[ SECRET POST #3525 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3525 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 42 secrets from Secret Submission Post #504.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Most annoyed you've been by a TV character's decisions?

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed. And it was never implied that he was supposed to be a bit dim, like some other characters. Even if he had turned into the great big villain at the end, it still makes no sense that he never learned anything. If he's supposed to be this manipulative, scheming and entirely self-(pre-)serving dude, why is he such a failboat?

Also, Flopbert remained Flopbert to the end.

Re: Most annoyed you've been by a TV character's decisions?

[fishnchips]

Ugh, Wobat. Wobat was one of the worst offenders as well in the "never learned a thing" but at least he has the excuse that he was older and pretty set in his ways. Thomas though? How many times can you fuck yourself over that badly and never learn to be more careful about things?

Re: Most annoyed you've been by a TV character's decisions?

[(Anonymous)]

LOL I haven't heard Wobat before. I'll have to remember that. :D

I just found Thomas' non-arc more frustrating, because Robert never really had the potential to be more than he was. But imo Thomas did. Especially because he wasn't the 'minority character' who is only allowed to exist as a paragon of virtue to serve as a conformist example for the yet unenlightened public. No, he's a genuine jerk, but his situation, his isolation and loneliness, his battling with himself etc. could have been used to give him so much more depth. But he remains a ridiculous figure. I'm usually the first to emphasise with troubled souls in fiction, but his great emotional scenes left me between pretty cold to amused.

But who am I kidding? If I was able to take the characters seriously, it wouldn't be Downton Abbey. I mean, I (mostly) love the show. But I love it as a soap opera with pretty dresses and scenery, not a socially concious and well-researched exploration of class relations in the early 20th century.

Re: Most annoyed you've been by a TV character's decisions?

[fishnchips]

A friend and I call him that because it's kinda what it sounds like when Cora says his name haha!

I think Thomas had the best development during the war, and especially after with the Courtenay thing. And he had small scenes that made it seem like he finally got some development (Like when Sybil died or when he turned to that charming "therapy" to cure his gayness) but it all got the "huh, nah, that never happened, why should this have a lasting effect on the character when we can just go back to a ridiculous mustache twirling incompetent bad guy?" treatment right after it happened.

Re: Most annoyed you've been by a TV character's decisions?

[(Anonymous)]

LOL, I thought it was because he's always so woe is me about his non-issue or self-created problems, but your explanation is even more hilarious. She really says it like that O_O