Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

S02.E10: Episode 10


  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

I have to agree with Scoobie and Dancer about Demelza, it's easy to judge her (and like her) based on present-day social standards and our own thoughts of how women should act. But back then, while I do not know it for a fact, I think most men, married or not, frequented "ladies of the night" and the wealthy all had courtesans. Wives were pretty much there to fed, cloth, clean, have kids and bed the husband ... when he wasn't bedding some other woman. Oh my, I do sound jaded, don't I!

Link to comment

Demelza's behavior may be anachronistic, but Poldark is a work of fiction written for a 20th century audience, and there's not much story if the main character can only curtsey and say "yes, sir," "no, sir."  For me, an engaging story, flawed as it may be, overrides 100% authenticity in every aspect of the telling.  Now, if she pulled a cell phone out of her pocket and placed a call over to Trenwith I'd take issue, but Demelza being spunky is something I can live with.

  • Love 14
Link to comment
5 hours ago, DHDancer said:

Exactly.  And I still maintain that a girl (remember she's not that old at this point, despite how old the actress is) raised up out of poverty would NEVER risk everything by speaking so boldly, no matter what Ross had done (and remember he's no different to other men in his class).  It's one thing to think all those words, but quite another to say them, even today I'd argue (but then I was raised in a different era I guess).  Again, people are applying very modern sensibilities and interpretations.  We may think her spunky and he deserved of her anger, but she had no legal or societal legs to stand on.

Ordinarily, I'd agree that a woman in her situation wouldn't risk endangering that position during this time period. But I think Demelza literally did not give a shit anymore about that position and she's been established as outspoken, so though it would have been highly unusual, I don't consider it impossible--there are always folks out-of-step with their time period--and I didn't think it was really out-of-character.

Honestly, I am bothered more in period dramas not when people behave anachronistically, though it can and does irk me, but when people don't call them out on that behavior. So, what I found odd and anachronistic is everyone's response to Demelza's threats. My history degree was not for this time period, but if my memory is right, she would have had no legal right to her son and a divorce would have literally required an act of Parliament. So, if I'm not mistaken, she could have left if she was very adamant about it, but she would still have been legally married to him and she wouldn't have been taking her son with her. Or at least she wouldn't have had him long. I was surprised nobody threw that in her face.

From a character standpoint, I thought it was more out-of-character that she threatened to go to her dad. I mean, she doesn't really have options, but I'd think she would know that he isn't really an option, what with his personality and their past history, and that Ross would know that wasn't an actual option for her and consider it a bluff.  

Though I enjoyed the episode, authenticity-wise, I was much more bothered by Caroline and Dwight's public kiss. That had me rolling my eyes. No. Just, no. 

Edited by Zella
  • Love 6
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Zella said:

Ordinarily, I'd agree that a woman in her situation wouldn't risk endangering that position during this time period. But I think Demelza literally did not give a shit anymore about that position and she's been established as outspoken, so though it would have been highly unusual, I don't consider it impossible--there are always folks out-of-step with their time period--and I didn't think it was really out-of-character.

Honestly, I am bothered more in period dramas not when people behave anachronistically, though it can and does irk me, but when people don't call them out on that behavior. So, what I found odd and anachronistic is everyone's response to Demelza's threats. My history degree was not for this time period, but if my memory is right, she would have had no legal right to her son and a divorce would have literally required an act of Parliament. So, if I'm not mistaken, she could have left if she was very adamant about it, but she would still have been legally married to him and she wouldn't have been taking her son with her. Or at least she wouldn't have had him long. I was surprised nobody threw that in her face.

From a character standpoint, I thought it was more out-of-character that she threatened to go to her dad. I mean, she doesn't really have options, but I'd think she would know that he isn't really an option, what with his personality and their past history, and that Ross would know that wasn't an actual option for her and consider it a bluff.  

Though I enjoyed the episode, authenticity-wise, I was much more bothered by Caroline and Dwight's public kiss. That had me rolling my eyes. No. Just, no. 

Yes, I agree about the kiss.  PDA I don't think was done back in the day among gentlefolk. I'm not sure Caroline the prissy heiress would be seen in a dive like that. Respectable ladies did not go unescorted into pubs, either.

  • Love 4
Link to comment
7 minutes ago, Arwen Evenstar said:

Yes, I agree about the kiss.  PDA I don't think was done back in the day among gentlefolk. I'm not sure Caroline the prissy heiress would be seen in a dive like that. Respectable ladies did not go unescorted into pubs, either.

Agreed! I also thought her inviting herself to his room seemed anachronistic and out of character.  She's obviously not an entirely traditional woman of her class, but that seemed to push the boundaries much more than she's been shown to.

  • Love 3
Link to comment
13 hours ago, magdalene said:

I thought Demelza's behavior towards Ross was not only understandable but quite cheer worthy.  How many would be able to resist from being "bitchy", "nasty" and "offensive" after your partner cheated on you and in such a callous manner?

"Bitchy" crudités and Nasty Salad would have been the light and tasty appetizers served right before the  Devil's Dinner that I  would be serving to a cheating Spouse. My main dish would have been.......... Hot n' $our REVENGE, you know,  the Dish Best Served COLD. Who wants Dessert? Humble Pie, anyone? Fuck you Ross.

  • Love 3
Link to comment
28 minutes ago, Zella said:
29 minutes ago, Zella said:

Agreed! I also thought her inviting herself to his room seemed anachronistic and out of character.  She's obviously not an entirely traditional woman of her class, but that seemed to push the boundaries much more than she's been shown to.

No. She's independent and rare. Also rich. Girlfriend in love dont care bout convention, she sets new conventions.. because she can .. Prissy is for insecure Posers, no matter what century a girl is in. Shocking? No. Our girl Caroline is human, spirited, impulsive, and not about to wait for Dwight to bust a move. She gets What she Wants!!!    ***3 finger snaps in a "Z" formation***snapsnapsnap!

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Zella said:

 

3 hours ago, Zella said:

..bothered by Caroline and Dwight's public kiss. That had me rolling my eyes. No. Just, no. 

Why was that bad ?

Edited by Nanu160
Bad salad
Link to comment
30 minutes ago, Nanu160 said:

Why was that bad ?

A big public display of affection like that between an unmarried couple - in a public house, no less - was a HUGE social no-no in 1793. Caroline has already been skating the line by meeting Dwight secretly - her uncle specifically warned her of the damage to her reputation if it became widely known. And on the one hand, Caroline doesn't care all that much about reputation or public opinion, but on the other hand even she has limits - kissing in a public bar (the domain of prostitutes, let us remember) and going up to Dwight's room afterward are inventions of the show and absolutely would not happen in the source material, a total anachronism.

I much prefer how it plays out in the book, wherein Ross takes both Dwight and Caroline back to Nampara to stay for Christmas (in separate guest rooms) before Dwight ships out (but the show has messed up the timeline, so it isn't Christmas in the show). I also really regret that the show didn't give us Ross's fabulous line from the book when Demelza asks how he managed to get Dwight and Caroline back together, and he replies, "I asked myself: what would Demelza do? And I did it!"

  • Love 9
Link to comment

Call me a hopeless Romantic, I choose to find all this in character for this version of Caroline. She gets What she Wants , when she wants, 1793 or not, Heiresses have a long colorful tradition of forgiveable( sometimes tragic)  impulsivity. But hey, isn't Suspension of Disbelief and Sexy Romantic notion WAYYY more fun than dry Historical Accuracy? (Also, to humanize them, Dwight and Caroline waited a Long agonizing time as  young beautiful and utterly repressed hormonal Star-Crossed Lovers,  dang, why wouldn't they Go For it right before he went to war!!!)

  • Love 1
Link to comment

The point is that if Dwight and Caroline don't marry for whatever reason, liked if he happens to be killed in war or just doesn't come back, it's her reputation that suffers by behaving that way in public.  This is still a relatively small town and small social circle.  Word will travel quickly that Caroline was behaving like a loose woman in a public tavern and men may treat her accordingly.  Yes, the fact that she has a fairly hefty fortune and a respectable name as part of the package buys her a fair amount of leeway, but men of that time still mostly expected to marry an untouched virgin and tended to treat women who didn't fit into that category as fair game.  Caroline would certainly be aware of that.

The show hasn't addressed it at all beyond playing the whole red room thing at Sir Hugh's mostly for laughs, but it's a recurring thing in the books that Demelza has to contend with.  Because of her low birth and former maid status, men of society make certain assumptions and are always looking for reasons to brush up against her or try to get her alone when Ross isn't right there.   She can't really call them on it, but she's generally pretty clever at using it to keep her and Ross in their good graces regardless of whatever Ross may have done now while keeping them at arm's length so she can continue to live as a respectable married woman.  I enjoy book Demelza who manages to be a fair force to be reckoned with within the framework of her time and society a lot more than the show's Thoroughly Modern Demelza who delivers rousing go go girl power speeches without any acknowledgement of how utterly implausible she or her actions would have been in a time when women literally had no rights to make most of their own choices.   

Edited by nodorothyparker
  • Love 5
Link to comment
11 hours ago, Zella said:

I was surprised nobody threw that in her face.

The people who could throw it in her face were likely on her side, and Ross, while an asshole about a lot of things, doesn't strike me as someone who would threaten his wife like that.

8 hours ago, Zella said:

 [Caroline is] obviously not an entirely traditional woman of her class, but that seemed to push the boundaries much more than she's been shown to.

True, but someone upthread made the point that if the women acted as they were expected (regardless of class), all we'd have is a bunch of passive characters. There'd be little point in having women in the show if all they're going to do is curtsey and say "Yes, dear" to their husbands/guardians/suitors.

7 hours ago, Llywela said:

I also really regret that the show didn't give us Ross's fabulous line from the book when Demelza asks how he managed to get Dwight and Caroline back together, and he replies, "I asked myself: what would Demelza do? And I did it!"

That really is a bummer.

  • Love 1
Link to comment

Don't get me wrong ... Demelza is my favorite person in this show, I love that she is bold and confident and says what she feels. My point was, at that time women were chattel. That's even an undercurrent in today's world. I was the first one in my office to wear a pantsuit when department dress code was changed to allow women to wear them. (Top and bottom had to match.) I also spent a good part of that day in the bathroom crying after my boss berated me for wearing it, females should wear a dress. So there's that.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, dubbel zout said:

The people who could throw it in her face were likely on her side, and Ross, while an asshole about a lot of things, doesn't strike me as someone who would threaten his wife like that.

I think even the sympathetic ones would warn her that she wasn't getting her kid and that she'd likely stay married to Ross, no matter what. I think Ross may have let her go,  but I don't know that he'd let her take his heir.

 

1 hour ago, dubbel zout said:

 

True, but someone upthread made the point that if the women acted as they were expected (regardless of class), all we'd have is a bunch of passive characters. 

I think Caroline can be depicted that way without her offering premarital sex. I think what galls me is there is no acknowledgment that what she is doing is is a serious breach of the time. She acts like it's no big deal. Dwight seems pretty unstartled. I find that unbelievable. They want her to be a thoroughly modern woman, okay, but they shouldn't then pretend like that wouldn't shock the living hell out of most other people at the time.

Edited by Zella
  • Love 4
Link to comment
29 minutes ago, Zella said:

I think Caroline can be depicted that way without her offering premarital sex. I think what galls me is there is no acknowledgment that what she is doing is is a serious breach of the time. She acts like it's no big deal. Dwight seems pretty unstartled. I find that unbelievable. They want her to be a thoroughly modern woman, okay, but they shouldn't then pretend like that wouldn't shock the living hell out of most other people at the time.

Exactly. I'm sorry to bring it back to the books again, but the book versions of these characters manage to remain true to the time in which they live without ever being passive or boring, and they feel much more genuine and engaging for it.

  • Love 5
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Zella said:
Quote

The people who could throw it in her face were likely on her side, and Ross, while an asshole about a lot of things, doesn't strike me as someone who would threaten his wife like that.

I think even the sympathetic ones would warn her that she wasn't getting her kid and that she'd likely stay married to Ross, no matter what. I think Ross may have let her go,  but I don't know that he'd let her take his heir.

It would have been far more realistic to see Prudie or Jinny or someone protest as she's bustling around packing her things that they know she'd never leave her child like that and that she needs to think it through before she takes that step.  Because that's what would have been expected if she was truly hellbent on fleeing the house, just as it would have been understood that from there on out it would be entirely at Ross's whims whether she even saw her son since custody courts weren't a thing either.

I know we're all railing at Ross for being an asshole from a modern perspective, and I'm not disputing that he is an asshole in the whole Elizabeth ridiculousness, but then we're turning around and saying at the same time that oh he's not that bad that he would ever really be cruel enough to exploit the fact that as the husband he has all the legal power in their relationship.  Because Ross is neither a black and white hero or villain.  He's a fairly progressive man of his time, but he is a man of his time where a lot of people wouldn't have considered what he did all that big a deal.  In these past couple of episodes he's rather meekly accepted taking a punch to the face, being screamed at in front of the help, and was kicked out of the marital bed, things that a husband of that era might have considered well within in his rights to outright refuse or punish.  He also could have pulled a George and dictated to Demelza how things were going to be, and in retrospect that might be where the ridiculous scene of him trying to tell her that she needed to "let this thing play out" was trying to go.  Luckily, both book and show Ross realize they do need to do better and make the effort to win her back.

Edited by nodorothyparker
  • Love 3
Link to comment
Quote

I agree that her father would have told her to go back to Ross, but I don't think Demelza was rude to Ross.  The man cheated on her for goodness sake.  All she wanted was for Ross to be honest with her, to not go off to war to run away, to look her in the eye and say that yes, he did cheat with Elizabeth because he thought she was all that, but now he realizes that it was nothing but a fantasy.  Demelza wanted Ross to say that to her, and when he finally did, it was then that she seemed to accept his apology. 

 

I never had a problem with Demelza being rude to Ross.  He had cheated on her.  But there is no way in the world she could have gotten away with leaving him with Jeremy.  Regardless of whether he had cheated on her, he would have the law on his side.  I had a problem with the Demelza-Elizabeth scenes.  One, they never happened in the novel.  And two, how were we expected to react to them?  Cheer Demelza?  I couldn't, considering my knowledge that Ross had forced himself on Elizabeth and he had failed to inform Demelza.  Were we expected to bemoan the end of a friendship between the two cousins-in-law?  Why?  They were never that close to begin with.  The scene was unnecessary.  Why Horsfield decided to include it, I have no idea.

 

As for the mob at Trenwith . . . this was actually an invention of the 1975 producers to resurrect Ross' reputation with the viewers.  I guess Horsfield had decided to utilize it as well to have the audience cheer at not only Ross, but also Demelza.  I thought it sucked back in 1975 and it still sucked in 2016.  I will give credit to Horsfield for not taking it to the extreme by burning down Trenwith, which happened in the 1975 production.  By the way, why is Aunt Agatha still living at Trenwith by the end of Series Two?

 

By the way, I do not believe Ross when he tells Demelza that Elizabeth was nothing but a fantasy.  I think he is simply lying to ease her mind.  I realize that many of you like to pretend that Elizabeth was some shallow woman of whom Ross harbored fantasies over.  His feelings for her have always been not only serious, but also complicated.  Very few fans are willing to accept this, because they want to paint Ross and Demelza as some kind of ideal couple - without the messiness of a real marriage.

 

Quote

He very well could have pulled a George and dictated to Demelza how things were going to be, and in retrospect that might be what the ridiculous scene of him trying to tell her that she needed to "let this thing play out" was supposed to be.  

You don't recall Ross dictating to Demelza not long after their wedding in Series One?  I do.  He was not above doing it in the novel, every now and then.

Edited by LJones41
  • Love 4
Link to comment
1 minute ago, LJones41 said:

By the way, why is Aunt Agatha still living at Trenwith by the end of Series Two?

Why shouldn't Agatha still be living at Trenwith? In the books, she never leaves the house. It's her home.

Link to comment

Technically, Trenwith is not her home.  Not anymore.  Elizabeth is no longer a member of the Poldark family.  She is a member of the Warleggan family.  As the head of the Poldark family, Ross should have immediately assumed responsibility for Agatha.  And since George is in control of Trenwith until Geoffrey Charles legally becomes an adult, it is up to him on whether Agatha can or not stay at Trenwith.  Elizabeth can barely tolerate Agatha at times.  George despises her and Agatha despises him.  Why on earth would they allow her to remain at Trenwith?  And why on earth doesn't Ross simply make it clear that she would have to stay at Nampara?

I think this is whole scenario is basically a plot device that Winston Graham had created without regarding the lack of logic behind it.

Edited by LJones41
Link to comment

It seems reasonable enough to me that Elizabeth feels responsible for Agatha and wouldn't see a woman in her 90s turned out of the home she has lived in all her life, and George goes along with that. He wouldn't give anything to Ross, not even an old woman he despises. Plus, George likes to be seen to be doing things properly, and it wouldn't look good in society if he turned her out. George also likes to be the one in control, and keeping Agatha at Trenwith keeps her within his control, even if he does hate her.

  • Love 6
Link to comment
53 minutes ago, LJones41 said:

By the way, I do not believe Ross when he tells Demelza that Elizabeth was nothing but a fantasy.  I think he is simply lying to ease her mind.  I realize that many of you like to pretend that Elizabeth was some shallow woman of whom Ross harbored fantasies over.  His feelings for her have always been not only serious, but also complicated.  Very few fans are willing to accept this, because they want to paint Ross and Demelza as some kind of ideal couple - without the messiness of a real marriage.

 

You don't recall Ross dictating to Demelza not long after their wedding in Series One?  I do.  He was not above doing it in the novel, every now and then.

Yes, he did and yes he does periodically in the books, especially early on.  I meant that in this particular situation he could have simply dictated to her that she would just have to get over him sleeping with another woman and not turn him out of his own bed.   Lots of husbands did and wives were expected to suck it up and not acknowledge that they either knew or felt anything about it.

I think Ross touches on it briefly on the show and more in depth in the books that Demelza had been in his house for years at the point they got together and knew full well that he had long had the feelings he did for Elizabeth.  She initiated a relationship with him knowing that.  That doesn't mean of course that she ever expected or deserved to have him behave as he did.  But they don't try to pass it off as a youthful fantasy either.  It was a first love that never got to burn itself out on its own.  That's always been the problem with portraying Demelza and Elizabeth as friends on the show when they were never more than socially cordial in the books.  

I didn't care for the Demelza-Elizabeth confrontation either for the reasons you already stated.   

Edited by nodorothyparker
  • Love 4
Link to comment
22 minutes ago, LJones41 said:

George despises her and Agatha despises him.  Why on earth would they allow her to remain at Trenwith?

Because George is terrified of Agatha and knows she'll kill him in his sleep (or not; heh) if he throws her out. And I like to think Agatha is petty enough to want to stay at Trenwith because she knows George is terrified of her. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment

I'm reading all of these excuses on why Agatha had remained at Trenwith and it's not working.  It's just not working.  To me, this was simply a bad decision on Winston Graham's part in order to forward his story regarding Ross, Elizabeth and George.

 

Quote

It seems reasonable enough to me that Elizabeth feels responsible for Agatha and wouldn't see a woman in her 90s turned out of the home she has lived in all her life, and George goes along with that. He wouldn't give anything to Ross, not even an old woman he despises. Plus, George likes to be seen to be doing things properly, and it wouldn't look good in society if he turned her out. 

 

All George had to do was quietly contact Ross and ask the latter to take responsibility for Agatha ( which the latter should have done anyway).  That's all.  Instead, I'm facing contrived writing.

Link to comment

It's not entirely clear what Liz thinks of Aggie.  She shoots her usual constipated looks Aggie's way all the damn time, but who could tell what the hell that means?  I can't.  The actress playing Liz is just so limited & lousy.  She has 2 shticks -- either looking constipated or quivering her puffy lips.  Oy, who can figure out what she's trying to convey?  Man, she stinks up this production.

In any case, she does seem to confide in & regularly converse with Aggie.  While she ignored Aggie's warnings about George, she does not generally ignore Aggie.  Does she value her opinion -- as we know she well should?  Maybe not.  Can't tell.

Did anyone think Demelza actually got shot by George's henchman, as she was leaving Trenwith?  I did at first.  It was an unclear scene.  The henchman actually shot at the fence as Demelza was climbing over it & she fell to the ground.  That's how she injured her wrist & forearm.  She did not have a gunshot wound.  I realize this move (to shoot at Demelza as she was leaving Trenwith) was extremely dangerous & disrespectful, and was clearly done on George's orders.  But is this enough motivation to start a riot to burn his house down?  She actually only suffered a minor bruise.  Seems like a weakness in the script to me.

Edited by ScoobieDoobs
Link to comment

Ross does ask Agatha to come live at Nampara right around the time of the marriage and she refuses to go.  I do seem to remember Elizabeth at some point saying that as Francis' great-great aunt she considered her still her responsibility.  Yes, it always seems a little far-fetched to me too that George would be willing to start out married life with what he considers a dried up old woman he's not related to even by marriage on the premises or that Ross as the now head of the family wouldn't have pushed the issue more since in the books it's a big deal that he can only visit her when he knows George and Elizabeth aren't at home and basically has to sneak around to check on her, but it is what it is.   Houses were big and people who could were expected to care for random sick or elderly relatives like that.

I don't disagree that it's mostly a plot purposes decision for Graham.  Her continued presence in the house sets off a huge chunk of plot of the next couple of books.

Link to comment

It is farfetched. But I also completely believe that George would not want to cede anything to Ross, including Agatha. Keeping her at Trenwith keeps her under his control, and it's a huge ego boost to him to be in control of any Poldark. And I also believe that Elizabeth would not want to feel she had turned a 90-year-old woman out of the house she'd lived in since birth.

  • Love 2
Link to comment

That's probably true.  George looks for any excuse he can to stick it Ross because of that massive chip on his shoulder he's carrying where Ross and to a lesser extent the local gentry are concerned.  The Warleggans already own a couple of great houses at the point that he marries Elizabeth.  He has no need to live in Trenwith at all, and it's not terribly convenient to his business interests.  But he wants to.  It gives him great pleasure and satisfaction to be able to preen around the Poldark ancestral home and deny Ross entry to it.  The fact that Ross has to sneak around the estate he's had full run of his entire life just to make sure Agatha isn't being mistreated is probably worth whatever minor annoyance she might be to him.

  • Love 4
Link to comment

I agree it's odd it's never discussed. That could have been quite fun. My theory is they're both acting out of spite. 

Agatha: "That sniveling slime ball probably wants me to leave. I'm staying!"

George: "That old bat probably wants to leave.  She's staying!"

Edited by Zella
  • Love 4
Link to comment

I at first thought Demelza got shot, but then we saw a view of the fence board that was damaged, so I'm guessing she only got some "back spray" from the shotgun. I also wondered why she wasn't treating/extracting buckshot from her wrist, she didn't even have it wrapped. So I'm supposing the fence got shot, which knocked her off. It was odd she got shot at when going home though, and not coming in, unless George sent the gun guy there. Or Elizabeth did, more likely. I really didn't like her going to confront Elizabeth, no one winds in a bitch stand off like that. I also did not like Demelza "conceding" Ross to Elizabeth. Big ick.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Quote

 The fact that Ross has to sneak around the estate he's had full run of his entire life just to make sure Agatha isn't being mistreated is probably worth whatever minor annoyance she might be to him.

 

Why doesn't Ross simply take responsibility for Agatha?  Step up and be a man?  As head of the Poldark family, he has every right to do so.  I've encountered so many excuses on why she remains at Trenwith and they all do not make any sense to me.  Why on earth did Graham have her living with a couple who are not related to her?  Why didn't he allow Ross to step up as head of the Poldark family and assume responsibilty for her . . . even if it meant her leaving Trenwith?  This makes more sense to me.  

Keeping Agatha at Trenwith following Elizabeth's marriage to George strikes me as nothing more than a plot device . . . one that lacks any logic whatsoever.

 

Quote

It was odd she got shot at when going home though, and not coming in, unless George sent the gun guy there. Or Elizabeth did, more likely. I really didn't like her going to confront Elizabeth, no one winds in a bitch stand off like that. I also did not like Demelza "conceding" Ross to Elizabeth. Big ick.

 

The idea of Elizabeth possibly sending armed men makes no sense to me whatsoever.  Especially since she is now married to George and would automatically leave the defense of Trenwith to him.  Why on earth would it be more likely if she had sent the armed man?  How is that logical?

Edited by LJones41
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Quote

Keeping Agatha at Trenwith following Elizabeth's marriage to George strikes me as nothing more than a plot device . . . one that lacks any logic whatsoever.

Two things: 1) Trenwith is Agatha's childhood home. It's always been her home. If anyone should be leaving it's George and Elizabeth. Their only tie, now, to Trenwith is Geoffrey Charles who will inherit the estate. And 2) Remember Agatha was not very sympathetic to Demelza. She was all but cheerleading the notion that Ross should leave his "kitchen maid," move to Trenwith, and take up with Elizabeth who is a woman of his class. Can't see how that kind of attitude would work well at Nampara with Demelza as the mistress of the home in which she'd be living ... which is not her home.

  • Love 6
Link to comment
On 11/30/2016 at 2:37 PM, LJones41 said:

I'm reading all of these excuses on why Agatha had remained at Trenwith and it's not working.  It's just not working.  To me, this was simply a bad decision on Winston Graham's part in order to forward his story regarding Ross, Elizabeth and George.

George wants to be considered a gentleman.  It would have looked bad on George to drive an old lady out of her home.  The only reason George even decides to live at Trenwith is to piss off Ross because why stay in an old house that needs repair?  George has to have his own home.  BTW Elizabeth is a fool, George is so in love with her, she could have him licking the soles of her boots and barking like a dog.

In the movie Belle, which takes place a few decades before the Poldark books; Belle lived in the home of her father's uncle; her uncle had a wife, but he also had an unmarried sister (I believe) who "was given the keys."  Before Belle inherits her father's money, her uncle, feeling that no one would marry her (since she was mixed race) said that he'd "give her the keys."  (of course once she inherited her father's money, the douchebags came calling)  What I got from the movie and from this series was that a high born unmarried woman was technically the "mistress of the house."  Had Verity not married, she would have become Agatha, staying on at Trenwith

  • Useful 1
  • Love 5
Link to comment
Quote

He's a fairly progressive man of his time, but he is a man of his time where a lot of people wouldn't have considered what he did all that big a deal. 

Actually, I'm pretty sure committing adultery with his recently dead cousin's wife might have been kind of a big deal if people knew about it...

  • Love 2
Link to comment
19 hours ago, ZoloftBlob said:

"He's a fairly progressive man of his time, but he is a man of his time where a lot of people wouldn't have considered what he did all that big a deal. " Actually, I'm pretty sure committing adultery with his recently dead cousin's wife might have been kind of a big deal if people knew about it...

Adultery was a mans prerogative, and a long held double standard of many cultures. There may have been a convoluted logic at the time that adultery was a crime only if a woman committed it due to questions regarding the legitimacy of heirs. Now we have DNA testing. 

Tongues  would have indeed been a wagging for sure had Ross and Elizabeth been "found out".  A recently widowed woman finding herself "up the duff" in June or July when everyone knows her husband died the past November. Her remarriage to George she claims would "not appear seemly", so I imagine she was supposed to observe a code of mourning.

Link to comment

George wants to be considered a gentleman.  It would have looked bad on George to drive an old lady out of her home.  The only reason George even decides to live at Trenwith is to piss off Ross because why stay in an old house that needs repair?  George has to have his own home.  BTW Elizabeth is a fool, George is so in love with her, she could have him licking the soles of her boots and barking like a dog.

 

Exactly how was Elizabeth a fool?  Getting George to do what she wanted was never that easy for her.

Link to comment
15 hours ago, CTrent29 said:

 

 

Exactly how was Elizabeth a fool?  Getting George to do what she wanted was never that easy for her.

Because at least in the beginning, George wanted her for two reasons, one to piss off Ross and the other because he sees her as a "lady."  If I know a man wants me for a dumb ass reason like that and I really don't give two fucks for him, I'd make him lick the bottom of my boots to show his devotion.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
On 11/30/2016 at 11:31 AM, nodorothyparker said:

t would have been far more realistic to see Prudie or Jinny or someone protest as she's bustling around packing her things that they know she'd never leave her child like that and that she needs to think it through before she takes that step.  Because that's what would have been expected if she was truly hellbent on fleeing the house, just as it would have been understood that from there on out it would be entirely at Ross's whims whether she even saw her son since custody courts weren't a thing either.

Or Jud, yelling, "Ain't fittin'! Ain't proper!

i imagine Prudie had overheard enough to know why Ross and Demelza were sparring.  She's always addressing her own husband Jud as "ye black worm!", so that tells me she doesn't suffer fools gladly. I also think she regards Demelza as a daughter since she came to Nampara at the age of 13 or 14.

  • Love 3
Link to comment
On 12/4/2016 at 9:09 AM, Neurochick said:

Because at least in the beginning, George wanted her for two reasons, one to piss off Ross and the other because he sees her as a "lady."  If I know a man wants me for a dumb ass reason like that and I really don't give two fucks for him, I'd make him lick the bottom of my boots to show his devotion.

I just don't see someone like George Warleggan easily allowing himself to be manipulated . . . not even by someone he loves or is infatuated with.  I just don't see it.

 

 

Quote

Because George is terrified of Agatha and knows she'll kill him in his sleep (or not; heh) if he throws her out. 

 

This makes no sense to me.  George dislikes Aunt Agatha.  He is certainly not afraid of her.  I rather doubt that anyone is afraid of her.  I find her rather buffoonish.

Edited by LJones41
Link to comment
On 11/28/2016 at 1:59 PM, beadgirl said:

Ok guys, I'm confused -- the finale, called episode 9 by my (NYC) PBS station, aired last night.  But you all are calling it episode 10.  Wikipedia says there are 10 episodes, but the PBS episode says there are only 9 (and I checked next week's schedule -- no Poldark.) As I scroll through the descriptions of the episodes, it seems like the numbering done by PBS is off by one number; I watched "episode 5" last night, but the description and plot points match episode 6, as listed in the thread for it.  Was the first episode PBS aired of season 2 really both episodes 1 and 2? Am I missing an episode?  Am I going insane?

 

On 11/28/2016 at 2:01 PM, NumberCruncher said:

The first PBS episode was BBC episodes 1 and 2 combined.

Not for me it didn't! Here in MD, episode 1 was Indian Summers, even if my provider said it was supposed to be episode one of the second season. And since it they never aired it, I have never seen the premiere, and it's not available on Demand, either. So the only way I know what happened is to read what others had to say about it.?

Link to comment
30 minutes ago, LJones41 said:

This makes no sense to me.  George dislikes Aunt Agatha.  He is certainly not afraid of her.  I rather doubt that anyone is afraid of her.  I find her rather buffoonish.

You're absolutely entitled to your opinion, and your favorite characters may not be the same as mine, but that's totes cool. I think we'd all look buffoonish if we got dressed up the way she is in 18th century old spinster dress.  That bonnet does no one any favors. The actress is 83 and the character is pushing 100.

He likely despises her because she outranks him in every way, being born into the aristocracy, and his family rising from humble beginnings. She sees him as nouveau riche, smug, and foppish. He sees her as miserable old crone.  Aunt Ags is quite canny, she sees GW for who he is, a man who has stopped at nothing to ruin her family and their good name.

  • Love 6
Link to comment
58 minutes ago, LJones41 said:

I just don't see someone like George Warleggan easily allowing himself to be manipulated . . . not even by someone he loves or is infatuated with.  I just don't see it.

I've seen smart and nasty guys go completely gaga over some woman they think is hot. 

Edited by Neurochick
  • Love 1
Link to comment
On ‎11‎/‎30‎/‎2016 at 0:30 AM, Nanu160 said:

"Bitchy" crudités and Nasty Salad would have been the light and tasty appetizers served right before the  Devil's Dinner that I  would be serving to a cheating Spouse. My main dish would have been.......... Hot n' $our REVENGE, you know,  the Dish Best Served COLD. Who wants Dessert? Humble Pie, anyone? Fuck you Ross.

Hell I would have just cut his dick off and made a lovely cock stew with it.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
Quote

He likely despises her because she outranks him in every way, being born into the aristocracy, and his family rising from humble beginnings. She sees him as nouveau riche, smug, and foppish. He sees her as miserable old crone.  Aunt Ags is quite canny, she sees GW for who he is, a man who has stopped at nothing to ruin her family and their good name.

 

The Poldarks are not members of the aristocracy.  They are not part of a titled family, like the  Granthams in "Downton Abbey".  They're members of the upper class, but the aristocracy.  They're simply part of the landed gentry.  You've verified that both George and Agatha despise one another.  I don't see how he would fear her.  As for the Poldarks' "good name", it doesn't strike me as worth anything.

 

I find it odd that Winston Graham's main protagonist is a member of the "Establishment" (inherited wealth), despite his limited income; and that his main villain came from a family of self made men.  I wonder why he had portrayed these two in that manner. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, CTrent29 said:

The Poldarks are not members of the aristocracy.  They are not part of a titled family, like the  Granthams in "Downton Abbey".  They're members of the upper class, but the aristocracy.  They're simply part of the landed gentry.  You've verified that both George and Agatha despise one another.  I don't see how he would fear her.  As for the Poldarks' "good name", it doesn't strike me as worth anything.

I find it odd that Winston Graham's main protagonist is a member of the "Establishment" (inherited wealth), despite his limited income; and that his main villain came from a family of self made men.  I wonder why he had portrayed these two in that manner. 

Um, perhaps because it was a very real class distinction.... "old money" vs "new money" with the added distaste that the Warleggans are "trade".

  • Love 5
Link to comment
1 hour ago, DHDancer said:

Um, perhaps because it was a very real class distinction.... "old money" vs "new money" with the added distaste that the Warleggans are "trade".

There was very much a class distinction at that time, though the Poldark family did not hold titles, being landed gentry made them of a higher class even if Warleggan had more of everything.  For those of us who watched Downton Abbey, there was a pecking order among the servants

George did not like being treated like he was still lesser for all his material wealth, and who would. It also makes him referring to Demelza as "your scullery maid" when he gets mad at Ross all the more despicable. It did seem unfair, but I think Graham wanted to play out what that must have been like for George.  

George also represented a ruthless group not unlike the "vulture capitalism" that seems to be emerging again here with derivatives, 30% credit card interest and payday loans, and we all saw in 2008 just how well all of that worked when chickens came home to roost. The 18th century predated modern banking laws, and  was a time when banks were still figuring things out...stocks, bonds, usury, venture funding, and the fear of debtors prisons were all very real back then.

There are many reasons to despise George, least of all that he's successful and self made and has bettered his lot in life. He's despised for being a jerk and his contempt for others and how he trod on others to get to where he was.

  • Love 6
Link to comment

The Poldark name is worth something to the gentry.  It implies a certain level of respectability and good lineage.  It's why Ruth Teague and her mother were chasing Ross around early in the first season even though it was no secret that he wasn't exactly rolling in dough.  Marrying a gentleman of limited means would still be regarded as preferable to many people of the time to marrying a wealthier social climber.  They didn't really address it much on the show but Elizabeth's mother was not at all thrilled that she married George because for all his new money to them he's still a blacksmith's grandson.

The fact that George's money mostly comes from extremely predatory practices that could and did ruin "good" families when the Warleggans arbitrarily called their loans in is just proof to a lot of these people that he's not of their class.  They'll tolerate a fair amount of socializing with him because he does have money and in many cases does hold their loans but that doesn't mean they really accept him, and the fact that he tries so hard only makes it worse in their eyes.

  • Love 8
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...