Downton Abbey

FloatingVoter · 19-10-2015 12:19pm

jezzer wrote: »

wow, so an estate could slip away from a family quite easily, this is obviously why they didnt really care about cousins marrying

Yeah, and they were often lost at gambling tables by feckless idiots who by accident of birth had a valid claim. Even when the inheritance was treated with respect it was subject to inheritance tax that burdened even well managed and profitable estates. Add to that the better hours and wages in factories and scholarships opening a road for Downstairs into the professions and upper middle classes for the very smart (who previously would have risen to the lofty heights of Carson or Mrs Hughes).
A couple of world wars and the need for women workers which in turn proved to everyone but the most blinkered misogynist that women could do any of the traditional male jobs.
It was a lot easier by the end of WWII to just sell the bloody thing to the highest bidder and retire on the proceeds to the house in London. Maybe marry the title to some American cash and party with movie stars. Better that than worry about pig breeding and leaky roofs. I'd sell up and out and so would most faced with the choice of damp manor or warm penthouse.

jezzer · 19-10-2015 2:44pm

FloatingVoter wrote: »

Yeah, and they were often lost at gambling tables by feckless idiots who by accident of birth had a valid claim. Even when the inheritance was treated with respect it was subject to inheritance tax that burdened even well managed and profitable estates. Add to that the better hours and wages in factories and scholarships opening a road for Downstairs into the professions and upper middle classes for the very smart (who previously would have risen to the lofty heights of Carson or Mrs Hughes).
A couple of world wars and the need for women workers which in turn proved to everyone but the most blinkered misogynist that women could do any of the traditional male jobs.
It was a lot easier by the end of WWII to just sell the bloody thing to the highest bidder and retire on the proceeds to the house in London. Maybe marry the title to some American cash and party with movie stars. Better that than worry about pig breeding and leaky roofs. I'd sell up and out and so would most faced with the choice of damp manor or warm penthouse.

what signaled the end of these big estates, as shown in downton at the moment, they were on the way out, what made this different from the previous 50 years? was it because servants were harder to come by and demanded more wages or they would go and get work in a factory or elsewhere? it looks like none of the gentry worked, they must have been bored out of their heads, hanging around the house all day and what was the point in getting dressed up every single evening just to eat dinner with your family?? they had such purposeless lives.....edith drives me mad, always moaning about having no purpose then when asked if she would be the editor of the magazine she said no! she bloody wants it every way..

pinkypinky · 19-10-2015 4:26pm

Well, the industrial revolution & WWI were the big differences. Proper education for the masses too.
Also, a system which excludes all children except the eldest son from proper inheritance was always going to breed itself out.

Eugene Norman · 19-10-2015 4:37pm

jezzer wrote: »

what signaled the end of these big estates, as shown in downton at the moment, they were on the way out, what made this different from the previous 50 years? was it because servants were harder to come by and demanded more wages or they would go and get work in a factory or elsewhere? it looks like none of the gentry worked, they must have been bored out of their heads, hanging around the house all day and what was the point in getting dressed up every single evening just to eat dinner with your family?? they had such purposeless lives.....edith drives me mad, always moaning about having no purpose then when asked if she would be the editor of the magazine she said no! she bloody wants it every way..

Well it's been answered.

1) inheritance tax
2) better jobs for the servants causing massive wage inflation (a good thing)
3) reduced prices for food -- their major product -- relatively. Also a good thing.

There are still super rich families hanging on. The royals. Other aristocrats like the devonshires.

FloatingVoter · 19-10-2015 4:55pm

pinkypinky wrote: »

Well, the industrial revolution & WWI were the big differences. Proper education for the masses too.
Also, a system which excludes all children except the eldest son from proper inheritance was always going to breed itself out.

Yup, forget the aristocracy...in Victorian Britain if I'm a self made man with a daughter as my sole beneficiary - then she marries some drunk with a gambling issue, good luck to my legacy. I can set up a trust to benefit the next generation and bypass him - that's if I'm smart enough to see what's coming.
Forget the fictional Downton and watch the Alex Kingston episode of Who Do You Think You Are for a lesson in this aspect of Victorian inheritance law. Do watch, no fake weeping and brothels in

.

jezzer · 20-10-2015 9:51am

Eugene Norman wrote: »

Well it's been answered.

1) inheritance tax
2) better jobs for the servants causing massive wage inflation (a good thing)
3) reduced prices for food -- their major product -- relatively. Also a good thing.

There are still super rich families hanging on. The royals. Other aristocrats like the devonshires.

so essentially their product became unsustainable, which was farming, food prices fell, labour prices rose and i guess the fact that most of them were good for nothing as they had everything handed to them

Asarlai · 21-10-2015 4:48am

I fancy Barrow, but I'm in love with Lady Mary.

jezzer · 21-10-2015 9:26am

Asarlai wrote: »

I fancy Barrow, but I'm in love with Lady Mary.

thats messed up

cowboyBuilder · 21-10-2015 1:33pm

So there was a warning about the bloody scene with Grantham ?

somesoldiers · 21-10-2015 1:35pm

cowboyBuilder wrote: »

So there was a warning about the bloody scene with Grantham ?

"Viewers may find some scenes disturbing" on ITV

cowboyBuilder · 21-10-2015 2:35pm

Anyway, they go on about Lord Grantham being stressed thats how he got the Ulcer ... it's ridicoulous, what does he do all day ?
apart from wander around the grounds,drinking brandy and shooting grouse ?

syklops · 21-10-2015 3:04pm

I think thats very infair, especially how the last two pages of comments was about how and why these estates ended.

FloatingVoter · 21-10-2015 5:46pm

cowboyBuilder wrote: »

Anyway, they go on about Lord Grantham being stressed thats how he got the Ulcer ... it's ridicoulous, what does he do all day ?
apart from wander around the grounds,drinking brandy and shooting grouse ?

He's running a medium sized business - and he could make half the staff redundant in the morning due to his ability to dress himself and keep a diary. There went the underbutler and the twenty footmen. Given his army experience I'll even lay money he could knock out a dinner for one but social rank means he does need a professional cook.
It's about looking after what he was given and ensuring it passes intact to the next generation. At some point it is time to say stop and it does happen to be about now.

syklops · 22-10-2015 10:13am

Watching the most recent episode now. Is it really the end of the horrid Denka?

Also, hosting the Minister of Health for dinner is easily an excuse for added stress.

jezzer · 22-10-2015 11:48am

cowboyBuilder wrote: »

Anyway, they go on about Lord Grantham being stressed thats how he got the Ulcer ... it's ridicoulous, what does he do all day ?
apart from wander around the grounds,drinking brandy and shooting grouse ?

isnt it so true, the man doesnt even dress himself, he doesnt have a job to commute to, doesnt cook, clean, work, dress himself, maintain the gardens, work on the farm....i'd like to see him operate in modern times, mary and edith, spend about twenty minutes before dinner with the kids, they litterally do nothing.

in last nights episode, would Branson really shake the hand of neville chamberlain? it wasnt long ago he was fighting with the rebels back in Ireland, whatever about getting on with the non political gentry, there is no way an irishman of the time would be so friendly towards a member of the british parliment

syklops · 22-10-2015 12:59pm

jezzer wrote: »

in last nights episode, would Branson really shake the hand of neville chamberlain? it wasnt long ago he was fighting with the rebels back in Ireland, whatever about getting on with the non political gentry, there is no way an irishman of the time would be so friendly towards a member of the british parliment

You do remember he married a member of the non-political gentry?

Isnt it so true, the man doesnt even dress himself, he doesnt have a job to commute to, doesnt cook, clean, work, dress himself, maintain the gardens, work on the farm....i'd like to see him operate in modern times, mary and edith, spend about twenty minutes before dinner with the kids, they litterally do nothing.

He does work. He runs the estate.

FloatingVoter · 22-10-2015 1:28pm

Michael Collins got on with Churchill when they met (despite or because at various points each had wanted the other dead). Brendan Bracken was one of the most trusted figure in the same Churchill's inner circle a few years later.
On a less stellar level, plenty of Irish people made their living in Britain during those years and political views were best left to those back home. Rescuing the minister for health from an awkward social situation would be seen as good manners and not a betrayal of some lofty principal.

jezzer · 22-10-2015 2:28pm

FloatingVoter wrote: »

Michael Collins got on with Churchill when they met (despite or because at various points each had wanted the other dead). Brendan Bracken was one of the most trusted figure in the same Churchill's inner circle a few years later.
On a less stellar level, plenty of Irish people made their living in Britain during those years and political views were best left to those back home. Rescuing the minister for health from an awkward social situation would be seen as good manners and not a betrayal of some lofty principal.

But you would imagine branson would have made some reference to the irish situation as we know that he was against british occupation of Ireland

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 22-10-2015 2:31pm

jezzer wrote: »

But you would imagine branson would have made some reference to the irish situation as we know that he was against british occupation of Ireland

Why would he have made a reference about Ireland to the minister for health? Plus we're post independence now, aren't we? Why would he bring it up?

There was plenty of mention of it in earlier series when it was actually relevant.

syklops · 22-10-2015 2:46pm

jezzer wrote: »

But you would imagine branson would have made some reference to the irish situation as we know that he was against british occupation of Ireland

Its 1925. Not only is it post the War of Independence, its post the Civil War, so what Irish situation do you mean?

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 22-10-2015 2:51pm

syklops wrote: »

Its 1925. Not only is it post the War of Independence, its post the Civil War, so what Irish situation do you mean?

I remember them mentioning the Civil War specifically because they got it wrong. It was the War of Independence that was ongoing at the time but they were calling it the Civil War.

syklops · 22-10-2015 2:56pm

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I remember them mentioning the Civil War specifically because they got it wrong. It was the War of Independence that was ongoing at the time but they were calling it the Civil War.

You could put that down to general ignorance and apathy to what was happening in Ireland at the time. Its not like there was a nightly bulletin on Sky radio for them to listen to.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 22-10-2015 2:58pm

syklops wrote: »

You could put that down to general ignorance and apathy to what was happening in Ireland at the time. Its not like there was a nightly bulletin on Sky radio for them to listen to.

Or general ignorance and apathy from the scriptwriters....

Anyway... point being, they have referenced Ireland a few times when it was relevant.

syklops · 22-10-2015 3:37pm

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Or general ignorance and apathy from the scriptwriters....

To be honest I doubt that, they are so diligent with nearly all aspects of the historical themes. Fellowes is still on board and he is a very knowledgeable historian. Can you remember when roughly that error was made?

Of course mistakes do happen, but I'd be surprised if something like mixing up to wars, however trivial to the gentry was accidental.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO · 22-10-2015 3:40pm

syklops wrote: »

To be honest I doubt that, they are so diligent with nearly all aspects of the historical themes. Fellowes is still on board and he is a very knowledgeable historian. Can you remember when roughly that error was made?

Can't remember exactly but quite early on. I have a feeling it was the Dowager Countess talking to someone, maybe even Tom, at the railway station. Can't remember exactly but I do remember thinking that's not right, the Civil War was after the treaty.

jezzer · 22-10-2015 3:45pm

syklops wrote: »

Its 1925. Not only is it post the War of Independence, its post the Civil War, so what Irish situation do you mean?

the irish situation that tom had gotten involved in and had himself banished from ireland for life....i mean, any irishman at the time who just so happened to be in the company of a british minister, of course you were going to ask the inevitable....what was it all for?

syklops · 22-10-2015 3:46pm

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Can't remember exactly but quite early on. I have a feeling it was the Dowager Countess talking to someone, maybe even Tom, at the railway station. Can't remember exactly but I do remember thinking that's not right, the Civil War was after the treaty.

That doesnt narrow it down much. I'll have to watch it all over again and come back to you. Such a heavy cross to bear. :pac:

pinkypinky · 22-10-2015 3:49pm

It's beside the point, but Neville Chamberlain's brother was actually one of the Treaty signatories.

Tom's days as a revolutionary are long gone; it wouldn't make any sense, particularly the context of a sudden family illness, for him to be taking on a minister about Ireland...

njs030 · 22-10-2015 4:10pm

jezzer wrote: »

the irish situation that tom had gotten involved in and had himself banished from ireland for life....i mean, any irishman at the time who just so happened to be in the company of a british minister, of course you were going to ask the inevitable....what was it all for?

It would be incredibly bad manners for Tom to be rude to a guest in the Grantham's house, especially as he is considered part of the family.

Perhaps he didn't want to embarrass his in-laws who are so generous to him and his daughter!!

Edited to add that there already has been a storyline about Tom making his feelings known about Ireland and planning to cause problems for a guest.
It would be pretty dull if the series kept going over old ground.

jezzer · 22-10-2015 4:19pm

notjustsweet wrote: »

It would be incredibly bad manners for Tom to be rude to a guest in the Grantham's house, especially as he is considered part of the family.

Perhaps he didn't want to embarrass his in-laws who are so generous to him and his daughter!!

Edited to add that there already has been a storyline about Tom making his feelings known about Ireland and planning to cause problems for a guest.
It would be pretty dull if the series kept going over old ground.

I guess so, either way, the show is not the same without tom in it! also if they were ever to make another michael collins pic, he would make a great collins

Downton Abbey

Comments