Pretty?


I wouldn't want anybody in the world but Gemma Jones playing this part, she's so good. But am I the only one who shrugs whenever somebody tells her on the show how extraordinarily pretty she is? As a woman who could have "the pick of society" according to Haslemere, and who captivates the Prince of Wales, she just doesn't seem to me enough of a looker. Is it just me?

Of course, the choices she makes -- the jerky walk and the harsh Cockney accent -- don't help her create the illusion of loveliness a lot of comparatively plain women are able to create by voice and the way they carry themselves. I think Jones herself was able to seem a lot more attractive in "The Spoils of Poynton" by exactly that method.

Again, I think she's an absolutely fantastic actress. I perk up every time I see her name. I have no wish to be unkind. But she simply is not Francesca Annis, and people in this series, early on, keep treating her as if she were. When men in the first episode keep advising her to go on the stage, and Monsieur Alex's first reaction is to call her a "chorus girl," I think "huh???"

The Republican Plan: repeal all reform; collect payoffs; go yachting (but not in the Gulf).

reply

[deleted]

I know what you're saying, and I have found Jones prettier in some other roles. It's rather ironic. Rosa Lewis, upon whom Louisa Trotter was based, looks attractive in several photographs. When Louisa is dressed up for an occasion, she looks far more attractive than in her day-to-day life. I'm not sure why that might be. As for the Prince of Wales' tastes in women, he usually preferred beauties, but I never found Alice Keppel all that attractive, much the way I can't abide her rather horsey faced descendant, the Duchess of Cornwall. Since I love Jones' work, I always suspend my disbelief.

Put puppy mills out of business: never buy dogs from pet shops!

reply

I agree. I think she's wonderful in the role but she's not a beauty, and her gait is rather masculine.

reply

I just began watching this series for the first time last night, and I was thinking the exact same thing as you wrote in your post. In fact, I could have written your post.

I'm more familiar with Gemma Jones as a now older woman, and I think she's an averagely attractive woman, then and now. I'm not overly critical when it comes to a person's physical appearance, but I do agree. It seems odd to hear time and time again in the first two episodes that she is so pretty when I find her looks just average.

I also agree that her walk and voice may be affecting her overall look.

I'm really enjoying the series, however, and I can't believe I haven't bothered watching it before.

reply

This issue comes up in IMDB discussions about Gina McKee in The Forsyte Saga. It's odd that all of these men throw themselves at her and she's no Keira Knightly.

reply

It's interesting what you say about Gina McKee in The Forsyte Saga. I've seen her in that, and other things and while I wouldn't catagorize her as a stunning beauty, I do think she's way above average in appearance. She has a really lovely face, at least I think so. Yes, I guess physical beauty is just so subjective, it's hard for people to agree, and of course the charm factor also plays into what attracts us.

I'll have to check out the IMDB discussions about Gina.

reply

I think she'd be extraordinarily pretty for Edwardian times. They were big on coloring, and she's got blue eyes along with a lot of rich auburn hair. That all goes with her milky white skin so yeah, she'd be a little doll and she IS dainty and slim.

I think that her harshness plays against her pretty doll-like appearance in an interesting way. I always like this actress in this role and the way she played it, but I know that for some people it was a bit too much.

reply

I think that her harshness plays against her pretty doll-like appearance in an interesting way.

I've thought that this was probably one of the things that attracted men to her. Maybe they admired her feistyness, finding it sexually appealing?

reply

The actress chooses to masculinize herself for the role and this takes away from what is pretty about her--her daintiness, doll like coloring, sparkly doe eyes. I too have a hard time seeing the character through the eyes of those around her as a man-magnet.

Now Gena McKee I think is striking. She has mystery and stunning coloring;her manner is langorous and inscrutable which adds charisma to the character. She looks very pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood painting.

reply

She's got a great figure and, taking into consideration the era (little, if any makeup), she's not half bad a looker at that. Keep in mind, this show was made in the year of my own birth. The only thing I can't stand is the nasty harsh cockney accent.

reply

She has a nice figure for the era that the show was filmed, but I don't think her body type fits the setting. She's a little too slim. She does have a tiny waist. But she has no other real curves to speak of. Basically until the 1960s, (well, maybe in the 1920s) buxom women were more desirable than very thin ones.

reply

It's interesting how much a voice can effect how people perceive that person. She has a soft, interesting kind of beauty but the harsh accent and manner she gave the character really over shadows it.

I had a neighbor in my trip-plex building when I first moved in who was originally from NY and had a strong accent and similar demeanor. She was very nice once you got to know her but could come off harsh. My landlords who are elderly really did not like her, even though she was an excellent tenant. She had some plumbing issues and ended up moving out... it all got a bit ugly.

I on the other, raised in SoCal, they love and have been fine to deal with when issues have come up. I always felt had she had a different voice that they would not have reacted to her that way.

reply

I looked up standards of beauty for the time, and Gibson Girls were thought to be extremely beautiful. I think she looks a lot like one. I think her coloring was desirable for the time period as well.

reply

What a relief to find this particular thread! I have just purchased the DVD 2-series set and am enjoying it tremendously but the first series had me constantly thinking that the part of Louisa was badly miscast. Gemma Jones's awkward physical carriage and voice were very harsh style choices to carry the actor through the series but the first segments in Series 1 are very challenging for the viewer because the constant comments on her being pretty jar badly with the fact that Gemma Jones was...not! Handsome, yes, in a distinctive way, but not pretty.

Who would you have cast instead? Any thoughts?

reply

Surely you understand that standards of physical beauty change over time, and that this was set before the advent of women's magazines with glossy Photoshopped images. The standard of beauty even changed considerably from the 50s to the 70s. It's totally conceivably that it was her presence alone they're reacting to, and that they see that as beauty, not just her physiognomy.

reply

by rob-949;

"Surely you understand that standards of physical beauty change over time,"

Absolutely agree.

* The first thing to keep in mind imo in that era is that there was no effective treatment for venereal disease.
Chasing the equivalent of a Kardashian who had had multiple partners was a very bad idea.

And as you put it about beauty in the Victorian era;

"this was set before the advent of women's magazines with glossy Photoshopped images."

This is compilation of what are called Victorian beauties; some of the competition for Rosa Lewis so to speak.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/flowersdaysgonebye/galleries/72157622507 290705

* What we do know is that the real Rosa Lewis was the mistress of the Prince of Wales and considered a beauty in her time.

- A couple of photographs of Rosa;
Plainly dressed;
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rosa_lewis.jpg
Dressed up;
http://www.onlinepublishingcompany.info/images/articles_images/of_the_ royals/of_25.jpg

- And now some pictures of Gemma Jones in the role.
Plainly dressed;
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-meapzYS1Hc8/T-oo65QfbMI/AAAAAAAACbI/W3QV27B7 1Gc/s1600/dods-04.jpg
Dressed up;
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/413NyMT-I1L._SX500_.jpg

Gemma Jones was a very good match for Rosa Lewis, a beauty in her day.

"It's totally conceivably that it was her presence alone they're reacting to, and that they see that as beauty, not just her physiognomy."

You are again right imo.
Rosa Lewis was a phenomenon for that time.
Decades before Julia Child, Rosa was an accomplished French chef.
She prepared meals for the finest families in London.
And her intelligence and unique skill made her attractive for well to do men of that era.

BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈

reply

Surely you understand that standards of physical beauty change over time, and that this was set before the advent of women's magazines with glossy Photoshopped images. The standard of beauty even changed considerably from the 50s to the 70s. It's totally conceivably that it was her presence alone they're reacting to, and that they see that as beauty, not just her physiognomy.

I was going to say the same thing! I also think posters are being rather harsh on Jones' appearance. IMO she's quite lovely, and I can easily see how she would have been considered a beauty during the Edwardian era.

reply

It feels as if the dialog was written when Hailey Mills was going to play Louisa and not altered to fit Ms. Jones when she took over the role.

Jones' version of Louisa is attractive, but for her energy and dynamism more than for her face. The dialog could have been rewritten to reflect Jones in the role--though truth to tell most of the talk of Louisa being so beautiful was in the first episode and was not so prominent in later episodes.

reply