I want to comment on all of this, because it's brilliant -- so brilliant, and even if I chalk much of it up to Lavinia being young -- so young (10 years younger than Matthew, IMO). But you have perfectly explained something that has always, ALWAYS bugged me about Matthew in S2.
Because I could never figure it out -- why Matthew, the self-professed, "not entirely" a creature of duty -- who valued love above all else -- was suddenly about honor and duty so much in S2. And that's it...of course that's it. It IS 1914 all over again.
And you hit a soft spot there, because in 1914, there was a girl who knew herself well enough to have doubts about being able to be Matthew's loving wife for decades without getting bored and bitter if his career should turn out to stall at the level of country solicitor and they would live in Crawley House forever. He withdrew his proposal as soon as it was ascertained that he would be heir to estate again, because he felt that no matter how much love she might bestow on him as his future wife, that could
( ... )
Instead, it became more about Matthew trying to right the wrongs of 1914 with the "wrong woman." And now, so it appears, after Mary has proved throughout S2, that she will love Matthew "on any terms," it becomes Matthew's turn -- once learning about the scandal -- to love Mary just as she has loved him.
It's not as neat a story, but I guess JF had no choice once he found out he was getting that Christmas Special. And because he realized Matthew's stubbornness was equal to Mary's, Lavinia had no choice but to die. She was far too weak to break it off with Matthew herself, and Matthew was far too stubborn to do it for her. So, she HAD to die (also conveniently drove a wedge between M/M).
This is also fabulous, as well...
I wonder if the way Matthew speaks about these things, as embarrassing and seemingly uncomfortable to experience, is more a result of him connecting them with you than a lack of appreciation of «the most dedicated nurse» as such (and as Mary was for him).Makes SO much sense, really. Because otherwise, it seems like
( ... )
Re: Part 2...maryme2December 25 2011, 01:28:16 UTC
I think I'm gonna do my next piece on the moral universe of Matthew Crawley. Then I've got something to do after the CS.
There is a quote from the Vicariously blog which I find intriguing, and which is very relevant to our discussion here. I might find the time to implement it into my final 2.08 part:
Matthew and Mary subscribe to two separate and fundamentally opposed worldviews. Matthew is idealistic to the point of naïveté: he believes he is (or rather, should be) living in a world where people are rewarded or punished according to the strength of their character; Mary is pragmatic to the point of self-sabotage: she believes (or rather, accepts) that sometimes bad things happen for no rhyme or reason at all - which is why she’s “never down for long”, and which is why she has a plan for every contingency and finds it difficult to take risks to grasp at illusory promises of future happiness. And somewhere in the space between these worldviews - between yearning for what should be and acceptance of what is - lies their relationship
( ... )
Comments 3
Because I could never figure it out -- why Matthew, the self-professed, "not entirely" a creature of duty -- who valued love above all else -- was suddenly about honor and duty so much in S2. And that's it...of course that's it. It IS 1914 all over again.
And you hit a soft spot there, because in 1914, there was a girl who knew herself well enough to have doubts about being able to be Matthew's loving wife for decades without getting bored and bitter if his career should turn out to stall at the level of country solicitor and they would live in Crawley House forever. He withdrew his proposal as soon as it was ascertained that he would be heir to estate again, because he felt that no matter how much love she might bestow on him as his future wife, that could ( ... )
Reply
Instead, it became more about Matthew trying to right the wrongs of 1914 with the "wrong woman." And now, so it appears, after Mary has proved throughout S2, that she will love Matthew "on any terms," it becomes Matthew's turn -- once learning about the scandal -- to love Mary just as she has loved him.
It's not as neat a story, but I guess JF had no choice once he found out he was getting that Christmas Special. And because he realized Matthew's stubbornness was equal to Mary's, Lavinia had no choice but to die. She was far too weak to break it off with Matthew herself, and Matthew was far too stubborn to do it for her. So, she HAD to die (also conveniently drove a wedge between M/M).
This is also fabulous, as well...
I wonder if the way Matthew speaks about these things, as embarrassing and seemingly uncomfortable to experience, is more a result of him connecting them with you than a lack of appreciation of «the most dedicated nurse» as such (and as Mary was for him).Makes SO much sense, really. Because otherwise, it seems like ( ... )
Reply
There is a quote from the Vicariously blog which I find intriguing, and which is very relevant to our discussion here. I might find the time to implement it into my final 2.08 part:
Matthew and Mary subscribe to two separate and fundamentally opposed worldviews. Matthew is idealistic to the point of naïveté: he believes he is (or rather, should be) living in a world where people are rewarded or punished according to the strength of their character; Mary is pragmatic to the point of self-sabotage: she believes (or rather, accepts) that sometimes bad things happen for no rhyme or reason at all - which is why she’s “never down for long”, and which is why she has a plan for every contingency and finds it difficult to take risks to grasp at illusory promises of future happiness. And somewhere in the space between these worldviews - between yearning for what should be and acceptance of what is - lies their relationship ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment