S06.E09: Christmas Day

[PBSLover]

Me too.

[Roseanna]

On ‎25‎.‎9‎.‎2016 at 2:29 PM, AndySmith said:

Given that more than a few of the nobility in the UK not only survived, but thrived (with many worth hundreds of millions of pounds), there is no reason why the Hexums and the Crawleys couldn't thrive as well.

I think the greater problem is that, if George and Edith's possible son will survive the WW2, their fate is sealed by their inheritance. Instead, Sybbie, Marigold and Mary's child by Henry can choose to do just what they like.

Edited October 5, 2016 by Roseanna

[AndySmith]

It has nothing to do with their fate, or doing what they want. I was just pointing out that the Crawley and the Hexum families could survive into today's world as still very wealthy people.

Edited October 5, 2016 by AndySmith

[Roseanna]

4 hours ago, AndySmith said:

It has nothing to do with their fate, or doing what they want. I was just pointing out that the Crawley and the Hexum families could survive into today's world as still very wealthy people.

As they aren't real people, their fate depends entirely on Fellowes (or fanfic writers). But a story that has no real dangers and challenges is boring.

[SusanSunflower]

... and part of Fellowe's world view / point was the nobless oblige of the upper classes in "taking care of" their properties and the people on them .... as descended from feudal days ... as befits Lords and Ladies of the realm.  The Crawleys minus Downton would do fine, but Downton in other hands, per the master, not.so.much.   Keepers of the Faith and the Royal Seal ... Nobility writ large. 

[AndySmith]

Quote

As they aren't real people, their fate depends entirely on Fellowes (or fanfic writers)

Well, obviously. But then why bother discussing any TV show then? Why bother about how or why a character acted a certain way when we can just waive it off as "Well, that's what the writer of the show wanted?" Once again, I am not writing fan fiction, I was just responding to a comment someone made about how the Crawley and potentially the Hexum fortunes could be wiped out by death duties and other things. My point is that both families could potentially survive all of that as others in the peerage did, as many current people in the peerage system still have their titles and large fortunes still intact. That is all. I'm not even sure why this argument is going on and on, since I am making no definitive claim as to how either family continued after the end of the show.

Edited October 7, 2016 by AndySmith

[sark1624]

On 5/10/2016 at 9:52 AM, AndySmith said:

It has nothing to do with their fate, or doing what they want. I was just pointing out that the Crawley and the Hexum families could survive into today's world as still very wealthy people.

Not so, those big estates and way of life is a thing of the past, very, very few aristocratic families survived the ww2, again, 80% of death duties? plus, the price of agricultural products were lower than in the 20´s. Highclare Caslte, were the show is filmed, had several rooms out of service and in poor conditions because the family didnt have the money for repairs, only now with the numbers of tourists are going to do some repairs. The Duke of Devonshire, the most powerful aristocrat in those times with some 200.000 acres of land, sold thousands of acres of land (about 80,000), gave another big house to the national trust, and part of his art collection to pay the death duties among other things, like opening Chatsworth House to the public, etc. And he was a example of adjusting his estate to the post ww2 britain. 

Downton Abbey is based in Highclere Castle, that estate is about 5.000 acres, so if Robert dies in the 40´s (and Robert is a man of 60 or something like that) and they are still paying Mattew´s death duties, the family would have to paid extremely high death duties, also paying better salaries, etc. Also, during the ww2, all those houses were forced to help to the war effort, some of those houses were used from military bases, colleges, camps of pow, hospitals, etc. So whem, the owners took back their houses, many were in poor conditions, then couldnt repair them because thre was a restriction of construction materials (to repair and build houses bombed in London and other cities). For that reason, many aristocrats simply sold their estates and simply demolished their old houses with explosives, and we are talking about thousands of houses like Downton. 

Edith and Bertie could have a bit more of luck, Bertie is still young, so they can be more prepared to the future (save more money) and their esatate is much more bigger and lavished than Downton, that is the reason of Mary´s jelaousy about Edith´s new possition and Robert and Cora were amazed by the size of the place, and any room of Brancaster is far more lavish than Downton. Brancaster Castle is Alnwick Castle, home of the dukes of Northumberland, and they have app 100.000 acres of land and a important art collection. 

But, am not saying that George is finished, i am saying that he and Mary they are going to need a extreme big effort to survive. and that is what have doing the few remaining aristocrats in England. They hapily would lease their houses for movies, opening to the public, for weddings, they rent the shoot, they have another jobs, and more ovbiusly they dont have valets or lady maids.   

[AndySmith]

Quote

very few aristocratic families survived the ww2

I suppose I could provide links to places that list all of the hundreds of aristocrats who are multi-millionaires today (more than a few of them who are worth over $100 million), or people could just do a google search themselves.

Quote

i am saying that he and Mary they are going to need a extreme big effort to survive.

Most aristocrats who did survive and are still fabulously wealthy today probably did put in an effort to survive. Again, it's isn't unreasonable that Mary and George would survive as well, if they plan things out carefully enough.

I'm not naive, obviously, the lifestyles of the Crawleys/Hexums/Talbots/Bransons will not continue the way the show has depicted, going forward. But as the show ended on an optimistic note, I like to think that is what we are supposed to think and feel about the future of the characters. Yes, they won't be catered to by the same amount of staff, and might have to sell off land and/or some of the smaller properties they own and/or rent out the main houses, etc.

But I like to think down the line, Mary and Edith's grandchildren will be living comfortable, nice lives, with homes in the nicer areas of London or abroad, working in white collar or civil service jobs, with the main houses in the estate either being rented out for various reasons (and the smaller ones too), and the main heirs still having decent family fortunes attached to them. They could work as lawyers, businessmen, writers, journalists, doctors, engineers, run charitable institutions, etc. Heck, one of them might even end up marrying a Saudi prince ;)

Quote

their esatate is much more bigger and lavished than Downton

Which also could mean it is much more expensive to maintain and has higher operating costs. But again, with careful planning, they're just as likely to succeed or fail as the Crawleys.

Quote

that is the reason of Mary´s jelaousy about Edith´s new possition

I'm not sure that is what Mary was focusing on. I don't think that Mary really cared about any of that, she was just pissed that she'd have to courtesy to Edith, and that Edith had a higher social ranking.

Edited October 11, 2016 by AndySmith

[sark1624]

When i said lavished i said that they had more things, paints, statues, art works, that they could sell; at first aristocrats sold some art things like Robert with his paint or the firts works of Shakespeare that some aristocrats had in their libraries, after they started to sell spare land, etc. The aristocrats, those who had land, are not millionaires in the sense that they have cash, they had assets but not cash. Most of the current aristocrats today are people who merely work their land queitly in some parts of england, if you see the list of rich persons in england they are very very few aristocrats in it and certanly not the earls of carnavon (the people who owns Highclere castle). 

Ovbiously Brancastger would be more expenseive to run, but their estate is more bigger and they had more sources of income than Downton, when Robert screwed up Cora´s money, they were going to sell ALL the estate, land and house, thats tells us that Downton dont have another sources of income like a few thousands of spare land, even Violet asked if there is another stash to keep the place, but there wasnt any. 

The thing about courtesy it was a joke, Edith by being a marchioness would be seated in a bettter place than Mary in any social oscassion, and in the Coronation ceremony Edith would have to participe in the whole process with a robe and a coronet (the next coronation would be in 1936 and 1937), Mary posible wouldnt be invited by not having a tittle besides being a earl daughter. But just those things make Mary jelaous. 

[AndySmith]

Quote

and they had more sources of income than Downton

Which were what, exactly? From what we saw, Bertie's cousin mainly seemed to rent out the place during his many trips to Boystown in Tangiers.

Quote

but their estate is more bigger and they had more sources of income than Downton, when Robert screwed up Cora´s money, they were going to sell ALL the estate, land and house, thats tells us that Downton dont have another sources of income like a few thousands of spare land

All that means is that Robert was an idiot who put all of his eggs in one basket (or bad investment). It says nothing about how much the estate was worth. And Downton did have farmers and tenants, they just weren't making enough to cover the cost of keeping the estate going. And they weren't going to sell everything either, they were planning on moving into a smaller property that they owned on the estate (from what we saw, there were 3 smaller houses the Crawleys owned on the estate, plus one more house in London).

Quote

Most of the current aristocrats today are people who merely work their land queitly in some parts of england, if you see the list of rich persons in england they are very very few aristocrats in it and certanly not the earls of carnavon (the people who owns Highclere castle). 

Actually, from what I have seen, more than a few current aristocrats have white collar jobs, similar to what I listed above. Lots of aristocrats, assuming they still have land, if they aren't renting it out to others then they are having someone else farm it.

Yes, the Earl of Caravon isn't the wealthiest of aristocrats (it does cost $1.5 million a year to maintain Highclere Castle). But again, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are the template for us to follow when it comes to the Crawleys, Hexums, and the rest.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, depending on how we see the characters and their descendants surviving into the modern day.

[sark1624]

What i was saying is that Mary and Robert would have a really thought, thought path ahead, as any other aristocrat in that time, as Bertie and Edith. But the difference of wealth betwen Bertie and Robert is big, the same Robert Crawley said: Edith is marrying one of the grandest men in England....that is straight from JF mouth. Then all thouse houses or castles were intended to reflect the power of their owners, and Brancaster is far more bigger than Downton, then they had more sources of income to maintain such property.

Also the show is very clear that the Crawelys are not rich (speaking in their level of course), they were reducing staff, paying Matthew´s death duties still, selling their art work, they have assets that they must keep in good order, but also Tom said thaty they even had money in order that the "house could wash her own face" (when they opened the house to the public and discussed money). The thing about renting property was common in those times, even the richest aristocrasts like the dukes of devonshires or other did, it was a logic way of obtain money and keep the staff busy when the owners didnt live in the house, it wasnt a sign of poverty. Then again, when Bertie inherited it was Robert who was praising Edith´s luck by marrying such powerful man, also Rose said that even the papers in NY spoke about Lady Edith and her millionaire marquess (and we are talking about pre ww2 millions, that is a lot, lot of money) and finally Robert and Cora were amazed of how luxuries was the place, and Bertie Pelham seems to be a intellingent enough in the way that he organized the opening of the house for the Crawleys in such way that even Tom and Mary praised (he showed such skills that Mary praised Edith´s boyfriend). If the Crawleys are going to survive, probably, Mary is not stupid and she is pragmatical. Brancaster Castle the hoome of the fictional Lord Hexham is Alnwick Castle, the home of the dukes of Northumberland, i think that the castle is in a estate of about 100.000 acres of land to farm and rent in comparison to the 5.000 acres of land in wich is located Higclere Castle (the fictional Downton aabbey). Both families were going to have a hard road ahead, but is clear the the Hexhams are in much good shape to face it than the Crawleys.

[AndySmith]

But JF never touched upon the death duties that the Hexums would have to pay, even though the Crawleys and Anthony Foyle had issues with it. It stands to reason it might have been an issue for the Hexums as well.

Quote

Edith is marrying one of the grandest men in England....that is straight from JF mouth. Then all thouse houses or castles were intended to reflect the power of their owners, and Brancaster is far more bigger than Downton, then they had more sources of income to maintain such property.

All of which was reflected from the POV of the Crawleys. From the POV of the average person in the DA universe, the Crawleys were well off, even though you paint them as being thisclose to losing everything. We never really got to know more specifics of the Hexum fortune. Yes, it's a grander house, but it's possible the costs were just as proportional as to what the Crawleys were dealing with. We knew nothing about the Hexum staff, the estate's finances, etc.

Quote

The thing about renting property was common in those times

Yes but so were all those other things you just mentioned; it wasn't just the Crawleys that experienced that, others were all well, on the show and in real life (Foyle mentioned they were renting out his estate's main house full time to pay off his own father's death duties). We never really saw or learned enough about the Hexum estate to really know if all those factors that were affecting them as it did the others. And Rose's family was also supposedly even richer than the Crawleys as well, and was of the same social rank as the Hexums, and look how they ended up.

From what we did see from the show, we saw that Mary, Tom, and Bertie were pragmatic enough to realize things were changing and that their own estates had to adapt and modernize if they were going to survive. That, more than anything JF showed, said to me that both families would do relatively well and survive into the modern era.

[sark1624]

Its Hexham anyway, Tony Gillingham had to give the house (the big one) to a girls school in order to have a reduction in the death duties, they keep the estate (the farm land) and moved to the dowager house.  Again, there were some aristocrats thaat they were so rich, that to pay the death duties they simply sold some art collection (the first shakespeare works, some paintings, some acres of land, etc) and they continued their lives. When Robert lost Cora´s money, the Crawleys didnt have any to spare and save the estate, so they were facing that they must sell everything and move to the "smaller" house. The death duties were introduced in 1919 in order to collect money after the ww1, the Crawleys were paying Matthew´s death duties of the 50% of his share in Downton, and they decided to pay them in fees because they didnt have the money to pay it once; the problem is that Robert is still alive and in his 60´s, with time the death duties were increased and in the 40´s they reached to at 80%, so if Robert dies in the 40´s in his 80´s, the estate would must pay 80% of death duties and Robert owns 50% of Downton, the ww2 was the death of many more esatates than the ww1.

Its true, they never told us what happened with the Hexham´s death duties, but we can fairly infere that they have enough money, after the death of Bertie´s cousin the New York times still referred to him as  "the millionaire marquess" (again, the millions of 1925 would mean a lot, a lot of money) and i doubt that the papers in NY would be talking about the wedding of some broke english aristocrat, then in any moment in the series they said something like they would need luck to the incoming years in themrs of money, in any moment Robert or anyone on the family spoke about it and Cora said that they would bring Marigold to Brancaster after the honeymoon, that tell us that Edith and Bertie would be living in that place, so they didnt have to sell it or anything like that. The Crawleys by no means are middle class or something like that, but if they say that someone is rich is because is very rich. And most of all, all in the family (excepting Mary) were doing cartwheels, especially Robert, by Edith marrying Bertie Pelham, now the marquess of Hexham, because Edith had the luck of hiting the jackpot. 

I never said that the Crawleys are poor or are going to loose everything, i am saying that they are not so well as they were in season 1 and no so well that the show sometimes make us believe; and in comparison to the Lord Hexham are clearly "more poor". The thing is that the Crawleys are the average aristocraatic family of that time, they were surviving, they were only very very few aristocrats who had so many land and other assets that they didnt had to worry too much (The Devonshires, Northumberlands (in wich i think that Bertie Pelham is based), the Westminsters, and a few others ) but they still made some reforms in their way of life like renting the shoot, selling their homes, having jobs, not having lady maids or valets, etc.  

[AndySmith]

But that has nothing to do with how well either family would survive into the future. True, the Hexhams have more money than the Crawleys, but so did Rose's family, and they had the same social rank as Bertie's family, and look how they ended up. The show even had a down-on-his-luck Duke trying to start something with Mary, in order to try and get her money, and a Duke would be in theory be much closer to the top of the (financial) food chain than either family.

Quote

When Robert lost Cora´s money

Well, yes, he was an idiot who went all in. It doesn't matter how rich you are, if you put all of your money into a business deal that goes south, well of course you won't have anything left (the Christmas Charity episode even poked fun at that with a scene where Robert mentions he lost the family fortune again by putting everything into one bad business deal, and everyone's response is "Again???"). That says less about how much the Crawleys were worth, and more about how Robert might not have the best business acumen.

Quote

The Devonshires, Northumberlands (in wich i think that Bertie Pelham is based), the Westminsters

Those are outliers and probably not the best representations of the aristocracy. The Devonshires own like a third of London, for starters.

At the end of the day, it has nothing to do with how rich your family is, or what social rank you have or had. Fortunes could easily be lost with bad planning, and people of lower "ranks" could still be wealthier than people ranked above them (Charles Blake once he would inherit his own title of Baronet, which is below that of a Baron). What matters is how the families plan for the future, and what steps they would take to modernize, which we definitely saw with Matthew, Mary, and Tom.

And most importantly, don't let Robert invest all your money in one business deal.

[Roseanna]

On ‎11‎.‎10‎.‎2016 at 7:22 AM, AndySmith said:

But as the show ended on an optimistic note, I like to think that is what we are supposed to think and feel about the future of the characters.

If Fellowes were a great author, that optimism would have been irony as we know, unlike the charcaters, the WW2. But as he isn't, you can be right.

[AndySmith]

Why does it have to be ironic? The show itself was something of a fairy tale, even with WWII on the way. They all survived WWI relatively intact.

[slf]

19 hours ago, AndySmith said:

Why does it have to be ironic? The show itself was something of a fairy tale, even with WWII on the way. They all survived WWI relatively intact.

True enough. Despite the failures and tragedies this entire show was essentially a fairytale. I recall Fellowes saying in an interview that in his mind the Crawleys and Downton survived into the new millennium so if he did do a modern DA that Crawleys would still have Downton. Fellowes loves the Crawleys and Mary too much to do anything else and it's not outlandish so. I'd imagine Edith and Bertie's estate would survive as well.

[PBSLover]

Remember Robert saying that Tony G. had acres of land and was very rich?  But Tony said they had to sell the house, keep the land and live in dower (sp-?) house.  He also said how he was lucky to have a valet.  It didn’t sound like he was very rich.

If Downton was a real place, don’t the Crawley’s own most of it/run it?  Isn’t that kind of a big deal?  And they have at least two other homes that were referenced during the show.  None of it makes any sense to me.

[Crs97]

I've decided Henry and Tom's used car dealership becomes Jaguar and they don't have to worry about money issues ever again because Robert has no managing interest in that business.

[PBSLover]

HA!

[TaurusRose]

Well.  That was just a little too sunny and bright and chipper for me.  More like a soapy fairy tale than serious drama.  I know, just what did I think I was binge watching? The only person that got the shaft and shouldn't have was Tom.  People who didn't deserve yippee, skippy, happy endings got them.  I'm looking at you Daisy, Thomas and Carson.  Edith really did become Cinderella, and I just couldn't buy into "I'm so in love with you" Mary and Henry.  They did not work for me.  And what kind of quack doctors were these people going to? I couldn't help rolling my eyes at Isobel's husband's misdiagnosis, and who was not surprised when Anna went into labor in Mary's bedroom? 

[Roseanna]

On ‎6‎.‎3‎.‎2017 at 8:10 AM, taurusrose said:

Well.  That was just a little too sunny and bright and chipper for me.  More like a soapy fairy tale than serious drama.  I know, just what did I think I was binge watching? The only person that got the shaft and shouldn't have was Tom.  People who didn't deserve yippee, skippy, happy endings got them.  I'm looking at you Daisy, Thomas and Carson.  Edith really did become Cinderella, and I just couldn't buy into "I'm so in love with you" Mary and Henry.  

Well, Jane Austin gave Lucy Ferrars a happy end i Sense and Sensibility although she she didn't deserve it. Just as many people don't deserve irl.

Otherwise, I agree with you. It was simply too much that almost all protoganists either found a spouse or started dating at the same time and it was presented the only way a person can become happy. 

I didn't like the class prejudices, either. It wasn't enough for Edith to own and edit a magazine and find a nice man, he had to become a duke by sheer accident (although irl an ordinary man could have married her despite Marigold but never a duke). And Matthew's egalitarian mother couldn't marry a doctor but a lord. Instead, servants was kept or chose to stay in their (to Fellowes) proper places, or at least the alternative was to become tenants or like. 

As for Tom, he was denied a plot of his own and tamed in every way. If he wasn't allowed to become a Radical journalist or a Labor MP, he could have come back at least with an American wife to show that the lifestyle in DA belonged to the past.  

[TheGreenKnight]

I don't know, I thought the series ended believably with certain characters still without a "perfect" ending or only on the cusp of one (I'm thinking especially of Thomas, Molesley/Baxter, Mrs. Patmore, Tom). That's part of the reason I was happy to hear about a film, because a couple plots felt like they had a little further to go.

[piequinn35]

So late in here lol so, Edith's editor and Tom could have been a couple if the show was continued.

It's funny when Robert said that Edith outrank them all. Good for her. Mary and Henry, meh, when Matthew died, I really didn't care about her lovelife.