Rant: Mary’s Suitors

Now that we in the US have concluded this season of Downton Abbey, it’s time to talk about Mary’s “desire” of suitors. Let’s have a look, shall we?

On the left, we have Tony Gillingham (Tom Cullen) and on the right, Charles Blake (Julian Ovenden). Tony is an old family friend of the Crawleys, and Blake is a government administrator who is assessing the effect of large aristocratic houses on the overall economy. On paper, they both sound like more members of this post-war suitor drought/snoozefest endured by the ladies of this era. But both men are awarded a heap of interesting plus points when we discover they served in the Royal Navy together at Jutland, the largest naval battle of WWI. And of course, we hear nothing more of this past a mere mention. *sigh*

But let’s get back to what you’re here for: MY OPINIONS.

My honest initial reaction to Tony Gillingham was ~*SWOOOOOONNN*~ from the first promo clips that were released. They looked at each other (sometimes that all it takes) and their kiss out on the Downton grounds was hot (and Mary was totally into it). It was all very angsty and romantic. He was rash, shameless, and probably a little too forward, but at least he wasn’t a wet washcloth about the whole thing, and he still managed to be sweet and adorable amongst it all. The change of romantic pace felt nice, and it brought out things in Mary for which I am totally on board. She wrestles with her need to mourn Matthew for a while longer and her utter attraction to Tony; she can’t pretend for a second that she doesn’t like him, but she also can’t pretend she’s ready to jump off a cliff after him.

It would be nice to see him support Mary through the struggles of the estate, having come from a struggling aristocratic family himself. But I wonder if that kind of storyline isn’t laden with enough drama to keep up with the usual fare on this show. I do enjoy that he was all set for a sensible marriage to the fantastically rich Mabel Lane Fox (even her name is cool) to cure his own failing estate woes, but he throws over Mabel and her money for the one he can’t stop thinking about. Part of me wants this kind of person for Mary: the one who will do even the dumbest things for love. He’s a nice contrast to Matthew, whose false honor tripped him up at almost every opportunity to be with his one true love.

Ok, moving on!

My honest initial reaction to Charles Blake was a little (a lot) like Mary’s very honest reaction. I did not feel the romance/sparks between these two initially, but I enjoyed the writing for the progress of their relationship. Though I think I have more feelings about Mary scrambling eggs than about Charles himself, the development between Mary and Charles was a delight to watch. We like when characters change their minds about each other, and that’s something Downton does well. It’s more than reminiscent of her beginnings with Matthew, and that can be seen as something going for him or against him, depending on what you, as a viewer, want for Mary. I’m not necessarily in favor of a Matthew 2.0, but his presence brought out complicated feelings on Mary’s end, and I’m pretty much entirely here for that.

Something that changed the game for Charles — in his favor or against it, again depending on what kind of man you want Mary to end up with — in the final episode of this season. Mary learns that Charles has been playing down his social status: he’s actually the heir to a baronetcy and one of the largest estates in Ulster (in present-day Northern Ireland), making him an extremely eligible bachelor and much more on Mary’s social level, even over Tony. This deus ex machina happenstance (another regular Downton move) sort of dispels, in my opinion, what Charles had going for him: his underdog status. It seems now that Tony, with not much to offer Mary outside of his undying love, is the underdog, which is not how these two were originally presented to us. (Sidenote: 10 House points to Tony for being honest and disclosing Charles’s secret status, when he could have withheld it and continued to let Mary lean in his favor. You go, Tony!)

I couldn’t say at this point which one is more right for Mary or who should be “endgame,” because I just enjoy having these two men around to act opposite Michelle Dockery. Seeing as they’re not fully-developed characters, I’m not sure that Mary going to pick one of these two sorry schmucks who are totally over the moon for her. Julian Fellowes might thank them both for helping Mary’s heart heal and then start fresh! She likes/needs what she’s getting from each of them: someone who wants to marry her on top of a mountain and someone who bickers with her in a way that ignites on screen. I’m not going to reach for things and say that Mary touching Tony’s hand is fraught with meaning or that Charles holding George for .38 seconds means that he will be an impeccable father figure. I’m just thrilled that Mary has lots of dudes hanging around her (Evelyn too!) so that she can start working out how she wants to move forward from Matthew. So whatever way it goes, I expect that it will be compelling.

Rant: Mary Crawley was Raped

As we draw closer to the premiere of Downton Abbey for its fourth season, I wanted to reflect (and rant a little bit) about a key moment for Lady Mary Crawley (Michelle Dockery) in the first season which unquestionably altered her life: her sexual encounter with Kemal Pamuk (Theo James), the son of a Turkish diplomat and a guest at Downton. I hope this will be the first of several scene studies primarily focused on Mary’s journey, as she is my favorite character (sorry Daisy/Matthew/Violet/everyone).

I, like many other viewers, glossed over the details of this incident — in the wake of Pamuk’s demise immediately following — but realized the depravity of his actions upon repeat viewings. But before moving on, we must, for academic purposes, agree that he and Mary did actually have sex before his ill-timed death, which was not obvious to some viewers.  A note from writer/executive producer/creator Julian Fellowes clears the air on the subject:

“In the edit, the Powers made a cut we all came to regret. After commenting that Mary ‘could still be a virgin for your husband’, which stayed in, Kemal was supposed to say: ‘A little imagination, a phial of blood hidden beneath the pillow, you wouldn’t be the first.’ But this was excised. Despite arguing fairly passionately, I could not convince them the lines were needed. I explained that, without them, it was anyone’s guess what Kemal was doing to Mary that would leave her virginity intact. But they were confident that no one would make any untoward connection. ‘Nobody will think that,’ they said. But everyone thought it.”

We also must set aside any perceptions we have of Mary before this interaction with Pamuk. As she comes on very strong in early Downton days, a person’s perception of Mary can be a barrier for fully understanding what happened to her. She is not a frigid bitch deserving of her fate, nor is she an angel whose wings have been ripped from her back. She is simply, for these purposes, a woman in 1913.

As I’ve said, I re-watched this scene a few times in various settings before I realized the true nature of this incident, perhaps because we don’t dwell on “Mary’s indiscretion” for too long before having to deal with a dead body in the room. Of course, we revisit that issue later when Cora reprimands Mary and holds said indiscretion over her head for quite some time, but our initial processing of the whole situation is interrupted by Pamuk’s death, and we really forget what happens.

Earlier this year, a fan of the show created a breakdown of this scene, which can be seen here, to demonstrate the perversion of this encounter and to display Mary’s duress and coercion. Breakdowns like these are extremely helpful, but I wonder at the extent to which we have to go to shed light on what we should see as clearly depraved. Do we have to tally up every time she says no or pushes him away? Fifteen “no’s” before a “yes” is not consent. One “no” before a “yes” is still not consent. 

The argument that it was “more complicated than rape” is one I hear often. It was complicated, but it was also rape; they’re not mutually exclusive. Mary chose to have sex with Pamuk, but she made that choice under duress. She could not give true consent because she no longer had an option to refuse his advances. The element of coercion — the fact that he was not going to take “no” for an answer — makes it rape.

In the interest of historical context, let’s note that the understanding of rape in 1913 was different than ours in 2013. Traditionally, rape was a crime in English law in that the victim was required to “prove a continued state of physical resistance”. The penalty of rape was death, as outlined in the 1828 Offenses Against the Person Act. In 100 years, we’ve learned that rape is not just about physical force. Mary tells her mother Cora she wasn’t “forced” and accepts “responsibility,” but Mary doesn’t have the framework to understand coercion or anything other than physical-force-as-rape. We, however, with our advanced understanding, cannot write it off.

Now, acknowledging that she was coerced — that she had only the illusion of choice — is not erasing her agency or her attraction to Pamuk (though her attraction to him and/or desire to sleep with him is irrelevant). The fact that she vaguely claims agency afterwards — to her mother, to Matthew, to anyone — does not change the fact that she couldn’t consent beforehand, and consent can’t be given retroactively.

In his footnotes on this scene in the Downton Abbey season one script book, Julian Fellowes doesn’t explicitly write, “and this is where Pamuk rapes Mary.” But it doesn’t matter whether Fellowes wrote it specifically to be — and look like — rape. It doesn’t matter that Michelle Dockery isn’t talking about it in every interview or industry panel about this show. If you understand what rape is, you understand that this is rape, and no matter what, that it isn’t okay. Let’s call a spade a spade.