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.
Given the help of Matthews Mom she could have had a respectable low income position and raised her son herself. Why only the streets? With help she could get off the streets. Seeing as how that nasty grandfather didn't raise such a nice son I think Ethel could have done better. Being poor isn't the worst thing.
Sorry, we'll have to disagree about Mary. Downton, earls wife, her traditions, are everything to her. She's in the past, its all more important to her than Matthew who is more progressive, and not because he's just middle class!
As for the mismanagement of Downton - they've essentially lost it twice and been bailed out by others money. And yet they are affronted by efforts to keep the place from going down a third time. Lord Grantham in particular seems pretty much a worthless stuff shirt. Some rich men became Drs and had practices, worked in govt or parliment and got involved in other things - not for the money but to keep up with things and contribute. Now maintaining the farms etc. of Downton seems to be his only work - and he's failing at that miserably. No surprise they are going the way of the dinosaurs.
Poor even then didn't buy you much. And being a prostitute would follow the son. She might have kept him off the streets with help, but that would follow. She is still grounded in the old society, and is being realistic. As she points out, Matthew went to the best schools. He got to write his own ticket. I have a friend who emigrated from Britan, and did go to the best and that still matters today. Class and track record still matter.
She might have raised him poor, but she wants more for him than that and knows that she cannot give that to him. It's not so terrible a thing to choose for the child's future.
And that's what I more or less meant by Mary. Matthew is looking at it from the point of view of someone trained in efficency. Mary is mired in tradition. Her father is even more so, and is lucky for good marriages which came with money.
The British middle class came from minor gentry like Matthew and skilled tradesmen who diid not have the funds to waste inefficently. Their tradition was functionality. That is imbued in him. Robert doesn't get it. Cora is deluding herself. Her mother isn't and I think the one person in the Crawley family who does get it is the Dowager, who gets that Robert is going to find a way to lose it again if left by himself. I don't she so much approves of the ideas Matthew is going to bring up but she'd like the mansion to still be there for her great grand children.
Given the help of Matthews Mom she could have had a respectable low income position and raised her son herself. Why only the streets? With help she could get off the streets. Seeing as how that nasty grandfather didn't raise such a nice son I think Ethel could have done better. Being poor isn't the worst thing.
Sorry, we'll have to disagree about Mary. Downton, earls wife, her traditions, are everything to her. She's in the past, its all more important to her than Matthew who is more progressive, and not because he's just middle class!
As for the mismanagement of Downton - they've essentially lost it twice and been bailed out by others money. And yet they are affronted by efforts to keep the place from going down a third time. Lord Grantham in particular seems pretty much a worthless stuff shirt. Some rich men became Drs and had practices, worked in govt or parliament and got involved in other things - not for the money but to keep up with things and contribute. Now maintaining the farms etc. of Downton seems to be his only work - and he's failing at that miserably. No surprise they are going the way of the dinosaurs.
What kind of a job could Ethel have gotten that would have earned enough to raise a son on her own? She had only been trained as an under kitchen maid so she couldn't have been very highly skilled at taking care of a house. Anyway she was dismissed from Downton as soon as they found out about her situation. If she was turned out of Downton, it was pretty obvious she would not have been able to get a job elsewhere. The stigma of being an unwed mother would have kept her from getting work. Look at Mrs. Bird's attitude towards her and she was hired help herself.
Even if Ethel found work somewhere, who would watch her baby while she worked? Had she somehow found a way to keep her son he would have forever been known as an illegitimate child and would have not had the opportunities in life he could have being raised by his grandparents. Ethel knew that. That's why she made the sacrifice even though it was so difficult. Those were the times in which she lived.
The grandfather was a jerk but he was reflecting the times and he did seem to care about his grandson. And the grandmother was a good woman. It was painful, but I believe Ethel did the right thing under the cricumstances.
I love this last episode especially the bates/anna thing and I loved it them both smiling and reading the letters .I felt bad for the maid who had to give up her son . Im surprised that Matthew's mother did not fire the rude maid as well . I think the new footman might be on the homosexual side .
Ding ! Ding ! Ding !
And in the preview where I thought I heard Sybil say something about being thirty... it was the she wasn't thirty yet.
Oh man! Those attitudes about Ethel really reminded me of reading The Scarlet Letter back in high school! Shades of Hester Prynne!
Sybil was really my favorite of the three sisters...she reminded me so much of how I used to be when I was young. I even married a man from another country who had a different religion like she did. I really hated what happened in this episode!
The arrogance of the aristocratic gentleman once again believing he could make the correct decisions on all matters because of his station. Sir Robert is bent on destroying his family in one way or the other.
Spoiler
Why on earth did he feel the need to call in that quack to begin with when he had the doctor who had known Sybil from childhood? One of the signs of eclampsia as the family doctor pointed out is swollen ankles. And Sybil had other signs as well. But the clueless new doctor dismissed it as many women having thick ankles and wouldn't listen when the family doctor stated Sybil didn't.
Even though I had seen this episode before, it still made me both very sad and very angry at the same time.
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.
