How M/M via DS Non-Ironically Ruined My Life Meme: Life Goes On
"That's done now .... Finished. It's time to move forward."
[Downton Abbey S3/S4 Spoilers Ahead]
Day 21 - How long do you think Mary will be in mourning for Matthew?
Lady Mary Crawley spoke these words to her grandmother, the Dowager Countess, at the beginning of 2x04 in response to Violet's question about the prospect of her marrying Matthew. Mary put on her best pragmatic face in this scene and many people now look at it (and other examples of her pragmatism) and claim it supports their view that Mary above all else is practical and will move on quickly in S4. What they do not allow for, however, is that Mary's speech to her grandmother was just that. Because in actuality, Mary had not moved on; she never did. She never stopped loving Matthew and longing for him, even when she believed he was lost to her forever (and I truly think she accepted that fact at the start of 2x01, but certainly no later than 2x02, when she happened upon Lavinia -- clearly ensconced in domesticity -- at Crawley House). Despite the best of her pragmatism and her (halfhearted) attempt to make the best of it with Carlisle, Lady Mary Crawley's feelings had not changed one iota in four years. ... When it comes to Mary, we must always remember to pay no attention to the things she says.
Now some will say that it is one thing to hold on to someone who is still alive (even when it seems all hope is lost) and quite another to continue to hold on to someone who is gone forever. And perhaps it is not entirely fair to compare Mary's actions and feelings towards Matthew from 1914-1919 with her (would be) actions and feelings post-1921. After all, unresolved, unrequited feelings can bind a person to another -- in almost an obsessive, unhealthy way -- to a greater extent than mutual, reciprocated love and affection. Perhaps. But that really is not my point. My point is Mary's pragmatism is often overblown (in my opinion, to accommodate fans' own projections of what they want her character to be). The fact of the matter is, Mary does not let many people in, but to those she does -- when she does -- she is deeply, deeply attached and loyal. She loved (no, loves) Matthew more than any person she has ever loved. All the pragmatism in the world is not going to make the grieving process anything but the worst, most difficult, most prolonged period of suffering she has ever endured. It is not a perfect parallel (for the reasons acknowledged), but if you believe that the best indicator of future behavior is past behavior, then those years she loved Matthew without hope are tangible cues from canon from which we can extrapolate.
All of this is by way of saying that there are two answers to the question, "How long will Mary be in mourning?" There is the answer I would give if I believed -- taking the foregoing into account -- Julian Fellowes would write a grieving Mary in-character, one who is compatible with the Mary he has shown us in S1-S3 (particularly S2-S3). In which case, I would say she would grieve at least three years (canon time) before getting involved with someone new and it would be four years (more or less) before she would remarry.
Then there is what I, unfortunately, think a jaded (and perhaps slightly embittered) Julian Fellowes will give us in a post-M/M Downton. Based on what we know about the time jump, the casting announcement (for Mary's new love interest), Fellowes' writing pace, the typical pacing of the show, previous bereavement arcs and perhaps most importantly (sadly), Fellowes and company's fears about rates of attrition, I believe Mary's new beau will be introduced mid-season (around 4x06). Now, the real question is, what will happen once he is introduced? Will Mary slowly thaw towards him or will she take to him right away? And more importantly, from my perspective, how fast will the show move next season? I have maintained all along that to me it is not as important how many episodes Mary's grief spans as it is how much time in canon passes. If I were merely concerned about my own feelings as a viewer (and admittedly a devoted shipper), then perhaps I would be more interested in the former. But my real concern is doing justice to Mary, the character. Frankly, it would be less problematic for me to start with a canon jump of 2-3 years and have her meet him in the early episodes (though this is a hypothetical since we know casting is not yet confirmed and they have probably filmed about two episodes already), than it would be to introduce him late in the season but have only 12-18 months gone by. In a recent spot on ITV's The Alan Titchmarsh Show, Elizabeth McGovern indicated that S4's pacing is slow, though she also states that they are in 1923 (which is significantly later than the opener which has been confirmed to pick up six months after Mattew's death [AMD]). Trying to reconcile these bits of information with one another, my best guess is that the new suitor will show up close to the two year mark AMD. If it is a slow acquaintanceship, it may very well be closer to three years before anything explicitly romantic between them occurs (this is assuming Lord Anthony Gillingham is not someone she was already acquainted with, which is plausible given her circle of influence; she likely would have met him during a London Season when she was younger or his family may have been friendly with the Crawleys). If this be the case, it would signify a mourning period which I would find close to acceptable. Otherwise, Mary will either be depicted as moving full speed ahead after a year or so (in canon) -- making her character appear shallow -- or she will be depicted as starting a romance before she is ready. And I believe if Mary learned one lesson from her failed engagement to Carlisle it was how ill-advised it is to get involved on the rebound (whether one is genuinely trying but conflicted or is just pretending). I believe an older and wiser Mary would give herself the space to grieve. (She would also, I believe, use this time primarily to bond with her infant son, another factor which tends to get overlooked in all the speculation over her romantic storyline in S4. How can Mary be the "wonderful mother" we were promised if she is also largely an absentee mother whose energies and screen time are increasingly siphoned away from her son and home and spent instead on Lord Gillingham or her new social life in general?)
So, in trying to ferret out what will happen, I venture that Mary's new love interest will show up mid-season and that anywhere from 1-2 years in Downton time will have passed (hopefully closer to two years).
Day 22 - Do you think Mary will have more children other than Matthew's son?
Well, assuming that Fellowes plans to give Mary the happy ending Dan Stevens denied her (and as much as he loves her character, I have no reason to believe he will not) ... why would she not have more children? So much was made of her vague surgical procedure which hastily dispensed of any fertility issues (which was necessary, I realize, to produce an heir and tie up Matthew's arc as a sperm donor), it is implausible that she would not have more children. Though by the time she is in the position to have another one, she will be closing in on the major fertility drop which occurs in every woman's reproductive cycle. (But I think it is safe to say I am thinking much more seriously about this than Fellowes ever will -- particularly with his known penchant for botching physiological facts! Details, details ...) In any event, I have to agree with eolivet that if and when she does, I think it unlikely that it will be depicted in canon -- because the series will have ended or because Michelle Dockery will have moved on to a real Hollywood career or because Dockery will have dropped to recurring status but will no longer be a series regular. Since Mary's status as a mother to subsequent children will have nothing to do with Downton (the estate), there is no utility in depicting her having future children. In fact, I would argue that fans who loved the show best in its early seasons but who nevertheless decide to stick with Downton would feel cheated by such a storyline since we saw so little of Mary's pregnancy arc when it really mattered (with her first child -- Matthew's child).
And of course all of this brings up the fascinating question that was explored a while back in this post: What is Mary's true attitude towards motherhood? It is difficult to say. We know she wanted children with Matthew. Yes, she felt the need to secure "a dynasty," but she also was "dying to start" a family of her own -- with Matthew. Would she really feel the same about having children with someone else, especially having already experienced motherhood and having to devote herself to fighting for her son's interests and to preparing him to become the next Earl of Grantham? This is one of those questions that I am less certain about; I feel that canon could go in either direction and still be credible (unlike the question of Mary's mourning period, which I do have strong opinions about in terms of showing consistency in Mary's characterization). I guess only time will tell.
[Downton Abbey S3/S4 Spoilers Ahead]
Day 21 - How long do you think Mary will be in mourning for Matthew?
Lady Mary Crawley spoke these words to her grandmother, the Dowager Countess, at the beginning of 2x04 in response to Violet's question about the prospect of her marrying Matthew. Mary put on her best pragmatic face in this scene and many people now look at it (and other examples of her pragmatism) and claim it supports their view that Mary above all else is practical and will move on quickly in S4. What they do not allow for, however, is that Mary's speech to her grandmother was just that. Because in actuality, Mary had not moved on; she never did. She never stopped loving Matthew and longing for him, even when she believed he was lost to her forever (and I truly think she accepted that fact at the start of 2x01, but certainly no later than 2x02, when she happened upon Lavinia -- clearly ensconced in domesticity -- at Crawley House). Despite the best of her pragmatism and her (halfhearted) attempt to make the best of it with Carlisle, Lady Mary Crawley's feelings had not changed one iota in four years. ... When it comes to Mary, we must always remember to pay no attention to the things she says.
Now some will say that it is one thing to hold on to someone who is still alive (even when it seems all hope is lost) and quite another to continue to hold on to someone who is gone forever. And perhaps it is not entirely fair to compare Mary's actions and feelings towards Matthew from 1914-1919 with her (would be) actions and feelings post-1921. After all, unresolved, unrequited feelings can bind a person to another -- in almost an obsessive, unhealthy way -- to a greater extent than mutual, reciprocated love and affection. Perhaps. But that really is not my point. My point is Mary's pragmatism is often overblown (in my opinion, to accommodate fans' own projections of what they want her character to be). The fact of the matter is, Mary does not let many people in, but to those she does -- when she does -- she is deeply, deeply attached and loyal. She loved (no, loves) Matthew more than any person she has ever loved. All the pragmatism in the world is not going to make the grieving process anything but the worst, most difficult, most prolonged period of suffering she has ever endured. It is not a perfect parallel (for the reasons acknowledged), but if you believe that the best indicator of future behavior is past behavior, then those years she loved Matthew without hope are tangible cues from canon from which we can extrapolate.
All of this is by way of saying that there are two answers to the question, "How long will Mary be in mourning?" There is the answer I would give if I believed -- taking the foregoing into account -- Julian Fellowes would write a grieving Mary in-character, one who is compatible with the Mary he has shown us in S1-S3 (particularly S2-S3). In which case, I would say she would grieve at least three years (canon time) before getting involved with someone new and it would be four years (more or less) before she would remarry.
Then there is what I, unfortunately, think a jaded (and perhaps slightly embittered) Julian Fellowes will give us in a post-M/M Downton. Based on what we know about the time jump, the casting announcement (for Mary's new love interest), Fellowes' writing pace, the typical pacing of the show, previous bereavement arcs and perhaps most importantly (sadly), Fellowes and company's fears about rates of attrition, I believe Mary's new beau will be introduced mid-season (around 4x06). Now, the real question is, what will happen once he is introduced? Will Mary slowly thaw towards him or will she take to him right away? And more importantly, from my perspective, how fast will the show move next season? I have maintained all along that to me it is not as important how many episodes Mary's grief spans as it is how much time in canon passes. If I were merely concerned about my own feelings as a viewer (and admittedly a devoted shipper), then perhaps I would be more interested in the former. But my real concern is doing justice to Mary, the character. Frankly, it would be less problematic for me to start with a canon jump of 2-3 years and have her meet him in the early episodes (though this is a hypothetical since we know casting is not yet confirmed and they have probably filmed about two episodes already), than it would be to introduce him late in the season but have only 12-18 months gone by. In a recent spot on ITV's The Alan Titchmarsh Show, Elizabeth McGovern indicated that S4's pacing is slow, though she also states that they are in 1923 (which is significantly later than the opener which has been confirmed to pick up six months after Mattew's death [AMD]). Trying to reconcile these bits of information with one another, my best guess is that the new suitor will show up close to the two year mark AMD. If it is a slow acquaintanceship, it may very well be closer to three years before anything explicitly romantic between them occurs (this is assuming Lord Anthony Gillingham is not someone she was already acquainted with, which is plausible given her circle of influence; she likely would have met him during a London Season when she was younger or his family may have been friendly with the Crawleys). If this be the case, it would signify a mourning period which I would find close to acceptable. Otherwise, Mary will either be depicted as moving full speed ahead after a year or so (in canon) -- making her character appear shallow -- or she will be depicted as starting a romance before she is ready. And I believe if Mary learned one lesson from her failed engagement to Carlisle it was how ill-advised it is to get involved on the rebound (whether one is genuinely trying but conflicted or is just pretending). I believe an older and wiser Mary would give herself the space to grieve. (She would also, I believe, use this time primarily to bond with her infant son, another factor which tends to get overlooked in all the speculation over her romantic storyline in S4. How can Mary be the "wonderful mother" we were promised if she is also largely an absentee mother whose energies and screen time are increasingly siphoned away from her son and home and spent instead on Lord Gillingham or her new social life in general?)
So, in trying to ferret out what will happen, I venture that Mary's new love interest will show up mid-season and that anywhere from 1-2 years in Downton time will have passed (hopefully closer to two years).
Day 22 - Do you think Mary will have more children other than Matthew's son?
Well, assuming that Fellowes plans to give Mary the happy ending Dan Stevens denied her (and as much as he loves her character, I have no reason to believe he will not) ... why would she not have more children? So much was made of her vague surgical procedure which hastily dispensed of any fertility issues (which was necessary, I realize, to produce an heir and tie up Matthew's arc as a sperm donor), it is implausible that she would not have more children. Though by the time she is in the position to have another one, she will be closing in on the major fertility drop which occurs in every woman's reproductive cycle. (But I think it is safe to say I am thinking much more seriously about this than Fellowes ever will -- particularly with his known penchant for botching physiological facts! Details, details ...) In any event, I have to agree with eolivet that if and when she does, I think it unlikely that it will be depicted in canon -- because the series will have ended or because Michelle Dockery will have moved on to a real Hollywood career or because Dockery will have dropped to recurring status but will no longer be a series regular. Since Mary's status as a mother to subsequent children will have nothing to do with Downton (the estate), there is no utility in depicting her having future children. In fact, I would argue that fans who loved the show best in its early seasons but who nevertheless decide to stick with Downton would feel cheated by such a storyline since we saw so little of Mary's pregnancy arc when it really mattered (with her first child -- Matthew's child).
And of course all of this brings up the fascinating question that was explored a while back in this post: What is Mary's true attitude towards motherhood? It is difficult to say. We know she wanted children with Matthew. Yes, she felt the need to secure "a dynasty," but she also was "dying to start" a family of her own -- with Matthew. Would she really feel the same about having children with someone else, especially having already experienced motherhood and having to devote herself to fighting for her son's interests and to preparing him to become the next Earl of Grantham? This is one of those questions that I am less certain about; I feel that canon could go in either direction and still be credible (unlike the question of Mary's mourning period, which I do have strong opinions about in terms of showing consistency in Mary's characterization). I guess only time will tell.