Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
maraleia

When Calls The Heart

Recommended Posts

I'm much more interested now that the stupid triangle is over and all 3 involved can move onto other storylines. I saved up the last 6 episodes of this season and watched them after I knew how things ended. It was much more tolerable that way (though that dumb party game at Flora and Ned's party was still so, so uncomfortable to watch--so much watching through my fingers).

I also love Lee running for mayor and Rosemary restarting a newspaper.

Edited by redpencil
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I recently started watching this series from the beginning.  It has evolved.  In the beginning the town was muddy, dingy and the weather seemed to be perpetually overcast. Of course the mine disaster was fresh and it was shown to be a hard scrabble life in a remote mining town.

Henry was definitely the villain.  Elizabeth was adorable in her clumsy attempts to be a "regular" lady in town.  Her cooking was ghastly.  Florence was a mean witch. But the romance with Jack and Elizabeth was so sweet and cute.  I'm sad some of the original characters left. 

So far, (still in season1) Jack has had competition for Elizabeth in the form of a con man(Andrew Walker).  Of course Jack found him out and Elizabeth also picked up on his game.  Jack has declared that he is courting Elizabeth and the fun stuff is coming up.

Since it will be probably early 2022 before WCTH returns, it sure is fun to watch how it all began.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Oh man, Andrew Walker!  I totally forgot he was Billy!  I like how he fully committed to actually looking period appropriate with his moustache.  I look at pictures from the early 1900s and it seems like every man had a moustache.  For all the criticism of the ladies mermaid waves the men don't look very period accurate either.  I remember an episode where Jack was wearing jeans and a flannel shirt which, combined with his clean cut side parted hair meant he looked straight out of the L.L. Bean catalog.  At least he wasn't wearing sneakers?

The early days were so good.  It's not on Netflix anymore but I feel like I'd enjoy watching season one and then would just stop.   

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

"The early days were so good.  It's not on Netflix anymore but I feel like I'd enjoy watching season one and then would just stop. "

Sadly, Netflix took WCTH off their service.  I have all the seasons recorded :) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/28/2021 at 7:45 AM, dubstepford wife said:

For all the criticism of the ladies mermaid waves the men don't look very period accurate either.  I remember an episode where Jack was wearing jeans and a flannel shirt 

Actually, jeans were common among working-class people in the western US from about the 1850s or so - and the Levi Strauss ones were initially marketed toward miners, which were certainly in vast numbers in Coal Valley. So it isn't too absurd to imagine that Jack could have picked up some jeans locally. As a guy who rode horses and did a lot of manual labor, I would imagine he would have liked some sturdy pants.

And of course, flannel shirts go back to the 17th century.

/ historical nerdery 

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/10/2021 at 8:33 AM, SnarkySheep said:

Actually, jeans were common among working-class people in the western US from about the 1850s or so - and the Levi Strauss ones were initially marketed toward miners, which were certainly in vast numbers in Coal Valley. So it isn't too absurd to imagine that Jack could have picked up some jeans locally. As a guy who rode horses and did a lot of manual labor, I would imagine he would have liked some sturdy pants.

And of course, flannel shirts go back to the 17th century.

/ historical nerdery 

 

 

All true.  I think it had more to do with the styling of it, similar to how the women are styled.  Like, the women are wearing ankle length skirts so that's accurate to the 1910s, just as Jack's jeans were technically accurate.  But the jeans combined with the obviously modern button down, gelled hair, and the fact that they put mascara on him makes it look so modern, just as Elizabeth's mermaid waves and lack of corset make her look very modern.

I realize though that pointing out historical inaccuracies in this show is beating your head against a cement wall.  I just thought it was nice that Andrew Walker actually was sporting facial hair that isn't attractive by 21st century standards but was the height of manliness back then.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

On 6/13/2021 at 11:03 AM, dubstepford wife said:

I just thought it was nice that Andrew Walker actually was sporting facial hair that isn't attractive by 21st century standards but was the height of manliness back then.

Andrew Walker could sport facial hair that hasn't been attractive since we lived in caves and he would still be hot.

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think I missed part of an episode this season...did they ever explain why we never heard of Henry having a son for eight whole years??

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, SnarkySheep said:

I think I missed part of an episode this season...did they ever explain why we never heard of Henry having a son for eight whole years??

Snarky answer:  because this is something they pulled out of the air this season. 

But seriously, the whole "Henry has a son no one ever knew about" plot was just so stupid, and really didn't mean much to the overall show. He showed up, did some things (act petulant/shady and attempted a romance with Lee's niece), then left. He didn't leave much of an impact and will likely not be mentioned ever again.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Watching some old eps...and wondering exactly why Ally had lived with Nathan all these years when it's been established she has a living grandmother. 

She was supposedly four when Nathan first took guardianship. Seriously, wouldn't it have been much easier for her to live in one consistent place with grandma and not be dragged from posting to posting, and just have Nathan send money on occasion? *scratches head*

Share this post


Link to post

On 7/29/2021 at 4:50 PM, SnarkySheep said:
Spoiler

I'm really surprised Henry is returning. His final scene(s) last season seemed to imply Henry was gone for some time, if not for good. 

And um, what exactly is the Robert character going to do next season, since they made a big deal out of his graduation? Will he follow Nathan around (AGAIN!) "learning" how to be a Mountie?!  

I get that actors need work, but it should at least make sense for the story!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post

How is Rachel supposed to help Christopher "to become a better person", when she evidently admired his daring to steal her uncle's watch and even fell in love with him because of "his daring to take a chance"?

Allie is as insufferable as before, but even more insufferable are the writer who present that a niece declaring how good her uncle is and how she lovers him, made that lunkhead who wanted to revenge on Nathan to change his mind.

Watching Allie, I begin to understand the old ways to raise the child! Maybe she is allowed to have an opinion if her uncles with whom she lives would have going to marry a woman she couldn't get along, but she has no right whatsover to try to make Elizabeth to choose her uncle instead of Lucas.

So Nathan was earlier so gruff because he guilty in falling in love with Elizabeth who he had only come to Hope Valley to help a bereaved widow of a colleague who had died because he had acted instead to Nathan who was punished? It doesn't make me like him a bit, especially he had a nerve to make his declaration of love when Elizabeth is dating Lucas.

BTV, when did people irl start dating instead of courting?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/13/2021 at 4:06 AM, scenicbyway said:

At that point, Liz should’ve said she didn’t have feelings for Nathan to both he and Ally. I can see why people are upset, we were told their was a triangle when she was really just dating Lucas.

Elizabeth said very clearly to Nathan that they was no chance *before* she started to date Lucas. Nathan should have believed her and told Ally that it was none of her business.

The second sentence doesn't make sense at all: since Lucas returned, there was no triangle to be seen whatever the show claimed. Of course they could have done against the wishes of the audience but luckily they didn't as Nathan simply wouldn't compete with Lucas who was handsome, charming and also a good man (perhaps even too good irl).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/28/2021 at 6:06 AM, Roseanna said:

How is Rachel supposed to help Christopher "to become a better person", when she evidently admired his daring to steal her uncle's watch and even fell in love with him because of "his daring to take a chance"?

Agreed. Rachel and Christopher are basically the new and younger version of Julie and Tom.

 

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/3/2021 at 5:42 PM, TVForever said:

Good for Lucas for being the adult in the room. If Elizabeth wants him, she'll have to do the chasing now, because he's done. She "chose" him, but every time he wanted to get together, she acted like there was somewhere else she had to be. And every time he turned around, she and Nathan were in each other's faces. Of course that was going to get old. 

 

On 5/3/2021 at 7:13 PM, treeofdreams said:

"Let me warm up your jacket for you, I used to do that for Jack."  And then buttoning it up for him.  Good grief.

The look on her face as he left said something was  going on in her head...

 

On 5/3/2021 at 8:41 PM, norcalgal said:

I thought that scene was a little weird. Why didn't she just tell him to go stand by the fireplace to warm up!  Yeah, Elizabeth used to warm up Jack's red serge, but Nathan is not Jack. Again, goes to my point that maybe she's projecting what she felt for Jack onto the nearest Mountie.

 

On 5/5/2021 at 1:29 AM, allonsyalice said:

I really want to rescue Lucas from this shitty show he's on. (Tempted to write a bar owner named Lucas into my next book if that wouldnt be plagarism) I really only watch for him and Rosemary. And Lucas just deserves better. Honestly, the problem with drawn out triangles means that the main character will almost never end up in a good light after waffling and changing their mind. it makes them look fickle, and in Elizabeth's case, it makes her look selfish and lowkey weak as well. 

 

On 5/5/2021 at 1:52 AM, CarpeFelis said:

I just don’t see what’s so all-fired great about Elizabeth that she’d have two men chasing her, especially after waffling for this long.

Nathan has been coming off like a stalker (and a somewhat ill-tempered one at that), while Lucas has been treating Elizabeth really well and has been exceedingly patient with her. Even for the show’s time period, it makes no sense to me that she was so reluctant to even so much as hold hands(!!!) in public. The way she was acting, you’d think she was some blushing 16-year-old virgin, not a woman who’s been married and given birth to a child!

Good points.

I just want to add one thing: the writers obviously want to present Elizabeth so "modern" that she doesn't care about conventions of the time, but did they also meant to present her stupid? Having a man in her home *in the morning* would ruined her reputation and then she couldn't any more work as a teacher. Is that what Nathan *wanted* to happen, when he left his horse in front of her house - to get her in the dire situation he could to "save" her by offering marriage? But of course the writers didn't use that kind of plot, they only let Rosemary look in astonishment/horror.

Elizabeth surely looks like a tease: it took a long time she allowed Lucas took her hand even when they were dating, but she had nothing against holding both hands with Nathan. And then she asked him to undress his coat!      

Share this post


Link to post

I have now read elsewhere some opinions favoring Nathan.

I understand that we all have our own worldview and values through which we interpret the characters and happenings, but I still wonder some claims, such as Lucas only "wined and dined" Elizabeth? Well, in many old-fashioned love stories such a man turns to be no good, f.ex. trying to seduce the innocent heroine. But Lucas never tried to do such a thing, on the contrary all he did for Elizabeth (and he did much!) he did for her best interests.

Also, in many old-fashioned love stories "the proud silent man" who first seems to be unfriendly towards the heroine in the end wins her heart. But let's remember that Darcy in Austen's Pride and Prejudice must first prove that he has changed (although he had already much good inside him). Nathan never changed, he only declared his love but he never shared his other thoughts with Elizabeth, unlike Lucas.

Nathan's love was only passion ("eros"). Even when Elizabeth dated Lucas, Nathan couldn't give up. This is called mania! As he had come to Hope Valley "protect" Elizabeth, he lectured her, not realizing that he had no right for it. Therefore I suspect that as a husband he would have tried to control her even more. He never seemed curious to learn what she dreamed about, unlike Lucas.

Instead, in Lucas' love there was, in addition to passion that he kept in check until she was ready, also other aspects of love: love that helps and gives away (in Latin ”pragma” that in the best case grows to ”agape”), play ("ludus") growing friendship ("filia"), tolerance and an open attitude growing to esteem and respect (in Greek ”timee”).

 

   

   

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/30/2019 at 11:37 PM, ctlady said:

I dig Lucas and he gets props for what he did for his friend.  But I swear I wanted to smack Elizabeth when he offered her his coat after the ordeal and she pretty much swatted him away.  Hey...he didn't force you to show up at the saloon with those men there, sister.  He didn't do anything nefarious.  He helped out a friend (yeah, he cheated in the poker game, but so was the other guy) and that guy wanted revenge.  Her reaction to his act of kindness (even after he told those men over and over to let her go) really irked me.

I agree. Only, Elizabeth didn't know this, Lucas told the story only to Nathan.

But even later she blamed Lucas that because of him her son could have lost her mom. Hey, you chose to go to the saloon in the middle of night all on your own, Elizabeth! It wasn't Lucas's fault that these criminals were there waiting to revenge on him.

Actually, it was just as much sheer coincidence that Jack was taking Nathan's place.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Rosemary's comments about Nathan are regarded true by Team Nathan, but I can't agree.

Rosemary says that Nathan didn't tell Elizabeth that Jack had took his place because he didn't think that the matter was important. That simply can't be true because of Nathan himself thought the matter so important that he came to Hope Valley.

Rosemary says that Nathan's reasons were noble and selfless, meaning that he wanted to "protect" Jack's widow and son. But Elizabeth was IMO right in saying that she hadn't asked to be "protected" (I hate that word, it's so patronizing) by Nathan. And in fact, she was quite capable to take care of herself and her son and if there was a *physical* danger, Bill, Lee and any new Mountie could surely have saved her.

But that duty to "protect" Elizabeth finally explains that why Nathan saw his right to worry about Elizabeth and Lucas's journey to listen to Virginia Woolf, as if she weren't an adult and he were her legal guardian. In the same way, Nathan had warned Elizabeth of Lucas's motives to donate a space for the library when he was still as much a stranger to her as Lucas. In both cases, his real reasons was of course jealousy that led to controlling towards Elizabeth and judgmental towards Lucas.

In addition, Nathan doesn't seem at all noble and selfless when one remembers that his primary duty in the private life was to raise his orphaned niece Allie and after they had already moved many times, it wasn't in her best interests to move again. Yes, Elizabeth became the exemplary teacher who helped Allie finally got friends, but Nathan had no way to anticipate it. Actually, it was mainly Nathan who took the benefit from moving to Hope Valley as Elizabeth helped him to raise Allie (although she never ceased to be an annoying brat - I can't understand why because his experience with Allie he was regarded so wonderful a stepfather to Little Jack).

Of course the most import matter that also Elizabeth came to realize was true: although Jack took Nathan's place, he can't be blamed for Jack's death. It was sheer contingency. 

But the basic question wasn't about it, it was about that Nathan kept the matter secret even when she came to ask him if he had known Jack, and he denied it - it was literally true, but it wasn't "the whole truth". Although it was a grave error, it wasn't in itself fatal - in love stories a far serious one could be forgiven (cf. El Cid).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

And do we think the writers are just trying to keep us interested?  I enjoy this show for what it is.  Which is a pleasant diversion from every day life.  Because this surely was never about every day life.  It still amazes me that the Elizabeth character has a coat for every occasion, no one gets dirty, no one mentions the outhouse, etc.

  • Laugh 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/3/2021 at 4:12 PM, lookeyloo said:

And do we think the writers are just trying to keep us interested?

I guess that's true. Although I often get annoyed, I have kept watching.

I can even admit that the writers succeeded much better than Julian Fellowes in Downton Abbey in the plot "how can a heroine of the perfect romance find a new love after losing her husband". Lady Mary first had two suitors but didn't choose neither - probably because the audience didn't like enough either of them. Then came Henry Talbot - for some reason men just fell for Mary after she treated them badly. She had a few dated with Henry, they flirted a little and kissed once but didn't really know each other (unlike her sister Edith and Bertie). After his friend had died in racing, he decided to seize the moment and proposed to her, not taking care one bit of her equally traumatic memory of losing her husband in the car accident. She said no, but he didn't accept her decision and became uninvited to her home with the marriage license in his pocket and again she said no. Other people tried to persuade her - and the audience - that she must love her. Finally she confessed to her granny that she was afraid to love again after losing her husband in the car accident, after which she invited him to her and accepted him, but they never discussed about her fears, nor his callous words that he would make her as he could to decline his proposal. I can't understand that kind of "romance", nor I didn't see any chemistry between them.

This show at least gave the heroine a chance to make her decision freely and then go to the suitors. I liked Lucas because he put Elizabeth's happiness first and "set her free" whereas didn't like Nathan's way to "fight for love" although Elizabeth was dating Lucas.    Nathan only said "I love you" twice whereas Lucas behavior proved that "Love is patient, love is kind..." 

The problem in the show, however, was that as Elizabeth didn't know her own mind until end, the audience was divided in two camps who interpreted the happening in their own way and now, it seems, Team Nathan even refuses to accept Elizabeth's own words that she saw Jack in Nathan.

One example of two interpretations: Nathan comes to Elizabeth's home in his red coat and when he is cold, he undresses his coat away and warms it saying that she did the same for Jack's coat and finally helps him to dress his coat. Either: they seem so comfortable with each other that she must be in love with him. Or: they seem so comfortable with each other because Elizabeth remembers Jack but there is no erotic tension between them.

Second example: Lucas slowly leans to kiss Elizabeth in the car during the car and she first seems willing but then says "no" and then "not yet". Either: she likes to spend time him but she knows in her heart that it's nothing serious. Or: she finds so strong attraction towards hims that she becomes afraid. 

Edited by Roseanna · Reason: correcting the first example which I remembered wrongly

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

I guess that's true. Although I often get annoyed, I have kept watching.

I can even admit that the writers succeeded much better than Julian Fellowes in Downton Abbey in the plot "how can a heroine of the perfect romance find a new love after losing her husband". Lady Mary first had two suitors but didn't choose neither - probably because the audience didn't like enough either of them. Then came Henry Talbot - for some reason men just fell for Mary after she treated them badly. She had a few dated with Henry, they flirted a little and kissed once but didn't really know each other (unlike her sister Edith and Bertie). After his friend had died in racing, he decided to seize the moment and proposed to her, not taking care one bit of her equally traumatic memory of losing her husband in the car accident. She said no, but he didn't accept her decision and became uninvited to her home with the marriage license in his pocket and again she said no. Other people tried to persuade her - and the audience - that she must love her. Finally she confessed to her granny that she was afraid to love again after losing her husband in the car accident, after which she invited him to her and accepted him, but they never discussed about her fears, nor his callous words that he would make her as he could to decline his proposal. I can't understand that kind of "romance", nor I didn't see any chemistry between them.

This show at least gave the heroine a chance to make her decision freely and then go to the suitors. I liked Lucas because he put Elizabeth's happiness first and "set her free" whereas didn't like Nathan's way to "fight for love" although Elizabeth was dating Lucas.    Nathan only said "I love you" twice whereas Lucas behavior proved that "Love is patient, love is kind..." 

The problem in the show, however, was that as Elizabeth didn't know her own mind until end, the audience was divided in two camps who interpreted the happening in their own way and now, it seems, Team Nathan even refuses to accept Elizabeth's own words that she saw Jack in Nathan.

One example of two interpretations: Nathan comes to Elizabeth's home in his read coat and when he is cold, she helps him to take his coat away and warms it and says that she did the same for Jack's coat. Either: they seem so comfortable with each other that she must be in love with him. Or: they seem so comfortable with each other because Elizabeth remembers Jack but there is no erotic tension between them.

Second example: Lucas slowly leans to kiss Elizabeth in the car during the car and she first seems willing but then says "no" and then "not yet". Either: she likes to spend time him but she knows in her heart that it's nothing serious. Or: she finds so strong attraction towards hims that she becomes afraid. 

I keep watching too - but just consider it mindless entertainment. Janette Ike’s books are much better 

Share this post


Link to post

9 hours ago, Roseanna said:

The problem in the show, however, was that as Elizabeth didn't know her own mind until end, the audience was divided in two camps who interpreted the happening in their own way and now, it seems, Team Nathan even refuses to accept Elizabeth's own words that she saw Jack in Nathan.

I was Team Nathan because I thought they just looked like a prettier pair (to me, their height and coloring just meshed better than Lucas/Elizabeth), but I posted on this forum that it seemed to me that Elizabeth "saw" Jack in Nathan. It was emotional transference, and not real love that Elizabeth had towards Nathan. Looking back, the answer of "Who would Elizabeth choose" seemed to be right in front of our eyes the whole time, because WCTH did very little, if anything at all to show Nathan wooing Elizabeth (contrast with Lucas), or discuss anything beyond Allie. Now that we've seen the triangle ended, duh - of course it was Lucas all along, because the show never truly invested in furthering the Nathan/Elizabeth bond.  I know the actors were interviewed after the season finale and they said the producers didn't make up their mind until some point in Season 8, but if WCTH really did think Elizabeth/Nathan might be Endgame, SHAME ON THEM for not putting in the work like they did with Lucas/Elizabeth. 

tl;dr The triangle ended in a logical manner given what the show presented on the screen these past few years. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, norcalgal said:

I was Team Nathan because I thought they just looked like a prettier pair (to me, their height and coloring just meshed better than Lucas/Elizabeth), but I posted on this forum that it seemed to me that Elizabeth "saw" Jack in Nathan. It was emotional transference, and not real love that Elizabeth had towards Nathan. Looking back, the answer of "Who would Elizabeth choose" seemed to be right in front of our eyes the whole time, because WCTH did very little, if anything at all to show Nathan wooing Elizabeth (contrast with Lucas), or discuss anything beyond Allie. Now that we've seen the triangle ended, duh - of course it was Lucas all along, because the show never truly invested in furthering the Nathan/Elizabeth bond.  I know the actors were interviewed after the season finale and they said the producers didn't make up their mind until some point in Season 8, but if WCTH really did think Elizabeth/Nathan might be Endgame, SHAME ON THEM for not putting in the work like they did with Lucas/Elizabeth. 

tl;dr The triangle ended in a logical manner given what the show presented on the screen these past few years. 

You are really a rare person, being able to differ what you hope and what you see. It's a qualification we all need even more in the real life.

However, dating isn't the only possible way to build a romance. It would be have been possibly to do so by giving E&N common interests but it was Lucas who helped Elizabeth to found a library and encouraged her in writing.

Also, Nathan has some characteristics (he is uncommunicative, sulky, suspicious, unforgiving) that prevent a close relationship. He did change a little but with Allie, not Elizabeth.

Although Nathan said to have come to Hope Valley to "protect" Elizabeth (which she in fact didn't need), it's she who has mostly been the one who gives him, namely advice about Allie. Instead, Lucas has been the one who gives to Elizabeth in their relationship.

Lucas seems to be almost too good to be true irl. However, just like his mom with his dad, he hasn't yet shown his vulnerability to Elizabeth. Strange that it was Allie whom he first told being lonely as a child and now told being afraid of losing his mom to another man. Also his mom told Elizabeth that she is unable to bond with children. So it's likely that Lucas conceals emotional wounds behind his charm. When he is hurt or jealous, he doesn't make accusations or demands but withdraws. He speaks only when he is in command of himself. It worked now but maybe not so well later?

Edited by Roseanna · Reason: correcting a wrong word
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Roseanna said:

However, dating isn't the only possible way to build a romance. It would be have been possibly to do so by giving E&N common interests but it was Lucas who helped Elizabeth to found a library and encouraged her in writing.

Also, Nathan has some characteristics (he is uncommunicative, sulky, suspicious, unforgiving) that prevent a close relationship. He did change a little but with Allie, not Elizabeth.

Yep - all this!

I suspect that starting next season, they will pair up Nathan and Fiona. Although I can see the attraction of "opposites attract", it seems like over time, Fiona's personality (bubbly, energetic, go-getter) will wear on someone like Nathan unless the writers make him loosen up a little. As Fiona is my favorite character, I hope Nathan will be made to earn her love/affection. 

I also wonder what the show will do if the two actors break up IRL. Aaawk-ward!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, norcalgal said:

because WCTH did very little, if anything at all to show Nathan wooing Elizabeth (contrast with Lucas), or discuss anything beyond Allie.

That's correct. But doesn't it also show what kind of character Nathan has? He just isn't a good communicator, even less can such playful banter Lucas and Elizabeth have. Add to that his guilt, it was no wonder he made his first move (flowers) too late when Lucas had already bonded with Elizabeth in the intellectual level and helped her in many ways.

Unfortunately, Nathan also made mistakes which showed his negative sides. He warned Elizabeth of Lucas which made her to remark how dark the world is when one suspects all. He also lectured her when she had gone to search for Emily in the wood - yes, he explained that that was because he was worried about her and that kind of behavior is very human in the situation, but he didn't apologize for treating her like a child instead of an adult, a teacher and widow with a child. For some reason he never spoke in the same harsh way to Allie although she would have deserved it many times.

It's true that Austen's Mr Knightley also warned Emma that Mr Elton didn't marry a girl without money and connections like Harriet and reproved her for her bad behavior towards Miss Bates, but he was right in both cases, they were in-laws and he had known her since she was child, and they always settled matters amicably.

The date with Little Jack and Allie was a obviously a mistake which meant that it would have been impossible to them to get to know each other.

And when Elizabeth said that she believed that he wanted more from her it was no time to make a declaration of love. 

Nathan has been compared with Jack, but have they really anything else common than the same profession? Actually, Jack had same traits than Lucas: Jack build Elizabeth a school, gave her a typewriter, arranged fancy dates with candles - and was very patient.

Having said all that, I admit again that the romance with Nathan would have been possible - but then it should have been built already in S7: they should have had some common interests and become friends etc. It's not a long time when Nathan told Rosemary that he had read also women authors - but only such as Alcott (perhaps Nathan is a romantic in his heart!), not modernists like Virginia Woolf.

Edited by Roseanna · Reason: added a word
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, Roseanna said:

That's correct. But doesn't it also show what kind of character Nathan has? He just isn't a good communicator, even less can such playful banter Lucas and Elizabeth have. Add to that his guilt, it was no wonder he made his first move (flowers) too late when Lucas had already bonded with Elizabeth in the intellectual level and helped her in many ways.

Unfortunately, Nathan also made mistakes which showed his negative sides. He warned Elizabeth of Lucas which made her to remark how dark the world is when one suspects all. He also lectured her when she had gone to search for Emily in the wood - yes, he explained that that was because he was worried about her and that kind of behavior is very human in the situation, but he didn't apologize for treating her like a child instead of an adult, a teacher and widow with a child. For some reason he never spoke in the same harsh way to Allie although she would have deserved it many times.

It's true that Austen's Mr Knightley also warned Emma that Mr Elton didn't marry a girl without money and connections like Harriet and reproved her for her bad behavior towards Miss Bates, but he was right in both cases, they were in-laws and he had known her since she was child, and they always settled matters amicably.

The date with Little Jack and Allie was a obviously a mistake which meant that it would have been impossible to them to get to know each other.

And when Elizabeth said that she believed that he wanted more from her it was no time to make a declaration of love. 

Nathan has been compared with Jack, but have they really anything else common than the same profession? Actually, Jack had same traits than Lucas: Jack build Elizabeth a school, gave her a typewriter, arranged fancy dates with candles - and was very patient.

Having said all that, I admit again that the romance with Nathan would have been possible - but then it should have been built already in S7: they should have had some common interests and become friends etc. It's not a long time when Nathan told Rosemary that he had read also women authors - but only such as Alcott (perhaps Nathan is a romantic in his heart!), not modernists like Virginia Woolf.

I'm no fan of Nathan's but I really thought at some point we would see Nathan try to woo Elizabeth. We saw Lucas do many things for her and with her. I assumed at some point we would see that from Nathan. When Elizabeth points out he never asked her out I thought okay we're finally going to see Nathan trying to be romantic. It was a triangle after all. I'm still surprised they never gave us anything. Its hard to root Nathan and Elizabeth when they don't give us a reason to.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I'm no fan of Nathan's but I really thought at some point we would see Nathan try to woo Elizabeth. We saw Lucas do many things for her and with her. I assumed at some point we would see that from Nathan. When Elizabeth points out he never asked her out I thought okay we're finally going to see Nathan trying to be romantic. It was a triangle after all. I'm still surprised they never gave us anything. Its hard to root Nathan and Elizabeth when they don't give us a reason to.

Well, obviously TN did root N&E . They interpreted Elizabeth's constant looking at Nathan from distance even when she was with Lucas to mean that she longed for *him* and not Jack (and the former interpretation *was* possible). Nathan's two declarations of love were passionate, the first even desperate when Elizabeth refused to listen to him. There were moments like her throwing herself in his arms, them holding each other with both hands and her warming his coat.

I also guess that TN  interpreted Elizabeth's word that Nathan would be Allie's ideal man according to whom she would chose her future husband that to Elizabeth he was an ideal man for her new husband. In the context, however, I interpreted that Elizabeth urged Nathan to behave in the different way in order to *become* the ideal man for Allie, namely to deal problems, not ignore them. Nathan had just answered to Elizabeth's claim that FC was still a problem for Allie by saying it was "past".

I have read many satisfactory love stories where the hero doesn't make any romantic gestures, but love is born in work or otherwise in the situation where the real character is revealed. However, we had already learned knew that Nathan is honest and brave etc., so a plot like "Nathan saves Little Jack from danger" wouldn't reveal anything new from him and the plot "Elizabeth is afraid for Nathan who is in danger" had been used in S7.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

6 hours ago, Roseanna said:

I also guess that TN  interpreted Elizabeth's word that Nathan would be Allie's ideal man according to whom she would chose her future husband that to Elizabeth he was an ideal man for her new husband. In the context, however, I interpreted that Elizabeth urged Nathan to behave in the different way in order to *become* the ideal man for Allie, namely to deal problems, not ignore them. Nathan had just answered to Elizabeth's claim that FC was still a problem for Allie by saying it was "past".

I forgot that Nathan *did* accept advice in another matter: that it wasn't wrong not to come to the parent discussion because he had difficult to meet Elizabeth after she had rejected him, but as Elizabeth said they should deal with Allie's school regardless of their relationship. In that sense he understood that his behavior had given Allie a wrong model how a man (a woman, for that matter) should behave: let one's hurt feelings prevent one to do one's duty towards a child.

But the he still ignored Fort Clay's effects on Allie who had told Elizabeth that her uncle "changed". Also, they either had to move and constant moving wasn't good for Allie.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/6/2021 at 6:32 PM, norcalgal said:

I suspect that starting next season, they will pair up Nathan and Fiona. Although I can see the attraction of "opposites attract", it seems like over time, Fiona's personality (bubbly, energetic, go-getter) will wear on someone like Nathan unless the writers make him loosen up a little. As Fiona is my favorite character, I hope Nathan will be made to earn her love/affection.

It's likely that Nathan will find a new love, but I think it would be a mistake to make it happen already in the next season - unless it's meant to say that he only believed to be in love with Elizabeth.

Many have hoped a long courtship for Elizabeth and Lucas. I understand that it would be sweet food for all romantic watchers, but she already had all that with Jack - and wasted time that they could have been married. In fact, we almost saw very little of the married Elizabeth as they were mostly separated.  

Traditionally, there were two kind of love stories: either a young woman search for love and a husband and the story ends in the engagement, or a married woman is unhappy in her marriage and finds a lover and the end was tragic for her or both (Anna Karenina, Tristan and Isolde). There was no room for romance inside the marriage.

Even nowadays, when the couple marry, something elemental is missed, so the shows are often reluctant to do that. The audience seems to like tension and uncertainty better than satisfaction and certainty, or at least the latter must be only temporary.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/1/2021 at 4:27 AM, Roseanna said:

Nathan's love was only passion ("eros"). Even when Elizabeth dated Lucas, Nathan couldn't give up. This is called mania! As he had come to Hope Valley "protect" Elizabeth, he lectured her, not realizing that he had no right for it. Therefore I suspect that as a husband he would have tried to control her even more. He never seemed curious to learn what she dreamed about, unlike Lucas.

I find it hard to believe that in all the years Nathan was raising Allie, he wouldn't have found some woman to marry. We met them when Allie was already old enough to be largely self-sufficient, so it's easy to forget she was only four when he first got guardianship. But, given his job and also the time period, he would certainly have gotten a lot of urging from all sides to find a nice woman who could help him raise her. We know he traveled to a lot of different places over the years; did no woman ever interest him before Elizabeth?

As for the "protecting," IMO that would not have been unusual for the time period. Even in the '50s/'60s, there were women who did not work outside the home, did not drive or even know how to write checks, because the husband took on the role of "provider" and "protector". Like with anything, I'm sure there were some women who were ok with this, and others who balked.

And in regard to dreams? Sadly, I doubt that many men in that time would have even considered that a woman might have dreams of any sort, aside from marriage and children. In that respect, IMO either Lucas is an unusually perceptive man for his era, or else it's a case of the writers writing a character from a 21st century lens.

On 9/7/2021 at 4:37 PM, Roseanna said:

Also, they either had to move and constant moving wasn't good for Allie.

In the books, Jack/Wynn is constantly being sent to different posts, like every year. It's explained there that the Mounties were allowed a limited time at a place, because it was considered that there was risk of their getting too familiar with the place and people, which could turn into laziness/sloppiness in policing and watching the area.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, SnarkySheep said:

I find it hard to believe that in all the years Nathan was raising Allie, he wouldn't have found some woman to marry. We met them when Allie was already old enough to be largely self-sufficient, so it's easy to forget she was only four when he first got guardianship. But, given his job and also the time period, he would certainly have gotten a lot of urging from all sides to find a nice woman who could help him raise her. We know he traveled to a lot of different places over the years; did no woman ever interest him before Elizabeth?

Maybe Nathan treated them the same as he treated Elizabeth? Between that and his obnoxious niece its no surprise why women aren't beating down the door to marry him. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

Maybe Nathan treated them the same as he treated Elizabeth? Between that and his obnoxious niece its no surprise why women aren't beating down the door to marry him. 

Don't forget, though, in that time period a lot of women married simply because it was the best option - it was hard to get jobs that would let them support themselves/their kids. Remember in the first season, how a number of the mine widows were marrying whoever wanted them? I forget the name, but there was that adolescent boy who was so mad his mom was marrying a new miner, saying they were insulting his dad's memory and all that? And the mom just said he'd understand one day, as the two of them got big-eyed watching him bring food to the house for dinner. No doubt more than one woman along the way would have simply wanted Nathan for the fact of having a secure steady job.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, SnarkySheep said:

Don't forget, though, in that time period a lot of women married simply because it was the best option - it was hard to get jobs that would let them support themselves/their kids. Remember in the first season, how a number of the mine widows were marrying whoever wanted them? I forget the name, but there was that adolescent boy who was so mad his mom was marrying a new miner, saying they were insulting his dad's memory and all that? And the mom just said he'd understand one day, as the two of them got big-eyed watching him bring food to the house for dinner. No doubt more than one woman along the way would have simply wanted Nathan for the fact of having a secure steady job.

Oh, I know. I just find it funny to think that women who met Nathan and Allie at the various places they lived deciding they aren't that desperate to marry. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

13 hours ago, SnarkySheep said:

As for the "protecting," IMO that would not have been unusual for the time period. Even in the '50s/'60s, there were women who did not work outside the home, did not drive or even know how to write checks, because the husband took on the role of "provider" and "protector". Like with anything, I'm sure there were some women who were ok with this, and others who balked.

Well, in the beginning of the show several women lost their husband in the mining accident and they - including Abigail and so far Florence - hadn't needed to marry in order to get a "protector" or "provider". And of course widows with children were exactly catches.

Elizabeth was in the much better position than they: she had her salary as a teacher and a pension from Jack. If those weren't enough, she could have asked help from her family - actually, when she became a widow, any sensible and caring father would have given her the dowry Jack refused to accept.

As for the real history, Varpu Lindström had in her studie about the Finnish-Canadian immigrant women in 1890-1930 shown that many chose rather to work as maids than to marry and became a "slave".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varpu_Lindström

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, SnarkySheep said:

I find it hard to believe that in all the years Nathan was raising Allie, he wouldn't have found some woman to marry. We met them when Allie was already old enough to be largely self-sufficient, so it's easy to forget she was only four when he first got guardianship. But, given his job and also the time period, he would certainly have gotten a lot of urging from all sides to find a nice woman who could help him raise her. We know he traveled to a lot of different places over the years; did no woman ever interest him before Elizabeth?

Actually, it was Nathan with a kid to raise who *had* to marry - or to hire a woman as a housekeeper because men didn't cook nor do any other household chores and eventually it was practical to marry her. (In the same way, a woman couldn't do men's work in the farm and a widow had to hire a hand and eventually it was practical to marry him.)

Not to speak of that Nathan couldn't leave a kid alone at home when he was chasing criminals, so he just couldn't manage without a live-in help. Well, this is a fairy tale!

Edited by Roseanna · Reason: removing a word
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, SnarkySheep said:

And in regard to dreams? Sadly, I doubt that many men in that time would have even considered that a woman might have dreams of any sort, aside from marriage and children. In that respect, IMO either Lucas is an unusually perceptive man for his era, or else it's a case of the writers writing a character from a 21st century lens.

Well, it wasn't common but it *was* a possible. And sometimes dreams were common, so spouses became colleagues or tried together to make the world better. Of course, a wife still had to do all the household chores - or rather, if they were at least lower middle-class, she directed servants.

One of the funny things in this show is that only Elizabeth had a nurse for Little Jack whereas even Rosemary who works full-time and has no servant although Lee certainly could afford one. Before the machines, household chores took much more time than today.     

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, SnarkySheep said:

there was that adolescent boy who was so mad his mom was marrying a new miner, saying they were insulting his dad's memory and all that? And the mom just said he'd understand one day, as the two of them got big-eyed watching him bring food to the house for dinner.

Nowadays, children got a stepmom or -dad after their parents' divorce, but formerly many children lost either or both parent before they were adult.

Also, a couple often lost at least one of their children. Even in the youth novels it was quite usual that a young person died (f.ex. Alcott's Beth).     

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The women would have had more to pick from then the men for sure except in hope valley where there are a lot of women.  But women had choices.  One of my great-grandmothers never remarried after the death of her husband in 1917.  The other one got divorced (I assume papers were filed) in 1918 because she got pregnant while he was away at the war and um.. no finessing that date and then married my great-grandfather in 1920 (not the father), then divorced in the early 1930s and everybody thought she was nuts divorcing a man who had a steady job during the depression (she had her reasons) and remarried within a year to a man who helped her raise her kids and then some grandkids until she died in the 50s. During her brief times single she cooked for the rail road and ran a boarding house so lots of places where she could run into single men and as my grandmother said, "My mother never had trouble finding a man."  The thing is the very poor and the very rich get away with a lot more than the respectable middle class.  Nathan would, though, I think be looking for a wife who fit the respectable and middle class role.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, bybrandy said:

The women would have had more to pick from then the men for sure except in hope valley where there are a lot of women.

Irl there were in Canada much more women than men because so many men were fighting overseas or already died in WW1. It was just the WW1 where millions of British soldiers (including their dominoes and empire) died.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

3 hours ago, bybrandy said:

The thing is the very poor and the very rich get away with a lot more than the respectable middle class.  Nathan would, though, I think be looking for a wife who fit the respectable and middle class role.  

Yes, Nathan seems conservative. He is the type of the man who wants her wife to quit her job and stay at home, because he wants to "protect" her. Also, he can't stand that the others would think that he can't earn enough money to keep a family.

Of course, in this show writers could have made Nathan a "liberal" husband if Elizabeth had chosen him. Or the disagreements would have been only small and temporary.

I didn't like that the there was never any real discussion about the reason of Jesse and Clara's crisis: Jesse could use as he pleased their *common* savings. They seems to have had a common account in the bank but was it only in Jesse's name? It wasn't only a private problem (that Jesse didn't consult his wife) but a problem of law.

I don't know when the married women in Canada had a right to her own salary and her fortune, but it certainly was odd that Elizabeth's father offered Jack her dowry, instead of giving his daughters equally whether they married or not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I have read some fanfiction where Elizabeth chooses Nathan and I just can't understand most of them. It isn't enough that the finale of S8 is written anew. The whole season must be written anew. Nathan should have given chances to *show* his feelings in action, and with that I don't mean saving Elizabeth or Little Jack.

Why on earth did Nathan never ask Elizabeth go riding with him? Before all, when he did go to the land where he planned to buy in order to build a house, why didn't he ask her to ride there with him? Was there really nothing that he could have done to her (Lucas even offered to build book shelves in S7 - a job where he was no good at, but where I believe Nathan would have excelled). 

As for picnics, they didn't need to be "fancy". Simple ones would do if there was the right atmosphere. And for that - sorry Nathan - you simply have to open yourself. Or at least ask Elizabeth questions about her life.

Plus, don't say things like "I know you feel the same", Nathan - you just can't know it. Accept gracefully that a woman has a right to say "no" and show that you understand her fear. (It was understandable that Nathan didn't tell his plan to catch Allie's father, but after he came back, he should have done it for thereby he would have shown Elizabeth that he is capable to deal with situations of these kind - that he isn't just brave and strong but also smart and sly.

And don't sulk! Not coming to the parent meeting with Allie's teacher because she had declined your advances to you was childish - if it wasn't a sly means to get her make a move which made you come to her door in the late evening.

I think it's funny that Nathan told Rosemary about books he had read - why didn't he talk Elizabeth about the subject? Sometimes you reveal your real values when you talk about characters and relationships in books or movies (or your friends' relationship for that matter).

Speaking of that, it was the only time when I had doubts about Lucas's feelings and intentions when he revealed that his favorite novel was Dangerous Liaisons where a rake seduces several women. Not that don't love the movies based on it - I do! Of course the story can be understood also as a warning about loosing one's true love when you are too afraid to recognize and admit it.

Now, Nathan *did* something for Elizabeth in S7: a tree shield engraved "Always do what you are afraid do do". Although it's from Emerson, I beg to differ and the reason is the word "always". Although there are many situations when it's right to win one's fear (like to dare to love again), there are also many situations where fear (or let's say healthy caution) prevents one too take too big risks (f.ex. if you have no experience in hiking, don't begin it alone in Lapland).

There are situations where you must take risks because there is no other way (a Mountie has a duty to save life and catch a criminal) or you want to be develop and use all your talents (sending your manuscript to the publisher), but there are other situations where by taking foolhardy risks you can loose your life or cause others loose their lives for some stupid reason. 

Back to Nathan, the shield was of course a apology for his earlier behavior in the forest. But I wasn't sure that he had learned his lesson.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Further musings about TN's remarks:

- Lucas is "the safe choice": Elizabeth's greatest fear was that loving anew she would experience pain of losing anew. That Nathan is a Mountie of course means that he has a dangerous profession, but Ned's sudden sickness showed, that there is no guarantee about Lucas's long life either. Also, he is a gambler by nature, so he could loose his money, the saloon could be burned etc.

- Lucas is "too suave" and arranges "fancy" dates: well, these *could* mean that he had an ultimate motive to seduce Elizabeth or to use her for his own benefit in some other way. But we have been shown no sign of his sinister motives after S6 when his relationship with criminals was explained. Also, it *could* be that dates were only superfial, but we have seen that their discussions have from the beginning gone deep. 

- Lucas have outwardly "all" but something is missing in their relationship: well, that is a matter where everyone sees in their own way, but could it be that it's also based on one's concept on love? I *could* perhaps have been persuaded that Elizabeth's looks towards Nathan tell about longing, but in that case they were based only on sexual longing, for I couldn't see any other connection between them (besides of course him being a Mountie and her helping him about Allie). Instead, I saw Elizabeth and Lucas to bond in every level (including sexual) and although both had an affluent background, they chose HV and thus have common values. 

If Lucas had a fault, it is the maxim many like: "always put her happiness first". I think that in some relationships the other party gives too much and in the end he/she becomes disappointed at getting too little or nothing from the other. Luckily, Elizabeth begin to correct this unbalance in the final scene in the library.

Also, like Lee realized when Rosemary wasn't glad that he had bought the shop for her, one can't always know for sure what the spouse wants. Plus, Rosemary is a person who wants to win her own goals and not simply being given to her on the silver tray. Luckily, Lucas seems to understand this: he criticized Eliuzabeth's text and helped her find an editor, but it was she who wrote her book and did it many times.       

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Before all, when he did go to the land where he planned to buy in order to build a house, why didn't he ask her to ride there with him? Was there really nothing that he could have done to her (Lucas even offered to build book shelves in S7 - a job where he was no good at, but where I believe Nathan would have excelled). 

I think it's funny that Nathan told Rosemary about books he had read - why didn't he talk Elizabeth about the subject?

For me, the two things above seemed like the writers were trying to inject an actual triangle into this. Like saying:

1) Ooooh, Nathan is serious about settling down because he wants to buy property to build a home;

2) Hey, see! Nathan likes books and reads too - - - it's not just Lucas! 

But how much do you bet both things - Nathan wanting to buy property and his interest in books - gets dropped now that Elizabeth has chosen Lucas?

9 hours ago, Roseanna said:

- Lucas is "too suave" and arranges "fancy" dates: well, these *could* mean that he had an ultimate motive to seduce Elizabeth or to use her for his own benefit in some other way. But we have been shown no sign of his sinister motives after S6 when his relationship with criminals was explained. Also, it *could* be that dates were only superfial, but we have seen that their discussions have from the beginning gone deep. 

     

Well, if this was on Lifetime, yeah, we could maybe see Lucas's motives as superficial and even nefarious. But c'mon - it's Hallmark. Of course there would be no sinister motives involved...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, norcalgal said:

For me, the two things above seemed like the writers were trying to inject an actual triangle into this. Like saying:

1) Ooooh, Nathan is serious about settling down because he wants to buy property to build a home;

2) Hey, see! Nathan likes books and reads too - - - it's not just Lucas! 

But how much do you bet both things - Nathan wanting to buy property and his interest in books - gets dropped now that Elizabeth has chosen Lucas?

1) he dropped the project already after Elizabeth said "I can't"

2) it was too late, Nathan didn't speak to Elizabeth but to Rosemary, his favorite (Alcott) was was old-fashioned (which would fit to Hallmark)   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, norcalgal said:

Well, if this was on Lifetime, yeah, we could maybe see Lucas's motives as superficial and even nefarious. But c'mon - it's Hallmark. Of course there would be no sinister motives involved...

I don't know Hallmark so well - I only look at the character's behavior or some other sign (in S6 there was such a sign but it were explained). 

If there were sinister motives, Lucas should at some point have tried to seduce Elizabeth. Or she should have had so much money that he would have wanted to marry her to get it. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Roseanna said:

If there were sinister motives, Lucas should at some point have tried to seduce Elizabeth. Or she should have had so much money that he would have wanted to marry her to get it. 

Which brings up an interesting point - does Lucas even know who Elizabeth's father is? We've seen people in the past, such as Billy, trying to get to know her because of the Thatcher name. But she has gone by Thornton the whole time Lucas has known her, and also it seems that Lucas is not Canadian (he's always been rather vague about his origins but based on his French and that he visited friends in Louisiana, it seems that he's from that area). So does he know of her family line the way others did?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/13/2021 at 5:58 PM, SnarkySheep said:

Which brings up an interesting point - does Lucas even know who Elizabeth's father is? We've seen people in the past, such as Billy, trying to get to know her because of the Thatcher name. But she has gone by Thornton the whole time Lucas has known her, and also it seems that Lucas is not Canadian (he's always been rather vague about his origins but based on his French and that he visited friends in Louisiana, it seems that he's from that area). So does he know of her family line the way others did?

 

Only the writers know if Lucas knows! 😁

In any case, a fortune hunter would marry a heiress who already has a fortune. If one marries a woman whose father and/or mother is rich, one can't know how long one must wait to get money.

Edited by Roseanna · Reason: removing a letter
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

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

Guest
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...

Customize font-size