S03.E06: A Coburg Quartet

[dubbel zout]

7 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I'm not sure where Feodora or Daisy Goodwin is getting the idea everything would have been great if she'd only married him.

Feodora answered that: She'd have been queen. She's got a giant chip on her shoulder that Victoria won the big prize and she was shuttled off to some minor German backwater. (Fair enough, but also not at all unusual for a woman of her status. There were only so many big crowns available, even back then.)

[Nolefan]

58 minutes ago, dubbel zout said:

Feodora answered that: She'd have been queen. She's got a giant chip on her shoulder that Victoria won the big prize and she was shuttled off to some minor German backwater. (Fair enough, but also not at all unusual for a woman of her status. There were only so many big crowns available, even back then.)

Not to mention that King George was advanced in age by that time. If Foedora had pooped out an heir quickly after marrying him before he kicked the bucket, Feodora’s child would be heir to the throne (instead of Victoria). Feodora would have been Queen mother, and possibly even’the regent to the heir to the throne. And Feodora would not have had to deal with nasty, fat King George most of her life.  So in my opinion, Feodora was really done dirty by Leopold and Victoria’s mother. I don’t get why she is unloading on Victoria, though. I guess she feels like Victoria just forgot about her, that Victoria is a self centered brat, which is how she is winning over Albert. And maybe if Victoria had greeted Feodora with open arms (and bought her some new clothes instead of making her wear Victoria’s hand me downs after seeing Feodora in rags) instead of treating her right off the bat with suspicion and coldness, Feodora might not have treated Victoria this way. Who knows. The show would have been better off showing Feodora as initially nice to Victoria and Victoria being stingy, but instead we got some over the top entrance that smacks of a menacing character’s arrival. The audience was conditioned to hate Feodora right off the bat.

Edited February 19, 2019 by Nolefan

[sarahlee]

On 2/18/2019 at 10:40 AM, TigerLynx said:

What does Victoria see in Albert?  I'm starting to hate him almost as much as I do that viper that Victoria has the misfortune to have as a half-sister.

So very glad I am not the  only one. Albert is an insufferable boor.

[sarahlee]

1 hour ago, dubbel zout said:

Feodora answered that: She'd have been queen. She's got a giant chip on her shoulder that Victoria won the big prize and she was shuttled off to some minor German backwater. (Fair enough, but also not at all unusual for a woman of her status. There were only so many big crowns available, even back then.)

She would have been the Queen until King George IV died. Then, if they had children, she would have been Queen Mother. If they didn't have children, she would still have been behind Victoria. She would never have ruled.

[Nolefan]

46 minutes ago, sarahlee said:

She would have been the Queen until King George IV died. Then, if they had children, she would have been Queen Mother. If they didn't have children, she would still have been behind Victoria. She would never have ruled.

If Feodora had a child, she may have been made regent, like Albert and Victoria’s mother. Then she would have ruled until the child was old enough to rule. Even if not regent, she would have had  all the perks of English royalty, especially as mother to King or Queen. At least a better life than she had in Germany.

Edited February 19, 2019 by Nolefan

[estellasmum]

4 hours ago, Nolefan said:

My guess, totally a guess, but... with all the love being thrown on the Lord Palmerston character right now, I think he is going down in the next episode. Lord Russell foreshadowed it in this episode, when he said that one day he (Lord Russell) will have a smirk on his face when Lord Palmerston finally pushes things too far. I am also guessing Feodora is also going to go down at the same time. Both Victoria and Albert will feel stupid as to how they were manipulated against each other, and Victoria and Albert will be solid again.

I can see that happening, too, and if it does, I'm out. I'm only sticking around this season because Laurence Fox brings the pretty to the show. This show has strayed so far from history,  we might as well get a show where English people do revolt against the crown, and Victoria and Albert are out, and in their place, Lord Pam and Ernst are installed. That way London gets the swinging 60's about a century early. We're just basically watching a soap opera, anyway, so why not?

[Zella]

Another thing that occurred to me this morning is the show is written with the apparent assumption that because Joseph is thumbing his nose at Penge, audiences will root for him. I don't like Penge as a general rule, but he is in the right on this. Besides, Joseph is a terrible employee on many levels. He more than deserves to be fired, and I have a hard time believing he lasted at any large noble house for any length of time.

21 minutes ago, estellasmum said:

This show has strayed so far from history,  we might as well get a show where English people do revolt against the crown, and Victoria and Albert are out, and in their place, Lord Pam and Ernst are installed. That way London gets the swinging 60's about a century early. 

I'd watch the shit out of that show. 

[LiveenLetLive]

3 minutes ago, Zella said:

Besides, Joseph is a terrible employee on many levels.

Clearly he is no Owen Tudor, haha. 

As for Goodwin's projections about Victoria my eyes are spinning out of my head, she loved Albert for obvious reasons--at first because of his physical beauty which always attracted Victoria--so much that she judged her own children harshly in that respect, and second precisely because Albert was a serious man verging on being a tyrant, it is clear that this sort of thing turned Victoria on, she liked the fights and the make up sex, Albert was the father figure she never had.

As for Feo and the whole George 4 thing there are no words, he was a gross old man who probably couldn't have gotten it up at the end of his life, where Godwin picked this story-line out of who knows, probably her backside.

[Kohola3]

8 minutes ago, Zella said:

He more than deserves to be fired, and I have a hard time believing he lasted at any large noble house for any length of time.

And weren't footmen pretty much assigned to one area of the house for certain duties.  This dude is all over the damned place.

[LiveenLetLive]

25 minutes ago, Kohola3 said:

And weren't footmen pretty much assigned to one area of the house for certain duties.  This dude is all over the damned place.

Not only all over the place but always creeping on the Duchess in PUBLIC it is ludicrous. 

[Moxie Cat]

Where was poor Louise during "the naming of the kids"?

[iMonrey]

Perhaps the weirdest thing about this season is the absence of Victoria's mother, especially given the addition of Feodora to the cast. I get the impression we're supposed to assume she is dead, but given the fact that historically she would have still been alive at this point it's interesting neither Victoria nor Feodora has mentioned her. Nor did Leopold. That leads me to believe the show is deliberately ignoring her existence because they know there would be negative criticism to kill her off before her time. And the only way the story with Feodora works is if her mother is out of the picture. Let's face it: The Duchess of Kent would have never allowed Feodora to get this far. So the story only works if there is no mother to meddle in her plans.

[Nolefan]

6 minutes ago, Moxie Cat said:

Where was poor Louise during "the naming of the kids"?

Thought it was a joke about Victoria and Albert having reached the point of having so many kids that they don’t even know when one of their kids are missing.

[Notwisconsin]

On 2/18/2019 at 2:15 PM, izabella said:

They are also ignoring Victoria and Feo's mother!  Shouldn't she be invited to the ball?

I was hoping for that too. When Feo was bitching to Uncle Leopold (whose son and successor was one of the nastier villains of the 19th century), I was thinking "where's the mom? I wanted to see a blow-out between Feo and the Dutchess of Kent soooo bad.  A good old knock-down, drag-out family fight.

[Notwisconsin]

4 hours ago, LiveenLetLive said:

Clearly, he is no Owen Tudor, haha.

 

That would be FUN! Shakespeare meets Forrest Gump. For anyone who doesn't know, which is probably most of you, Owen Tudor was a minor Welsh princeling (the second cousin of Owen Glendower), who became a servant of Henry V and wound up marrying his widow, the Queen.

[Nolefan]

I am still waiting for the biggest mystery of S3 to be resolved — how did the Irish cop hired by Palmerston to seduce Abigail and plant weapons in the Chartist headquarters lose the top part of his finger??

[dargosmydaddy]

9 hours ago, Nolefan said:

Yes, people are hating the Albert character because he is being written to make people hate him. The topper for me was the Bertie cowering in the corner scene at the end. The show places this scene right after Victoria and Albert have their knock down, drag out fight. The show then seems to make it appear that Albert did something to Bertie off screen that was so horrible that the child is cowering in the corner afraid that his father doesn’t love him anymore because he is stupid.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Bertie was upset at the end because he lost his mouse (and maybe the corner he was "cowering" in was the last place he'd seen it?). Which I had issues with for a whole other reason... the mouse got lost at least half a dozen times in the episode (Bertie even appeared to leave it outdoors at one point in the scene where he wished his mother would die) and he always got it back eventually, so I don't know what made this time any different. Also, were pet mice a thing back then? We saw Victoria's extreme aversion to rats in series one-- would she really encourage her son in his love of small rodents? It just seemed like a lazy set-up so Victoria could make her point about love.

1 hour ago, Moxie Cat said:

Where was poor Louise during "the naming of the kids"?

I thought she was introduced first? I want to say they went in reverse age order, minus the baby, but maybe I'm imagining things and they just started with Helena? 

[magdalene]

11 hours ago, Nolefan said:

My guess, totally a guess, but... with all the love being thrown on the Lord Palmerston character right now, I think he is going down in the next episode. Lord Russell foreshadowed it in this episode, when he said that one day he (Lord Russell) will have a smirk on his face when Lord Palmerston finally pushes things too far. I am also guessing Feodora is also going to go down at the same time. Both Victoria and Albert will feel stupid as to how they were manipulated against each other, and Victoria and Albert will be solid again.

Well, if "Palmerston is going down" next episode it doesn't look like he will be down for long - 

Spoiler

he resigned as Foreign Secretary in 1851 but was already back as Home Secretary in 1852.  He outlived Albert and became Prime Minister twice.  I think he is the only Prime Minister to this day to die in office - at the age of 80.

Not exactly a guy who was down and out.

[seacliffsal]

So, I'm probably alone in support of the Duke over Sophie and Joseph.  I was hoping that he would find them together and in a violent outburst end my suffering of having to fast-forward whenever Sophie and Joseph are together.  Sure Joseph, nobody will see you lurking and eavesdropping outside the door-especially in his red and gold outfit.; and I have to wonder how he would have known about the scandal surrounding the Duke's ancestor.  Joseph noted to Chartist character that he doesn't want to stay a servant forever.  Well, if Sophie and the Duke did divorce, he would keep her wealth as women did not get to keep their property/wealth when they married (and she would lose custody of their son).  I am so team Penge in this.  Well, team Duke and Penge I guess...  Just a disclaimer-I would never support the Duke in real life, but as this is obviously fiction...

I guess I don't really understand Feodora's plan.  She hates Victoria and wants to turn Albert against her.  However, the only reason that she has any power or standing at all is because she is the Queen's sister.  It would seem to me that if one wanted power and wealth, one would ensure the strength of the relationship with the person at the base of that power and influence.  Setting Albert against Victoria really only weakens Feodora's position, but I guess that hate and revenge are more important to her.

Loved the Georgian ball.  All of the costumes were fabulous. 

Not sure if I'll watch a season four if there is one as this series is feeling very tedious to me. 

[Moxie Cat]

1 hour ago, dargosmydaddy said:

I thought she was introduced first?

I think it went Alice, Helena, Alfred (Alfie? Alvy? what do they call him?), then Bertie and Vicky, and of course Victoria was holding Arthur. I watched it twice because I was so surprised they actually did a scene naming all the kids, but yet one was inexplicably missing! 

Question for those who know this history better than I: wasn't Balmoral part of their lives by 1850? Or did that come later? I figured it was because of how Bertie always seems to be wearing a kilt, but I'd think that would (or should) consume an entire episode and we haven't seen it yet.

[Twopper]

3 hours ago, iMonrey said:

Perhaps the weirdest thing about this season is the absence of Victoria's mother, especially given the addition of Feodora to the cast. I get the impression we're supposed to assume she is dead, but given the fact that historically she would have still been alive at this point it's interesting neither Victoria nor Feodora has mentioned her. Nor did Leopold. That leads me to believe the show is deliberately ignoring her existence because they know there would be negative criticism to kill her off before her time. And the only way the story with Feodora works is if her mother is out of the picture. Let's face it: The Duchess of Kent would have never allowed Feodora to get this far. So the story only works if there is no mother to meddle in her plans.

This has been driving me crazy.   The mother dies soon after Alfred, so I guess they will bring her back for some real tear-jerking scenes with VIck and Feo united in grief.   Or not.

I was really looking forward to this season, and I guess I will watch it to the bitter end.  Unless it improves I have no interest in another season, although I did want to hang in there until Alfred dies. 

I hated Alfred with his interest in phrenology; in some of the scenes he has seemed rather progressive, and I recall his enthusiasm over steam engines.

I am so over the Duchess and the footman.  Their characters are so blah.   I may hate Feo, but at least she has a personality.

[Tippi]

I find the way the characters (and, in the case of Joseph, the actor) of Feo and Joseph so off-putting that I am sorry when they pop up in a scene.  I was completely taken out of the Joseph/Duchess beach scene by the sight of his blinding white scalp showing through his apparently thinning hair. 

Albert is being written as a martinet dunce, but at least he is still easy on the eyes.  I don't care for the child actor, but was Bertie so mistreated as a child in real life?  If yes, it is quite horrifying.  Reminds me of the future King George VI in the King's Speech.

Why are they so stingy with Ernst appearances? 

[dargosmydaddy]

1 hour ago, Moxie Cat said:

I think it went Alice, Helena, Alfred (Alfie? Alvy? what do they call him?), then Bertie and Vicky, and of course Victoria was holding Arthur. I watched it twice because I was so surprised they actually did a scene naming all the kids, but yet one was inexplicably missing! 

You're right, I went back and watched the scene again, too. At first I thought Arthur was absent as well, and maybe she was in the nursery with him (she's next youngest, right?), but he is there being held by a nursemaid and was the first introduction. Poor Louise.

And according to close captioning, Alfred was "Affie."

[Kohola3]

On 2/18/2019 at 4:39 PM, Kaiju Ballet said:

As for Albert and the phrenology, this is the same dude who brought Mr. Cain (cleverly referenced by Vicky) to handle Bertie.

Phrenology was considered a legitimate science for many years and we know how Albert loves science.  It was taken quite seriously and showed up in literature and novels.  I'm not surprised Albert had Bertie "tested". 

Of course "is it real or is it Memorex"?  Frankly I'm getting a little confused so I'm going to stop thinking this is about Queen Victoria any longer since there is so little that seems historically accurate any longer.

[Brn2bwild]

21 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Feodora is a cartoon villain without a mustache and hates her sister for something that's totally not her fault. But who cares let's ruin Victoria's life. You'd think she'd be trying to destroy Leopold's life or her mother's? How exactly does she think her life would have been so much better if she married George? I assume she's meaning George IV right? What exactly was it about his marriage to Caroline that made her think she wanted that life? The affairs? Horrible treatment? I know Caroline wasn't great either. But he was a crappy husband, father, son, king. I'm not sure where Feodora or Daisy Goodwin is getting the idea everything would have been great if she'd only married him. I really kept waiting for someone to point that out to her. I really thought Leopold would when Feodora brought it up. Or Victoria going off on her how horrible her life was with their mother and Conroy. Where is their mother? She hasn't seen Feodora, she's missed trip to Osborne, Christenings and birth of two more grandchildren. 

Plus, you'd think Victoria's mother would favor a two-fer: marry her pretty older daughter to the old King and possibly produce the heir to the throne, and if she's unsuccessful, the younger daughter, Victoria, would be Queen.  A win-win either way.

ETA: It looks like this whole plot is based a real rumored attraction by George IV.  Even so, rumor is one thing, an actual courtship is another.  Plus, the real Feodora never seemed to regret it.  

Edited February 20, 2019 by Brn2bwild

[Zella]

22 minutes ago, Brn2bwild said:

Plus, you'd think Victoria's mother would favor a two-fer: marry her pretty older daughter to the old King and possibly produce the heir to the throne, and if she's unsuccessful, the younger daughter, Victoria, would be Queen.  A win-win either way.

If I were the conniving royal version of a stage mom, that's what I'd do!

Honestly, I think the character Feodora is the type of person who would always be bitter, so you're damned if you do and damned if you don't with her. If she had gotten her way about marrying the king, I think she'd be bitter about being married off to an old man. At least that's how the actress comes off to me. 

Edited February 20, 2019 by Zella

[Nolefan]

8 hours ago, Kohola3 said:

Phrenology was considered a legitimate science for many years and we know how Albert loves science.  It was taken quite seriously and showed up in literature and novels.  I'm not surprised Albert had Bertie "tested". 

Of course "is it real or is it Memorex"?  Frankly I'm getting a little confused so I'm going to stop thinking this is about Queen Victoria any longer since there is so little that seems historically accurate any longer.

This is another case for me of putting modern sensibilities on past actions. Albert is a monster for believing a renowned medical professional of the time only because Victoria, as unusual this season, is the smart all knowing modern mother who sees this as fake science. Yet, she had no problem believing Dr. Snow, because history proved him to be right. And any faults Victoria has are glamorized. Most adults do not hit people and destroy things in fits of rage when they get angry. And people that do this have some serious anger management issues. Instead of showing Victoria’s anger management issues as an unattractive trait, the show always puts her violent outbursts in the context of Albert acting like a sexist pig. Victoria’s domestic violence is “justified” and even cheered about (PBS tweets about the “slap heard ‘round the world!”) Yes, women stand up and cheer for your feminist warrior! Albert’s real life statement of how he does not want to “get down on Victoria’s level” when she acts this way is twisted by the show writer as a dig about Albert viewing Victoria as a stupid woman, when the statement could have instead been depicted as a husband who is often physically assaulted by his wife telling his wife that he needs to walk away because he does not want his anger from the situation to escalate into him becoming violent against her. But, no, this is all about Albert the sexist pig, cruel husband who “deserves” what he gets from Victoria. Yeah, let’s all hate on Albert. As he stated this episode, “it’s a national pastime.”

[iMonrey]

Quote

I hated Alfred with his interest in phrenology; in some of the scenes he has seemed rather progressive, and I recall his enthusiasm over steam engines.

I assume you mean Albert.

There is an Alfred, it's Lord Alfred, and I hate that he has been reduced to a background character this season after having such an important storyline last season.

[tennisgurl]

I am so tired of watching Victoria and Albert argue lately. Its like all they do! For the last three or four episodes, its just been "Albert says Victoria is crazy, Victoria says Albert doesent respect her" rinse and repeat, over and over. Its like watching some crappy sitcom, except its actually supposed to be a historical drama! Do the writers want us to hope that Victoria and Albert, what, break up? That Victoria will actually be thrilled when Albert dies because Victoria is a Strong Independent Woman That Dont Need No Man? I dont mind them taking some liberties with history to tell a good story, but this isnt even a very good story now. Real life Albert and Victora were so much more interesting than this. It does start to feel like Albert is being thrown under the bus to prop up Victoria, although she isnt coming off as much better. Smacking people and breaking stuff isnt a super great look for anyone, let alone a queen. 

I did think there was something interesting in the public's reaction to pictures of Victoria spending times with her kids. It reminded me a lot of how many female politicians or business women or other high powered women deal with, especially when they have school age children. You almost always hear something like "she cant run for that office, she has to take care of the children, who will take car of the children?!?" from someone, like the public just cant imagine a woman being a parent AND a powerful figure. 

It was cute to see little Bertie and Vicky playing and dancing together, and Palmerston grabbing the mouse and sticking it on his shoulder was adorable and hilarious! At least we got a few fun moments this weeks.

When do Feodora and the Duke run off together so they can cackle evilly on their own somewhere?

[andromeda331]

47 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

I did think there was something interesting in the public's reaction to pictures of Victoria spending times with her kids. It reminded me a lot of how many female politicians or business women or other high powered women deal with, especially when they have school age children. You almost always hear something like "she cant run for that office, she has to take care of the children, who will take car of the children?!?" from someone, like the public just cant imagine a woman being a parent AND a powerful figure. 

I wasn't even thinking that way. Nowadays people love to see the cute pictures of Royal kids and any family pictures. We're used to that. But back then? They've never really had a Queen who was having children (not that poor Anne didn't try with what 17 pregnancies but her last pregnancy and last surviving child died a couple years before she became Queen). The last two Kings all they saw and heard were scandals, affairs, huge debts, and illegitimate children. Its easy to see why they'd be happy to see nice pictures of their Queen and her family. I did like Abigail's and Palmerston's  comments when Victoria was worried what people would think or wouldn't see her as Queen. Seeing her as a mother is something other women can relate to. The idea the Queen gives her baby a bath like they do instead of being distant hands off like they might have thought or assumed. 

[Nolefan]

On 2/19/2019 at 6:06 PM, dargosmydaddy said:

Also, were pet mice a thing back then? We saw Victoria's extreme aversion to rats in series one-- would she really encourage her son in his love of small rodents? It just seemed like a lazy set-up so Victoria could make her point about love.

All I could think of was, “didn’t mice spread the plague?” And you are right, Victoria was shown as having some sort of phobia about rats. Maybe it will be discovered that she got rid of it and is trying to pin the blame on Albert :)

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 2/18/2019 at 2:57 PM, Nolefan said:

Heck, that’s what all of Victoria’s predessors did!!

All of Victoria's predecessors were men and their illegitimate children were just that.  King William, who succeeded George IV, had 12 children by his mistress, but none of them were in line to the throne, which is why Victoria became Queen.  Any credible whiff of adultery on the part of the Queen would lead to a governmental crisis. The arrangement that Palmerston and his wife had was a completely different situation, plus she seems too old to have more children, anyway.

Victoria would never commit adultery.  She is ordained by God to be Queen and lead the Church.  The Church may turn a blind eye to a king having a mistress, but a queen committing adultery is beneath contempt in the eyes of God.

If Sophie becomes pregnant, she may not be able to pass it off as her husband's, since it doesn't seem as though she spends much alone time with him.

On 2/18/2019 at 4:27 PM, Cyranetta said:

I find it quite understandable that Victoria has concerns about how she is perceived, whether on a coin or in a sketch. Since her youth and diminutive stature made it difficult for her upon  her ascension to the crown to be perceived as a monarch by her court, it makes sense to me that her automatic response is to "preserve the image" that best underlines her function as monarch, and one who is also head of the church. It doesn't strike me at all about her purported desire to be worshiped.

Queen Elizabeth I felt that to be a successful leader of her people, she had to be both Queen and King to them.  No husband, no children, no female frailty.

On 2/18/2019 at 2:13 PM, Nolefan said:

As I said, I don’t understand why Victoria isn’t happy that Albert has basically checked out of their marriage.

She loves him.  She has just realized that he no longer loves her, except in the way that he loves their children.

Edited February 21, 2019 by ItCouldBeWorse

[Nolefan]

4 hours ago, ItCouldBeWorse said:

All of Victoria's predecessors were men and their illegitimate children were just that.  King William, who succeeded George IV, had 12 children by his mistress, but none of them were in line to the throne, which is why Victoria became Queen.  Any credible whiff of adultery on the part of the Queen would lead to a governmental crisis. The arrangement that Palmerston and his wife had was a completely different situation, plus she seems too old to have more children, anyway.

Victoria would never commit adultery.  She is ordained by God to be Queen and lead the Church.  The Church may turn a blind eye to a king having a mistress, but a queen committing adultery is beneath contempt in the eyes of God.

If Sophie becomes pregnant, she may not be able to pass it off as her husband's, since it doesn't seem as though she spends much alone time with him.

Queen Elizabeth I felt that to be a successful leader of her people, she had to be both Queen and King to them.  No husband, no children, no female frailty.

She loves him.  She has just realized that he no longer loves her, except in the way that he loves their children.

My point in regard to Victoria and affairs, I agree that she may have been held to a double standard like all the women of the time, but who knows?? She was also the Queen, so maybe no one would dare say anything? I agree that the reason she is unhappy is because he just realized his feelings for her have changed (although the actors playing Albert and Victoria said in the PBS interview short, that while Victoria and Albert are going through the worst rough patch in their marriage, they are still deeply in love — l love that they both seem to really care about their characters!). I guess my statement has more to do with, if Victoria wants Albert “to love her the way he used to” maybe she needs to do some real soul searching to determine what went wrong. I know this is the part where a lot of people are going to start attacking me for even mentioning that a woman needs to do anything to please/keep her man, but from a married person’s standpoint that is what I think needs to be done. I think Albert needs to do some soul searching himself as to what went wrong. There are pionts in your marriage where both husbands and wives need to look at their partner and look at their own behavior and decide if the other person is “worth” making some changes and/or, maybe more importantly, giving some forgiveness for shortcomings that each have. I think Victoria and Albert are at this point. Her behavior (and his behavior) is not working. Victoria seemed to know this already, she felt things were different. Albert has confirmed to her that he has felt things are not the same, either. Now, the problem has voiced between the two, and now there is no more pretending that everything is alright. If Victoria loves Albert, the question now becomes what is she willing to do to get that feeling back? And Albert will have to decide the same question. Just hope that Victoria doesn’t get “judged” by other women as not being a “real” woman for any changes she may be willing to make. If she doesn’t love Albert, then she doesn’t need to do anything to work on the relationship. Just don’t agree with some of the sentiment out there that Victoria had no “choice” in her relationship with Albert, and she was forced to stay in some loveless marriage with her German tyrant. She was Queen. She held most of the cards with regard to Albert.

Edited February 21, 2019 by Nolefan

[TigerLynx]

Victoria has tried to talk to Albert, and he dismisses anything she says.  It's difficult to work on the relationship when one partner won't listen.  Not saying Victoria is right about everything, but she has made more of an effort to try and talk to Albert.  Whereas, when Victoria's starts asking questions, or tries to talk to him, Albert walks away, interrupts, or flat out won't listen to anything she says.  Victoria's penchant for throwing things isn't helping either.  However, if Victoria ever stops losing her temper, and starts treating Albert with icy contempt, then he might want to worry.  That is usually a sign that not only is the person not interested in fighting, they also aren't interested in fighting for or putting effort into making the relationship work anymore.

Queen Elizabeth I had a bird's eye view of exactly how lousy marriage was for women of her time, even noble or royal born women.

Edited February 22, 2019 by TigerLynx

[Nolefan]

25 minutes ago, TigerLynx said:

Victoria has tried to talk to Albert, and he dismisses anything she says.  It's difficult to work on the relationship when one partner won't listen.  Not saying Victoria is right about everything, but she has made more of an effort to try and talk to Albert.  Whereas, when Victoria's starts asking questions, or tries to talk to him, Albert walks away, interrupts, or flat out won't listen to anything she says.  Victoria's penchant for throwing things isn't helping either.  However, if Victoria ever stops losing her temper, and starts treating Albert with icy contempt, then he might want to worry.  That is usually a sign that not only is the person not interested in fighting, they also aren't interested in fighting for or putting effort into making the relationship work anymore.

Queen Elizabeth I had a bird's eye view of exactly how lousy marriage was for women of her time, even noble or royal born women.

Actually, I think both listen, they just totally disagree with what the other person says. When the disagree, Victoria starts either yelling or throwing things, and Albert either shuts down or walks out. They both seem to have become talking pieces for the person the other person hates - Victoria for Palmerston and Albert for Feodora. And both Feodora and Palmerston are manipulating them for their advantage (all these scenes between Feodora and Palmerston are evidence of this). Yes, both Feodora and Palmerston are just highlighting the fault lines already existing in their marriage, but I think if they can get on the same side again (protecting and standing up for each other), they will be in a lot better place. 

[Calvada]

On ‎2‎/‎19‎/‎2019 at 7:09 PM, Moxie Cat said:

Question for those who know this history better than I: wasn't Balmoral part of their lives by 1850? Or did that come later? I figured it was because of how Bertie always seems to be wearing a kilt, but I'd think that would (or should) consume an entire episode and we haven't seen it yet.

Victoria and Albert acquired Balmoral in 1848, first leasing it, then purchasing it outright in 1852.  The house on the property was considered too small, so a new one was built, completed in 1856.  They also purchased the neighboring estate, Birkhall,  The estate now totals about 50,000 acres.  

[floridamom]

Frankly, I'm disappointed in this series. I thought I was going to watch a historically accurate show about Queen V's life; not a fictionalized version. I'm chugging along anyway this season hoping that things get better.

[Dirtybubble]

I agree with previous posters about the footman and the duchess relationship = zzzzzzzzzzzzz

LAWD it is boring!  I can't even remember the character's names and it's almost the end of the season.  It would be more compelling if they had a more developed story.  We know NOTHING about these 2 people than the standard soap opera rich girl/poor boy story line.  Good grief it is so dull and cliche'.

[Possum]

At this point, Laurence Fox as Lord Palmerston is the only reason I keep watching.  All of this bickering between Victoria and Albert isn't entertaining.  I've liked Albert only in rare moments anyway, and he is becoming more insufferable with each episode.  Plus, there's too much focus on the kids.  I realize they had more than their fair share of little ones and they have to be a part of the show.  However, too much focus on kids makes this less of an adult drama, IMHO.  Some of the more interesting characters are gone this season, such as Diana Rigg's Duchess.  Her daughter was set to marry Lord Alfred and although we see him, there is no sign of her.  Did I miss something?  They're also really light on servants now, and I'm bummed with what they did with Skerrett.  I know, I sound like such a complainer.  But at least Fox as Palmerston keeps me watching, and I only hope they bring his wife on more.

[Dirtybubble]

3 hours ago, Possum said:

At this point, Laurence Fox as Lord Palmerston is the only reason I keep watching.  All of this bickering between Victoria and Albert isn't entertaining.  I've liked Albert only in rare moments anyway, and he is becoming more insufferable with each episode.  Plus, there's too much focus on the kids.  I realize they had more than their fair share of little ones and they have to be a part of the show.  However, too much focus on kids makes this less of an adult drama, IMHO.  Some of the more interesting characters are gone this season, such as Diana Rigg's Duchess.  Her daughter was set to marry Lord Alfred and although we see him, there is no sign of her.  Did I miss something?  They're also really light on servants now, and I'm bummed with what they did with Skerrett.  I know, I sound like such a complainer.  But at least Fox as Palmerston keeps me watching, and I only hope they bring his wife on more.

IKR?!  It's like she never existed!  If the actress didn't/couldn't come back next season that's fine but please explain why she is all of sudden not here.  And please don't neuter your interesting characters.  Lord Alfred had such a big part in S2 and now he's reduced to following Prince Albert around like a puppy dog doing literally NOTHING!  Gah this pisses me off! 

I hate to keep comparing this show to Downton Abbey BUT Julian Fellowes is a genius at keeping a consistent story line going with his characters

Edited February 22, 2019 by Dirtybubble

[Bunnyette]

On 2/19/2019 at 4:47 PM, iMonrey said:

Perhaps the weirdest thing about this season is the absence of Victoria's mother, especially given the addition of Feodora to the cast. I get the impression we're supposed to assume she is dead, but given the fact that historically she would have still been alive at this point it's interesting neither Victoria nor Feodora has mentioned her. Nor did Leopold. That leads me to believe the show is deliberately ignoring her existence because they know there would be negative criticism to kill her off before her time. And the only way the story with Feodora works is if her mother is out of the picture. Let's face it: The Duchess of Kent would have never allowed Feodora to get this far. So the story only works if there is no mother to meddle in her plans.

Victoria’s mother didn’t die until after Albert...so in reality, Feo would not be hanging out. But then we are in Godwin reality 

11 hours ago, floridamom said:

Frankly, I'm disappointed in this series. I thought I was going to watch a historically accurate show about Queen V's life; not a fictionalized version. I'm chugging along anyway this season hoping that things get better.

Me too!  I’m a huge Victoria fan and hate this fake history!

[andromeda331]

1 hour ago, Bunnyette said:

Victoria’s mother didn’t die until after Albert...so in reality, Feo would not be hanging out. But then we are in Godwin reality 

Me too!  I’m a huge Victoria fan and hate this fake history!

That's right Victoria's mother died March 1861 months before Albert died. Her mourning of her mother was similar to later with Albert.

[TigerLynx]

14 hours ago, floridamom said:

Frankly, I'm disappointed in this series. I thought I was going to watch a historically accurate show about Queen V's life; not a fictionalized version. I'm chugging along anyway this season hoping that things get better.

This.  If they wanted to do a fictional Victorian era soap opera, then don't pretend the show is about real people who actually lived, and whose history people know.

Victoria didn't have to marry Albert, but her choices were limited.  She wanted out from under her mother's thumb, and marriage was one way to do that.  Of course, taking that route opens up a whole new can of worms.

I agree with others who are enjoying Palmerston.  The actor seems to be having a good time to.

[LilWharveyGal]

On 2/18/2019 at 5:12 AM, Haleth said:

I usually dvr the show and watch later, but I did watch in real time last night since the title made me think Ernst would make an appearance.  Dang it.

On 2/18/2019 at 8:32 AM, magdalene said:

I too thought Ernst was going to show up because of the episode title - dang it.  There are only two episodes left and I doubt he will make an appearance this season.  Which sucks for me as an Ernst lover...

On 2/18/2019 at 7:21 PM, Zella said:

I am basically hatewatching at this point. Oh and Ernst watching.

On 2/19/2019 at 5:52 PM, Tippi said:

Why are they so stingy with Ernst appearances? 

LOL, I'm with y'all.  And if someone had told me during Pillars Of The Earth or The Borgias that someday I'd actually hope for a David Oakes appearance, I'd have laughed my head off.

[izabella]

4 hours ago, TigerLynx said:

This.  If they wanted to do a fictional Victorian era soap opera, then don't pretend the show is about real people who actually lived, and whose history people know.

I wish they had done that instead.  It would be a lot less limiting in terms of characters and story options. 

[Nolefan]

16 hours ago, TigerLynx said:

I agree with others who are enjoying Palmerston.  The actor seems to be having a good time to.

I see a lot of posts about people enjoying Palmerston, but he sees like the most underutilized character of the season. Maybe this will be remedied in the next episode, but after a good introduction as a possible foil for Victoria, all his characters has done is “explain” everything to Victoria so that she can listen to what he tells her to do. The smack talk with Feodora was good for a couple of episodes, but it is now just repetitive. And while the show keeps trying to tell us he is some “bad boy,” so far his current actions make him seem kinda boring to me — he is Victoria’s new bestie (and to show that while Victoria has been Queen for 10 years, she still cannot figure out how to anything useless there is a man guiding her in making decisions, unless of course it is Albert, then it’s the patriarchal system!!). While at first I thought this show may explore some real flirtation between Victoria and Pam, looks like I was wrong there. I think the show really wasted an opportunity with Sophie/Palmerston. Instead they added an extra character of Joseph, who is undeveloped and who just takes up Palmerston’s screen time. I was about to say that I hope that Emily Palmerston shows up, but really what is left for her character to do now that we all know she is coolz with Lord Palmerston’s “collection?”

Edited February 23, 2019 by Nolefan

[TigerLynx]

1 hour ago, Nolefan said:

He is Victoria’s new bestie (and to show that while Victoria has been Queen for 10 years, she still cannot figure out how to anything useless there is a man guiding her in making decisions, unless of course it is Albert, then it’s the patriarchal system!).

It was a patriarchal system.  That's why Victoria could not live on her own without her mother or another chaperone until she married.  It's why Victoria had to go through that stupid church ceremony after she had a child.

[LiveenLetLive]

On 2/22/2019 at 7:37 PM, LilWharveyGal said:

LOL, I'm with y'all.  And if someone had told me during Pillars Of The Earth or The Borgias that someday I'd actually hope for a David Oakes appearance, I'd have laughed my head off.

I never watched any show he has been in before, but I was re-watching a Henry 8 BBC doc tonight from 2009 in which he appears as Cardinal Wolsey's secretary, and DAMN has he grown into one fine man--cute as a guy in his 20's, I wouldn't give him a second look, but as Ernst and with that adorable German accent, hubba hubba, LOL. 

Edited February 24, 2019 by LiveenLetLive

[Ilovepie]

Add me to the list of people hate watching. I think it's pretty funny the way Albert treats Victoria as if she is stupid, but let's just recap all the ways Victoria showed she is smarter than everyone else: The Chartists, Cholera, the abusive tutor, and this week, she solved the mystery of who sold the etchings, as well as decrying the phrenologist (even though that hadn't been proved yet, but still) .......if anything, Victoria is approaching God-like omniscience. It's absolutely ridiculous.

I really wished when the sister waxed poetic about how wonderful Kensington was that Victoria, had been like, "Oh really? You loved Kensington? Here's a carriage that will transport you there; you may leave us." And the sooner the better as far as I am concerned.

I am now fast forwarding through the Duchess and Joseph's stupid affair. I do not care about them. At. All.

[Latverian Diplomat]

On 2/18/2019 at 12:14 AM, magdalene said:

From what I recall reading about the period hygiene was rather spotty during Georgian times and head lice found a comfortable home underneath those elaborate white wigs.

Wigs helped with the lice problem though. They were easy to delouse, and to properly wear a wig, people shaved off their real hair.

http://mentalfloss.com/article/31056/why-did-people-wear-powdered-wigs