Downton Abbey - Season 2
In which I have at last a favourite character whom I'm rooting for, because Julian Fellowes inadvertendly manages to push every dormant Jacobin bone in my body with his writing for this season. (Note: the season, not the Christmas special, which wasn't on the dvds, so I haven't seen it.)
And no, it's not Branson the chauffeur. Mind you: Branson illustrates something I've been wondering about a few years back, when I marathoned The West Wing. Back then, it occured to me that while you get the occasional sympathetic conservative character written by left-leaning or moderate writers (in WW, Ainsley or Alan Alda's character come especially to mind), I couldn't think of a sympathetic leftist character written by a conservative writer. So ever since I've been wondering what a leftist character intended to be sympathetic but written by a conservative writer would be like. The answer: not written very well, I'm afraid.
It's not even that Branson's politics as defined by the scripts exhaust themselves in commentaries about the Czar and his family designed to showcase his naivete about the Bolshewiks and a few pro Irish independence remarks. It's that after his failed attempt to drench the general, he has nothing else to do for the rest of the season except to pester Sybil and tell her she loves him. (Which already was a turn-off to me when movieverse Wolverine did it to Jean Grey, and has been ever since.) Now if the writing had bothered to show them debating politics (or, well, anything other than his insistence she wants him) I could have bought the relationship as something else than Sybil, as she herself put it, seeing him as her ticket out of the Downton Abbey life, but since it didn't bother, I couldn't.
Not that romance faired particularly well in any direction this season. Bates/Anna stopped reminding me of Persuasion and because gratituious angst because Bates' wife was such an obvious zomg!Evil!plot device. Lavinia while also being an obvious plot device was at least presented as a sympathetic one, and since The Insignificant Other (aka the romantic rivol only there to be disposed of) is one of my least favourite story tropes which makes me immediately sympathize with the Insignificant Other and not the parted lovers, I found the way she was fridged after already having given Matthew his get out of engagement free pass extra gratious. Not to mention that, having liked her scenes with Mary, I was rooting for Mary to decide she was bisexual and start an affair with her.
Speaking of Mary: here's why while liking her I can't share the love fandom at large seems to have for her: she's a parasite. A witty and pretty one, granted, and one far more honest with herself than her father is in similar situations (loved the scene where she reminds him why he married her mother; Mary's open about marrying for money to maintain her life style), and I think it's a shame she wasn't born a few centuries earlier because she'd have made a great Restoration era courtesan and success at the court of Charles II, but, well: she never as much as considers a future that doesn't entail marrying someone to maintain herself. Which compared with her sisters who both find work far more gratifying than idleness is pretty lame.
Though of course this brings me back to the problem of Sybil/Branson, because, well, she doesn't actually need him as a way out. With her nurse qualifications, she could have gone to London or whereever and continued working there. So while I can fanwank that Sybil shows remnants of the period brainwashing that a girl has to get married by her combining Branson & independent life instead of seeing these as two separate things, I still hit the problem of: what's appealing about Branson this season? I liked him last season, but not in s2, where he killed off the remnants of my s1 goodwill by asking Sybil "what work?" I'm not saying this is ooc, btw, because a great many men with otherwise progressive politics had and still have a macho attitude re: marriage and their work versus their s.o.'s work, but it makes me even more baffled that Sybil is supposed to see anything in him other than a ticket out of Downton Abbey which she doesn't really need.
Edith fared better this season than the last, was allowed to be competent, was less patronized and accordingly became less bitter. "Less" is only relatively speaking; if I were Edith, I'd hightail it out of DA anyway as fast as I could.
New character Ethel, by contrast, was given a worse storyline than Gwen whom she was replacing got last season. Gwen last season was the show's proof that ambition wasn't invariably punished or presented negatively by the narrative (can you guess who my new favourite character is yet?), and I'm really glad she was allowed to exit the tale on a high note, having fulfilled her dream. Ethel, by contrast, is relentlessly punished for wanting more than the faithful servant life. She gets a very Victorian illegitimate mother plot, complete with dismissal from service, pregnancy, poverty, cruel treatment by dastardly father of child and even more dastardly grandfather of same, moment of dignity in deciding that Love Of Child is the most important thing. The show is a soap, so a storyline like this was to be expected sooner or later, but the problem is that this season, we have no other example of a servant wanting more and this being presented as a good instead of a bad thing. (In theory, yes, there's Branson, but in practice he's so off putting with his Sybil stalking.)
Surprisingly un-cliché like written, on the other hand, was Daisy's storyline. I felt for Daisy throughout the season. What Mrs. Patmore did to her with the best of intentions was horrible, really horrible, but the difference to this and the storylines I just complained about is that the narrative meant it to be. We weren't meant to root for Daisy to realise that zomg, she does love William!, we were meant to cringe and flinch as Mrs. Patmore guilt tripped her into an impossible situation which grew ever more impossible and claustrophobic. I really liked that after William's death, Daisy was still crystal clear that it had all been a lie, and no, not a good one. Go, Daisy!
The Jane and Robert storyline was an oddity to me in that I found it entirely believable - Robert had been feeling increasingly useless and had thrown a self pity party all through the war, and Jane offered him the chance to be Lord Grantham, admired benefactor again - but still frustrating, as Jane joined the ranks of "let me be noble on your behalf" self negating female characters this season.
Here's whom I found myself emotionally invested in most, though: last season's villains, O'Brien and Thomas. Thomas especially. Having handed over his OMG EVIL!status to Mrs. Bates this season (ha! Mrs. Bates! I only realise now!), Thomas was allowed to be a three dimensional character, and his early war scenes, culminating in the one where he gets his hand shot in order to manage a transfer from France, and his reaction to the suicidal officer were pretty much the only ones on the front which had an emotional reality for me. (One big problem later on was that Matthew had far too many home leaves.) Not that he and O'Brien were suddenly selfless angels; they still carried different grudges. (I.e. O'Brien having the other big guilt trip of the season re: Cora making for complete devotion there but still having it in for Bates, while Thomas was 'eh' about Bates but had still a chip on his shoulder re: Carsons.) I also find their relationship fascinating, not least because I can't quite figure it out. O'Brien isn't quite old enough for Thomas to be her secret love child, but he's still gay and she never behaved as if she was romantically interested in him, either, so I'm stuck with them originally bonding over being the malcontents/outsiders in the devoted servants club. Except that they kept writing to each other for the two years Thomas was in the war which would indicate a friendship deeper than allies by necessity. They have this interesting mixture of helping each other and ruthless honesty towards each other (see: when O'Brien's getting sentimental about the Crawleys due to her Cora guilt trip).
Another thing I find appealing about Thomas is that he's one of nature's inventive survivors - getting himself out of France, getting, with O'Brien's help, the supervising job at the hospital, making himself indespensible at Downton Abbey near the end after his blackmarket scheme fell through - but with the last I'm also back to feeling frustrated with the show again, because the irony of Thomas having to scheme to end up where he started had this unpleasant taste of punishment-for-uppity-servants with it. Not least because Thomas, while having shown some sympathy for William and Matthew due to shared war experiences and in William's case class background, is still the only servant not impressed by or sentinmentally bound to any of the Crawleys. So basically, I ended the season in a curious bind: because Thomas had become the character I'm most interested in and most emotionally invested in, I was on the one hand glad the show didn't write him out, but on the other was immensely frustrated on his behalf with how they let him end up.
...I think I'm rooting for Thomas to become an impresario of a couple with 1920s musicians next. And for Lord Grantham to go broke and having to sell Downton Abbey to one of Cora's American relations, to be played by Kevin Spacey. The relation lets Cora stay but Robert has to earn his living somewhere else. Sir Richard's papers go broke as well which removes Mary's reason for marrying him. Since Matthew is still angsting and working a lot pro bono and Mary really isn't into being a poor lawyer's wife, she becomes Vita Sackville-West's mistress for a while until figuring out Vita expects her to do some gardening. Then she asks Thomas to become her manager instead. Yes.
This entry was originally posted at http://selenak.dreamwidth.org/766249.html. Comment there or here, as you wish.
And no, it's not Branson the chauffeur. Mind you: Branson illustrates something I've been wondering about a few years back, when I marathoned The West Wing. Back then, it occured to me that while you get the occasional sympathetic conservative character written by left-leaning or moderate writers (in WW, Ainsley or Alan Alda's character come especially to mind), I couldn't think of a sympathetic leftist character written by a conservative writer. So ever since I've been wondering what a leftist character intended to be sympathetic but written by a conservative writer would be like. The answer: not written very well, I'm afraid.
It's not even that Branson's politics as defined by the scripts exhaust themselves in commentaries about the Czar and his family designed to showcase his naivete about the Bolshewiks and a few pro Irish independence remarks. It's that after his failed attempt to drench the general, he has nothing else to do for the rest of the season except to pester Sybil and tell her she loves him. (Which already was a turn-off to me when movieverse Wolverine did it to Jean Grey, and has been ever since.) Now if the writing had bothered to show them debating politics (or, well, anything other than his insistence she wants him) I could have bought the relationship as something else than Sybil, as she herself put it, seeing him as her ticket out of the Downton Abbey life, but since it didn't bother, I couldn't.
Not that romance faired particularly well in any direction this season. Bates/Anna stopped reminding me of Persuasion and because gratituious angst because Bates' wife was such an obvious zomg!Evil!plot device. Lavinia while also being an obvious plot device was at least presented as a sympathetic one, and since The Insignificant Other (aka the romantic rivol only there to be disposed of) is one of my least favourite story tropes which makes me immediately sympathize with the Insignificant Other and not the parted lovers, I found the way she was fridged after already having given Matthew his get out of engagement free pass extra gratious. Not to mention that, having liked her scenes with Mary, I was rooting for Mary to decide she was bisexual and start an affair with her.
Speaking of Mary: here's why while liking her I can't share the love fandom at large seems to have for her: she's a parasite. A witty and pretty one, granted, and one far more honest with herself than her father is in similar situations (loved the scene where she reminds him why he married her mother; Mary's open about marrying for money to maintain her life style), and I think it's a shame she wasn't born a few centuries earlier because she'd have made a great Restoration era courtesan and success at the court of Charles II, but, well: she never as much as considers a future that doesn't entail marrying someone to maintain herself. Which compared with her sisters who both find work far more gratifying than idleness is pretty lame.
Though of course this brings me back to the problem of Sybil/Branson, because, well, she doesn't actually need him as a way out. With her nurse qualifications, she could have gone to London or whereever and continued working there. So while I can fanwank that Sybil shows remnants of the period brainwashing that a girl has to get married by her combining Branson & independent life instead of seeing these as two separate things, I still hit the problem of: what's appealing about Branson this season? I liked him last season, but not in s2, where he killed off the remnants of my s1 goodwill by asking Sybil "what work?" I'm not saying this is ooc, btw, because a great many men with otherwise progressive politics had and still have a macho attitude re: marriage and their work versus their s.o.'s work, but it makes me even more baffled that Sybil is supposed to see anything in him other than a ticket out of Downton Abbey which she doesn't really need.
Edith fared better this season than the last, was allowed to be competent, was less patronized and accordingly became less bitter. "Less" is only relatively speaking; if I were Edith, I'd hightail it out of DA anyway as fast as I could.
New character Ethel, by contrast, was given a worse storyline than Gwen whom she was replacing got last season. Gwen last season was the show's proof that ambition wasn't invariably punished or presented negatively by the narrative (can you guess who my new favourite character is yet?), and I'm really glad she was allowed to exit the tale on a high note, having fulfilled her dream. Ethel, by contrast, is relentlessly punished for wanting more than the faithful servant life. She gets a very Victorian illegitimate mother plot, complete with dismissal from service, pregnancy, poverty, cruel treatment by dastardly father of child and even more dastardly grandfather of same, moment of dignity in deciding that Love Of Child is the most important thing. The show is a soap, so a storyline like this was to be expected sooner or later, but the problem is that this season, we have no other example of a servant wanting more and this being presented as a good instead of a bad thing. (In theory, yes, there's Branson, but in practice he's so off putting with his Sybil stalking.)
Surprisingly un-cliché like written, on the other hand, was Daisy's storyline. I felt for Daisy throughout the season. What Mrs. Patmore did to her with the best of intentions was horrible, really horrible, but the difference to this and the storylines I just complained about is that the narrative meant it to be. We weren't meant to root for Daisy to realise that zomg, she does love William!, we were meant to cringe and flinch as Mrs. Patmore guilt tripped her into an impossible situation which grew ever more impossible and claustrophobic. I really liked that after William's death, Daisy was still crystal clear that it had all been a lie, and no, not a good one. Go, Daisy!
The Jane and Robert storyline was an oddity to me in that I found it entirely believable - Robert had been feeling increasingly useless and had thrown a self pity party all through the war, and Jane offered him the chance to be Lord Grantham, admired benefactor again - but still frustrating, as Jane joined the ranks of "let me be noble on your behalf" self negating female characters this season.
Here's whom I found myself emotionally invested in most, though: last season's villains, O'Brien and Thomas. Thomas especially. Having handed over his OMG EVIL!status to Mrs. Bates this season (ha! Mrs. Bates! I only realise now!), Thomas was allowed to be a three dimensional character, and his early war scenes, culminating in the one where he gets his hand shot in order to manage a transfer from France, and his reaction to the suicidal officer were pretty much the only ones on the front which had an emotional reality for me. (One big problem later on was that Matthew had far too many home leaves.) Not that he and O'Brien were suddenly selfless angels; they still carried different grudges. (I.e. O'Brien having the other big guilt trip of the season re: Cora making for complete devotion there but still having it in for Bates, while Thomas was 'eh' about Bates but had still a chip on his shoulder re: Carsons.) I also find their relationship fascinating, not least because I can't quite figure it out. O'Brien isn't quite old enough for Thomas to be her secret love child, but he's still gay and she never behaved as if she was romantically interested in him, either, so I'm stuck with them originally bonding over being the malcontents/outsiders in the devoted servants club. Except that they kept writing to each other for the two years Thomas was in the war which would indicate a friendship deeper than allies by necessity. They have this interesting mixture of helping each other and ruthless honesty towards each other (see: when O'Brien's getting sentimental about the Crawleys due to her Cora guilt trip).
Another thing I find appealing about Thomas is that he's one of nature's inventive survivors - getting himself out of France, getting, with O'Brien's help, the supervising job at the hospital, making himself indespensible at Downton Abbey near the end after his blackmarket scheme fell through - but with the last I'm also back to feeling frustrated with the show again, because the irony of Thomas having to scheme to end up where he started had this unpleasant taste of punishment-for-uppity-servants with it. Not least because Thomas, while having shown some sympathy for William and Matthew due to shared war experiences and in William's case class background, is still the only servant not impressed by or sentinmentally bound to any of the Crawleys. So basically, I ended the season in a curious bind: because Thomas had become the character I'm most interested in and most emotionally invested in, I was on the one hand glad the show didn't write him out, but on the other was immensely frustrated on his behalf with how they let him end up.
...I think I'm rooting for Thomas to become an impresario of a couple with 1920s musicians next. And for Lord Grantham to go broke and having to sell Downton Abbey to one of Cora's American relations, to be played by Kevin Spacey. The relation lets Cora stay but Robert has to earn his living somewhere else. Sir Richard's papers go broke as well which removes Mary's reason for marrying him. Since Matthew is still angsting and working a lot pro bono and Mary really isn't into being a poor lawyer's wife, she becomes Vita Sackville-West's mistress for a while until figuring out Vita expects her to do some gardening. Then she asks Thomas to become her manager instead. Yes.
This entry was originally posted at http://selenak.dreamwidth.org/766249.html. Comment there or here, as you wish.