Soprano would "persuade" business people to act in ways that worked against their own interests, flattering himself that he was doing them a service.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I was certainly hoping to see serious money changing hands ... 

 

 

Same here.   Instead all Drewe got was the equivalent of a pat on the shoulder and a "that's a good chap."

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

Not only that, the Crawleys pride themselves on having led Mr. Drewe to make the "right decision."   The Drewe family managed that farm since "before Waterloo" (1815) and in a single episode they are deprived of it and sent away to face a very uncertain future, and for what?   The Crawleys' peace of mind!   God forbid the Crawleys ever worry about anything more than the changing times.   The way Robert prevailed upon Mr. Drewe to consider giving up the farm reminded me a lot of the way Tony Soprano would "persuade" business people to act in ways that worked against their own interests, flattering himself that he was doing them a service.

 

Originally it was Robert who had made Mr Dewe a favor. Mr Drewe's father hadn't paid rent for a long time. Although it had been economically better to get the farm back to the estate, Robert decided against Mary and Tom that Mr Drewe could keep the farm and loaned him 50 pounds so that he could pay his debts to him (Robert wanted keep Mary in dark but she found out). 

 

Further, in S5 it was was Mrs Drewe ​who wanted and even demanded that her husband to leave the farm of his family and move out, in order to prevent Edith visiting Marigold.

 

Finally, Mr Drewe had promised to Robert that Mrs Drewe doesn't cause any trouble but failed his promised as she kidnapped Marigold. After that it was quite natural to Mr Drewe to realize that he had better to leave the farm because of his wife' sanity. No doubt he was also grateful ​that his wife's deed was kept secret by Crawleys. For some reason his debt was never mentioned although it's doubtful that a farmer could pay 50 pounds (it would be 1337.50 pounds today) in a couple of years. 

 

As for Crawley's "peace of mind", knowing what harm stalking ex-partners and ex-parents quarreling about the child's custody can do, how can one speak of it lightly?   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry, I'll never believe anything but that the downfall of the Drewes rests squarely upon the shoulders of the Crawley family, who can destroy you with their good intentions.

 

(But kudos to you on having such a firm grasp of how the situation unfolded.)

Edited by millennium
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

IMO, had Mrs. Drewe been able to readily accept that Edith, who had no husband or child of her own (at least by all appearances), wanted to be a regular presence in the life of a seemingly orphaned girl, and assist with money, opportunities, etc., things might have worked out well for everyone.  But it did seem from the beginning that Mrs. Drewe became overly attached to and possessive of Marigold and didn't seem willing to 'share' her with anyone, which I understand is a bit unusual for that time frame.  The more Mrs. Drewe pulled Marigold away from Edith, the more Edith was determined to pull Marigold closer to her, which resulted in the circumstances of taking Marigold completely away from the Drewes. 

 

So I kindof blame the result on Mrs. Drewe, who probably should have allowed Edith to fawn a bit over the girl.  But agreed that we don't know whether there was some issue in Mrs. Drewe's past that contributed to her emotional state, a lost child, a lost daughter, some prior problem with Edith personally.

 

I agree. Of course it can be troublesome to have someone, and your superior at the top of all, to pop at your home anytime to fawn over your child (although some people wouldn't mind that at all, indeed it's a habit in some regions to visit uninvited for no reason at all). But even if troubled, normally you would say politely that now is the wrong time to visit and suggest the other time, instead of refusing these visits altogether.

​I don't deny Mrs Drewe's love ​for Marigold but that she was just as selfish as Edith. Whereas Edith during her visits never showed any interest in any other family member than Marigold as simple politeness would have demanded, Mrs Drewe evidently couldn't stand to share Marigold and often practically snatched Marigold from Edith's lap.  

 

As one remembers that Edith's originally told Mr Drewe that Marigold was her friend's child and she gave her to Drewes on condition that she could visit her but it was Mr Drewe who invented the tale that Marigold was an orphan child of his friend, one could blame Mr Drewe causing all the mess. But maybe he had reason? After all, he guessed Marigold's true parentage and sympathized that Edith as a mother couldn't help but love her child. Could it be that he suspected that if he told his wife Edith's version, she would also guess the truth but couldn't be trusted to keep it secret? It's the only explanation that makes sense  - although Fellowes showed with Bateses that he wasn't much interested with plots being believable.

 

And it was a plot Fellowes wanted and that can't be done if all behaved sensibly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I agree. Of course it can be troublesome to have someone, and your superior at the top of all, to pop at your home anytime to fawn over your child (although some people wouldn't mind that at all, indeed it's a habit in some regions to visit uninvited for no reason at all). But even if troubled, normally you would say politely that now is the wrong time to visit and suggest the other time, instead of refusing these visits altogether.

She did. Repeatedly. We saw her being uncomfortable about Edith being there, but holding her tongue. We saw her trying to politely put Edith off. It was only after many months of Edith's enforced daily visits, disrupting the whole household, that Mrs Drewe began to put her foot down and stopped letting her in.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

She did. Repeatedly. We saw her being uncomfortable about Edith being there, but holding her tongue. We saw her trying to politely put Edith off. It was only after many months of Edith's enforced daily visits, disrupting the whole household, that Mrs Drewe began to put her foot down and stopped letting her in.

 

We can't know whether Edith visited daily or weekly.

 

In any case, Mrs Dewe's seems to be a woman who couldn't talk in time what troubles her (which of course is often a case with a superior person) but who collects her anger until she is so fed up that she can no more make compromise. Before all, she put her own feelings before Marigold's best interests: a rich single spinster who took so much fancy on a girl could have paid her education and thereby she could get all options in the world.

 

Not to speak of that Mrs Drewe didn't care at all of her husband whose position as a farmer was completely at the mercy of the Crawleys.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

We can't know whether Edith visited daily or weekly.

 

In any case, Mrs Dewe's seems to be a woman who couldn't talk in time what troubles her (which of course is often a case with a superior person) but who collects her anger until she is so fed up that she can no more make compromise. Before all, she put her own feelings before Marigold's best interests: a rich single spinster who took so much fancy on a girl could have paid her education and thereby she could get all options in the world.

 

Not to speak of that Mrs Drewe didn't care at all of her husband whose position as a farmer was completely at the mercy of the Crawleys.

We do know that they were daily visits because we were told as much. We were also both shown and told that those visits were prolonged and disruptive to the routine of the household. And Mrs Drewe did try to raise her concerns, politely, but was ignored - being more forceful was difficult for her, because, as you say, they were social subordinates at the mercy of the Crawleys. But Mrs Drewe did not believe Edith's intense interest to be in Marigold's best interests and explained why in some detail: she was worried that the girl would be given ideas above her station and then dumped as soon as the pretty rich lady lost interest. Her concerns were valid, in her circumstances, especially since she did not have all the facts.

 

You and I are never going to agree on this. You seem to want to paint Edith as an innocent victim who was blameless in the entire affair, whereas I can sympathise with both women, and acknowledge both to have behaved poorly at times, but feel that Mrs Drewe was the bigger victim and was very badly treated. The bottom line is that the Drewes were placed in a truly untenable situation purely at Edith's whim, because they were convenient to her for a time, and they suffered because of it.

Edited by Llywela
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

We do know that they were daily visits because we were told as much. We were also both shown and told that those visits were prolonged and disruptive to the routine of the household. And Mrs Drewe did try to raise her concerns, politely, but was ignored - being more forceful was difficult for her, because, as you say, they were social subordinates at the mercy of the Crawleys. But Mrs Drewe did not believe Edith's intense interest to be in Marigold's best interests and explained why in some detail: she was worried that the girl would be given ideas above her station and then dumped as soon as the pretty rich lady lost interest. Her concerns were valid, in her circumstances, especially since she did not have all the facts.

 

You and I are never going to agree on this. You seem to want to paint Edith as an innocent victim who was blameless in the entire affair, whereas I can sympathise with both women, and acknowledge both to have behaved poorly at times, but feel that Mrs Drewe was the bigger victim and was very badly treated. The bottom line is that the Drewes were placed in a truly untenable situation purely at Edith's whim, because they were convenient to her for a time, and they suffered because of it.

 

I think it is indisputable that the Drewes got the short end of the stick.  No matter what, Tim Drewe was not going to be able to say to Edith, no thanks, can't help, sorry.  He actually wanted to help, yes, and that speaks to his character, but given the inequalities, he had no bargaining power whatsoever and couldn't make Edith stop coming over any more than he could make his wife "behave" differently.  They suffered, economically, and in their marriage and their kids being uprooted, but Edith got what was "best for everyone."  And Edith doesn't express a whiff of gratitude for the months (or year?) of nurturing through developmental milestones, fevers, diapers, nightmares, etc.  Which Edith might not have much experience with because nannies.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Remember:  The Drewes are also still burdened with keeping Edith's secret. They can't tell the real story of why they are relocating, needing a new farm. They will have to come up with some other lie to explain it. 

 

One explanation for Mrs. Drewe's irrational behavior was the burden of having to stay silent, to keep the Edith's secret. She had been grievously hurt, wronged, and could tell no one. I'd guess talking to her husband just opened the wound further and poured salt in it -- he was to blame, he had lied to her, betrayed her by using her and placing her feelings second to Edith's need for a foster mother. 

 

Either Drewe might tell the story and even be believed or ridiculed as malevolent gossip mongerers, but they might well never get another farm because trustworthiness in the face of such indiscretion. Rock/hard place forever. 

Edited by SusanSunflower
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

She did. Repeatedly. We saw her being uncomfortable about Edith being there, but holding her tongue. We saw her trying to politely put Edith off. It was only after many months of Edith's enforced daily visits, disrupting the whole household, that Mrs Drewe began to put her foot down and stopped letting her in.

 

we saw her thinking Edith must like herbhusband. We saw her refuse to let Edith in AT ALL. We saw her throw a hissy fit assuming Edith had snatched her when Edith was on her property. Given that how the heck can anyone excuse her snatching her for real, later? if anybody knows what panic that causes it's her.

 

She had NO business "putting her foot down." MR. DREWE knew, even if she didn't.

 

We ALSO saw her rip up the birth certficate! if it had been the only one, Mrs. Drewe wouldn't have cared. She was selfish-- and idiotic, too, because her failure to make the connection makes her the dumbest person alive.

I think it is indisputable that the Drewes got the short end of the stick.  No matter what, Tim Drewe was not going to be able to say to Edith, no thanks, can't help, sorry.  He actually wanted to help, yes, and that speaks to his character, but given the inequalities, he had no bargaining power whatsoever and couldn't make Edith stop coming over any more than he could make his wife "behave" differently.  They suffered, economically, and in their marriage and their kids being uprooted, but Edith got what was "best for everyone."  And Edith doesn't express a whiff of gratitude for the months (or year?) of nurturing through developmental milestones, fevers, diapers, nightmares, etc.  Which Edith might not have much experience with because nannies.

 

Sorry it IS disputable.

short end of the stick?

Mr. Drewe had no right to that farm in the first place, it was in arrears.

as for fevers etc.-- that's total fanwanking. Edith nursed and weaned that baby, and wanted to stay in her life.

Mrs. Drewe actually threatened to move off the farm with her and Mr. Drewe, the wimp, was about to allow it.

 

I dispute it absolutely. I find Mr. Drewe a wishy washy wimp. Mrs. Drewe didnt go to Cora for any other reason than malice.

 

and frankly snatching the child is unforgivable. they absolutely had to leave at that point. they cant say the real reason they have to leave the farm is that Mrs. Drewe is unstable and engages in criminal activities.  Had she not snatched Marigold they wouldnt have been kicked out.

 

No, I'm not sorry for their having to keep their mouths shut about her criminal and irrational behavior. That's on them regardless of how provoked she might have been.

Edited by lucindabelle

Share this post


Link to post

My kids had fevers quite regularly in their early years so I am confident that children everywhere are subject to them and without benefit of Tylenol, etc. Teething, viruses, toilet training, all of that happened even if we never saw it.

Many missteps were made by all, but the end result has one party with the child and a home, and the Drewes without. That looks short end of the stick to me. The tenancy wasn't in arrears, and Tim raised the prize winning pig. I have lots of empathy for them, for Edith, not so much as I used to. She got what she wanted, except she can't live honestly.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I think it is indisputable that the Drewes got the short end of the stick.  No matter what, Tim Drewe was not going to be able to say to Edith, no thanks, can't help, sorry.  He actually wanted to help, yes, and that speaks to his character, but given the inequalities, he had no bargaining power whatsoever and couldn't make Edith stop coming over any more than he could make his wife "behave" differently. 

 

Actually Mr Drewe could have refused when Edith asked for his help. His landlord was the Earl of Grantham and Mr Drwewe's loyalty was solely towards him (and Mary) whereas Edith had no power over him. In a way Mr Drewe did wrong to help the Earl's daugher behind his back, but as you say, it speaks volumes of his character. He was a kind man and as he said it's right for the mother to love her child, he did not want to forbid Edith's visit. 

 

On the other hand he was a weak man for otherwise he would have simply said to his wife that whether Edith could visit Marigold was his decision to make, not hers.  

Share this post


Link to post

she can't live honestly.

 

It's also a question of Marigold and what's best for her. If Edith admitted that she is her baby outside wedlock, she would be hurt socially and also by other children.

 

Society must change first.

Share this post


Link to post

I think it bears repeating: The Drewes are off their farm because of Mrs. Drewes' actions, not because of Edith. Nobody was going to make them leave until Mrs. Drewe kidnapped Marigold.

 

As far as Edith not living "honestly," I think it's very easy for anyone to say that she should be open about her relationship to Marigold in the time they're living in. Marigold wouldn't benefit from her admitting it out loud either. If only everyone could be a saint in a high-stakes situation like this one. I'm not even going to pretend I would be more open than Edith is being about Marigold.

Edited by TheGreenKnight
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size