Open Letter to Julian Fellowes
[Downton Abbey S3/S4 Spoilers Ahead]
This week, The Powers That Be could not seem to speak with one voice, so I think it is important that we, the Downton fandom, do. Amidst the panic over possible S4 plotlines, I decided to stop gnashing my teeth and do something a bit more productive. ... So I wrote an open letter to Julian Fellowes. A more succinct, abridged version (courtesy of the critical eye of eolivet) appears at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/open-letter-to-julian-fellowes. We could use your support, so if you agree with the sentiments below, please sign the petition and help spread the word on Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook, etc.
***
January 18, 2013
The Rt. Hon. Lord Fellowes of West Stafford DL
c/o Julian Fellowes
Independent Talent Group Ltd.
Oxford House
76 Oxford Street
London W1D 1BS
UK
My Lord:
We are writing as avid fans of Downton Abbey who are disillusioned with the show and the direction in which it seems to be headed in its upcoming fourth series. From recent press interviews, publicity photos and hints/spoilers about future plotlines for certain characters, it appears that in the name of reinventing itself, the show is prepared to sacrifice continuity of narrative and characterization.
Our primary concerns are that future plans for the characters Mary Crawley and Tom Branson will unrealistically involve their pursuing new love interests too quickly (possibly even with each other). We believe introducing a love interest in Series 4 for Mary in particular is a mistake.
It is no secret that Mary Crawley is the central character of the show and that a lot (though certainly not all) of the show’s success is down to the strength of Michelle Dockery’s performance. For three series, she also comprised one half of the show’s central romantic pairing, along with Dan Stevens’ Matthew Crawley, who unfortunately had to be written off the show. (Casting Dockery and Stevens in their roles was a stroke of sheer genius; they had the kind of onscreen magic that comes along in television maybe once in a generation.) For three series, they represented the future of Downton and were the lynchpin to the show’s narrative structure. For three series, viewers were captivated by the “will they, won’t they” romance between the two which culminated in a happy, if too brief, marriage and the birth of their first and only child (and the heir presumptive). You wrote and created a deeply moving love story for the pair, which in our estimation was one of the most sweeping, iconic love stories ever to grace television. We were drawn to their banter, chemistry, sexual tension, friendship and unconditional love. Even the painful moments were a pleasure to watch because we were so sure of their “rightness” and destiny as the future Earl and Countess of Grantham. Tragically, that has all been taken away from us with Matthew’s sudden death.
I think it is ubiquitously acknowledged by Downton viewers that the third series was excessively heavy, though we all realize that you were constrained to make unwanted decisions with the characters and storylines given the defections of two important cast members (Dan Stevens especially). It is understandable that you and the producers would want to move beyond the bleakness of Series 3 and return to the lighter, more optimistic Downton of old. We suspect this motivation is at least partly behind recent comments about introducing new suitors for Mary. The problem is, it is not realistic. You cannot pretend the events of Series 3 did not happen.
Broadly speaking, Matthew’s death signaled a sea change in the Downton universe. The manner in which his death was written and filmed is unlike anything we have seen before on Downton (in style, tone, structure, etc.), where previous tragedies made sense given the moral logic of the narrative. Matthew’s death was not logical or noble; it was brutal, random and senseless (but for the crumbling of the fourth wall). In that respect, it truly spelled the end of a kinder, gentler age. Some have called it the death of innocence, which perhaps is fitting given the setting and historical context. For better or worse, his death bifurcated the show and you must own up to the creative decisions which led to his demise (and for that matter, the heaviness of the third series as a whole).
With respect to Mary specifically, to trivialize her loss by having her move on too quickly is to do a disservice to her character, Matthew’s memory and the continuity of the narrative. Matthew was the love of Mary’s life; for three series you made that crystal clear. It would be inconsistent with her character not to grieve that loss for a significant period of time. (This is a woman, for example, who was not ready to move on in the two plus years between Matthew’s goodbye at the garden party in 1914 and their reconciliation at the benefit concert in 1916, when she learned of his engagement to Lavinia.) We do not expect to see her become an inconsolable wreck of course - except perhaps in her most private moments - because that is not characteristic of Mary either. Rather, we expect to see her adjusting to the new dynamics in the family and, most importantly, being a mother and an advocate for implementing Matthew’s plans for the estate. Thus, if Series 4 picks up in 1922, as Gareth Neame has indicated, it would be unrealistic to introduce a lover or potential spouse in the next series (unless you plan to cover several years as you did in Series 2 and the candidate is introduced in the last episode).
It would also be terribly out of character for Mary to ever fall in love with or consider marrying Tom Branson (as recent statements to the press and publicity photos hint at as a possibility). Mary has softened over the years, and her grief may soften her more, but she will always view the world in a certain way; it goes to the very core of her identity. She still is Lady Mary Crawley. Her support of Tom in the last series is a testament to Mary’s love for Sybil and her child, as well as empathy for someone I believe she feels a sisterly obligation towards. Mary herself, however, would no more consider (or be satisfied with) marrying the former chauffeur than she would cut off her right arm. Under different circumstances, it could be plausible to envision a scenario where she might (in the short term) rebel or turn against her life, her upbringing and the traditions she holds dear because with Matthew’s death, the possibility of fulfilling that role of chatelaine has been snatched away (once again). As it stands, however, she has a son who will (or should) become the future Earl, so she has to protect his interests. In essence, she has to fight for the aristocracy and their way of life. She cannot, on one hand, embrace aristocratic tradition and its trappings and, on the other, defy it by marrying someone who represents the antithesis of it.
In addition, we believe Tom Branson’s marrying another Crawley sister and permanently remaining at Downton does a disservice to his characterization as well. Within the space of a few short months, Tom went from an Irish radical who supported the burning of a noble family’s estate to working to preserve a way of life he abhors. As a practical matter, we understand that he wants to do what is best for his daughter and that being employed as a land agent is preferable to going back to a life of servitude or being arrested or killed in Ireland. To truly embrace Downton as his life’s work, however, is simply not what he would want for himself. Nor is it what Sybil would have wanted (hence her line, “fetch me the matches”). We are not suggesting that Tom cut his ties with the family; they have accepted him and he them. However, happily remaining at Downton - which he would have to do if he and Mary wed - and working for the estate indefinitely, amount to a transformation of his character into someone unrecognizable. (We note, too, that for many of us, the idea of a Mary/Tom pairing is an uncomfortable one because they both loved the same people. Some might even call it “incestuous” - not in the literal sense of course, but in the sense that it is too risky given the dynamics of a close-knit family where they were both romantically involved with other members. It is akin to the idea of not wanting to “poison the well.”)
Please do not misunderstand us. We are not suggesting that Mary and Tom never remarry or find love again. Tom, in fact, has had a year longer than Mary to grieve so perhaps a new love interest for him in the next series - if introduced with care - is not outside the realm of credibility. Even Mary should move on with the passage of time - perhaps in four or five years in Downton time (and preferably not until Series 5 if there is one). We do not want her to be alone for the rest of her life, particularly knowing that in twenty years her son will probably go off to war, just as his father did, and may not return. We simply want to see the next chapter unfold in a way that honors the original narrative vision, the loss of Matthew to the series and to the Crawley family and the beauty of the Matthew/Mary story which can never be outdone or recreated. It is folly to even try. The most we can hope for (and this is more or less true in life as well) is that she will find a second love, which is for most people who remarry, a sadder but wiser love. Having loved Matthew the way she did, it is not possible for her - especially as a more mature woman raising her son - to fall that hard again.
We realize that you may have concerns about viewers leaving the show in Series 4 after all the tragedy of Series 3. We also realize that romance - particularly the excitement of the chase - is part of what you see as a key ingredient to Downton’s success. The romance, however, has to be compelling and believable, not merely convenient (as in “unattached man from Column A” plus “unattached woman from Column B”). A convenient, clichéd romance will not rev up viewers for the next series and, in fact, it will alienate your fan base, those of us who have been Downton’s most ardent supporters. Many of us are on the fence as it is about whether to stick with the show. We assure you that we will not watch future series of Downton if you decide to pair Mary with Tom or if Mary becomes romantically involved with anyone too quickly (certainly no sooner than three years on in Downton time). Maybe this means the show will have to jump ahead a bit chronologically to create that necessary space. We leave the particulars in your capable hands.
Perhaps you feel it is presumptuous of us to write such a letter and perhaps it is. We believe, however, our views are representative of the audience at large. While naturally we have not conducted any empirical studies, we have found that the online comments and reactions of viewers to the possibility of Series 4 romance(s) for Mary are overwhelmingly negative. In addition, one of our ranks conducted an (unscientific) online poll about the prospect of a Mary/Tom romance, and two out of every three participants were against the idea (the polling sample consisted of approximately 100 people). In addition, many have signed this open letter. For your reference, signatures are available for viewing at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/open-letter-to-julian-fellowes (this letter has been blogged, reblogged and “liked” throughout the realms of Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, LiveJournal, etc. and is widely available, with annotations, through these channels as well).
More personally, we also feel that a good part of Downton’s meteoric climb and its elevation into the zeitgeist is due to our activities in promoting the show, both directly and indirectly. In discussing Downton ad nauseam on our blogs and in social media, Downton owes some of its success to our efforts (which are not efforts at all, really, just a deep love for and fascination with the show). The only compensation we expect is to have our concerns heard and validated. Frankly, after what the show put us through in Series 3, we feel entitled to some concessions. Humor us, by all means.
Sincerely yours,
/s/
Downton Abbey Fandom and Community of Bloggers
This week, The Powers That Be could not seem to speak with one voice, so I think it is important that we, the Downton fandom, do. Amidst the panic over possible S4 plotlines, I decided to stop gnashing my teeth and do something a bit more productive. ... So I wrote an open letter to Julian Fellowes. A more succinct, abridged version (courtesy of the critical eye of eolivet) appears at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/open-letter-to-julian-fellowes. We could use your support, so if you agree with the sentiments below, please sign the petition and help spread the word on Tumblr, Twitter, Facebook, etc.
***
January 18, 2013
The Rt. Hon. Lord Fellowes of West Stafford DL
c/o Julian Fellowes
Independent Talent Group Ltd.
Oxford House
76 Oxford Street
London W1D 1BS
UK
My Lord:
We are writing as avid fans of Downton Abbey who are disillusioned with the show and the direction in which it seems to be headed in its upcoming fourth series. From recent press interviews, publicity photos and hints/spoilers about future plotlines for certain characters, it appears that in the name of reinventing itself, the show is prepared to sacrifice continuity of narrative and characterization.
Our primary concerns are that future plans for the characters Mary Crawley and Tom Branson will unrealistically involve their pursuing new love interests too quickly (possibly even with each other). We believe introducing a love interest in Series 4 for Mary in particular is a mistake.
It is no secret that Mary Crawley is the central character of the show and that a lot (though certainly not all) of the show’s success is down to the strength of Michelle Dockery’s performance. For three series, she also comprised one half of the show’s central romantic pairing, along with Dan Stevens’ Matthew Crawley, who unfortunately had to be written off the show. (Casting Dockery and Stevens in their roles was a stroke of sheer genius; they had the kind of onscreen magic that comes along in television maybe once in a generation.) For three series, they represented the future of Downton and were the lynchpin to the show’s narrative structure. For three series, viewers were captivated by the “will they, won’t they” romance between the two which culminated in a happy, if too brief, marriage and the birth of their first and only child (and the heir presumptive). You wrote and created a deeply moving love story for the pair, which in our estimation was one of the most sweeping, iconic love stories ever to grace television. We were drawn to their banter, chemistry, sexual tension, friendship and unconditional love. Even the painful moments were a pleasure to watch because we were so sure of their “rightness” and destiny as the future Earl and Countess of Grantham. Tragically, that has all been taken away from us with Matthew’s sudden death.
I think it is ubiquitously acknowledged by Downton viewers that the third series was excessively heavy, though we all realize that you were constrained to make unwanted decisions with the characters and storylines given the defections of two important cast members (Dan Stevens especially). It is understandable that you and the producers would want to move beyond the bleakness of Series 3 and return to the lighter, more optimistic Downton of old. We suspect this motivation is at least partly behind recent comments about introducing new suitors for Mary. The problem is, it is not realistic. You cannot pretend the events of Series 3 did not happen.
Broadly speaking, Matthew’s death signaled a sea change in the Downton universe. The manner in which his death was written and filmed is unlike anything we have seen before on Downton (in style, tone, structure, etc.), where previous tragedies made sense given the moral logic of the narrative. Matthew’s death was not logical or noble; it was brutal, random and senseless (but for the crumbling of the fourth wall). In that respect, it truly spelled the end of a kinder, gentler age. Some have called it the death of innocence, which perhaps is fitting given the setting and historical context. For better or worse, his death bifurcated the show and you must own up to the creative decisions which led to his demise (and for that matter, the heaviness of the third series as a whole).
With respect to Mary specifically, to trivialize her loss by having her move on too quickly is to do a disservice to her character, Matthew’s memory and the continuity of the narrative. Matthew was the love of Mary’s life; for three series you made that crystal clear. It would be inconsistent with her character not to grieve that loss for a significant period of time. (This is a woman, for example, who was not ready to move on in the two plus years between Matthew’s goodbye at the garden party in 1914 and their reconciliation at the benefit concert in 1916, when she learned of his engagement to Lavinia.) We do not expect to see her become an inconsolable wreck of course - except perhaps in her most private moments - because that is not characteristic of Mary either. Rather, we expect to see her adjusting to the new dynamics in the family and, most importantly, being a mother and an advocate for implementing Matthew’s plans for the estate. Thus, if Series 4 picks up in 1922, as Gareth Neame has indicated, it would be unrealistic to introduce a lover or potential spouse in the next series (unless you plan to cover several years as you did in Series 2 and the candidate is introduced in the last episode).
It would also be terribly out of character for Mary to ever fall in love with or consider marrying Tom Branson (as recent statements to the press and publicity photos hint at as a possibility). Mary has softened over the years, and her grief may soften her more, but she will always view the world in a certain way; it goes to the very core of her identity. She still is Lady Mary Crawley. Her support of Tom in the last series is a testament to Mary’s love for Sybil and her child, as well as empathy for someone I believe she feels a sisterly obligation towards. Mary herself, however, would no more consider (or be satisfied with) marrying the former chauffeur than she would cut off her right arm. Under different circumstances, it could be plausible to envision a scenario where she might (in the short term) rebel or turn against her life, her upbringing and the traditions she holds dear because with Matthew’s death, the possibility of fulfilling that role of chatelaine has been snatched away (once again). As it stands, however, she has a son who will (or should) become the future Earl, so she has to protect his interests. In essence, she has to fight for the aristocracy and their way of life. She cannot, on one hand, embrace aristocratic tradition and its trappings and, on the other, defy it by marrying someone who represents the antithesis of it.
In addition, we believe Tom Branson’s marrying another Crawley sister and permanently remaining at Downton does a disservice to his characterization as well. Within the space of a few short months, Tom went from an Irish radical who supported the burning of a noble family’s estate to working to preserve a way of life he abhors. As a practical matter, we understand that he wants to do what is best for his daughter and that being employed as a land agent is preferable to going back to a life of servitude or being arrested or killed in Ireland. To truly embrace Downton as his life’s work, however, is simply not what he would want for himself. Nor is it what Sybil would have wanted (hence her line, “fetch me the matches”). We are not suggesting that Tom cut his ties with the family; they have accepted him and he them. However, happily remaining at Downton - which he would have to do if he and Mary wed - and working for the estate indefinitely, amount to a transformation of his character into someone unrecognizable. (We note, too, that for many of us, the idea of a Mary/Tom pairing is an uncomfortable one because they both loved the same people. Some might even call it “incestuous” - not in the literal sense of course, but in the sense that it is too risky given the dynamics of a close-knit family where they were both romantically involved with other members. It is akin to the idea of not wanting to “poison the well.”)
Please do not misunderstand us. We are not suggesting that Mary and Tom never remarry or find love again. Tom, in fact, has had a year longer than Mary to grieve so perhaps a new love interest for him in the next series - if introduced with care - is not outside the realm of credibility. Even Mary should move on with the passage of time - perhaps in four or five years in Downton time (and preferably not until Series 5 if there is one). We do not want her to be alone for the rest of her life, particularly knowing that in twenty years her son will probably go off to war, just as his father did, and may not return. We simply want to see the next chapter unfold in a way that honors the original narrative vision, the loss of Matthew to the series and to the Crawley family and the beauty of the Matthew/Mary story which can never be outdone or recreated. It is folly to even try. The most we can hope for (and this is more or less true in life as well) is that she will find a second love, which is for most people who remarry, a sadder but wiser love. Having loved Matthew the way she did, it is not possible for her - especially as a more mature woman raising her son - to fall that hard again.
We realize that you may have concerns about viewers leaving the show in Series 4 after all the tragedy of Series 3. We also realize that romance - particularly the excitement of the chase - is part of what you see as a key ingredient to Downton’s success. The romance, however, has to be compelling and believable, not merely convenient (as in “unattached man from Column A” plus “unattached woman from Column B”). A convenient, clichéd romance will not rev up viewers for the next series and, in fact, it will alienate your fan base, those of us who have been Downton’s most ardent supporters. Many of us are on the fence as it is about whether to stick with the show. We assure you that we will not watch future series of Downton if you decide to pair Mary with Tom or if Mary becomes romantically involved with anyone too quickly (certainly no sooner than three years on in Downton time). Maybe this means the show will have to jump ahead a bit chronologically to create that necessary space. We leave the particulars in your capable hands.
Perhaps you feel it is presumptuous of us to write such a letter and perhaps it is. We believe, however, our views are representative of the audience at large. While naturally we have not conducted any empirical studies, we have found that the online comments and reactions of viewers to the possibility of Series 4 romance(s) for Mary are overwhelmingly negative. In addition, one of our ranks conducted an (unscientific) online poll about the prospect of a Mary/Tom romance, and two out of every three participants were against the idea (the polling sample consisted of approximately 100 people). In addition, many have signed this open letter. For your reference, signatures are available for viewing at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/open-letter-to-julian-fellowes (this letter has been blogged, reblogged and “liked” throughout the realms of Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, LiveJournal, etc. and is widely available, with annotations, through these channels as well).
More personally, we also feel that a good part of Downton’s meteoric climb and its elevation into the zeitgeist is due to our activities in promoting the show, both directly and indirectly. In discussing Downton ad nauseam on our blogs and in social media, Downton owes some of its success to our efforts (which are not efforts at all, really, just a deep love for and fascination with the show). The only compensation we expect is to have our concerns heard and validated. Frankly, after what the show put us through in Series 3, we feel entitled to some concessions. Humor us, by all means.
Sincerely yours,
/s/
Downton Abbey Fandom and Community of Bloggers