|
#46 | |||
Extreme Fan
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,495
|
Quote:
I wonder how many more chances Thomas will get, it's got to the point where they have to come up with more ways for him to blackmail or bully someone, and he's found another victim in Baxter, I just find the whole thing tiresome now, and so one-dimensional, time for him to go. |
|||
|
#47 | |||
New Fan
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 72
|
Hello Northbound
I read your posts and often agree. But I have to disagree here about Bunting. You see I don't think she was insulting Robert if you listen to what she said exactly. She was saying that he ,Robert would be a good advocate for the Memorial cause since he agrees with everything it stood for(although apologizing after Carson spoke up would bolster my case a little more). She just came off as more tactless and not knowing how to 'finesse' her views in such a strongly conservative setting - but not maliciously rude. |
|||
|
#48 | |||
Extreme Fan
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,267
|
Quote:
I think what she was saying (and Tom too) was that England paid a huge price in blood and treasure for WWI, and it was not worth it. It gained them nothing. History pretty much agrees 100% with her, and even by 1924 people did. People lost everything; sons, husbands, dynasties. The country was bankrupted by it. And she has paid a price too. If not for the war (which she did not get to approve, since she couldn't vote) there would not be a huge man shortage and she might not be left a spinster. It has hurt her personally just as it did other people. Now, I don't think the war memorial was "condoning" the war: just honoring the sacrifice of those who died. So that was the wrong target for her criticism. It's kind of like with the Iraq War: just because a lot of people were against it doesn't mean they didn't support the troops. Not at all. So I think their opinion was valid and frankly correct, as far as the war not being worth it. But that's a separate matter from the memorial, which is to honor the soldiers and not the war itself. My biggest problem was what she said to Rose's friend who was just being nice, and her nasty crack about Robert not being asked to head the memorial committee. That was making it personal, which is different from criticizing the war. But on the other hand, Robert did not just shut down their opinions about the memorial: he shut down their opinion about the war itself. And he said they were not "allowed" to hold that opinion, which is ridiculous. It was a commonly held opinion even then. Even he had asked "what was it all for?" right after it ended. He was shutting down all discussion that did not validate his views, which is condescending and intolerant. God forbid someone should disagree with His Lordship! He can't and should not tell people what to think. She was being too pushy and confrontational about it, but Tom wasn't. Robert should not have responded by telling them both to STFU. He should have found another way to diffuse the bomb, a way that wasn't so patronizing and controlling. Last edited by HarshBench; 09-25-2014 at 01:06 PM |
|||
|
#49 | |||
Loyal Fan
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,398
|
Quote:
I think that was cruel, to expose to Robert's guests, that he's not wanted from the people of the village. I also found her comment about the memorial being a "waste of money" incredibly rude and unfeeling.There were people sitting at the table who fought in the war and who saw their camerades die (like Tony or also like Jimmy or Thomas). And she just shruggs it off and says a memorial for those who died is unnecessary? Then her comment to the ninnyhead that is Rose's friend. Yes, the friend is not very smart and her giggling about her own stupidity is stupid, but does Sarah have to embarrass her deliberately? I thought that was cruel, too. She is saracstic all the time. When Edith says at the school that they have to leave because of the "gong", she's mocking them for being "ruled by the gong". Yes again. It is a bit silly that they have to change for dinner every evening etc, but why is it her concern? Why does she have to mock people who are nothing but friendly to her? Even when she goes down to the servants (which IMO was a request solely made to provoke Robert further), the first thing she does when she is downstairs: She mocks the work of Baxter and Anna who are preparing the breakfast trays. Again a sarcastic, needling comment. No, she is doing it on purpose, not just because she is not used to the company. She knows very well how to be polite, but she doesn't want to. |
|||
|
#50 | |||
Extreme Fan
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,267
|
I thought she was very rude EXCEPT for when she said that the war had been too costly in both lives and money. And Tom agreed with her, because there was a very strong argument to be made for that view. Again, history has confirmed it and even in 1924 it was a widely held one. The new PM, Ramsay MacDonald, had said: "War is not murder, it is suicide." And in the case of WWI, it was.
What happened was she set Robert off by how she talked about the memorial, then when the subject turned to the war itself (and Tom supported her position) he couldn't change course. He was already angry. My biggest problem was that he shut down Tom's (very valid) opinion even though Tom had not been rude at all. And he said Tom had to "answer for" his guest, making him guilty by association just because he agreed with her about the war (not the memorial). Not to mention had assumed that he had fooled around with her at the house even though Tom had explained to him exactly what happened. Tom didn't invite Sarah to the dinner and Robert knew that. She wasn't HIS guest. But it wasn't wrong for Tom to support her at least as far as he DID agree with her. I bet Tom gets sick and tired of sitting at that table feeling like he can't express his views without getting snide remarks or looks from Robert, Violet and even Carson. He wasn't "endorsing" her rudeness. The important thing was that he spoke firmly but diplomatically. HE wasn't rude so he should not have been accused in such a way. Robert was very unfair to Tom and didn't behave as "gentlemen" were supposed to behave. That wasn't proper etiquette: you're supposed to maintain composure even when someone else is being difficult. Otherwise, you're no better than she is. Last edited by HarshBench; 09-25-2014 at 02:04 PM |
|||
|
#51 | |||
Loyal Fan
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,398
|
But Tom spoke only about the war and not about the memorial. Sarah went on that a memorial was a "waste of money" and a reminder of a senseless war. I don't agree with her there, even though she IS right about the war.
About Robert shutting Tom down: It was not the right place to discuss politics and that was why Tom apologized later. Not for his opinion, just for the chosen moment. Robert tried to lighten the mood right after it though, but then Bunting stepped in again. |
|||
|
#52 | |||
New Fan
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 72
|
She did make a point which I agree with about if it had been a Memorial Service, and that it would be more beneficial. I don't think anyone would quarrel with that. The issue about war monuments or memorials is really subject to different views - a hateful reminder of waste? or a tribute to the war dead ( kind of like Bush erecting a monument about the Iraq war. Do you think that would invite emotional responses here in the US? around dinner tables? you betcha!)
Yes, she was condescending and snobbish in an opposite way - kind of like the way we can get when we go into a room preparing to dislike everyone and not let them one up us. But she just comes across as incredibly confident about her views and unapologetic about them. She single-handedly brought the long silence at the dinner table of about 20 guests! You have to admire that. |
|||
|
#53 | |||
New Fan
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 72
|
Ok I have been reading too many novels about feisty females but truly I don't dislike her.
|
|||
|
#54 | |||
Loyal Fan
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,200
|
Quote:
Does that mean you like Charles too? (crossing fingers) Quote:
But I also don't think Sarah is intrinsically a mean or cruel person at her core. I think that at the dinner she felt outnumbered, as well as pressured to put her money where her mouth is where her views are concerned. For her, it was a rare opportunity to make her side heard to people she probably felt weren't often exposed to it. She just didn't go about it as well as she could have, and that's what I had a problem with. __________________
"I understood why you're doing what you're doing. Why you told me when you did -- to save me." [emily&jack] | "You're my ride." [linden&holder] "Nobody could be that clever." "You could." [sherlock&john] | "Why do you wear the, uh, key chain I got you?" [emma&neal] "I'd say I believe in the future -- and so could you." [mary&charles] (tumblr.) |
|||
|
#55 | |||
Extreme Fan
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,267
|
Quote:
I don't think he needed to apologize for himself. He didn't raise the subject, after all. Sarah did. But when she spoke her mind about the war itself he weighed in on her side. That's all. He didn't start the argument: Sarah said something, Robert replied, she spoke again and Tom said "well, I agree with her there." He didn't choose the moment and I don't see why he should have to be the one to diffuse the bomb or lighten the mood. Once the discussion started it was fair game. And again, he wasn't rude about it. The thing is....when IS it the right time to discuss politics with these people? Never. In S3 Matthew asked Tom about the situation in Ireland and he answered honestly. Then everyone got butthurt about it. He answered a question and got punished for it. Whenever anyone (including Sybil) mentions something political at a meal, he/she gets shut down or someone changes the subject. So what ends up happening? Progressive-minded people like Tom and Isobel are marginalized and silenced all the time. Now, Sarah is different because she was a first-time guest, no one asked for her opinion and she expressed it in a rude way. But Tom is a member of the family, the conversation had already started and he expressed it in a diplomatic way. So IMO, he did nothing wrong and did NOT owe Robert an apology. Of course he gave it because he is a better, more mature and smarter man than Robert is. But it's ridiculous that he always has to be the bigger man while people defer to Robert even when he's being rude or arrogant. |
|||
|
#56 | |||
Loyal Fan
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,398
|
Quote:
Quote:
And because of that, Tom apologized. Not for his views, he is never apologetic about them. I'm absolutely with Violet here: "Prinicples are like prayers. Noble of course, but awkward at a party." |
|||
|
#57 | |||
New Fan
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 72
|
I definitely see why Tom apologized. He got into it as well even though Rose told him he was splendid.
Yes, Northbound, I very much like Blake. And I agree that Tony shot himself in the foot a number of times in this episode. |
|||
|
#58 | |||
Extreme Fan
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,267
|
Quote:
And her implication was clear: she was saying Isobel was gauche for mentioning money at all. Sorry, but IMO it is much worse to be snide and insulting to a guest than to mention money (or principles) at the table. It's not like her kind doesn't care a LOT about it and put their hands in other peoples pockets all the time. I am not saying Violet was wrong that it was an awkward topic for the dinner table, but she has no leg to stand on when it comes to appropriate behavior at dinner or making guests feel uncomfortable and patronized. She does it all the time, and not for the sake of principles but for the sake of pure snobbery. I like Tom as much as you do and like that he is the bigger man but I don't think either Robert or Violet is entitled to have him follow their rules of etiquette when they can't even follow them themselves. The same rules should apply to all of them, but they seem to feel entitled to break them because they are "superior." |
|||
|
#59 | |||
Moderator Manager
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 704,278
|
I'm in the minority but (so far) Tom doesn't really have a solid SL this season. I don't like this dance going on between Sarah vs. the Crawleys. In the end, it's just irritation for me.
I'm also on the fence with Molesley & Baxter's relationship. I like them but I just want them explored more. I hate that Molesley's getting to be in the middle of this Thomas/Baxter 'war'. And this Green SL has to die, why is it still a topic this season? UGH. Anyway, I did like this ep and I will have to re-watch at some point. __________________
|
|||
|
#60 | |||
Loyal Fan
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,398
|
Quote:
Quote:
Instead we will very likely see the next "Bates is suspected of murder" case, urgh. As if the last one wasn't bad enough. |
|||
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|