Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Dowton Abbey Revisited

A few weeks back, I wrote about Downton Abbey and Upstairs Downstairs arguing that the two shows were the most obvious examples of our celebration of the rich that seem so well timed to our emerging plutocratic age. Having now watched the first two seasons plus the beginning of the third of the former, I have to admit it is an exceptional show. This doesn't temper my critique; in fact the subtext of noblesse oblige that seems to crop up in almost every episode is even more apparent than Upstairs Downstairs, which seems to shine a much harsher light on the foibles and malevolence of so many of the English haute culture. With Downton, the politics are clearer, if more nuanced. Comments fly unchallenged (such as one about middle class "defeatism," the throwing away of the lives (both figuratively and literally) of the non-gentried class and a general disdain for those who don't understand the importance of tradition and nobility -- as well as Americans) and there is a general sense that a higher purpose exists merely in maintaining the stringent class system of the past, even as it slowly dies. The shows creator and head writer Julian Fellowes is an unapologetic Tory and sympathizer with the old world monied class -- playing up their deeper nobility and superiority over those who toil through their "meaningless" lives.

Yet the show is clearly among the best on television -- British or American. It is an addictive treat taking the classic melodrama and updating it to more contemporary tastes. Each character is well-developed, compelling and with a depth and nuanced morality that the impressive actors bring to life. Among the highlights are Hugh Bonneville as the flawed but likable head of household Robert Crowley, Elizabeth McGovern as the conniving, manipulated wife and Michelle Dockery as the flawed, but likable black sheep of the family (Mary). The creme of the cast is clearly Maggie Smith as the aristocratic doyenne of the clan -- anachronistic even in her age, pragmatic and brutally funny from one scene to the next. The plots are clearly contrived for maximum dramatic effect, but Fellowes has not an eye for detail and vivid filmmaking, a penchant for building suspense and excellent hanging plot devices and, maybe most deftly, for not allowing scenes to linger unnecessarily. Within a little more than two seasons we fly through several years from before the start of World War I to 1920. Characters die, others fall in love, impossible romance is alit and extinguished in quick succession only to flicker to life anew. 

There is a constant sense that the life of every character could collapse at any moment together with the lietmotifs that there is often great nobility and sacrifice in lying and that the non-aristocratic set fail much more often than they succeed. And yet you find yourself rooting for most of the characters, whether the spinster on the hunt Edith (Laura Carmichael), the enigmatic and embattled John Bates (Brendan Coyle) or even the fastidious and imperial head of the upstairs Mr. Carson (Jim Carter). As with so much British television in recent years (Sherlock, Upstairs Downstairs, Inspector Lewis), there is a production value that seems missing from much American television -- potentially based on shorter seasons of around eight episodes -- a better sense of pacing and narrative structure and truly compelling characters that don't fit into tight formulaic frames. Sure the show sometimes feels like a soap opera with the constant Jane Austin like impossible-romance tales, the endless overlapping dramatic schematics and the almost maudlin manner in which the most mundane challenges become epoch struggles. Yet this all occurs within the backdrop of truly momentous events including WWI, the challenges to the old European order, Irish political upheaval and revolt and the push toward the contemporary world. It is riveting television and a perfect example of the way ideas can be sold in a delightful package that hides their conservative underbelly. It's too bad progressives have such a hard time emulating the model (p.s., this weekend, I will discuss the troubling  ideology of Lincoln).

No comments: