One of 1840's Problems

[Joeytrom]

1840 is unique among the flashbacks in that we never see the "legacy" character.
Daniel was 1795's legacy and Jamison was 1897's, but 1840's legacy character is unnamed and far away at boarding school (which actually makes him one of the lucky ones).

There's a detachment to this storyline in that there isn't any clear path to the future that the audience knows is there.
This Collins family is detached to begin with and [spoiler]The change in history where those who originally died now live (Quentin, Desmond, Daphne, Carrie, Tad) and those who originally live now die (Gabriel & Edith) while Samantha dies both times[/spoiler] doesn't help matters, it actually creates MORE.

There isn't anyone to root for as none of them really have redeeming qualities that at least Judith & Edward of 1897 did and Joshua & Naomi of 1795.  All the characters are one big mess and not fleshed out.

The writers could have at least had either Samantha/Quentin or more likely Edith/Gabriel more grounded for the audience.  It makes you wonder how they managed originally to get the family to the present time.

[Gerard]

It appears in the unchanged history, one of Gabriel and Edith's children became the heir (father/mother of Judith, Edward, Quentin, Carl?).  As you said, the possible offspring of Gabriel and Edith were somewhere "away," probably in that boarding school.  And, like you said, Joey, it does create a paradox.  The entire lineage had changed and therefore the Collins family forward was wiped out.  Well, not necessarily - they could possibly have all been born but were now some distant poor relation.  When Barnabas, Julia and Eliot return to 1971, there should've been an entirely different family occupying Collinwood.  And that's just what I had happen when I did my version of what-if-DS-had-continued?  The three heroes returned to 1971 and found a completely unknown descendants residing in the mansion.  Now, how would they fix it?  For those who read my version of WIDSHC, you found out.

Gerard

[Josette]

I never had a problem with the continuation of the family.  It seemed pretty obvious that one of Edith and Gabriel's children was the father of the 1897 family.  The only problem I had was that Edith was still there as Grandmama.

[MagnusTrask]

Is it at all possible that 1897 Edith just happened to have the same name as 1840 Edith, but was a different person?

[Josette]

Magnus, that's probably the best suggestion for it!

[BangsnFangs]

I've always admired what Curtis and the writers tried to do with the end of 1840, but agree that the execution wasn't really all there.

As a loyal supporter of Barnabas and Angelique, I've always thought the conclusion of their arc was very poignant and fitting.  However, I thought their was very little development of it prior to this, and very little to explain how Angelique turned so quickly to support Barnabas' cause.  This is especially jarring considering that 1840 Angelique is established as being 1795 Angelique 45 years later (I'd imagine that would make sense to everyone), and therefore didn't share the experiences with Barnabas in 1897, 1968 and 1969.  As a fan trying to make it out, I've tried to treat this in terms of narrative time, but logistically it just doesn't work out.

An attempt has also been made to reconcile the timelines, but it's very sloppily done.  Joeytrom has mentioned the lack of a "legacy" character, which I feel would've been especially important here, especially considering the dense, time jumping elements of the story arc as a whole (1995/1970/1840).  Edith, in spite of all her nastiness, really should've been that character, but her untimely death put an end to that.  I guess it could be explained away in terms of 1897 Edith being a different character, but I don't really buy that as 1840 Edith fits in perfectly into 1897 in terms of her generation and family lineage.  Edith being killed off, therefore, would have major implications in 1897.  Who would be the guardian of "the family secret"?  The results of this would be much different due to another person carrying this knowledge, and I'd imagine the effect would carry on into present time.  I agree with Josette with regards to not having a problem with the continuation of the family.  It's not too much of a stretch to imagine they carried on through an alternate line.

There are some other inconsistencies which no doubt would have had a major effect throughout all the timelines but I won't get into it as I think they've already been mentioned a lot on these forums.  I think the cause of them is simply a major case of burn out on the part of the writers.  Barnabas and Julia had been back and forth throughout time so much by this period that keeping up with everything would've been an impossible task.  I'm sure they had no idea that committed fans of the show like us would be discussing this over 40 years later!

My nitpicks don't mean that I hate 1840; far from it.  I have a great affection for the storyline, and I find it to be by far the easiest storyline to write about (even more so than 1795 and 1897).

[Uncle Roger]

1840 has always been a continuity problem for me. There are many WTF moments but I will confine myself to those mentioned in the thread.

Since Quentin was Daniel's favorite son, the estate would have gone to Quentin and his heirs, not to Gabriel and his children. For the line of succession to follow the established outcome, a couple of things would have to have occurred. Quentin and Daphne would have no children or none who lived to adulthood. Tad would also have to have no heirs. This bit more problematic. Tad may have died young. Maybe he was sterile. Maybe he was gay.

Edith is a more difficult glitch. She isn't a major character in 1840 or in 1897. Most of what she does happens off screen, so it's very hard to fit her into continuity. Maybe she struck a deal to return to life, similar to Angelique.

And, aside from Daniel, no one in 1840 seems to know that is a secret in the first place. Daniel seems to be regarded as the family whack job, so maybe he told someone and they didn't believe him. Or he simply didn't trust any of them enough to tell them.

[MagnusTrask]

1840 has always been a continuity problem for everyone, but you bring up ones I hadn't thought of.  All I can say is, all the resolutions you mention are possible, unlike with other continuity problems, which just can't be reconciled. 

People died more easily back then.  I also think the Ediths may not be the same person.  I had thought the name Gabriel had been mentioned by 1897 Edith, but I listened for it this time, and nothing.

[Gerard]

I think a good place to start is trying to figure out what happened in the unchanged situations in 1840/41 with no Barnabas, Julia or Eliot (and no Angelique).  Here's how I see it. 

The Judah Zachary-possessed Gerard Styles goes wild in his (Judah's) first attempt at revenge and ends up killing Tad and Carrie (and maybe a few more family members).  Gerard is killed and Daphne, strongly under his influence, also dies from whatever means or reason.  Maybe she commits suicide.  The rest of the family picks up the pieces and plugs along.  Maybe even Gabriel is dead, but Edith is still alive and she becomes mistress of Collinwood.  One of her children (who were off at some boarding school when all of this happened) becomes the parent of Judith, Edward, Quentin and Carl.  As for Quentin I, his son is dead; his wife is dead (maybe Joanna's ghost still killed her, maybe Gerard did).  But his life is basically over.  Maybe he hangs around, helping to pick of the pieces but that's pretty much for him.  Maybe he becomes a recluse.  Maybe he leaves to start life over again elsewhere.  And maybe (so many "maybes") he takes his staircase through time as a means of escape from all that happened and ended up who-knows-where.  Wouldn't that've been a great sub-plot?

But Barnabas, Julia, Eliot and Angelique changed all that.  Tad is still alive; Gabriel and Edith are dead and their progeny most likely lost their place as primary heirs.  It now goes through Tad's lineage.  That's not to say there weren't Judith, Edward, Quentin II and Carl.  For that matter, it doesn't mean there wasn't Jamison and his children Elizabeth and Roger and their progeny.  They could've all been born, but not at Collinwood.  They are now the distant relations living elsewhere.  But the 1971 masters and mistresses of Collinwood would be an entirely different family.  Everything that initially happened from 1841 to 1971 would've been wiped out.  No werewolves, no spectres of Quentin II and Beth haunting Collinwood.  None of it happened.  Like I said, in my version of what-would've-happened-if-DS-continued, that's what Barnabas, Julia and Eliot found when they returned.  The family they loved is gone (well, gone from Collinwood, but not completely gone).  Those inhabiting the estate are all strangers. 

Gerard

[Claude North]

For what it is worth, Big Finish Productions released an audio story (titled “Dress Me in Dark Dreams”) featuring Edith (with Terry Crawford reprising the role) set at the halfway point between 1840 and 1897 (the opening narration gives a year of 1874). In this story the character is stated to be both Gabriel’s wife and Judith’s grandmother. How she survived her apparent death in 1840 isn’t revealed. Maybe she only appeared to die in 1840? You guys may not consider these stories to be a legitimate continuation but the Big Finish writers do go out of their way to keep them in continuity with the original series.

[Uncle Roger]

I seem to have missed that particular Big Finish production. I am going to seek it out. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

And a belated welcome to the boards, Claude North. 

[DarkLady]

1840 is WAY too confusing for me to think about, but welcome to you, Claude North! 

[Uncle Roger]

As far as Edith goes, it's possible (though highly unlikely) that another Edith from parallel time could have crossed over and stepped in. 

[BangsnFangs]

I've always liked to think that when Barnabas, Julia and Eliot return to present time everything seems to be restored to normal, but in actual fact something that is at first unnoticeable but significant has been altered.  Kinda like that Treehouse of Horror episode of The Simpsons with Homer and the time-travelling toaster, where everything at first seems normal and then they all start slurping their food with lizard tongues.

[MagnusTrask]

I always liked the idea of BarnaJulliot having two conflicting, overlapping sets of memories when they get back, of the events we've seen, and of the new, changed timeline, in which they never went back to the past, because they didn't have to ("now").  Eventually, the new, changed set of memories settles in and becomes dominant.  And they all remember arranging to go to the event Liz was dragging them off to see, how they'd wanted to go (or not) etc..

As for Edith, the family line takes repeated shakings-up over the generations.  Members of other lines of the family step in and take over.  I guess we know 1897 Edith married into the family (not a Collins), but married to whom?  If there were two Ediths, they would have been about the same age, but do they have to be the same person?

It's not really continuity that we're trying to preserve.  Barnabas has gone out of his way to demolish continuity.  We're rooting for him to do that.  What we really want is not to have to say in our heads that certain treasured storylines are so utterly changed that they "didn't happen".   We'll take a few changes, but nothing so major as to wipe the slate clean.  We want Edith to survive to become that matriarch.