Characters Downton Abbey Discussion

collapse/expand topics

05:57:28 PM Feb 26th 2014
This order of the page looks nice.
09:37:08 AM Feb 3rd 2014
Moved this to Discussion (is regarding Tom):

As I posted on the Discussion for Downton Abbey, it's really ambiguous what happened- like I see why someone could come away from the scene thinking Tom was drugged, but it isn't clear cut, and I can also see why the scene might have been intended as a straightforward Sexy Discretion Shot.

I'm also somewhat questioning of the idea that there is a double standard in play- no except for Tom himself seems to believe he's at fault- Mrs. Pattmore doesn't think he's equally at fault (and to the extent she does think he's at fault is in terms of seeing the sex as consensual).
02:49:43 AM Feb 4th 2014
Agreed on the above. Well caught. Lex
11:46:45 AM Nov 18th 2013
Alfred encourages Jimmy to be nicer to Thomas one episode after he called the police on him, glared him with hatred at the table, and acted as the most homophobic character in the show. Is that Character Derailment on his part, or emphasizes that Thomas is a woobie Up to Eleven?
04:57:16 AM Nov 17th 2013
edited by
But seriously, I may think immaturely for understanding Daisy's point, but Matthew's case also justifies it In-Universe. Only when it comes to Daisy does everyone pretend there is no difference between caring for a friend and being in love (am I the only one who feels Violet's reassuring as a manipulative evasion of the question by sticking to whether she liked him, and the 'being forced together equals being in love' approach closer to concrete thinking?) but everyone encourages Matthew to be sensibly selfish and not marry for duty (though it was admittedly their interest to keep his fortune in the family by pushing him towards Mary). Also, several other characters have a Hopeless Suitor, but they don't mistake them for their Love Interest. Though my utilitarian morality can agree with Mrs. Patmore, Daisy's uncomfortability to feign love is also understandable, especially if she isn't used to lying, and her Honor Before Reason doesn't deserve not to be taken seriously either, especially considering she was open-minded enough to reluctantly act against it.
09:28:14 PM Oct 14th 2012
Peter Gordon/"Patrick Crawley" should be listed under Recurring and Guest Characters, not The Crawley Family, because we don't actually know if he's a member of the family or not.
06:05:27 PM Oct 16th 2012
On a related note, where does Branson belong? Is a character sheet meant to be accurate as of each character's introduction, or kept current? If the tropes under each character are kept current, why shouldn't his status?
10:08:13 PM Apr 5th 2013
theodrixx, I think it's that while tropes themselves can have spoilers hidden, for certain characters (like Branson) moving the character entry itself is a spoiler.
04:08:32 PM Sep 26th 2013
Speaking of spoilers, I've found at least three for Series 4 on this page that aren't under cuts. I'm going through the page and hiding them now, but a closer eye needs to be kept on that score.
09:53:36 AM Nov 15th 2013
I'd put Branson into the Staff entry.
05:51:28 AM Jan 28th 2014
edited by
As a rule of thumb, we list staff under the position they held when they debuted, but list their career advancement under the Rank Up entry on their character entry to provide an accurate chronology. So for example, Anna debuted as the Head Housemaid and she is listed as such, but Rank Up in her entry lists her as being promoted to Lady's Maid in Series 3. In terms of Branson, he started as staff, so is listed there, but Rank Up details his promotion to Estate Manager, and Rags to Royalty details his marrying into the family.