 |
| Edith gets some unwelcome news in this week's "Downton Abbey" |
I really hate the way Downton
Abbey treats its women sometimes. With
the exception of Mary, who is always portrayed as walking perfection, and Rose,
who is generally too frivolous to be concerned with, almost every woman on this
show seems to be pining after a man or otherwise obsessed with the love lives
of the show’s characters. I mean, I’m
pretty sure this episode fails the Bechdel Test since, despite a female
cast numbering a dozen and at least ten scenes involving only women, every
conversation between the female characters is either about a man or about a man’s
birthday party (the sole possible exception being a conversation about a man
and his wife).
Take Edith for example.
I had high hopes for her last season.
After being left at the altar she really seemed to be progressing toward
a life of independence. But then she met
Michael Gregson and has since circled around the same, tired story all season
long. She wants him but can’t be with
him. We get it. But they’ve been telling what is essentially
the same story for eight or nine hours now (covering almost two years in real
time). And the fact that she’s pregnant
and he’s missing in Germany is a storyline ripped straight from a Lifetime
Original Movie. Maybe this show’s
viewpoint and mine just don’t get along, but is it really too much to ask that,
in an era when women were first allowed to experience their own agency, that
Edith be allowed to experience a life that doesn’t revolve around finding the
love of a man? Mary has managed to make
a life for herself in managing the estate.
Let Edith do the same. Then
again, perhaps following the story of a single mother in 1920s Britain will
allow for just that.
Downstairs, the ladies are having their own trouble with men
as Alfred is awarded a spot at the Ritz’s cooking school after all and Jimmy
makes unwanted advances on Ivy. I really
don’t know what to do with either of these stories. With Alfred, on the one hand I’m happy that
he got into culinary school. On the
other, I don’t understand why that had to be delayed an episode except so that
we could get one more week of Carson crapping on Molesley and Daisy getting to
passive-aggressively ream out Ivy for “breaking Alfred’s heart.” I’m sorry sweetheart, but if men aren’t
allowed to complain about being friend-zoned, neither are women. I’m not sure if this is supposed to be some
kind of karmic retribution for Daisy’s treatment of William a couple seasons
ago, but it just doesn’t suit her character well, especially given her history
with unrequited love.
The Jimmy and Ivy storyline is troubling for other
reasons. For starters, Jimmy’s
aggressiveness came from out of nowhere.
It’s one thing to have a character act incredibly creepy before going
after a woman (see: Mr. Green). But to
have it come out of nowhere seems like a cheat.
It might just be a factor of not having enough time to properly service
all of these characters and plots, but even if that’s the case, it’s still the
fault of the writer, no matter how it comes about.
I really hate that this review has been so critical of a few
particular storylines because, the fact is, I enjoyed a great deal of this
episode. The performances, as usual,
were amazing. I loved seeing the Bateses
working to rebuild their marriage. Mary
and Tom are raising pigs! Who doesn’t
want to see that? It’s just that certain
themes tend to arise in each episode and this particular hour seemed to want to
torture the women more than usual. I
would really like for this show to let its women be their own people, rather
than forcing them to be more concerned with the lives of men than anything
else.
A couple of spare thoughts –
I largely ignored Rose, the most progressive character on Downton Abbey, but that’s largely
because her story was also focused mainly on a man, as Robert’s surprise party
seemed mostly to be an excuse to bring the black bandleader Jack Ross to
Downton. It would just be nice if her
motivations were based on something other than A) wanting to throw a party and
B) wanting to see a man again.
I feel like we could have a lengthy discussion on Carson’s
views toward work and his unwillingness to rehire Molesley because the former
butler isn’t thankful for the job. It’s
a position that could easily be heard today, but if writer Julian Fellowes is
unwilling to spend more than a minute on it, I don’t see how I can either.
So thoughts?
Comments? Just want to tell me my
blog sucks? Let me know in the comments
or on Twitter @TyTalksTV
No comments:
Post a Comment