Downton Abbey and Real Life

I have to admit that one of the largest deficits in my knowledge and understanding of world history and historical events is the early 20th century. Apart from the basic facts related to when wars started (and ended) and some of the people who shaped the events of the times, I really did not have an understanding of what life was like. This is really quite funny because my own grandparents were born and lived through the early years of the 20th century; my parents were young adults through the World War II years and beyond. You would think from hearing their stories that I would have a strong grasp on the life and times of the 20th century. Not really.

Being one of the countless viewers of Downton Abbey, I have appreciated the attention to historic detail in the writing, but more importantly in the overall look and feel of the times. I am not talking about fashion and furniture and outward appearance; what is impressive to me is that they have created something that gets to the heart of those who lived at the time. I never really considered the fact that these times were one of great upheaval in the social order, and I applaud those behind the scenes who have given viewers some real food for thought.

Downton Abbey has been a window into a not-so-distant past, a place where I believe humans at all levels on the social spectrum took great pride in their state in life. The Crawley family is of particular interest to me, not so much because they lived on a grand estate and have the "luxuries of life," but because as landowners they knew and understood the role they filled in society: Lord Grantham expressed it quite clearly that he/they are only the custodians of the land and responsible for keeping the community a thriving place. Many, many lives are impacted by decisions he/they make -- both in and on the estate but in the village as well, and he took this responsibility seriously.

Understanding this perspective I think has been lost in our times amid the sound and fury of those who believe that the world is made up of the "haves and have nots," and that somehow there exists an oppression of one class over another. The irony is that from the characters developed in the fictional Downton Abbey, I never recall anything other than civility and compassion from the Crawley family. Why else, for example, did Lord Grantham feel the stress from his near-mismanagement of the estate? He knew that he needed to make changes or else the tenant-owners of the land suffer; businesses in the village, dependent on the financial support from the estate and estate owners, suffer. Those who work in the household suffer job insecurity at the least and job loss at the worst (think of the Mosely character or even Barrow).

The fascination I find is that those characters who want to push the progressive ideas of a more fluid movement between social classes (and even roles between the sexes) are the very characters I find most disagreeable. Isobel Crawley, who comes into the family as a result of the social system she despises, irritates me most. The school teacher, too, who works with Daisy to help her learn reading and math, comes across as contentious and unyielding in her beliefs; her lack of understanding is clearly shown in her incredulous surprise in meeting Lady Grantham (she wasn't what she thought she would be), as well as in her discourteous attack on Lord Grantham at his dinner table. Whether or not this is contrived by the writers, I don't know; they certainly are not the most sympathetic characters in the story. I think these characters who seek to replace an ordered system of simplicity, courtesy and respect with a system that pits class against class in an ongoing struggle where no one seems really happy and content come across as the saddest.

I suppose that the best example of conflict with this change is Tom Branson. Growing up in the revolutionary political environment in Ireland, his preconceived ideas about the Crawley family causes no end of struggle because what he sees and experiences as a member of the family has run in direct opposition to the ideas he learned before he married into the family. He finds himself not comfortable in either social environment; so he leaves for the open and progressive world of the United States, where individualism and a strong work ethic enables a person to make their dreams into reality. Being in the United States, he might find that acceptance and comfortability he somehow cannot experience in England. It will be interesting to see if the writers bring any conclusion to his story or if they just decide that writing him out of the story is sufficient. For my part I hope that there is a clear resolution to his story. It will validate or invalidate the idea that the progressive upheaval was worth it.

So for what it is worth, I am looking forward in some respects to the end of Downton Abbey. As the series has not yet concluded, I am still in the dark about where the writers are going to take the principle characters, but I am grateful for the glimpse into life in early 20th century; in many ways this explains much about what I have seen and lived growing up in the mid-to-late 20th century.