#this is just a critique on this interview and how jf handled barris

[the-girl-in-the-box]

So there’s just been an interview in Japan of Julian Fellowes, and I am… So Furious I don’t even hardly know where to start. So, I’ll start with the worst part, which reeks of straight privilege.

…I don't think the proportion of homosexuals like Ellis and Barrow in society was much different then than it is now, but in 1920s Britain, it was a society that didn't accept it, so most parties had to live a lie. I wanted to remind young people today how stressful that was. We've come a very long way in the last 20 or 30 years in terms of their human rights, but I wanted them to understand once again how much they've benefited from that progress.

I’m sorry, WHAT? I guarantee you, Mr. Fellowes, we’re very well aware that it’s stressful! “How much they’ve benefitted”?? Sir, I still live in the closet because it is not safe for me to come out of it right now. Who do you think you are, to tell us what we’ve benefited from? You’re a straight man! This is NOT your story to tell! You have no need to remind us what we suffer, to make it sound like things are so great now. Sure, we’ve won battles in the last 20-30 years, but our fight is far from over and saying you have to “remind” us of anything is extremely offensive. As a straight man, reminding queer audiences of the suffering we’ve been through is just homophobic, full stop. That’s not your place, and we don’t want you minimising what we still endure today like we’ve somehow forgotten our own damn history. Take several seats, please.

Another thing is about the character of Barrow. Ellis makes the choice to marry for his own life rather than for his life with Barrow. But while Barrow recognises this, he is given the chance to express that he himself does not want to be a person who lives a lie. Moreover, he even has compassion for those who have had to compromise in order to lead their own lives. That's what we wanted to portray.

I just… Really? Richard nearly was given a wife in the first film, but the creative team cut it so Thomas would have a hopeful and optimistic arc. What does this say now, if you scrapped that storyline only to bring it back, but now worse because you’ve also allowed your queer audiences to root for Thomas and Richard? This could have been discussed between them in this film, shown Thomas’s compassion for Richard in having to make this decision, but ultimately Richard chooses Thomas instead, and you’d have gotten the same result, just without hammering home that apparently a queer couple is the only one in this show which has to be held to extreme historical accuracy (ha!), and can’t overcome their conflict to come together and stay together ultimately. Cool. Great message, Julian. I sure feel so hopeful after seeing Richard’s, who I deeply connected with in the first film, arc go this way. Again, several seats. Please take them.

Let's say, for example, that Ellis and Barrow's relationship was a happy one. In that case, they would have lived in love in London, renting separate flats but hiding from the world. I don't think that's entirely bad in itself, but it's not a dramatically interesting story either. That's why we have a story for Barrow in this piece that is more dramatic and offers a choice that is uniquely his.

This is all just blatant bullshit. There is a literal running joke about “historians will call them lifelong friends” because of the amount of so-called “lifelong friends” who lived together! Men who lived with men included! In fact, is Thomas not going to go and live with Guy Dexter now? Why is it they won’t have to rent separate flats, but Richard and Thomas would? And all this about it not being dramatically interesting? What could be MORE interesting than seeing them work together to make things work? I’m sorry, but I don’t think his DA2 plot was more dramatic. Maybe he got to make a choice, but there was no need to butcher his relationship with Richard Ellis to give him any choices. In fact, he could have even still chosen to leave Downton to be with him, if that was the desired angle! There were places queer men could go to be together in (relative) safety. So why could this not have been drama? It would have even managed all the points you covered here! We could have seen the struggles of two gay men in the society they lived in, Thomas’s compassion, his choices, and it still would have ended on a hopeful note, all without crushing anything, or toting your straight privilege around as if he understands anything about our history, when he clearly doesn’t. What a slap in the face this entire thing has been.

Fantastic joke, Julian Fellowes. You’ve made yourself a brilliant farce with this one.