Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They may not; but if these were your only 2 choices...
As for the second category..are you sure?
Did you look around? Not sure where you are, but in the US the rat-race is fierce - and the model keeps expanding everywhere. So the prototype is valid.
Perhaps, but at least in the "rat race" the rodents *LOL* can have their own names and identities. To have been a servant during the Victorian and Edwardian eras meant that alone determined who you were.
If the family didn't like your name (or couldn't be bothered to remember or pronounce it), it was changed. Permission was required to leave the house/estate even on your day off. Although the practice of "giving way" had faded out for the most part servants were constantly reminded in many ways great and small they were *not* equal to their employers. Lady Mary's dressing down of Carson for speaking to her in familiar terms regarding how she was conducting her widowhood is an example. Though LM later apologized the point was taken. LM then went on later to tell her maid Anna "we like to think we are good employers but even we want to get what we pay for..". A subtle shot over the bow but never the less telling of who is in charge.
Perhaps, but at least in the "rat race" the rodents *LOL* can have their own names and identities. To have been a servant during the Victorian and Edwardian eras meant that alone determined who you were.
Nah....
I, for one, would could care less about "name" and "identity" than about being forced to run 1000 miles an hour just to stay in place, sleep 6-7 hours, then start the rodent race the next day all over again.
The "progress" bias can be as strong as the "nostalgia" bias. I argue stronger.
Many think our perceptions of the past can be "rosier" than what reality actually was back then. Few want to admit that we tend to overestimate the NET GAIN the average person has achieved by progressing from Era A to Era B (Era B being right now, not 1950's White America).
More often than not, the modern man is severely indoctrinated with the belief that what IS NOW is clearly better than what USED TO BE. We like it that no one can tell us we are "officially inferior" anymore. Our egoes have been soothed and who does "Lady Mary" think she is, after all?
My question: so what if I am "essentially" just as good as LM? Why does this label even matter, if the quality of life of the average person still sucks? Or it is worse in many respects.
Once the smoke and mirrors of "democracy" and "individual self-determination" are removed ... most of us live the same indentured lives great-grandpa and great-grandma used to live...only surrounded by more plastic. Also, at a much faster pace, with more insecurity, more daily stress, more information overload (nasty assault on with the immune system, btw), lonelier, and more likely to be lived away from people who matter. Quality of life is about all of the above more so than it is the validation that "I am just as good as Lady Mary". At least to me.
Also, today's "Granthams" don't "get used to you". They don't "attach" to you or seek to earn your loyalty. Sometimes I think it would be nice if we were given the opportunity to become "trustworthy servants". The only opportunity we are given is to become servants who keep up with our fiercest competitors and produce ever more every year. Our bosses don't oppress us any more because they don't need to. Our "rodent competitors" do a much better job of it; and those of us who can - return the favor.
Even the jerkiest Lord Grantham couldn't operate on the assumption that a servant can continually increase his productivity or that he can do the jobs of 4 servants so 3 can be "kindly let go" to figure out the "self-determination" part on their own.
And the cherry on the cake is a matter of decorum: if most of us MUST end up with a MASTER in life, should I go for the LG type or for a DT type? Yeah, as in Donald Trump.
Or how about this type?
I remain convinced that the average man has not gained squat, other than a mended ego and the opportunity to maintain poor quality of life throughout his existence on Earth while constantly dreaming of "moving up".
Hmmmm.....bang, bang - hmmmmmm....bang, bang...,hmmmmm....
I, for one, would could care less about "name" and "identity" than about being forced to run 1000 miles an hour just to stay in place, sleep 6-7 hours, then start the rodent race the next day all over again.
The "progress" bias can be as strong as the "nostalgia" bias. I argue stronger.
Many think our perceptions of the past can be "rosier" than what reality actually was back then. Few want to admit that we tend to overestimate the NET GAIN the average person has achieved by progressing from Era A to Era B (Era B being right now, not 1950's White America).
More often than not, the modern man is severely indoctrinated with the belief that what IS NOW is clearly better than what USED TO BE. We like it that no one can tell us we are "officially inferior" anymore. Our egoes have been soothed and who does "Lady Mary" think she is, after all?
My question: so what if I am "essentially" just as good as LM? Why does this label even matter, if the quality of life of the average person still sucks? Or it is worse in many respects.
Once the smoke and mirrors of "democracy" and "individual self-determination" are removed ... most of us live the same indentured lives great-grandpa and great-grandma used to live...only surrounded by more plastic. Also, at a much faster pace, with more insecurity, more daily stress, more information overload (nasty assault on with the immune system, btw), lonelier, and more likely to be lived away from people who matter. Quality of life is about all of the above more so than it is the validation that "I am just as good as Lady Mary". At least to me.
Also, today's "Granthams" don't "get used to you". They don't "attach" to you or seek to earn your loyalty. Sometimes I think it would be nice if we were given the opportunity to become "trustworthy servants". The only opportunity we are given is to become servants who keep up with our fiercest competitors and produce ever more every year. Our bosses don't oppress us any more because they don't need to. Our "rodent competitors" do a much better job of it; and those of us who can - return the favor.
Even the jerkiest Lord Grantham couldn't operate on the assumption that a servant can continually increase his productivity or that he can do the jobs of 4 servants so 3 can be "kindly let go" to figure out the "self-determination" part on their own.
And the cherry on the cake is a matter of decorum: if most of us MUST end up with a MASTER in life, should I go for the LG type or for a DT type? Yeah, as in Donald Trump.
Or how about this type?
I remain convinced that the average man has not gained squat, other than a mended ego and the opportunity to maintain poor quality of life throughout his existence on Earth while constantly dreaming of "moving up".
Hmmmm.....bang, bang - hmmmmmm....bang, bang...,hmmmmm....
Well, I'll just tell you what my grandmother told me.
My grandmother grew up the only daughter (of five kids) and the second oldest child. Her parents were dirt farmers in rural Arkansas, the descendants of Scots Irish who had moved to the New World in the 1600s and 1700s, and who had scraped and mucked for a living for generations. She was picking cotton by age 6, and by age 9 she was lugging the lunch pails out to the fields, four at a time, to the adults, with a baby brother or two tagging along behind her. She only went to school up till the 8th grade - her parents needed her to work.
Here's what she always said: "Everyone's always taking about the good ol' days. Well, let me tell you something - they weren't all that good."
She was amazed and delighted with 20th and 21st century life in the US. When she was born, her family had no electricity, no indoor plumbing, and no car (they had a horse and cart). When she died in 2002, she was the owner of a beautiful custom built home, with all the bells and whistles, and had a Cadillac parked in the garage. She had never buried a child or grandchild - something no ancestors before her could claim. She had never fought tuberculosis in herself or a loved one. She had TWO full bathrooms in her house! Her dog's bed was of better quality than the bed her mother laid her newborns in.
I think we've got it a lot better than most of our ancestors.
I've not watched a single episode, beyond trailers and previews. I threw my television away ten years ago.
To be honest, I cringe at the idea of contemporary people trying to imitate the civility and genteel behaviour of a more gracious culture.
I was on the set of The Young Victoria, written by the same writer of Downton Abbey.
One of the crew was an expert on etiquette and would advise as to how people should behave in given situations, whether it was addressing a monarch, or simply eating at a formal meal.
I was on the set of The Young Victoria, written by the same writer of Downton Abbey.
One of the crew was an expert on etiquette and would advise as to how people should behave in given situations, whether it was addressing a monarch, or simply eating at a formal meal.
Same sort of position exists on DA, and yet a few things still are gotten wrong or are taken liberties with, but methinks those are mostly historical and or social. Things like the supposedly "out" gay footman being kept on and defended to the point of the Earl protecting him against arrest after an "attack".
Talking of liberties, some the historical inaccuracies in The Young Victoria were really pushing things.
Am finding more and more these modern period dramas feel the need to sex things up for fear of low ratings. By this one means taking vast liberties with what is known and accepted historical facts for reasons unknown.
Was watching "The Lost Prince" on recording the other night and when it came to the murder of the Romanovs it was set in a farm house complete with animals. Lord S. even goes as far to tell the king that the family was being held "in a type of farm house". Ipative house may not have been Tsarsko Selo but a "farm house" it wasn't.
I always look for authenticity , if it doesn't look right i won't watch it, many period TV productions and Movies make the mistake of having the female stars wearing today's hair styles and makeup. One thing about DA it has everything correct in those areas.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
