S03.E03: Et in Arcadia

[Popples]

20 hours ago, screenaddict said:

I keep thinking that Bertie is a miniature Ossie from Poldark. I obviously spend too much time watching British TV.

 

 

So glad it wasn't just me, but I didn't want to say because I hated Ossie so much.

I did go on IMDb to see if they were related.

[Brattinella]

2 hours ago, Popples said:

So glad it wasn't just me, but I didn't want to say because I hated Ossie so much.

I did go on IMDb to see if they were related.

Ossie was the most loathsome character in recent memory.  Ugh.

[Nolefan]

16 hours ago, Ohmo said:

Agreed. Skerritt and Victoria were not even remotely peers.  When the Chartist woman came before Victoria, Skerritt was the one to say that the Chartist woman couldn't talk to the Queen like that.  To offer an explanation like "I love him" would have been too bold.  Skerritt was required to be restrained in her emotion, and Victoria also knew that she had to maintain the dignified air of the monarch.  I think they both knew of their fondness for the other, but class status being what it was at the time, neither could let their feelings truly show. In another life, they might have been friends, but not in this one.

I kinda thought Victoria’s close friendships with her servants was one of the things about her that made her so different from typical royals. For example, Lehzen her governess, who she treated like her mother. And I thought the show would follow the unorthodox way Victoria treated her servants as a way of laying the groundwork for 

Spoiler

Her future relationships with her servants John Brown and Abdul.

As for Nancy, I have speculation as well

Spoiler

I am getting the feeling she may become a victim of the cholera epidemic. It would be historically inaccurate, but her whole character is. Also, the chef is such a big character in real life. If Nancy dies, he can still go on to become a famous chef.

[Nolefan]

22 hours ago, dubbel zout said:

For the men? Not much, especially if they were of a certain class. The women, of course, suffered much more, since their jezebel siren songs were responsible for luring the poor innocent men to their carnal doom.

If everyone was fairly discreet about it, society just drew a veil and pretended nothing was going on.

No, for the women. A lot of women were used and abused. Yet, this show seems to depict that even the rakish men were thoughtful to women’s feelings (i.e. Palmerston agreeing to back off because Sophie’s heart might get broken and the whole Ernest stuff, when the real Ernest was thought to have given his wife the STD). I know that Sophie’s husband is in the mix, but that character is full on villain, not someone more complicated where the audience might like the character, but dislike his behavior.

[andromeda331]

I really hate the Feodora stuff. Its mostly boring and annoying, and she's practically a cartoon villain. All she needs is a mustache to twirl. I still find it odd that their mother isn't around. It doesn't make sense she wouldn't be spending time with Feodora or wouldn't want to go up to Osborn with her family. 

I didn't really like Joseph going off bathing in the nude. It just didn't seem like something a servant the Queen would do especially when she's home. I don't like him sniffing around the Duchess. Unless he murders her husband its not really interesting.  

I've been a fan of Albert but he is starting to drive me crazy. Him wanting to stay there when it was clear Victoria didn't want to and blaming it on her wanting adoration. I don't really think that's why she wanted to back. She didn't want to leave in the first place and thought she should remain in London while all the stuff with Chartists was going on.

I'm torn on Victoria being angry with him over his parenting of Bertie. I know historically that never happened, Victoria either agreed with her husband or let him do whatever he wanted when it came to parenting and education of their children. Both tried to turn their son into another Albert or some sort of ideal king. Both were really hard on him and Victoria only got worse after her husband died. To make matters worse his older sister was really smart and excelled at her lessons (unfortunately Albert ended up setting the poor girl up for failure by not preparing her at all for her life in Prussia/Germany.). I do agree with her in the show and its nice to hear at least someone saying it. When Albert was going on and on about wanting him to read books and stuff. Its clearly never occurred to him his son might not have an interest in books. Or that it was all too much for a kid that young. Or that he's not a mini-Albert. 

I loved the archery lesson with letters. What a great idea! It looked like Bertie was really learning.

Vicky and Bertie both seem like how they probably were as kids. 

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 2/1/2019 at 9:43 AM, Nolefan said:

In regard to Palmerston and Sophie...I was almost getting interested in that storyline, but then Palmerston backs off? Weird. It is almost like this show doesn’t want to show the men that were historically rakes (example, Ernest) being rakes with real characters in the show (outside of visits to nunneries) and the fallout from their rakish behavior, which I would find interesting. So, now are we supposed to view Palmerston as just misunderstood? Sophie still could of ended up in Joseph’s arms even after a dalliance with Palmerston. Seems like the show is missing some low hanging fruit here.

If Sophie has an affair and is found out, she'll lose all contact with her son, as well as her position, and will be turned out, just like Albert and Ernst's mother was.  It's too great a risk, and she should know that.  Her best hope is to hope to outlive her husband, or at least wait until her son is an adult.  Her husband already has her money, and would probably be thrilled to have an excuse to divorce her and marry someone more appropriate.

[dubbel zout]

9 hours ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

Her husband already has her money, and would probably be thrilled to have an excuse to divorce her and marry someone more appropriate.

He's not going to divorce her. The stigma of divorce was too great for all parties, and it would also be on their son and subsequent generations (at least for a while). 

They'll lead separate lives—or he will—and she'll just have to gut the marriage out and hope if her husband dies first, he hasn't totally poisoned their son against her.

[b2H]

Husband was quite specific in the scene where he asked her if she liked the necklace she was wearing.

Because it was his.

Her position with him was made all too clear in that scene,

[AZChristian]

On 1/28/2019 at 10:11 PM, LittleIggy said:

He doesn’t look anything like Rufus Sewell to me, and I am a huge RS fan.

I didn't think so either . . . but here's a comparison shot of the two of them.  Maybe a bit of resemblance, but not "just like."

 

[Kohola3]

On 2/7/2019 at 9:31 AM, AZChristian said:

I didn't think so either . . . but here's a comparison shot of the two of them.  Maybe a bit of resemblance, but not "just like."

Nope, not seeing the resemblance at all.  But both are gorgeous!

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 2/5/2019 at 10:28 AM, dubbel zout said:

He's not going to divorce her. The stigma of divorce was too great for all parties, and it would also be on their son and subsequent generations (at least for a while). 

They'll lead separate lives—or he will—and she'll just have to gut the marriage out and hope if her husband dies first, he hasn't totally poisoned their son against her.

Perhaps, but remember that Albert's father divorced his mother (in Hanover) for committing adultery, and the scandal did not prevent Albert from marrying the Queen of England!

[Paws]

Very late to the party, but damn the whole episode I thought  Victoria and Palmerston were  going to hate fuck each other, which would be RATHER historically inaccurate so good thing it didn’t go there. 

Edited February 17, 2019 by Paws

[Brattinella]

6 minutes ago, Paws said:

Very late to the party, but damn the whole episode I thought  Victoria and Palmerston were  going to hate fuck each other, which would be RATHER historiaclally inaccurate so good thing it didn’t go there. 

Yes, but it wouldn't be a TOTALLY horrible thing, from an aesthetic POV. :)

[Nolefan]

8 hours ago, Paws said:

Very late to the party, but damn the whole episode I thought  Victoria and Palmerston were  going to hate fuck each other, which would be RATHER historically inaccurate so good thing it didn’t go there. 

Victoria is definitely being shown to have both a physical and even emotional attraction to Lord Palmerston. The whole “I cannot believe you were going to leave without saying goodbye” scene at the carriage with the romantic music playing in the background sealed this for me. I think it is totally historically inaccurate, but Daisy Goodwin is going there. I think this episode also showed that Albert is aware of the attraction (the way the camera shows his face looking at Victoria and Palmerston flirting with each other, especially during the card game). And I think Palmerston knows that he is good at seducing women and is using this in his favor to get Victoria on his side and needle Albert about it (creating a wedge between the two — just like Feodora!). While I believe the show is never going to address this (where Victoria and Albert talk about it), I think this is a big basis for why Albert acts the way he does for the rest of the episode (and beyond). I think Albert is crazy about Victoria and is hurt/jealous by her looking at another man (especially a powerful man) for advice and maybe more. Add to the mix, I think Albert has an underlying fear that Victoria is just like his mother (supposedly Albert mother’s and Victoria have similar personalities!), and look what she did. And the way the show has made Albert almost inept when advising Victoria, it stacks the deck in Palmerston’s favor. It is the Lord Melbourne thing all over again for Albert.

[Scarlett45]

On 2/11/2019 at 10:49 PM, ItCouldBeWorse said:

Perhaps, but remember that Albert's father divorced his mother (in Hanover) for committing adultery, and the scandal did not prevent Albert from marrying the Queen of England!

Yes- if a woman is found to have committed adultery her husband was free to divorce her, the stigma was mostly on her. Society might snicker at him for not being able to control his wife but he would be free to function in society as before, while she would be an outcast. 

[Roseanna]

On ‎1‎/‎28‎/‎2019 at 11:13 PM, Nolefan said:

I thought it was written very clearly that Victoria is needing adoration. Actually, I feel like the show is hitting us over the head about it. The way she was basking in the glow of the crowds cheering for her while she sat alone by the window in her room after the return to Buckingham Palace really cements this to me — she almost had a pathological look on her face. Was it clear that Victoria didn’t want to be at Osborne House? Yes, but sometimes you have to do things to make your spouse (or family) happy (like actually going on vacation and spending quality time with them without letting your work interfere) but (as a recurring theme in this show) sometimes it is unclear when Victoria is acting as the Queen or Albert’s wife. Was Albert being petty and childish when he laid that bit of honesty on her in their bedroom at Osborne? Heck, yes. But, on the other side of the coin, she seemed to come across to me as uninterested in her husband and family.

On ‎1‎/‎28‎/‎2019 at 11:28 PM, Ohmo said:

I think that is Albert's perception.  Victoria is the monarch.  She has seen what has happened in France.  She wants to be as inclusive as possible in matters like the Chartists because she doesn't want the British people to turn on her.  The Isle of Wight is too far away.  Albert sees it as needing adoration.  I think Victoria sees it as good strategy as a monarch.

On ‎1‎/‎28‎/‎2019 at 11:43 PM, Nolefan said:

I agree there is a strategy involved in keeping yourself visible. But, it is a balancing act. It is like being a celebrity. But like a lot of celebrities, too much self promotion while ignoring your family destroys your family. At that point, she better hope her people’s love will fill the hole left in her life when Albert is gone because he is not feeling attended to. 

On ‎1‎/‎28‎/‎2019 at 11:43 PM, iMonrey said:

I'm sure Victoria does crave adoration to some extent but Albert is being just as selfish as Victoria in this instance and it doesn't serve anyone's interest except for Albert's to remain at Osbourne House. It's not good for the monarchy and it doesn't really matter much to the children either - they can spend just as much time with their father in London. So even if both parties are motivated by self interest I still say Albert's is the more selfish one. Victoria's is more practical. 

Victoria said herself in the previous episode that when she inherited the crown, she decided to be loved by her people. I think it's highly significant that she didn't say that she decided to do her duty and serve her people. Cf. George V who was quite astonished how much adoration he got - at the time he had already a long reign behind him.

As for Albert, among all the sychopats he is the only person who can really speak honestly to Victoria about her faults. Cf. Clementine and Winston Churchill.

[Roseanna]

On ‎1‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 8:12 PM, Ohmo said:

This must be a mileage thing because I don't have this sense at all.  Victoria is a monarch, a female monarch in the 1800s in politically unstable Europe.  The whole thing with Osbourne House was politically ill-timed, and I don't know why Albert couldn't see that.  Hanging out at Osbourne House for weeks like Albert wanted would have been utterly tone deaf on Victoria's part.  Away from her people, in an opulent country estate with a recent (and very bloody revolution) having just taken place in France.  Victoria was correct.  She needed to be seen in London as being engaged in matters that affected her country. 

Lazing around at Osbourne House for weeks on end would have been a terrific way to get Victoria, Albert, and the kids all killed if the anti-monarchy sentiment had risen to the level that it did in France.  Also, the reality is, Victoria loves Albert, but he is not the priority.  Britain is the priority.  For Albert to truly give Victoria what she needs, he needs to show that he understands that concept more than he is demonstrating.

 It's really rare that royals have been killed: Charles I of England, Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette and Nicholas II, Alexandra and their chilren. Otherwise, the the monarch just fled or was sent from the country (f.ex. in France in 1830 and 1848 and in 1918 in Germany).  

But lets suppose that the life of Victoria and her family would have in danger by "the anti-monarchist sentiment".  It's in London they could have have been caught by the mob whereas in a distant place like Osborne they would been safe. No mob could have gone there to kill them - even if it had found a ship, Victoria could have sailed away in time.

[Roseanna]

On ‎1‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 3:55 PM, Nolefan said:

I was a little floored that the show went there to the point of Victoria accusing Albert of bullying HER son. Even the fact and fiction stuff that PBS sends on Twitter says that IRL BOTH Victoria and Albert were concerned about Bertie to the extent of being harsh with him. Why on Earth did Daisy Goodwin then choose to make only Albert look like the bad guy and actually have Victoria look like some protecting mama bear?? Sometimes I feel that Daisy has a low key dislike for Prince Albert, which causes her to twist things to always paint him in the most unflattering light possible. And if you read the fact and fiction stuff from PBS, it seems that all the good things that Victoria is shown doing on the show are revealed as fiction (the Chartist storyline, her not liking the Isle of Wight, the ship speech from S2). So Daisy paints Victoria as better than she was, and compares her to real life Albert, which makes Victoria look like some superhero standing up for women’s rights. I LOVE this show, but sometimes....

It's partly due the laws of drama: there must be at least antogonism between two people, if there is no antogonism between them and others, 

[Roseanna]

On ‎1‎/‎30‎/‎2019 at 12:52 AM, Nolefan said:

I would actually argue the opposite. Albert was the first prince consort. He created the role, and I don’t think anyone knew for sure what that role would mean. Whereas, the thing that bothers me about Prince Phillip in  The Crown is that I am left scratching my head as to why he didn’t understand the role when he already had Albert as an example and the knowledge of Prince Albert faced in the role, so I have much less sympathy for Prince Phillip. And I think overall, Prince Albert does tolerate Victoria’s foibles and letting her have her way.

Philip couldn't have Albert as a role model because Albert had power as he read all papers Victoria got from the government and acted as her chief counsellor. Instead, Philip had no official role, wasn't allowed to read state papers in the Red Box and was excluded from Elizabeth's meetings with Prime Minister. 

[EveT]

What I can't figure out is why they have Feodora pronounce "Langenberg" as if it were "Longenburg." You'd think the show's German accent coach would know the difference.

Also, of course, AFAIK Feodora actually never came to England after she was married, but I acknowledge we simply have to suspend disbelief on that score in order to have an evil character for a few episodes.