1840 Questions!

[Joeytrom]

they most likely changed the 1840 story due to the unavailability of David Henesy, who appeared in only three or four episodes of 1840.  This time, I believe another actor should have been hired to play Tad.

As for the 1795 difference to what was said before in the present time, originally they were going to tell the flashback through books and ghosts instead of it being a time travel story.  If they did it that way, then they could have told the origin of Barnabas over several years instead of condensing it to five months.  I don't know who made the decision to have a character go back in time (Sam Hall perhaps?)

[MagnusTrask]

that was inspired, even though the method seemed silly.   it was like spoiling us, allowing us to actually see the events unfold.

[Gerard]

The Java Queen - that's it!  I remember way back in 1970 when I watched the story for the first time, I got really excited because next to DS, my greatest passion is for things nautical and maritime, like ships, boats, etc., and here they were building up this whole seemingly important plot thing that involved a ship.  And then when they popped back to 1840, nary a mention is made.  Ironically, probably because I was in denial about nothing coming of it after such great expectations, I suffered a bout of FDSMS (Faulty Dark Shadows Memory Syndrome).  For years I was positive that they not only talked about the Java Queen in 1840, but even had episodes taking place on board.  I was just so positive.  And then when I watched it all unfold again in the early '90's on the Sci-Fi Channel, there were no episodes.  But I was so sure about it.  Like I said, just another example of FDSMS.

Gerard

[MagnusTrask]

OMG... I have FDSMS!!    LOL!   I may also be catching EAAS!!!!   Excessive Alphabetical Abbreviation Syndrome!!!! 

Was Petofi on the Java Queen?   I'm pretty certain about that one....   Also, PT Trask fought Greg Trask in a death cage match.

[Gothick]

Jonathan Frid's 1967 letters to his Mother mention that Dan Curtis told him in August or September of that year that they would do a going-back-in-time storyline to show the origins of Barnabas.  Decisiions about major plot points such as this were ALWAYS made by Dan Curtis up until late in the game,perhaps around the Summer of 1970? when Lela Swift started producing the show and she is on record as having come up with a certain notorious plot twist in 1840...

G.

[Gothick]

I've always wondered whether the switch to 1795 occurred because of the costumes that were available for rental for that storyline; although I think Sarah's tombstone always read 1795.

G.

[BuzzH]

although I think Sarah's tombstone always read 1795. 

I think it did too, or a date very similar, which would back-up the statement made by Barnabas to Willie [spoiler]when he says his 'best friend' (Sarah) died when she, and HE, were children.  This statement makes Barnabas & Sarah closer in age, like a difference of 2 to 3 years, rather than a 10 plus difference as is of course established in 1795 when we see Sarah as a little girl and Barnabas as a grown man about to be married.  Her dying as a child of course means her ghost is that of a child, but Barnabas, who *didn't* die as a child, went on to grow up, which explains the subsequent age difference we see in 1967.[/spoiler]

[Joeytrom]

Prior to 1795, Sarah's tombstone read 1786-1796.

[MsCriseyde]

Did Professor Stokes ever find out about Barnabas's vampirism?

Nope, he never did.

That's a tough one to call. One of the things that makes Stokes an interesting character is that you can't always take him at face value. The early scene in the Adam storyline when he arrives at the Old House to barter over the talisman with Barnabas is a good example. I don't think he was honestly interested in any of the furniture he was commenting on. That was just a put on to gauge Barnabas' interest in the item -- whether he was interested as a collector or as someone who honestly felt protection from a witch was needed.

Just because he doesn't openly admit to knowing something, that doesn't mean he's ignorant of it.

[Mysterious Benefactor]

Just because he doesn't openly admit to knowing something, that doesn't mean he's ignorant of it.

That's an excellent obversation. Stokes was extremely observant and perceptive - at times briliantly so. One would have to be to deduce so quickly that Leona Eltridge was simply an anagram of Danielle Roget.    And at one point during the Adam storyline Stokes as much as told Julia he knew far more than she was aware he knew. On the surface he would have appeared to only be admitting to being aware of more about Adam than Julia was aware, but one never knows. As you said, Stokes often played a bit of a game with people just to see how they would react and what they might inadvertantly divulge. One can't help but admire Strokes tactics, and one could also learn a lot from studying them as well as occasionally employing them oneself. 

[Joeytrom]

Another thing about Professor Stokes is, unlike Barnabas and Julia, he didn't have any "baggage" hanging over him.

[Para L. Time]

Well, I've decided to write Stokes, in my story, as if he Knows Everything, but he's waiting for Barnabas and Julia to just come right out and tell him. The situation that I have them in, they are going to have to tell him everything to figure out what's going on. Actually, there isn't much to figure out, it all seems pretty straightforward to me, but with Barnabas, I have to make him really dumbed down, because even on the show he Just Doesn't Get It! Even Julia should be smarter sometimes, but she is consistently smarter than Barnabas. If anyone wants to check out the first chapter, the story is called "Altered Shadows" and it's on fanfiction.net.

(I don't know if we are allowed to talk about or peddle our own stuff on here, so if it's not okay, feel free to delete the last sentence! Thanks!)

[BuzzH]

Did Professor Stokes ever find out about Barnabas's vampirism?

Nope, he never did.

That's a tough one to call. One of the things that makes Stokes an interesting character is that you can't always take him at face value. The early scene in the Adam storyline when he arrives at the Old House to barter over the talisman with Barnabas is a good example. I don't think he was honestly interested in any of the furniture he was commenting on. That was just a put on to gauge Barnabas' interest in the item -- whether he was interested as a collector or as someone who honestly felt protection from a witch was needed.  Just because he doesn't openly admit to knowing something, that doesn't mean he's ignorant of it.

This is very true or course.  Stokes was astute enough to know more than he let on, and it's clear he relished not revealing what he knew.  I guess my statement above comes solely from the fact that we never saw, on camera, either Barnabas or Julia letting him in on the 'secret'.  So I assume he didn't know, but it's entirely possible, and believable to me, that maybe he did know!     For sure he at least suspected something was up w/Barnabas, at the very least that he was the ORIGINAL Barnabas who may have been a time traveler. 

[Nelson Collins]

Or the Screaming Queen?? 

How about the Raging Queen??!

[BuzzH]

Or the Screaming Queen?? 

I could say something, but I won't!