Isn't it interesting how neither Ethel nor Mrs. Hughes seems to think the major owes anything in justice to his son or to the son's mother whom he has ruined? They would like him to do something, but they're asking him to do it as a favor rather than as the fulfillment of a responsibility.

This is really from Pentimento -- I couldn't figure out how to sign on as myself, so I used my Twitter account. And there is a spoiler alert if you haven't seen the first season.

I don't have TV either. But I watched the whole first season on Netflix -- sometimes, like the women referred to in the article, four episodes one after another -- and pay to download each new episode of the second season on Amazon. And yet I take my addiction with a grain of salt. The show jumped the shark in the third episode or so of season 1. I mean, come on, it's not just the dowager countess who is over the top. It's the entire plot, especially the absurd premise of Lady Mary's dishonor and the subsequent actions both upstairs and downstairs, and all the resulting blackmail in season 2. And Lady Cora's pregnancy too, and the subplot in which everything is really being machinated by the downstairs staff.

But, as I said, I'm an addict. I am mostly in love with the ladies' clothes and the smoldering Irish revolutionary chauffeur, though he is nothing but a caricature. And Lady Mary is a good sort.

Very interesting observations. I'm tied up in meetings most of today so can't add anything at the moment, but will do so later.

Nice to hear from you, Pentimento.

I missed the first season, though I know the big events from it. So I can't compare the new one to it. I probably won't go back and watch season 1, as I'm not all that caught up in it, though I'm definitely enjoying it. I wouldn't say I'm an addict.

Re Ethel and the major: it's basically an old story, of course, but the extremely class-based aspect of his callousness makes it a little different and maybe more shocking to our sensibilities. He's genuinely offended that they keep bothering him and doesn't seem to feel at all guilty. But he probably wouldn't be behaving that way if it were someone of his own class.

I don't care too much about the clothes and interiors.:-) But most of them ladies is very easy on the eyes.

Yes, the thing as a whole is over the top, but I don't think of any single character other than the Countess as being especially that way. Well, maybe evil ex-wife...

Re Lady Sybil and smoldering chauffeur: interesting that two of you mention that, apparently hoping true love will win out, as I'm hoping in this case that class does, for Sybil's sake, because I like her and dislike him. I suspect he's a jerk at heart, and can imagine him beating her one day. I'm vastly more sympathetic to Mary and Matthew.

Yes, Mary has become a much more sympathetic character in just the three episodes I've seen--someone who's actually learned through mistakes and suffering.

I don't think class is a non-issue here, just not so huge and rigid a barrier as it seems to have been then/there.

"I suspect he's pleased at the idea of pulling a fast one on an earl more than he is actually in love with Sybil"

Yes. Moreover, that if he had her some of his contempt for her class might be transferred to her.

I haven't seen Gosford Park so I can't say about that. But the character does approach caricature. It's interesting that the new Upstairs Downstairs has a somewhat similar character, the dominating and acid-tongued mother of the man of the house.

It's definitely not the clothing and class that make it interesting to me. I suspect, though, that the real enthusiasts are predominantly women.

"The truth is neither here nor there. It's the look of the thing that matters." :-)

AMDG

Yes, it was.

Having watched slightly more than an hour of the second season, I was thinking earlier that to me it seems much more like a soap opera than the first season did. There are some things in the first season that were pretty much unbelievable, like Mary's fling with the ambassador, or whatever he was, but for the most part it was more like a miniseries, with a beginning, an end and a progression in the middle--except it didn't end.

AMDG

That would be a good plot twist to throw into the mix--King Tut's curse etc.

Definitely. We just can't help thinking that the world of the time actually looked like those photos. That's why filmmakers signal "1950s" with the look of fading Kodacolor, and why they go for that sepia tone for the early 20th c, and b&w for the '30s and '40s. etc. It's extremely powerful.

Ok, let fly the comments on the most recent episode (Feb 5, return of Patrick). Let's put them in this thread since I already have the spoiler warning on it.

Overall opinion: I won't go quite as far as saying it's jumped the shark but it's definitely gone way into soap opera territory. And it was certainly obvious what was going to happen to Bates's wife. And what will happen to him next week.

Yeah, I thought "oh come on, let's not do that." And similarly about Possible Patrick--a blow on the head, amnesia, another blow on the head and recovery from amnesia.... And especially about "let's kill Vera and set up plenty of circumstantial evidence against Bates."

Do you think this is actually Patrick? I sort of think it is and figure we haven't heard the last of him. Was he present in season 1? I guess he must have been, since I gather Matthew's becoming the heir happened then.

I was thinking "Rachel...Rachel...which character is that?"

Whether it's Patrick or not, I can't believe they're going to pick up and drop that story line so quickly, so I expect to hear more of him. I suppose one argument that it's not is that they wouldn't want to have a major character with that amount of disfigurement. Sad to say, it is difficult to look at him. One thing that I thought indicated either that it's not him or that the writers made a mistake is his Canadian accent having completely replaced his original voice. That doesn't happen that fast or completely.

True. I guess you could wave your hands and say "injury" to explain that, but still--there would be *something* recognizable in the voice, unless the injury was extreme, in which case it wouldn't be perfectly clear as his is.

Why does O'Brien have it in for everyone except Thomas? My daughter's theory is that he is her illegitimate son.

Oh. Love the NYMag quote.

The double-amnesia thing is straight out of opera. I mean opera before Verdi and Wagner, when no one cared about the plot. It just gives the chance to renew the rivalry between Mary and Edith.

Yes. Jumped the shark.

I'm sorry, I like that phrase. Although some people think it's jumped the shark now.

On reflection, I guess I would withdraw the word "total" above. Surely it's still better than Desperate Housewives. But then I've never seen Desperate Housewives. I do basically agree, though.

Naturally. One must know how it turns out (although true soap operas never really "turn out," this can't go on as long as Days of Our Lives or something...I hope).

I've been wondering if a show like this can ever hope not to descend to the soap opera level if it goes on and on to an uncertain end. I've been trying to think how you could do it.

One of the horrible things about soap operas is that you can be sure if a man and woman finally consummate their relationship (which has been going on in dribs and drabs for months), they will certainly break up in short order. The whole soap opera thing revolves around the viewer getting that thrill when "true love" finally wins out, and after that passes, well, they have to go on to the next thrill.

AMDG

Not for me. The fact that I live on a street that has Fonzie as part of its name absolves me from any obligation to allude to him in any other way.

I think I should star in a reality show called Desperate for Sleep Housewives.

AMDG

I think maybe I would just say, "It's just goin' all to hell."

AMDG