Why Sophie and Joseph are an excellent example of how not to write relationships.
*empties a salt shaker into a china cup, adds hot water and a tea bag, and then takes a long sip* Itâs a long post, so get yourself a cup of salty tea because BOI, do I have complaints to make.Â
First and foremost, they are both extremely boring.Â
Joseph has no traits aside from apparently being sexy (the actor isnât personally my cup of tea, but maybe Iâm in the minority so who cares what I think?) and that he likes to swim (which is just something the writer has thrown in as an excuse to see him in the nude, to âspice upâ the show). I honestly cannot tell you a single thing about him apart from this.
Sophie is a bland character. She has no defining characteristics aside from being a bit of a ditz, and Iâm not even sure that was deliberate. She consistently had one facial expression (not through any fault of the actress, but because she only experiences one emotion throughout the story - a sort of subdued mix of confusion and emotional pain; at least I think thatâs it, itâs kind of hard to tell⌠but thatâs what makes it artistic, right guys? Ugh.).
So, Problem No. 1 - They donât have personalities so why should we care?
Secondly, Sophieâs story arch just makes no sense, because we have no context to relate her experiences to.
She talks repeatedly in the series about William, her son, but we donât really see them interact, aside from a few throwaway scenes that are more to remind us that William exists than to build on a mother-child bond, so their relationship feels contrived. If we had been given a few scenes where we see her with William, maybe helping him with his studies or playing with him, then the audience can see the bond that exists between them; the writer should then juxtapose that with a scene with William and his father, Charles, where the atmosphere is uncomfortable and cold. Maybe show Charles as an absent father who is either working or is away at gambling houses and brothels, so on the occasions where he is home, his relationship with his son is awkward because they barely know each other. This establishes a family dynamic amongst the three characters and creates instant tension.Â
Also, I never really understood what the problem was in their marriage. Sure, Charles isnât very bright and Sophie clearly doesnât like him, but we have no evidence that their marriage is really⌠bad, so to speak. He never comes across as particularly abusive; heâs just kind of abrupt and a bit stupid. It doesnât make for a very tense relationship. If anything, Sophie seems largely at fault â given how bland and lifeless she is, I wouldnât be surprised if her husband disliked her. I wouldnât like her if I was married to her; sheâs the least interesting or intellectually stimulating human, real or fictional, to ever exist on this dimensional plane.
Another thing, why are they married in the first place? They clearly despise each other, so them being together in the first place with no additional context makes no sense. Was it devised by their parents? Did the Duke seduce her and when she became pregnant they were forced to marry out of honour? WHERE IS THE BACKSTORY?Â
If we fleshed out the Duke and gave him an actual personality, we have something to work with. In the show, heâs a Disney level villain with no development, goal, or purpose. This is the Duke of Monmouth in Victoria, not Jafar in Aladdin. The man needs character development, and that shit isnât hard to do.Â
Make his vain and selfish. A man who fancies himself the âNew Byronâ, he wanders into parties dressed in furs and silks, he has many an unusual or exotic pet lying neglected around his house, and he writes poetry, though, despite his efforts, he isnât artistically gifted, so he has to pay the magazines to get them to publish it. He likes running off to Europe at a momentâs notice â âOh, Sophie, whereâs your husband?â âHeâs gone to Geneva.â âAnd he didnât take you with him?â âClearly not, Karen.â â heâs having affairs with the kitchen maids, and he enjoys a night at the gambling house. The debt this man has accumulated is impressively devastating, the illegitimate children have reached numbers incomprehensible to the common manâŚ. and then thereâs his wife. His poor little wife, Sophie. âThat poor wee love,â the people whisper. But she doesnât mind, not yet anyway; âItâs just the way things are,â she says, âAll men do it.â
Maybe heâs in debt and riddled with STDs, which you could then use as another conflict â e.g. We meet Sophie in Episode 1 as a young mother whose husband is often away at âworkâ, and she wants to have another child. This reasonably wish is something that her husband, when he is home, doesnât have an issue with, but we learn throughout the episode that sheâs been trying for a while now and appears to be having difficulty conceiving. In Episode 2, she finally swallows her pride and consults a doctor to check if thereâs a problem, at which point it is discovered she has become infertile as a result of her husbandâs syphilis. Metaphorically, a crack appears in their marriage. Then, after getting over her shock, Sophie, being a sweet summer child, is confused as to how he got syphilis in the first place. A bit of digging around, and she discovers some cheques heâs been writing for a mistress. Another crack. Then, one of the maids in the household gets pregnant. The girl says itâs the Dukeâs, and the word spreads like wildfire. It was kind of accepted that he was a adulterous prick before this, but this is new â this is, shock horror, a high profile scandal. Sophie tries to ignore it, but that only makes it worse. The couple become a laughing stock: âThe Sex Pest and his Poor Little Wifeyâ. Â Thatâs the last straw; the final crack.
This way, thereâs a build up to the point where Sophie goes, âAh, fuck it,â and sleeps with another guy. Without it, itâs just like, âHereâs Sophie. She hates her husband and is looking to fuck someone else. Why does she hate her husband, you ask? It doesnât matter and youâre stupid for asking.â Â Â
So, Problem No. 2 - A lack of context and contrived relationships means the subplot doesnât make sense.
Now, onto Joseph. The fact heâs been employed by both the Cavendish family and Buckingham Palace is a stretch too far to contend with. He neglects his duties, he spends all of his time stalking one lady, and he doesnât follow orders. The man should have been whipped within an inch of his life and then fired.
What makes more sense, methinks, is if he was actually a good footman who wasnât interested in Sophie. That Sophie is the one to make a move. The way she sees it, her life had been ruined by her husbandâs greed and desire, so whatâs she got to lose? Joseph is handsome enough, and heâs always been nice and kind on the few occasions theyâve interacted, so why not? She goes up to him, takes him aside, and offers to pay him generously for a âserviceâ. Heâs initially hesitant, but once he gets the scope of this situation Sophieâs living with, he takes pity on her and does as she wishes.Â
In the show, he comes across as a bit creepy and manipulative, and I think Penge was actually in the right for telling on them when he found out. Penge, smoking out the fuckbois since 1849. Now, thereâs nothing wrong with him being creepy and manipulative if representation of a toxic relationship is what youâre going for, but I get the impression that it really isnât. It was the same with the characters Francatelli and Nancy; in S1, I thought Francatelli was a snivelling creepy weirdo, but it turns out you are actually supposed to ship them, which leads me to believe that Josephâs underlying creepiness is not a deliberate writing choice. I think Daisy Goodwin just really sucks at writing men in a way that isnât creepy or toxic. She sucks at writing generally, but that is a specific theme Iâm noticing.
So, Problem No. 3 - Joseph is not likeable, in any conceivable way.
Then, thereâs America. Okay, Joseph is a footman and he wants to explore the world. Him going to America and leaving boring old England in order to make his fortune is fairly realistic and makes sense. If only this had been built on earlier than Episode 7, to give him some sort of goal to be working towards. You could cut to him every so often putting a portion of his wages away into a jar, saving up for the ship ticket. (This doesnât work with my AU where theyâre developed characters, but itâs a nice idea if weâre sticking strictly with the canon.)
Sophie, however, shouldnât want to go to America. She has a child, who she apparently loves very much. She canât take William with her, the kid belongs to her husband. You canât tell me that a mother who adores her child would ever contemplate leaving her kid behind for some guy sheâs slept with and barely knows. No one does that. An absent mother who doesnât care about her kids? Thatâs more realistic, but thatâs not the character type weâve been presented with, so that fact this is a dilemma for her at all is a direct deviation from the little information weâve been given about the sort of person she is. I donât care if her husband is supposedly abusive, nothing is stronger than a motherâs love and itâs borderline insulting to suggest she loves a one night stand more than her child.Â
So, Problem No. 4 - The characters donât have consistent goals or consistent character types, so every single significant action they make falls apart.
And the finally thing Iâll talk about here⌠they arenât real historical figures.Â
So, Problem No. 5 - This is supposed to be a biopic about Queen Victoria. Who the fuck are these people?
