1897 is always named as one of the most popular storylines. So, what is it about 1897 that connects with so many people? 

For me, it's the way everything gels.  Admittedly there's scads of period goofs big enough to drive the Deathstar through -- but the tone and FEEL of the period overall is spot on.  At least most of the time, the characters' attitudes are too. You BELIEVE these characters,weird and supernatural as their experiences may be, as a wealthy family of the late Gilded Age along with those who moved within their circle.

Most of the characters are extremely well detailed and interesting (though that falls apart a bit near the end),as well as being a nudge nudge wink wink to stock characters in classic Victorian melodrama: The stuffy, humorless and not too bright elder brother, the bright and competant old maid sister, victimized by a charlatan in the end, the charming Byronic wastel and rapscallion who ends up collecting the wages of his sins, and the eccentric brother underestimated by all -- and in the end, mourned by none. Outside of the family you have the innocent young governess,menaced by the evil priest in name only, the gypsy grifters who are more than they seem, and the obligatory mad wife in the attic. Finally, there's the aristocratic lady's maid (though they didn't always show it in her range of duties, they seem to be acknowledging that a ladies maid was normally an educated woman from a good family who had lost their money, forcing her into needing to work),who, against her better instincts fell in love with the rapscallion,and who had to die in the end as "punishment" for sleeping with him outside wedlock.

Of course, that's just the cliff notes version. As we all know, the writers  and actors  ran with the stock characters and turned them into someone unique to the storyline and the show. Another was intelligent writing.  They didn't talk down to the audience, but ASSUMED  that people had enough of a solid basic education (I call it that because I have to think hard to think of any novel they stole from that wasn't required reading in Elementary School, Jr.High or High School) to know of the works, and understand when they were being tweaked.

They also took risks,such as the Petofi bodyswap storyline, trusting again that their audience would "get it".  (Though those who weren't familiar with written science fiction or shows like Twilight Zone and Outer Limits might have found it a stretch.

Then there's the lynchpin character,Quentin, himself. Most people I know who like the storyline are those who -- perhaps "like" is the wrong word, as he can be very unlikeable at certain points in the story --  but enjoy the character and watching his progression, his "hero's journey" so to speak.  But, do you HAVE to like him to enjoy the storyline? I'd like to get some opinions on that.

For all that Quentin is dismissed as a self absorbed, one dimentional drunk and a consciousless womanizer,the character also shows a great deal of depth  and complexity in many scenes. One that comes to mind is when cynical,doesn't care about anyone or anything but himself Quentin has a scene with Edward where he tells Edward he has just come from his son's grave, and confronts Edward (seeming at one point on the verge of tears.These can't  be blamed on drunkenness, as he is clearly cold sober.) desperately asking Edward WHY he considered Quentin so far beyond the pale that he didn't even deserve to know he had children. Edmonds and Selby just shone in that scene, one of the two that permanenly hooked me on the show.

So,I've babbled on long enough on this overlong post. Who else has an opinion to share?

Jeannie

later on however it's never quite satisfactorily explained as to why everyone readily accepts quentin into the household and no longer equate him with the ghost that caused them so much grief.

You can't tell the player without his sideburns and gramophone? 

Or maybe his previous alias was as Clark Kent - and we all know how different HE looks from his alter ego.

 

[spoiler]
so, when barnabas discovered why quentin was cursed, he should have gone back in time to prevent quentin from killing jenny racosi collins, thereby avoiding the curse.[/spoiler]

[spoiler]Not to mention that Barnabas had the solution right in his hands - and blew it -- when he didn't leave Quentin dead after Jenny stabbed him to death.   Which come to think of it leaves the question of whether, before all the mucking about with the timeline, that was orignally how he died. If not, how the heck did he get revived THAT time? (Yeah, I know, that doesn't explain the ghost of Beth.  One unsolvable paradox at a time, please!  [/spoiler]

They could have brought David Selby back in 1969 with a blond plastic wig and named him Cassander.

 
You do NOT want to know about the mental image I just got from this post.....    Be afraid, be very afraid.....
 

.... "Huh?  I've never seen the book before in my life.  What's it doing on my bookshelf and who's been messing around with my books?"  But Barnabas acted as though he had no idea what was in his bookcase....

Maybe he hadn't. Maybe Joshua had been one of those Georgian era nouveau riche businessmen who bought his books by the yard (with matching covers) simply to impress.

Jeannie

Just an educated guess here,but it might be because she lives here in Westchester. Counting on my fingers I believe that Mr.Frid was the only guest this year who does NOT live in California.  I DO think I remember her being at the Hollywood Fest I attended in 05, however. 

Possibly it was felt that there were enough local guests without importing anyone other than the one major guest. (Again, just an educated guess from having been involved with guest heavy conventions in other fandoms.  I'm not involved with the Fest in any fashion to know the reasons for certain  -- though when I used my pansity email address, I was constantly getting emails and or IMs from people thinking I was pansyfaye who works for the Festival.  LOL that's why I use the quentinscockney address -- which has its own little double entendre problems.   

Jeannie

Great topic!  Wish I weren't coming into it late. Little Foxes, for sure, and in the later stuff I also see Catherine Sloper of The Heiress (or Washington Square if you prefer the book to the play or movie version).

Love a lot of the speculation I'm reading here.  One thing I don't see pointed out though, is the diference in education between boys and girls in that time.  Oldest or not, Judith's education would have consisted of basic reading writing and arithmetic, NO college, but a Finishing School (such as Joan Bennett herself went to) where she would be taught to run a big house and entertain and be a nice, brainless ornament to some man of her class chosen as a business transaction rather than a love match.  And, as mentioned, this family and their backbiting and undermining of each other to grandmama (who probably played them off against each other from a young age, simply because SHE COULD), and the quote from Judith at Edith's grave about being forbidden to ever cry, since its a sign of weakness, takes even Victorian reserve, lack of emotion and stiff upper lip to new levels.  Admission of caring or other emotions meant weakness which left you vulnerable to manipulation by one of the others.

Then there's the age gap between the two oldest and the "babies" -- change of life babies, or one or more lost siblings which had to be mourned without any shameful crying or show of emotion?

Then again, to what extent DID these siblings ever live together since childhood? Social norm for a well off Gilded age family who hobnobbed with the British aristocracy was to have a governess for a time, then boarding school and, for the boys,  a "suitable" uppercrust college such as Harvard or Yale, where they were expected to get "gentleman's C's" before settling into the family business or a life of leisure.  Meanwhile, as grandmamamamamamama got more and more frail and old, its the only girl who will end up with sole responsibility for caring for her.  Men don't do such things.

Judith breaks the period mold in a lot of ways -- In her younger days Edith probably ruled, like Scarlett O' Hara, by manipulating men who only saw the feminine sweet appearance.  Judith seems to have been skipped over for feminine wiles, and Baby brother Q went back for thirds on charm and manipulating people.  Trask took her in by attacking her with kindness, against which she had few defenses.  And the way she and her brothers had always undermined each other, she would take any warning as just one more attempt to keep her in her place.  (LOL just thought of the WONDERFUL scene where she rousts Edward out of bed to announce she is moving rooms!  PRICELESS!)

THough, interestingly enough, as Judith develops and Quentin grows up during the course of the storyline, you see that they have the most in common of any of the siblings.  As the Romulan Commander put it in Balance of Terror "In a different reality I could have called you friend..."  Both are pragmatic, and realists;  neither is overburdened with scruples when they feel something must be done. And the sense I got in their last scene was that Quentin knew full well from what she said and how she said it that she was responsible for Gregory's disappearance -- and that she knew that he knew. Not to mention thought the more of her for it.

One more classic Judith scene that comes to mind is her challenging Trask and letting "Pansity" move back in -- despite his orders to the contrary.  Loved her conspiring with Pansity to tweak Trask's nose about Amanda Harris.

I really better stop playing in the old posts now....

Jeannie