Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Tara Ariano

S01.E04: The Clockwork Prince

Recommended Posts

Quote

So... Since I've seen The Young Victoria a few times but never read a proper Vic biography: is this show correct that Victoria and Albert got engaged during his first visit to England?

Spoiler

No. They had met before in England at least once, before she was Queen.

Quote

And good lord, I've never seen Tom Hughes in anything before, but there wasn't anything interesting about his Albert. One note, no affect, same monotone to the point where I had no idea how he really felt. Well except for his whining and sulking. Then he finally smiles at the end. Big Whoop.

I'm not trying to defend the actor - he may suck for all I know. But I  don't have any problem with his interpretation of Albert as serious-minded and disdainful of  frivolity. Nor to I find it unrealistic that Victoria could be attracted to such a man - there's something to be said for playing "hard to get" and Albert is doing the opposite of throwing himself at her. At lot of women go for guys that don't show any overt interest in them. Trust me.

Quote

And like others, I don't give any shits about the servants' story. 

I had earlier suggested the B-plots should involve the ladies in waiting and other aristocrats in Victoria's circle. To be fair, though, I can understand where the writers are reluctant to fabricate stories for historical characters. While they no doubt take artistic liberty with Victoria and Albert's stories there are based on facts. Stories about some of the real life characters in their circle might not be terribly interesting, and the writers don't have to worry about historical accuracy with fictional servants.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Mod Note:

As per the pinned spoiler policy topic; please do not post historical facts in episode topics, especially wikipedia links etc. A few posts have already been removed for this reason.

If you do not want your post removed it is your responsibility to ensure that you have read the spoiler policy before posting. 

Thank you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

I had earlier suggested the B-plots should involve the ladies in waiting and other aristocrats in Victoria's circle. To be fair, though, I can understand where the writers are reluctant to fabricate stories for historical characters. While they no doubt take artistic liberty with Victoria and Albert's stories there are based on facts. Stories about some of the real life characters in their circle might not be terribly interesting, and the writers don't have to worry about historical accuracy with fictional servants.

True.  But what's the difference between a fictional servant and a fictional lady? Surely somewhere in the historical record there is a written record of who her lady's maid was, or who the butler was, etc.  If they can simply make up a new maid or a new butler or a new cook then why not just make up a new Lady in Waiting?  I would have to believe that 95% of viewers are not well-versed on the history of Victoria's court and that only a very very small minority would leap up and say "hey wait just a minute!  Eleanor the Viscountess of Shrewsbury was NOT one of the ladies!"

I've talked before about my issue with the downstairs folk and the problem as far as I'm concerned is that they aren't very well fleshed out characters.  In Downton Abbey, they were real people who had a real relationship with the people they were serving.  You could really see the friendship between Lady Mary and her maid Anna Smith Bates.  And because Lady Mary cared about Anna, I cared about Anna.  I don't care about any of these servants.  So a (likely) prostitute is now Chief Maid to the Queen?  Whatever.

Did the show ever address the fate of those rebels from last episode?  I know they inferred that Victoria heard about the nephew and then stopped the execution (to demonstrate her compassion of course) but did I miss a line on what became of them.  Come to think of it, was the housekeeper whose nephew was one of the rebels even shown in this episode?  Most of the women, whether noble, in court, or servant, look the same to me.  I can distinguish the Queen's mother the Duchess of Kent by her blonde hair and awful hairstyle.  I know who the maid is because she is crammed down our throat.  But all of the others, from the lady who always stands near Melbourne at dances to the housekeeper to Victoria's former governess who now is in some position of authority to all of the brown-haired ladies in waiting.... all look the same.

Edited by blackwing
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, taurusrose said:

Albert doesn't disrespect Victoria, he wants her to be the best that she can be. 

Yes!  I can see him as a bit like Knightly telling Emma, "Badly done, Emma, badly done,"  with nothing but concern and disappointment for her.  She's been playing with dolls and cuddling her dog up until now.  Queen or not she needs a little guidance with all the decisions ahead of her and what could be  better than to have that guidance come from a position of concern for the people, other than just how to keep power, which seems to be foremost in the minds of most of the people around her.  I think great changes came during the Victorian age, with Victoria and Albert leading the way for aristocrats to give up some of there worst aspects, like thinking it was okay to get drunk at Whites and then rape the servant girls, with any commoner who tried to stop them getting transported. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

Lady Emma Portman: The Queen seems to enjoy dancing with Prince Ernest (pause) whom I find most charming. One might even forget he was German.

Lord Melbourne: Yes.

Lady Emma Portman: Unlike his brother. So stiff and awkward.

Lord Melbourne: A clockwork prince.

Thankfully not from the House of Orange.

Edited by Constantinople
  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, blackwing said:

Did the show ever address the fate of those rebels from last episode? 

I believe they were sent to Australia. 

Edited by rur
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, taurusrose said:

Regarding Albert, I can see why some people have a negative impression of him, but in his defense, he's of royal blood, a relative and a contemporary.  He's also being trotted out like a prized stallion for Victoria's approval.  I can understand why he might be a bit prickly. And regardless of her station, Victoria needs someone to challenge her and make her think for herself.  Albert doesn't disrespect Victoria, he wants her to be the best that she can be.  Melbourne's deference, flirting and easy approach in handling Victoria doesn't help her be the monarch for a country on the brink of industrialization.  As Albert rightly pointed out, Melbourne can't be bothered with the welfare of the people living in slums and poverty, these are conditions the Queen should not ignore.  The difference between Albert and Melbourne was clear in the question the Prince posed to Victoria...what did she prefer flattery or truth? 

 

2 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

Yes!  I can see him as a bit like Knightly telling Emma, "Badly done, Emma, badly done,"  with nothing but concern and disappointment for her.  She's been playing with dolls and cuddling her dog up until now.  Queen or not she needs a little guidance with all the decisions ahead of her and what could be  better than to have that guidance come from a position of concern for the people, other than just how to keep power, which seems to be foremost in the minds of most of the people around her.  I think great changes came during the Victorian age, with Victoria and Albert leading the way for aristocrats to give up some of there worst aspects, like thinking it was okay to get drunk at Whites and then rape the servant girls, with any commoner who tried to stop them getting transported. 

I really disagree with these interpretations. I guess it bugs me because his attitude seems so patronizing and he's the exact same age as her. He doesn't have the monopoly on life experience, good manners, knowledge or responsibility. Yes, he's been able to travel more and has seen more of the real world but she has been queen for a few years at this point and have carried the burden of duty along with the fun parties and Dash. Knightly has years on Emma (which is also really creeping and patronizing in a different way, but one that was fairly well accepted at the time so I don't hold it against the character.) Albert is her age. I get that men were used to being deferred to in a relationship but Victoria is a Queen and Albert shows no understanding or awareness that this experience has changed her or that she is not a typical woman of the time.

As for Lord Melbourne, he has guided her and I do think Victoria has shown growth with him. It's not really enough, I'll admit that, but I don't think he lies or flatters her. He stood up to her with Flora, he stood up to her with her ladies in waiting. He is her citizen and he has pushed her as far as propriety allows.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, blackwing said:

Did the show ever address the fate of those rebels from last episode?  I know they inferred that Victoria heard about the nephew and then stopped the execution (to demonstrate her compassion of course) but did I miss a line on what became of them.  

Apologies if this has already been answered, but if I recall correctly, Lord M gave her an idea about commuting the sentences so they weren't killed.  I think they were just sent away?

14 minutes ago, rur said:

I believe they were sent to Australia. 

Ok, yes, that would definitely be sent 'away'. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, vibeology said:

I really disagree with these interpretations. I guess it bugs me because his attitude seems so patronizing and he's the exact same age as her. He doesn't have the monopoly on life experience, good manners, knowledge or responsibility. Yes, he's been able to travel more and has seen more of the real world but she has been queen for a few years at this point and have carried the burden of duty along with the fun parties and Dash. Knightly has years on Emma (which is also really creeping and patronizing in a different way, but one that was fairly well accepted at the time so I don't hold it against the character.) Albert is her age. I get that men were used to being deferred to in a relationship but Victoria is a Queen and Albert shows no understanding or awareness that this experience has changed her or that she is not a typical woman of the time.

As for Lord Melbourne, he has guided her and I do think Victoria has shown growth with him. It's not really enough, I'll admit that, but I don't think he lies or flatters her. He stood up to her with Flora, he stood up to her with her ladies in waiting. He is her citizen and he has pushed her as far as propriety allows.

Hopefully, future episodes will show just how much big picture knowledge Albert has when compared to Victoria and how this helps her in the long run.  I disagree with Albert doesn't recognize Victoria isn't a typical woman.  How can he not be aware of the difference in their stations and responsibilities? He can't even propose to her!  What you see as patronizing, I see as a direct, serious personality. IMO, Victoria and Albert are a study for opposites attract.  As far as Lord M standing his ground over Flora...I didn't see it that way at all.  Melbourne gently advised her against any course of action, but Victoria got on her self-righteous high horse and did exactly what she wanted to do, creating a messy scandal in the aftermath.

Edited by taurusrose
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, vibeology said:

I really disagree with these interpretations. I guess it bugs me because his attitude seems so patronizing and he's the exact same age as her. He doesn't have the monopoly on life experience, good manners, knowledge or responsibility.

 

I agree with you completely, when viewed from my 2017 perspective.

However, Albert isn't the only one in-show who holds this view.  Even Lord M made comments on several different occasions about Victoria being "guided" by her husband, "looking to her husband" for council instead of himself, etc.  Which I agree doesn't make much sense if the husband is the same age as her, but that certainly seemed to be the opinion of the time.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, photo fox said:

I agree with you completely, when viewed from my 2017 perspective.

However, Albert isn't the only one in-show who holds this view.  Even Lord M made comments on several different occasions about Victoria being "guided" by her husband, "looking to her husband" for council instead of himself, etc.  Which I agree doesn't make much sense if the husband is the same age as her, but that certainly seemed to be the opinion of the time.

The only thing I would add is though while it is true that the 19th century worldview was definitely from the male POV, it's also true that when a spouse enters the picture, a new bond is formed and most people (male and female) will look to their spouse for counsel, comfort, support, etc. Being the same age doesn't change that dynamic.  Victoria's family knew she was stubborn (and a bit flighty) and hoped that Albert would be a steadying influence on her as she continued to grow in her role as queen.  Also, those Coburgs thought they'd benefit from Victoria and Albert's union.  Ha!  AFA Melbourne is concerned, knowing Victoria as he did, he knew he'd be out as soon as she fell in love and married.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, vibeology said:

I really disagree with these interpretations. I guess it bugs me because his attitude seems so patronizing and he's the exact same age as her. He doesn't have the monopoly on life experience, good manners, knowledge or responsibility. Yes, he's been able to travel more and has seen more of the real world but she has been queen for a few years at this point and have carried the burden of duty along with the fun parties and Dash.

I haven't seen her carry much of anything except to attend the unveiling of a monument to her father, salute the troops and review the pictures of herself that will be used on stamps and coins.  None of these duties could be described as burdensome.

One of the few times her life interacted with the real world she almost caused a constitutional crisis by refusing to appoint Tory Ladies in Waiting even though everyone, including the Prime Minister and her current Ladies in Waiting, said she must, and that she must appear to be neutral between political parties.  In this episode alone Victoria used Lord Melbourne to vouch for her "busy" schedule as an excuse to ignore her guests the following day, ("Afghan dispatches"), and then ignored Melbourne when he tried to update her about Afghanistan.  Later she kept Melbourne from Parliament because she didn't want to be "alone" at Windsor even though he said he had work to do at the House (and I've already mentioned how she showed less consideration to her guests than her dog).

So who better than someone her own age to tell her to grow-up?  It doesn't take someone of advanced years to point out her pompous BS "A queen does not have time for scales every day" with "Only for card games".

Edited by Constantinople
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/30/2017 at 2:30 PM, photo fox said:

 

I don't even know her ladies' names, there's just the one who looks like Laura Benanti and does all the talking, and some other people.  They're all brunette, too, which doesn't help!

That makes me think of the ep with Lady Rose's debut from DA. All of her friends were painfully thin brunettes. I didn't know who was whom. LOL

Albert is the Victorian era version of emo.

Edited by Atlanta
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

My only comment at this juncture is that there is something about Albert that completely reminds me of the late, great Prince.  Which is both disconcerting and...vastly entertaining!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Well that was unsatisfying...

Why it is okay for P.Albert to pull a knife out of his boot and hold it so close to Victoria to poke a hole in his shirt for the flower... no one gasped?

Awkward transition, making Victoria  be "in lurve" with mono facial expression P. Albert.

Me, not so much...Rupert Friend still the best Prince Albert.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, humbleopinion said:

Why it is okay for P.Albert to pull a knife out of his boot and hold it so close to Victoria to poke a hole in his shirt for the flower... no one gasped?

I was stunned by that, too, considering that just a few years earlier her mother wouldn't let her walk down a flight of stairs without someone holding her hand.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I read the "How No to Flirt," one and just thought about the comparison between Lord M. and Albert.  Lord M. is intelligent, prudent, conservative and measured in all he does.  Albert is brooding, liberal,  artistic, athletic and dramatic.  What 20 year-old girl wouldn't prefer Albert?  When I was in my 20's the oldest man I dated was 28 and I broke up with him after a few dates, because he just had that older generation vibe that reminded me of my father. (Ewww.)  Youth calls to youth.  Victoria may get her back-up over some of the things Albert says, but a part of her probably recognizes the need for change in herself and her country and that she will be more able to go there with Albert. 

In any case why do we think Victoria deserves someone like Lord M over Albert?  What has she done to prove herself more in his stage of wisdom and maturity than Albert's? 

I'm firmly entrenched with Sunday Night PBS or I wouldn't  even be watching this, because I so much prefer historical fiction to biography.  The writers try  so hard to make the old Kings and Queens relatable and admirable, but sadly, most of them just aren't.  So they twist themselves into knots trying to make us overlook Victoria's faults and we do the same ourselves, but I'd really so much rather have a nice big series taken from Norah Lofts house trilogy or more Trollop where karma and story arcs can work to our satisfaction.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎30‎/‎01‎/‎2017 at 11:16 PM, GHScorpiosRule said:

 

And like others, I don't give any shits about the servants' story. And I really find it difficult to believe that a butler for the Monarch, could get away with looking as if he's been on a bender and just rolled out of bed. 

You know, I couldn't put my finger on it but upon reading your entry, there it is.  The butler is such a rag tag guy.  Slouchy, sketchy, not at all proud to be where he is -- doesn't he read Dickens?  Doesn't he know about that lot who are in the streets with nary a meal or warm fire?  He has the best where he is and he scowls and snarls and does less than his best.

It seems on this show at least that the whole crew is quite unorganized.  Perhaps I am spoiled by Downton Abbey but you would think that someone would have the upper hand there and get things in order. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

So a (likely) prostitute is now Chief Maid to the Queen?

She's one of the "dressers," and only the secondary one at that. So it's not as if she's Lady's Maid to the Queen or anything quite that lofty. But still . . . yeah. Not sure how she got that job.

Quote

What you see as patronizing, I see as a direct, serious personality. 

I agree, and I think there's probably a tendency to view this relationship thru modern sensibilities, as in "How dare he speak to her that way? She's the Queen!" But we've seen how childishly she's behaving and, as I said before, I'm not convinced he was all that enamored of the idea of marrying her, so he might not have been that concerned with offending her and blowing the chance of marrying her. 

There's also the fact that Victoria is probably more likely to be attracted to someone who stands up to her than a sycophant who just wants her to favor him because of her position. There's something dreadfully appealing about someone who doesn't seem to want you or give a fig about what you think of them. To lots of women, anyway . . .

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, humbleopinion said:

Why it is okay for P.Albert to pull a knife out of his boot and hold it so close to Victoria to poke a hole in his shirt for the flower... no one gasped?

West Side Story was the first thing that popped into my head when I saw the knife even though it wasn't a switch blade.  Perhaps the characters had the same reaction.

When you're Coburg

You're Coburg all the way

From your first forest walk

Till your last dyin' day

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/30/2017 at 10:51 PM, bugsmum said:

Mr. Hudson would kick that scruffy butler to the curb so fast the dude wouldn't know what hit him.  

But then Albert would have no chance to do it. I'm sure the consort will succeed where the governess was shown to fail. The blackguards on the household staff will be cashiered, the devoted Skerritt and newly loyal Mrs. Jenkins will continue to redeem their pasts or close relations, and after Albert turns the spigot, gas lighting will flatter the Queen as well as candlelight or ministers -- or so the flatterers will say.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, MrsMoltisanti said:

You know, I couldn't put my finger on it but upon reading your entry, there it is.  The butler is such a rag tag guy.  Slouchy, sketchy, not at all proud to be where he is -- doesn't he read Dickens?  Doesn't he know about that lot who are in the streets with nary a meal or warm fire?  He has the best where he is and he scowls and snarls and does less than his best.

It seems on this show at least that the whole crew is quite unorganized.  Perhaps I am spoiled by Downton Abbey but you would think that someone would have the upper hand there and get things in order. 

So true!  I too find myself comparing this rag tag team to the Mr. Carson standards.  This head butler looked so out of place when delivering the outfits to Prince Albert and Prince Ernst.  While I did like the scene of him speaking German and putting that young man in his place the simple fact that I can't remember any of their names or even be bothered to care about them says a lot.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 2/1/2017 at 0:39 PM, iMonrey said:

She's one of the "dressers," and only the secondary one at that. So it's not as if she's Lady's Maid to the Queen or anything quite that lofty. But still . . . yeah. Not sure how she got that job.

I agree, and I think there's probably a tendency to view this relationship thru modern sensibilities, as in "How dare he speak to her that way? She's the Queen!" But we've seen how childishly she's behaving and, as I said before, I'm not convinced he was all that enamored of the idea of marrying her, so he might not have been that concerned with offending her and blowing the chance of marrying her. 

There's also the fact that Victoria is probably more likely to be attracted to someone who stands up to her than a sycophant who just wants her to favor him because of her position. There's something dreadfully appealing about someone who doesn't seem to want you or give a fig about what you think of them. To lots of women, anyway . . .

I got the impression that the maid had taken the other girl's place due to the fact she was going to have a baby and that she was keeping it on the down low as long has she was getting paid in some way. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, HelenBaby said:

I got the impression that the maid had taken the other girl's place due to the fact she was going to have a baby and that she was keeping it on the down low as long has she was getting paid in some way. 

Blah who cares?  I am so uninterested in this story line I fast forward thru it to get to the royals again.  The thing is I feel like I've seen this play out before.  Wasn't this a plot during the first seasons of D.A.?  And here we are again hashing it out?  Don't get me wrong I like the house maid or whatever she is just fine but geez this ole' chestnut again?

As far as Prince Albert goes I both like him and dislike him.  I've meet people like him before--this fresh out of college so I know everything kinda people.  The thing is they (and he) does have a point about poverty and how the crown addresses it and yeah I agree he probably didn't give a rip how the queen might take it so he spoke with no filter.  But for me personally I just don't like that type of behavior so I was turned off a bit.  Also it doesn't help I'm still pining for Lord M *blush*.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

This show starts to lose me when they have Victoria so obviously in love with Lord M., then a millisecond later she is supposedly besotted with Albert. I call bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post

It would help if they were clearer about the years. She was 18 when she became queen, and at the end of this episode she was 20 or 21. Seems like enough time for feelings to change, but it may not look that way when they compress it into a couple of hours.

Edited by Driad
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Dear god, but Albert is a boring, uptight, stick-in-the-mud!  Victoria's right, he's a prig, with about one facial expression.  Maybe if the show hadn't given Victoria all that mad chemistry with Lord M, I might buy her falling for Albert, but I just can't.  Hell, Victoria had more chemistry with Prince Ernst than she did with that lump-on-a-log Albert.  Seriously, Ernst was better looking, with a fun attitude and a much more interesting personality.  Although with Ernst, you'd have to worry about him bringing home syphilis or the clap.

Quote

What 20 year-old girl wouldn't prefer Albert? 

The 20 year old that I was.  Because he was god-awful boring.  Plus, I liked older (much older) men when I was younger.

Edited by proserpina65
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎6‎.‎2‎.‎2017 at 11:06 PM, proserpina65 said:

Dear god, but Albert is a boring, uptight, stick-in-the-mud!  Victoria's right, he's a prig, with about one facial expression.  Maybe if the show hadn't given Victoria all that mad chemistry with Lord M, I might buy her falling for Albert, but I just can't.  Hell, Victoria had more chemistry with Prince Ernst than she did with that lump-on-a-log Albert.  Seriously, Ernst was better looking, with a fun attitude and a much more interesting personality.  

If you a Queen in the 19th century and want not to lose your crown, you don't chose a spouse who looks good, have a fun attitude and has an interesting personality but someone who can help you do the job and Albert is such.

On ‎31‎.‎1‎.‎2017 at 11:29 PM, vibeology said:

I really disagree with these interpretations. I guess it bugs me because his attitude seems so patronizing and he's the exact same age as her. He doesn't have the monopoly on life experience, good manners, knowledge or responsibility. Yes, he's been able to travel more and has seen more of the real world but she has been queen for a few years at this point and have carried the burden of duty along with the fun parties and Dash. Knightly has years on Emma (which is also really creeping and patronizing in a different way, but one that was fairly well accepted at the time so I don't hold it against the character.) Albert is her age. I get that men were used to being deferred to in a relationship but Victoria is a Queen and Albert shows no understanding or awareness that this experience has changed her or that she is not a typical woman of the time.

As for Lord Melbourne, he has guided her and I do think Victoria has shown growth with him. It's not really enough, I'll admit that, but I don't think he lies or flatters her. He stood up to her with Flora, he stood up to her with her ladies in waiting. He is her citizen and he has pushed her as far as propriety allows.

It's not only the years who matter but one's character and education.

Sadly, girls didn't at that time get the same education as boys who could study at the university. In addition, men could move freely whereas young women were always chaperoned "and sheltered".  

So far, Victoria in this show hasn't "carried the burden of duty" at all but let herself be flattered by Melbourne and hadn't grown at all. She has absolutely no idea about the country and people she is suppose to rule, nor didn't she care a bit that as a constitutional monarch she should be impartial and not to favor Melbourne because she happens to like him. 

Unlike Victoria, Albert has a sense of duty and curiosity that makes him interested in the world around him. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, Roseanna said:

If you a Queen in the 19th century and want not to lose your crown, you don't chose a spouse who looks good, have a fun attitude and has an interesting personality but someone who can help you do the job and Albert is such.

I know that, but I was commenting as someone watching this show, and Albert made it unwatchable for me.  Thus, when Rufus Sewell was done, so was I.

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎26‎.‎4‎.‎2017 at 8:44 PM, proserpina65 said:

I know that, but I was commenting as someone watching this show, and Albert made it unwatchable for me.  Thus, when Rufus Sewell was done, so was I.

Well, wasn't Albert in the show just like one party of the ideal romance should be, not even trying to loveable and just with that catching the prize?

 Irl Albert would never have behaved incivilly as the aim of all such princes who had no realm of their own would have been to marry a queen, whether they love her or not.

I have a greater problem, though: I liked Young Victoria but I don't like Victoria as she is presented in this show. So I guess I stop watching. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Late to the party, but I'm just want to confess how much I appreciated the acting between Sewell and Oakes.  I can't claim to be a fan of Hughes, but at least he kept out of Sewell and Oakes' way during the last scene between the three of them at the House.

The double conversation going on, Lord M effectively saying -without saying- "I recognize my disruptive influence and I am taking steps to remove myself from the equation entirely. but discreetly so as not to make a scandal' and the way you see Ernst immediately pick up on this and express his gratitude on his brother's behalf, with only a look.  

It really was well written and well acted. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 2017-01-30 at 2:24 PM, PRgal said:

Albert's mustache looks really out of place on the guy's face (to me, anyway).  It's as if Albert grew one not because it was a cool thing for guys to do back then, but a way to prevent others from thinking he's 12. 

LOL! Yeah... As much as I love Tom Hughes as Albert, I think I would have preferred him without the fake moustache.

Edited by Furienna
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎2017‎-‎01‎-‎30 at 10:20 PM, scenicbyway said:

I felt sorry for his poor valet.  Everytime Albert changes his shirt he needs brand new ones because there are giant holes in them or arms missing.  I'm guessing the valet isn't able to sell the old shirts on the street like everyone else.

Yeah, Albert kept ruining his shirts to impress Victoria! :D

Share this post


Link to post
On 2017-02-01 at 1:11 PM, JudyObscure said:

I read the "How No to Flirt," one and just thought about the comparison between Lord M. and Albert.  Lord M. is intelligent, prudent, conservative and measured in all he does.  Albert is brooding, liberal,  artistic, athletic and dramatic.  What 20 year-old girl wouldn't prefer Albert?  When I was in my 20's the oldest man I dated was 28 and I broke up with him after a few dates, because he just had that older generation vibe that reminded me of my father. (Ewww.)  Youth calls to youth.  Victoria may get her back-up over some of the things Albert says, but a part of her probably recognizes the need for change in herself and her country and that she will be more able to go there with Albert. 

In any case why do we think Victoria deserves someone like Lord M over Albert?  What has she done to prove herself more in his stage of wisdom and maturity than Albert's? 

I agree. And besides, I don't see why anyone could expect Victoria to end up with Lord M.

Spoiler

Not only do we know from history, that it could never turn out that way. He was forty years older than her and not even a royal.

But I guess that some people love him as much as I love Albert, so... :/

 

On 2017-02-01 at 1:11 PM, JudyObscure said:

I'm firmly entrenched with Sunday Night PBS or I wouldn't  even be watching this, because I so much prefer historical fiction to biography.  The writers try  so hard to make the old Kings and Queens relatable and admirable, but sadly, most of them just aren't.  So they twist themselves into knots trying to make us overlook Victoria's faults and we do the same ourselves, but I'd really so much rather have a nice big series taken from Norah Lofts house trilogy or more Trollop where karma and story arcs can work to our satisfaction.

No, I don't feel that they ever tried to make us overlook Victoria's faults. You can perhaps argue that she was even worse in real life, or something. But they still allowed her to not be perfect all the time.    

Edited by Furienna

Share this post


Link to post

I continue with the opinion that the downstairs plot is needless.  I do find Victoria's story interesting and would really like to hear more about the politics of the time and details about the royalty/nobility.  There was no explanation as to why V could only marry Albert and not Ernst, for example.  And if I understand it correctly, if Charlotte hadn't died (and her baby), then she would have been queen and Uncle Leopold consort, but then he later became king of Belgium, was it?  Would he have been king of both or forced to renounce that crown, or what?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Hanahope said:

I continue with the opinion that the downstairs plot is needless.  I do find Victoria's story interesting and would really like to hear more about the politics of the time and details about the royalty/nobility.  There was no explanation as to why V could only marry Albert and not Ernst, for example.  And if I understand it correctly, if Charlotte hadn't died (and her baby), then she would have been queen and Uncle Leopold consort, but then he later became king of Belgium, was it?  Would he have been king of both or forced to renounce that crown, or what?

Had Charlotte lived Leopold wouldn't have been offered the Belgian crown it would have gone to someone else. He was offered the crown after Charlotte died. Ernst was heir to another throne. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

But apparently Uncle Cumberland could be king of both Hanover and Britain.  Its just confusing as to who can be the monarch of which country or countries and who can't.  But there's always google.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×