I thought his lungs were scorched from the fumes/heat of the explosion.
To avoid spoilers may I ask what episode you are up to?
Yesterday they aired the episode in which Matthew came back from France with his spinal injury, Daisy married William (who promptly kicked it), Mary’s engagement with the newspaper baron was published, Vera swore to get Bates (even if she couldn’t blab the Pamuk story), and Mrs. Hughes hired a maid with a baby and took food to the fired maid with a baby.
However, I thought that the American episodes are cut differently from the British ones, so you can’t really tell by episode number exactly what has been shown and what hasn’t.
I don’t know the episode number, but it’s the one where William dies and Matthew is injured.
I was confused by the pregnant maid’s already having given birth. There must have been a big jump in time between the last two episodes, which I didn’t expect.
[Maggie Smith] “Everything moves fahster in wartime, deah.” [/Maggie Smith]
Cool, thanks for that - it looks like you’ve just seen most, if not all of episode 5 by my reckoning.
I took the vagueness about William’s injuries to just be a result of the limited medical knowledge of the times. And his seeming comfort a manifestation of the good old stiff-upper lip approach of the times.
I’ll be very interested to see all your reactions to the next fwe episodes.
Julian Fellows is really playing fast and lose with spinal cord injuries during this time frame.
A study from the period shows that most people did not survive:
Just as I thought . . .
I wouldn’t call 20 percent “playing fast and loose.”
And anyway Lady Chatterley’s husband survived.
One of sentences in the link I brought up states:
Can full paralysis result from a partial lesion? And why would they bring Matthew from the front without even bothering to clean his face? Would they really send him all the way from the front to a small hospital in the middle of nowhere without doing a more thorough examination? Didn’t medics have a closer look at his backk? Did they know back then that jostling a patient over bumpy roads can easily make paralysis worse?
I really thought they were pushing it in this episode with that storyline. I’m not a medical historian but it didn’t ring true to me at all.
What did you want them to do in bomb cratered, cart-rutted 1916 front line France, fetch an MRI scanner?
Break out the Burke’s Peerage!
If Matthew (the heir apparent to the Grantham title) cannot have children, who is next in line?
Assuming Matthew outlives Robert Crawley (the current Earl), will the next in line have to wait until Matthew dies before he inherits? Can Matthew “renounce” his title in favor of the next in line?
I realize Matthew is wracked with guilt about “denying” his wife her right/desire to have children, but if Matthew and his wife adopt a son, can that son inherit?
Matthew can renounce. Adopted children cannot inherit. However, any child of his legal wife’s is his if he chooses to claim it - a time honored solution for “I can’t get my wife pregnant” among those that require sons.
I think the Peerage Act, which allows peers to renounce their titles, was passed in the 1950s or 1960s. Even then, the next in line has to wait until the renouncing peer dies before he can get the title.
Ah, yes, 1963:
So long as it is conceivable or possible, it doesn’t have to be probable. Fiction is not about portraying what is most likely. It’s not about depicting the average or common situation. So, so long as it isn’t actually, literally impossible, it’s fine.
Not in 1918 he can’t. Peers weren’t allowed to disclaim their titles until 1963. Matthew is the next Earl of Grantham wether he likes or not. He also can’t stop himself from inheiriting Downton Abbey because the entail. I think entail was abolished sometime in the 1920s.
Didn’t Lord Grantham say a couple of episodes back that he didn’t even know who was next in line after Matthew? It’s possible there isn’t anyone else left who qualifies, since only male line descendants can inherit the title.
I’m wondering if they’re going to go in that direction. When Lavinia said Matthew had told her he wouldn’t have her marry him and be forced to live her life as a “childless nun”, I thought “Well, there are ways around that, if you’re cool with it.” While I’m sure people would suspect that paraplegic Matthew wasn’t really the father of his wife’s child, if there are no other heirs waiting in the wings then no one is likely to make trouble about it.
Matthew is heir presumptive, not heir apparent.
I was reading an article about the writer Anthony Trollope not too long ago. Trollope’s father spent most of his life as the heir to a wealthy titled uncle (not as rich or high up as Lord Grantham but well-to-do and with a minor title). Knowing he would never have to worry about money or social position because his uncle was elderly and his uncle’s wife was far too old to have children, and there was nobody between him and his uncle in the succession, Trollope’s father never trained for anything practical but just developed a rural gentry demeanor and prepared to outlive his uncle.
The uncle’s wife died first. The uncle was devastated, he was very devoted to her, and Trollope senior probably thought to himself “poor old uncle, I hope he doesn’t grieve himself to death immediately… but if he does I wonder how blue velvet drapes would look in the morning room”. However, instead of mourning himself to death, the old uncle married a woman young enough to be his granddaughter and had children (plural) when he was an old man, leaving his nephew, Trollope’s father, first in line to the title of Jack of Squat. Since he had no fallback plans and was too highborn and utterly unprepared for anything menial he was left in genteel poverty with no prospects. (Trollope paid far more attention to the importance of money than many of his peers who were born to families with incomes did because, like Dickens, he knew what it was like to live without it.)
Similar thing on Downton Abbey: if Cora had not miscarried Matthew would have been out in the cold, though at least he would have had his legal career. Likewise, if Cora died and Robert remarried to one of Lady Sibyl’s schoolchums and had five sons, it could still happen. So, no point in forcing somebody to step aside because of no heir as any number of things could happen.