Downton Abbey: Season 2

[meganbmoore]

I'm not sure, but I think I may hold an unpopular opinion in that I view season one as being much better and much more enjoyable than season two? Maybe not. I've seen mixed comments. Season two has many strong points, but it also takes various POVs and plotlines in directions I don't care for.


In some ways it can best be summed up by "the main POV switches from Mary to Robert." Now, this isn't simply "Mary is my favorite and I don't care for Robert," but, even if you don't care for Mary, I don't think it can be denied that filtering the world with Mary as the entry point highlights the two main themes of the series, which are classism and gender roles and the deconstruction of both. But Robert is another matter. While Mary is both privileged and literally punished by her world for her gender, Robert is simply privileged. In season 1, while I saw and agreed with most of the criticisms of Robert, I also thought he was fairly progressive for a man of his time, so I had a more positive opinion of him than many others did. In season 2, however, Robert has become the extreme of all the worst aspects of men of his time and class, and openly values his male heir, who he's only known for a few years, over his wife and daughters (to the point where he asks his wife if she knows how "stupid and silly" she is for voicing concerns that his concern for Matthew is at Mary's expense, and is causing her pain. She‘s right, not that he cares) Some of this, I think, is deliberate-for example, I'm pretty sure Robert's frustration and obsession about not being able to go to war and instead being told home and "keep men's spirits up" (i.e., "do what we're always telling women to do") was the show saying that he wouldn't have the strngth to be a woman in his world-yet, the show still seems to see him as a sympathetic character and wants us to understand him.


So, I have a lot of criticisms about this season, yet, it's still one of the best things out there right now, or at least, better than quite a bit? Because it's depiction of the war and the social mindset it created (including the gender based double standards-men shouldn't have their son's taken from them but women should smile bravely and not try to keep their men at home, men are FAILURES if they aren't fighting, women should keep spirits up and stay out of danger, etc., even if it also brought in some of the most frustrating aspects of the season) and the way it affected everyone is spot on, and at almost every turn it's almost perfect in it's constant criticism of the male gaze and assumptions of class and privilege at all levels.


Edith: May I just say that this show really needs to do her more justice when it comes to love interests? Boyfriend #1 was sweet, but he flaked on her the second he heard something bad about her without questioning it at all, despite what he was told being completely out of character for Edith. Boyfriend #2 was married. Boyfriend #3 was either her sister's long-lost fiance or a con-artist trying to seduce her and rob her family of everything. Either way, he also took off on her.


But I'm very, very happy that they gave her things to do besides being in her sisters' shadow, and that she started getting recognition for everything she does.


Sybil and Sybil/Branson: I liked Sybil in season 1, bu just...didn't find her very interesting. There's absolutely nothing wrong with her, but that also means there's nothing really challenging about her as a character. I mean, in season one, her greatest hardship was her parents not wanting her to go do dangerous things, and her "flaws" were the kind of fake flaws that are really things that today we think are good things. But I do think this season took her out of the "I want to be a 21st century feminist!" thing they had going in season 1. The problem is that so much of her plot revolved around Branson and their relationship, now, I liked Branson and the potential of Sybil/Branson in the first season, but I came to hate both pretty quickly here. The thing is, every "romantic" scene between them only served to further convince me that Sybil doesn't love Branson. When she says to Mary "I'm not sure if I like him like that. He says I do, but i'm not sure." she's offering up the best possible summary of their relationship ever. He devalues her work as a nurse and desire to find more work because, to him, the ONLY way to prove that she's grown as a person and expanded her views is to marry him. To him, all that matters is that he "wins" over the upperclasses by having an aristocrat ditch everything for him. I mean, I think he actually does love her, but it's an incredibly selfish love that has little to do with her wants and desires. And even when she's talking about running away with him, there's little mention of feelings on her part. Instead, she's talking about doing things and experiencing the world beyond Downton and helping people. I honestly believe that she "decided" he was right because if she started a life her family wouldn't approve of for love instead of a desire to move past them, then she has less reason to feel guilty.


Unfortunately, I think the show genuinely views this as a true and epic starcrossed love story and, despite Sybil being allowed to call Branson on his bull a few times, the show is almost entirely uncritical of most of his behavior, both towards her and otherwise. Also, IMO, he's the most bigoted and classist person on this show. That whole “Well gosh, I wasn’t expecting it, but sometimes you just have to murder children to get the point across, and you should understand that if you have progressive values” bit was the most WTF thing ever.


Anna: Show, I like this woman a lot, but please give her more to do outside of the Bates thing. I disliked him less than last season, but he still bores me incredibly.


Vera: I like her purely because she lives(lived) to mess with with Bates? Also, is it just me, or did she pll a Rebecca de Winter?


Carlisle: Speaking of Rebecca de Winter, I so wish Iain glen had been Maxim in the 90s Rebecca with Emilia Fox. He has far far more charisma and presure than the guy they cast and can be both charming and creepy, sometimes simultaneously. Also, I wouldn't have choked on my Dr. Pepper when people started going on about how attractive he is. Ayway, I enjoy Carlisle? He's creepy and possessive (though I do think that he actually does love Mary, even if he didn't at first) but such a good looming antagonist in the making. Also, I can't help thinking that he had some sort ofthing for Lavinia? I kinda hope Thomas becomes his butler.


Thomas: I found Thomas somewhat intersting in the first season and also classified him as a fun antagonist, but I thought his arc her was very interesting and well done, and also pretty realistic. I especially liked all the scenes where he really does seem to want to make amends and no one is forgetting all the stuff he pulled before. If he continues on this past, he'll join the short list of redemption plots that work for me the waythey're supposed to.


Though, I found it very odd that, aside from the oblique referrence of always being given a hard time for being different at the beginning ofthe season, his homosexuality was completely absent? Not that I think that you have to have a homosexual person in a relationship at all times for it to count, but in season one, I thought the scenes where Pamuk and that one suitor of Mary's used it to blackmail and manipulate him went a long way to explaining why he's the way he is. I mean, he always would have been on the rotten side, IMO, but with that kind of treatment, it'sno wonder he can be such a nasty piece of work.


Daisy: You know, I have no strong feelings for or against Daisy, but I kept wanting to punch people on her behalf the whole season. I also had some of the same problems with William that I did with Branson. Now, unlike Sybil, i think daisy did give William reason to believe she had romantic feelings for him, and if the war hadn't come along, I suspectthat, once she matured, she would have fallen in love with and probably married him. But I don't think William ever stopped to wonder how she felt, he just assumed she felt the same way? And while everyone was right about how his spirits should be kept up, they were completely wrong in forcing her to pretend to be in love with him.
All I have to say is that these women are glorious and perfect in all their snobbish, high handed, big hearted, must-save-everyone-with-noblesse-oblife ways, whether they're quarelling with each other or at each other's throats.


Robert/Jane: Wow. It may not have progressed beyond kisses, but that was even more troubling to me than Pamuk's raping Mary. Unlike Pamuk's orchestrated assault and mental entrapment, I think it was accidental on Robert's fault, but even barring the fact that she was his servant in a world where servants andtheir futures were completely ruled by their employers, all of his actions towards her were those of a man courting a mistress? He takes in a single mother who no one else will employ. He shows her special attention. He makes sure her son is enrolled in a school that will let him move farther than a boy of his class could normally expect. Even if she genuinely liked him (and I'm not sure) she was so deep in his debt even without the cultural context that any consent on her part would be questionable. I'm glad he seems to have realized that (at least to some degree) before it went any further, but still. *shudder*

Mary: Mary has many flaws. If she didn't, I wouldn't like her nearly as much. But, IMO, everything about her is so terribly fascinating, from her relationships with her family and servants to how she approaches relationships with prospective romantic interests to the simple actions she makes every day. Unlike many, I've always thought Mary was a perfectly nice and decent person. She's arrogant, high handed, caustic, presumptuous and has a viper's tongue, but in both seasons, she was also incredibly caring and willing (even eager, at times) to help people who need help, rehardless of their class. The only people she was really awful to were the men thrown at her as potential marriage prospects (who she was perfectly nice to once she wasn't being reminded that her life must revolve around who she marries) and Edith (who, lets face it guys, instigated just as much as Mary did, and gave as good as she took). Everyone else she was perfectly kind to, though in Violet's vein of being incredibly high handed and not always stopping to think before expressing her displeasure. (Which, frankly, was frequently warranted.) In season 2, her potential marriage partner is one completely of her own choosing (and, notably, not the choosing of her family, unlike the others) and she and Sybil are on much better terms. So of course she seems much nicer this season, even though she's really the same.


Matthew and Mary/Matthew/Lavinia: You know, I like Matthew. I like Matthew a lot. As a character, I have almost no problems with him. It's just that the show is so ENAMOURED of him-both in general and becuse he's the main guy, so of course he's great-so I know that if he DOES start doing things that bug me (well, there's that "we killed her Mary" speech which was so WTF, but aside from that...) the show probably won't be very critical over it.


Then there's the triangle. Look I like Mary/Matthew. A lot. I also like Lavinia a lot and loved the few scenes she and Mary had together. I also think that, while Matthew's bringing her to Downton seemed to be a subconscious attempt to prove he was over Mary and that's also what initially prompted his interest, Mtthew genuinely loved Lavinia, though I think it was more in line with the way he loves, say, Sybil and Cora-platonic, comfortable, brotherly. They would have been perfectly content and comfortable together and Mary would have genuinely been happy for them even though she and Matthew would still be suppressing feelings. So, until the last episode, I was fine with the triangle. But then we got to the last episode, and Lavinia literally Dying For The Ship. I mean, do we think Carlisle is going to get killed off to get him out of the way? No. "Dying For The Ship" is incredibly gendered. Men can move on, but women with deep ties of affection and/or obligation have to get killed off so the guy is free and clear to either move on or wallow in angst and won't feel obligated to go to them or whatever.


And you know, Downton glories in emotional manipulation. Ok, I generally like that. While the end of season 1 was frustrating on the Mary/Matthew point and I think it represented some regression for both of them in terms of characterization (I mind less with Mary because for the first time in her life she had the prospect of marrying for no reason but WANTING to and not having to worry about her future or her mother and sisters' future, but he was so "You must answer now because if you don't say yes this instant I'll know you only wanted the secutity!" Which, seriously, is something that SHOULD be a consideration? "All that matters is love!" isn't going to result in long term happiness. I get his panic, but still.) It also made sense, but that was just...needless manipulation to keep the plotline going, and aggravating.


Carson: They should just rename him Hudson and give hima Scotting accent already. Except I liked Hudson more. And how bad is it that, even after ditching Mary when he learned she was going to marry a creeper, he's still a better father to her than her actual father.


Mrs. Hughes and Ethel: I hope Ethel isn't gone. Anyway, I know the popular interpretation of Mrs. Hughes's motives are that she once had to give up a child of her own (shades of Gosford Park? The show does really try to hide it's influences, particularly the original Upstairs, Downstairs) and I think that's a very valid interpretation and won't be at all surprised if that's it, but I can't help but wonder if there was a time she did turn a girl in Ethel's situation away (or did nothing while someone else did) and something bad happened to her?


Also, anyone else find it weird that Robert's sister just disappeared after a bit?