MovieChat Forums > The Forsyte Saga (2002) Discussion > Why are people defending Irene?

Why are people defending Irene?

posted 9 years ago by Tatiana777
53 replies | jump to latest

Alright, alright before my throat is ripped out please let me explain! At the beginning of the film I really loved Irene. To tell the truth even after she met Bossiney and was planning to run off I was still on her side, however after Bossiney died and she confronted June my feelings for her began to sour. I see Irene as a mean, manipulative, Opportunistic, selfish, and self-centered person. I was appalled that she showed no sympathy for June at all when they had the confrontation in Bossiney's room. I tried to hold on and continue seeing things from Irene's point of view, but I just couldn't subject myself to that anymore. My heart started to break realizing and watching how hard Soames tried day after day to please Irene without her even giving him as much as a chance, not only that, but she abused and hurt him MENTALLY every clear chance she got (even before the rape). Now I am not calling Soames completely blames less (the scene where he rapes his wife) but my God! I've read people on here defending Irene as if she were some kind of Martyr! A saint! She is not! She is not even a good person. My eyes finally opened to who Irene is (which was a bit hard to do with her "angelic like front")but do you realize that she was planing to run of with her BESTFRIENDS husband, the same friend who had been her shining light, the friend who had listened to her every problem (now close your eyes and picture Irene taking the man you love- not pretty is it?), and if that wasn't bad enough she ended up marrying her BESTFRIENDS dad as well who happened to be related to Soames! Remember when Soames walked into that Inn one day to find a pregnant Irene with his cousin Jolyon, she smiled as if she found pleasure in that! It made me sick. She makes me want to vomit. Soames never cheated or beat Irene, he was willing to do anything and everything for her. He felt such a deep deep connection with her, that when she left he feel so ill he could not get out of bed. I cried from Soames by the end of the film and my heart bled for him, watching him pour his soul into ungrateful women who could careless about him. Oh and Jolyon, don't get me started on Jolyon! He makes me sick to my stomach as well! I thought he was a man of character, come to find it was not character he had, but rather a lack of morals ugh! I had loved his character at first, before I found out he was a dirty hypocrite. In the end yes, Soames did a terrible thing, but do not forget that what Irene did was equally as terrible. Soames physically hurts her that night, but Irene mentally rapes and psychologically hurts him over and over and over again throughout the series.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

Seriously, where do I even start? What's up with all these 21rst century women defending Soames over Irene?

Try to put yourself into Irene's shoes! She had been pushed and bullied into a marriage to a sociopath, who saw her as a part of his property. Does that sound like a good situation to you? Would it really help that he bought you nice gifts and let you live in a nice house? It didn't to Irene, and even Soames's second wife Annette, who seemed to be a better match for him, was never that happy and had an affair. It seems like he was a really hard man to love, so why do you put all this blame on Irene? The rape (which you seem to just gloss over) only was the culmination of what a disaster her marriage to Soames was. And you seem to forget about all the several other times, when he was violent towards Irene, not to mention that he stalked her after she had left him. But yeah, smiling at him that once sure is just as cruel as him raping her... 

And you also forget that Bosinney carried half the blame for his affair with Irene, making it sound like only she was responsible for what happened. What's up with that? And we also have to remember that June loved him way more than he loved her (even if the 2000s version was extremely vague about that, so I can understand if you missed that). So in the end, she probably never would have been too happy with him anyway in the long run, had Irene not been willing to have an affair with him. Maybe it would have been similar to Winnifred's and Monty's marriage? And I guess that June was better off without that. And if she could forgive Irene, why can't you?

Intelligence and purity.

[–] mkd002 9 years ago

I agree with your point about "21st century women" when they defend a character like Soames. The same thing happened on the PBS site with defenses of Sir Richard Carlisle against Lady Mary Crawley. I'm glad someone besides me (and I'm a practicing female) fails to understand it.

[–] tdltd7557 8 years ago

OMG....."practicing female" LOL LOL You're kidding, right?

[–] shoolaroon-9-43507 9 years ago

I'm a 21st century woman and I'll defend Soames. While I understand that the bottom line is sexual chemistry and that Irene simply couldn't stand that in Soames, most women (and probably most men) are not that sensitive and value other things - the very things that a man like Soames exemplifies. He has many outstanding virtues...he's intelligent, sober, clean living, hard working, honest, devoted to his family, has good taste, is not bad looking, and loves his wife to distraction. He gives her EVERYTHING and is always trying to think of ways to please her according to his understanding of what should be pleasing (which is not her, alas, because they are just too different). He's also very wealthy and like to become more so, which doesn't hurt. Many women, perhaps even most, might think a Soames would be an EXCELLENT husband - myself included! He just needs some breaking in and someone who would meet him half way and teach him out to show affection. So Soames will have many defenders, and frankly, the way Irene commits adultery with her best friend's fiance, is pretty nasty. Maybe love is supposed to conquer all, but there's a lot to be said for self control and having respect and sympathy for others. While someone like Soames is always trying to figure out how to please others (especially women), characters like Irene and Bosinney and even young Jolyon, really only care about pleasing themselves. Irene is particularly appalling in that regard as she displays no concern about the heart break she's causing her alleged best friend, June. I think she's pretty awful, actually.

What an outstanding writer Galsworthy was to create characters that people feel so vividly about 100 or so years after he created them!

[–] furienna 9 years ago

Look... What you seem to have missed is that Irene never wanted to marry Soames in the first place, so I don't see how you can just blame her for having no sexual chemistry with him. And no matter how much Soames loved Irene, and no matter how much he might have tried to make her happy in his own delusional way, they simply never were right for each other. So there was no way that their marriage would be a happy one! And you seem to just disregard that he was abusive towards her and even raped her! Then you start listing all of his "virtues". And yes, he also did manage to get himself a second wife, who happened to be some twenty years younger than him as well. But even though Annette might have seemed to be a better match for Soames than what Irene had been, she was never happy with him either until after Fleur had grown up and gotten married. Her mother had talked her into choosing Soames over her other suitor, who was a young but poor doctor, as he of course happened to be the richer out of the two. And eventually, Annette too met another man and had an affair with him. So I have to put the blame here on Soames, who never could stop seeing his wife as a part of his property, and surely not on poor Irene, whom he actually had battered, raped and stalked.

And I adressed the Irene/Bosinney affair earlier in this thread, but it seems like I have to do it again... Yes, I can agree that June didn't really deserve that. But alas, things will happen. Irene was never happy in that marriage to Soames, which had been a total disaster from the beginning. And it also seems like Bosinney never loved June as much as she loved him, so he would probably had cheated on her anyway sooner or later (but when you consider that this version never really explained that detail, I can see how people missed it). And after all, June decided to forgive Irene after she had found out about the rape, which only made his more liberal cousins (and even his uncle) despise him even more than what they had before. And I guess that it made total sense for June to choose Irene over Soames at that point, but I don't like how she used her old hatred to keep her brother away from Fleur decades later.

As for Young Jolyon, he too had been stuck in an unhappy marriage. He had only married Frances when he was on the rebound from a previous relationship, and it was almost as disasterous as the Soames/Irene pairing. And if you ever watch the 1960s version, you can tell that Frances never was a very pleasant woman. Not to mention that she had also refused to have sex with Jolyon ever since June was born, which had only made things even worse between the two. Maybe you think that Jolyon should just have stayed in the same house as his wife, just to keep the appearances up, and visit Helene where she lived. And that is how most men back then would have handled a situation like this. But he bravely decided to not live a lie anymore, even if that meant that he couldn't see his own daughter for all those years. And for what it's worth, I wonder if he didn't do the right thing. June would never have been that happy with having two parents, who never could get along anymore. And it seems like Jolyon became a loving husband to both Helene (even after she had developed some kind of mental illness) and Irene, and he also reconciled with both his father and his daughter. But what I really dislike about him is that he pressured his son Jon into giving up Fleur, because of what her father had done years before she was even born!

Intelligence and purity.

[–] li-911-404682 8 years ago

No one forced Irene to marry him, Soames certainly didn't. He asked her, she declined. As he got ready to leave town, she came to him and said that if he asked her again she would accept. Probably because her stepmom gave her a reality-check about their situation. If Irene wasn't willing to be Soames' wife then she shouldn't have accepted his proposal. She was a cold fish, a manipulative emotionally abusive person who simply had decided to not love or even care for her husband. I have little sympathy for her, and the little I have is due to the circumstances she found herself in as a woman of little means in that era. All in all, she was a cold, entitled, dishonest and selfish person without honour and consideration. She basically loathed her husband for being rich, and blamed him for everything and anything and had not sense enough to see her own poor behaviour and blame. I despised Irene, I think she deserved much worse than she got. I loathed the selfish two-faced douche-lover Bosinney that died in the accident, and gloated when I got to see him die.

[–] catbookss 8 years ago

I have a great deal of trouble understanding this black and white -- or nearly so -- type of thinking. It's sad to me that given such outstanding, layered performances of outstanding and multi-faceted characters given us by the writers, so many people miss the point that all of the characters are flawed.

No one forced Irene to marry him, Soames certainly didn't. He asked her, she declined. As he got ready to leave town, she came to him and said that if he asked her again she would accept. Probably because her stepmom gave her a reality-check about their situation.

As you pointed out a little later, Irene was in a very difficult position. Her father had recently died, leaving her stepmother with few funds. She was pressing Irene very hard to marry. When she closed the door and left Irene standing out in the rain, that was a very clear metaphor for what Irene's future was if she didn't comply with her stepmother's wishes. Obviously there was no love lost between them. I understand in the book it was much worse, but I haven't read the book and we're discussing this production anyway.

Her stepmother was trying to force her, but you're right that Soames did not.

If Irene wasn't willing to be Soames' wife then she shouldn't have accepted his proposal.

If Soames was unwilling to accept Irene's only condition of the marriage, which he promised to honor, he shouldn't have married her. She asked him twice, to make sure he understood, and agreed, that if the marriage didn't work out, he would let her go as though the marriage had never taken place. If he hadn't given his word, she would not have married him.

She was willing to be his wife, at first. We don't see what happened until a year or two after they were married, except we know Irene is still fulfilling her "wifely duties," no matter how repellent Soames has become to her. And, let's be honest, watch Soames in that bed scene. He has zero awareness of her and her feelings. His only concern is filling his own needs. He is so unaware.

It was the most horrific, difficult to watch sex scene I've ever seen. Worse than the rape, because of all the unspoken misery that had gone on night after night. I felt awful for both of them.

She was a cold fish, a manipulative emotionally abusive person who simply had decided to not love or even care for her husband.

She later proved she was not a cold fish -- not with Bosinney, and not with Jolyon. How was she manipulative and emotionally abusive to Soames? She didn't love him -- could not love him -- and he was obsessed with her. She didn't simply decide not to love him, she was actually repelled by him. There's no overcoming that.

Soames had no understanding of Irene, they had no connection, no affinity, and he wasn't even aware of it. She loved art and felt it deeply, while Soames' only interest in it was what it was worth monetarily. They were completely unsuited to one another. He "loved" her like he loved an object, a possession.

Soames actually was emotionally abusive to her, as well as physically. He was extremely controlling and manipulative to her.

She basically loathed her husband for being rich, and blamed him for everything and anything and had not sense enough to see her own poor behaviour and blame.

What? Where are you getting that? She didn't loathe him for being rich. Nor did she blame him for everything and anything. She just wanted out! She wanted Soames to honor his promise, once she realized it was never going to work. I agree that some of her behavior was poor, and later she did come to realize it. I don't understand why you're not seeing that Soames did blame Irene for everything, and had even less awareness of his poor behavior than Irene. At the end, he too realized it.

Bosinney wasn't a very likable character, I'll agree with that. Not that I wanted to see him die, but in my opinion he was one of, if not the, most unlikable characters in the story.

[–] hilaryjrp 8 years ago

I have a great deal of trouble understanding this black and white -- or nearly so -- type of thinking. It's sad to me that given such outstanding, layered performances of outstanding and multi-faceted characters given us by the writers, so many people miss the point that all of the characters are flawed.

I agree. I wonder if this phenomenon is restricted to IMDB or if other forums that exist (or may have existed) don't tap into prejudice and misogyny quite so intense.

Bosinney wasn't a very likable character, I'll agree with that. Not that I wanted to see him die, but in my opinion he was one of, if not the, most unlikable characters in the story.

I think this is because in this version, Bosinney is presented as so much "cooler" than he comes off in the 70's version or the book. The 2002 Bosinney is Mr. Metrosexual. See, the problem is that every generation's Forsyte Saga will play to the lusts of its audience. And why shouldn't this be the case? Soames is a completely different person in the 70's version, not nuanced at all, to the extent that the focus is entirely, entirely, *entirely* on Irene's predicament. But, hey, what gal in her right mind wouldn't love the dude if he's wearing Sergeant Brody's face? (And to make it clear--I love Sergeant Brody's face.) Some viewers identify so wholeheartedly with an actor or actress, they can't see beyond their own private Forsyte Saga.

[–] li-911-404682 8 years ago

I do not hold Soames blame free, he acted horribly as well. The thing that made me angry was that everyone hated him and treated him badly and without respect, while holding her up as a form of innocent angel. THAT is what wound me up, that she was never held accountable. If the tables had been turned, I'd have been on Irene's side.

[–] furienna 8 years ago

Did you miss that Soames had raped Irene? Because yes, that was plenty enough for four of his own relatives to turn their backs on him. And when you consider Irene's story, she was the innocent victim. She had lost both of her parents before she was off age, and her only family was her mean stepmother. She was forced into marrying a sociopath, who she could never love back. And even her doomed affair with Bossiney was a desperate attempt at having some happiness in her life, that only would blow up in her face.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] catbookss 8 years ago

I understand how you feel, in some ways. While Irene was portrayed as having her flaws, as all the characters did, she was not held accountable for publicly humiliating Soames at the dance, in front of his family and peers, by dancing the way she did with Bosinney. That was unnecessary and inexcusable.

Nor was she held accountable for betraying her only friend, June, by having an affair with Bosinney behind June's back and not only showing no remorse for it, but saying cruel things to June when confronted. Yes, obviously Bosinney wasn't truly in love with June or it wouldn't have happened, and he wouldn't have treated her so abominably, but that's a separate issue, between he and June. A real friend wouldn't have behaved that way towards June, and Irene was no true friend to her. I didn't like it that June later forgave Irene so easily, without any apology from Irene.

None of this, however, excuses Soames' treatment of Irene, by any stretch. Nothing excuses rape, or stalking. He should have let her go, as he promised to do, which was her condition for marrying him.

Not everyone hated Soames or treated him badly and without respect. His father clearly loved and respected him, as did his mother, with some warranted misgivings. So did his daughter, although he helped make her a spoiled brat who later turned on him.

[–] all4sunni 9 years ago

I love this book and I love the BBC adaptation with Damien Lewis and Gina McKee as part of the excellent cast.

I find it interesting that so many people here are saying that Soames "did everything to please his wife." When he asks if she wants to move to the country, she is surprised that he would ask. She asks him, "if I didn't want to go, would you change your plans?" He says he would not. How is that "doing everything to please your wife"? He made all his decisions without consulting her, and then was upset when she didn't want to go along. He never knew her, never wanted to know her, couldn't even grasp that she was a separate person from himself. He was in "love" with his own made up fantasy of who she might be and upset that she didn't live up to the fantasy. Upset that she would smile at other people, including June. Even Soames' proposal (as shown on TV. I've forgotten how it went in the book) was an example of his and Irene's fundamental misunderstanding

Soames: Will you be mine?
Irene: I will marry you.

Irene will not be his. He didn't even hear her and wasn't concerned that her acceptance of his proposal was contingent on his promise to let her go if the marriage wasn't "a success".
Damien Lewis was wonderful in the role. Such a hard, difficult character.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

I find it interesting that so many people here are saying that Soames "did everything to please his wife." When he asks if she wants to move to the country, she is surprised that he would ask. She asks him, "if I didn't want to go, would you change your plans?" He says he would not. How is that "doing everything to please your wife"? He made all his decisions without consulting her, and then was upset when she didn't want to go along. He never knew her, never wanted to know her, couldn't even grasp that she was a separate person from himself. He was in "love" with his own made up fantasy of who she might be and upset that she didn't live up to the fantasy.

And alas, this would be a very good description of what Soames must have thought about his marriage to Irene. He expects her to live up to his idea of "the perfect wife", but he can't understand that it's not what she wanted her life to be. Soames believes that as long as he gives her a nice house and nice gifts, she would be satisfied. But that is not who Irene was, and he just can't understand that! And even his love for her, which should have been a beautiful thing, only becomes an unhealthy and desperate obsession to possess her. Soames had been raised to believe that women should always be subservient, and that money could solve every problem. And this would have been normal enough within the upper middle class in the Victorian era, so I don't blame him entirely. But it ended up destroying Irene's life, his own life and eventually also Jon's and Fleur's lives.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] catbookss 8 years ago

I find it interesting that so many people here are saying that Soames "did everything to please his wife." When he asks if she wants to move to the country, she is surprised that he would ask. She asks him, "if I didn't want to go, would you change your plans?" He says he would not. How is that "doing everything to please your wife"? He made all his decisions without consulting her, and then was upset when she didn't want to go along. He never knew her, never wanted to know her, couldn't even grasp that she was a separate person from himself. He was in "love" with his own made up fantasy of who she might be and upset that she didn't live up to the fantasy. Upset that she would smile at other people, including June. Even Soames' proposal (as shown on TV. I've forgotten how it went in the book) was an example of his and Irene's fundamental misunderstanding

Soames: Will you be mine?
Irene: I will marry you.

Irene will not be his. He didn't even hear her and wasn't concerned that her acceptance of his proposal was contingent on his promise to let her go if the marriage wasn't "a success".
Damien Lewis was wonderful in the role. Such a hard, difficult character.

It's refreshing to read a post by someone who actually understood the characters and their complexities.

You're absolutely right, Soames neither knew nor wanted to know Irene, and he did not want to please her, he wanted to please himself and control her.

Damian Lewis did have a very difficult role to play in Soames, and he played it brilliantly, often wordlessly. On the surface he was a despicable villain, yet Lewis -- and the script -- brought an underlying humanity and tragedy to his character, to the point where one could also eventually feel sympathy towards him. It was one of the most outstanding and memorable portrayals and characters I've ever seen for these reasons.

[–] sanderling5 9 years ago

What an outstanding writer Galsworthy was to create characters that people feel so vividly about 100 or so years after he created them!

Well said. I read the books many years ago, when the original Forsyte Saga series ran on American public TV in the 1970's, and have enjoyed seeing another rendition of the story in this more modern version.

The great tragedy of Irene and Soames' disastrous marriage is that Soames has a genuine passion-not sure if it is actually love-but that they are fundamentally unsuited for each other. Irene and Soames have such different values;they see life very differently. Soames feels the weight and responsibility of his position in his extended family and in society, and lives his life attempting to carry out what he sees as his duty. Soames appreciates art and music, but in a different way than Irene, young Jolyon and Phillip Bosinney-for those characters art informs and illuminates their lives and is essential to their wellbeing.

I found Irene to be a sympathetic character in many ways;she believes that Soames will honor her belief that if they are not happy in their marriage that he will release her. Soames cannot or will not do so, because he does, in some way, care for Irene. When she is unfaithful, Soames commits that dreadful rape, and Irene flees. I don't think that Soames ever fully recovered from the disastrous end of his first marriage; his marriage to Annette is a business arrangement to provide him with an heir. That was hardly uncommon in English society at the time that Galsworthy lived and wrote.

The one person whom Soames unconditionally loves is Fleur.

I enjoyed this version of the Forsyte Saga, particularly Damian Lewis as Soames-an excellent portrayal. As for the casting of Gina McKee as Irene, I was less impressed. Irene as described by Galsworthy is a unusually beautiful woman, and McKee is not. It's a stretch to believe that Soames would find her so captivating.

The 1970's version cast Eric Porter as Soames and Nyree Dawn Porter as Irene, and Nyree Dawn Porter was simply exquisite as Irene-she was very beautiful and also captured the passive yet sensual quality that Galsworthy gave her character.

[–] hilaryjrp 9 years ago

The 1970's version cast Eric Porter as Soames and Nyree Dawn Porter as Irene, and Nyree Dawn Porter was simply exquisite as Irene-she was very beautiful and also captured the passive yet sensual quality that Galsworthy gave her character.

Nyree Dawn Porter *was* beautiful as Irene, but in a "handsome" way. That's why I like her. I expected one of the endless parade of platinum-blonde, fake eyelash-wearing hussies that 70' (and late 60's) film producers stocked their ponds with. While Nyree Dawn Porter is as platinum blonde as everyone else in the '67 version, her beauty is hardly frail. It's almost androgynous--to the point where she reminded me of a more famous androgynous fake platinum blonde of that era, Kim Novak.

At one point, George (a loathsome minor character) says to Dartie about her, "'I'm beautiful! Look but don't touch'!" This statement suggests at least to me that the Soames that Galsworthy wrote prized Irene much more for her physical appearance than for her more cerebral qualities. I doubt that Soames ever went around reciting Ode to Intellectual Beauty. She was another painting to hang on the wall and would have ended up My Last Duchess if she stayed.

[–] nanonta 9 years ago

I an not the first to notice the resemblance between Gina McKee and Margaret Hamilton (yes, the one in The Wizard of Oz.).

From Masterpiece Theater Forum http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/masterpiece/forum/forsyte_20070417.html: "In some profile long-shots, with the awful hats she is made to wear, she looks disturbingly like Margaret Hamilton in The Wizard of Oz."

I don't think it's limited to long shots though.

[–] lulupalooza 9 years ago

Yes, many people feel this way. Netflix reviewers comment on the same things, so you're totally not alone.

Personally, I found most of the characters to be quite unsympathetic and even despicable - it was like a historical version of the old TV show Dallas or some other "soap opera" of backstabbers and cry babies. I couldn't stand Irene much of time, and often felt sympathy for Soames. And the others weren't much better; Jon and Fleur were cringeworthy with their ongoing adolescent behavior that filled too much runtime.

Perhaps June was the only consistently likable(ish) character next to Old Jolyon who redeemed himself by welcoming Young Jolyon back and becoming a man of character (i.e. making amends, changing his will, etc.).

And I can barely believe my eyes, but someone else in this thread thinks that the actress that played Irene looks like the wicked witch from The Wizard of Oz!! I had just mentioned that in a different post; she was a poor casting choice for a supposed "great beauty". Oddly, I found her eyebrows to be distracting as well.

"Don't get chumpatized!" - The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters (2007)

[–] nanonta 9 years ago

Perhaps Margaret Hamilton was not completely unattractive without the green skin. She was married in 1931 and had a child, but divorced later. Her family included famous scholar Edith Hamilton, who apparently did not entirely approve of Margaret's career in films.

[–] janet__el 9 years ago

I think the whole point of the movie is to make us think about how some victims are not sympathetic and some evil-doers are not sociopaths. I found being so strongly attracted to Soames' character to be very uncomfortable as a feminist. I thought the whole way through that my being drawn to him was a personal failing :)

Then I came here and found that like any great piece of art, this series made a lot of people think outside their stereotypes.

[–] mkd002 9 years ago

I think you're very hard on Irene. Her stepmother was eager and insistent on giving her to Soames in marriage and, with her youthful fear and apprehension, she saw no other realistic option. He tried every day to please her? Yes, if you assume that his assumptions about how to please her corresponded to her needs (not mercenary ones in her case). He became the most horrifying control freak he could be. I don't agree that he felt a connection to her except, of course, as a possession like a prized piece of furniture. She had taken his promise to free her if the marriage didn't work as a real promise, whereas it was no such thing. He could have moved on with his life by freeing her but his need to dominate and hypocritical fear of family scandal did not allow that. He could not make the mature, unselfish decision needed.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

This is what I wrote in a different thread:

My sympathy for Irene has only increased since I read a novel about a girl in a eerily similar situation. She too was an orphan daughter of a professor in the 1880s, who was bullied and pressured into a marriage to a man who raped her. And it all happened because back then, upper middle class girls weren't supposed to become independent women, who could make it on their own, but just pefect wives who were their husband's property. And in the end, I guess that conforming to people's expectations seemed like the best choice (although it really wasn't)...

So what I'm trying to say is, I don't see how so many people are so hard on Irene. Her marriage to Soames was a disaster from the beginning, and it had never been her idea to enter it. There weren't so many jobs out there in the 1880s, which would have been suitable for a girl from that social class. So I understand that marriage seemed to be the only option for Irene, when her stepmother wanted to throw her out of the house.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] mkd002 9 years ago

Good points. I think very often commenters either don't know or just overlook because of modern attitudes how different women's lives were -- and we must remember that this story starts in 1879. The restrictions were very strong and very frightening. Soames was the quintessential product of his male-dominated age, and Irene was a woman who had to try for a freer life. And I believe that stepmother would have thrown her out.

[–] catbookss 9 years ago

I think you're very hard on Irene. Her stepmother was eager and insistent on giving her to Soames in marriage and, with her youthful fear and apprehension, she saw no other realistic option. He tried every day to please her? Yes, if you assume that his assumptions about how to please her corresponded to her needs (not mercenary ones in her case). He became the most horrifying control freak he could be. I don't agree that he felt a connection to her except, of course, as a possession like a prized piece of furniture. She had taken his promise to free her if the marriage didn't work as a real promise, whereas it was no such thing. He could have moved on with his life by freeing her but his need to dominate and hypocritical fear of family scandal did not allow that. He could not make the mature, unselfish decision needed.

Thanks for saving me some typing. It's astonishing to me that anyone could defend Soames' actions, let alone any woman in the 21st century.

The main problem seems to be that many can't deal with characters who are not painted either black or white, as villain or villainess. Because Irene has her flaws, and Soames has some sympathetic qualities, therefore Irene must be the villain, and Soames the hero. Except good literature and drama don't work that way.

In today's terms, Soames would be seen as an obsessed stalker, and yes, a control freak. He tried to "please" Irene by isolating her, removing her from London where she knew people (not coincidentally from June, her then closest friend, who didn't approve of Soames), to the country where there would be no one. Except of course Soames.

There's an ocean of difference between loving someone and being obsessed with them. The former isn't selfish, the latter is.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

But how exactly did Irene have any flaws? Because to me, she was the most flawless character in the whole series. Then again, she was hardly some sickeningly perfect Mary Sue either. So I would say that she feels like a real person, like how a woman in her situation would be. And there is no doubt that she's my favorite character in this series.

I think I agree with you on Soames though. Even if he too came to show some sympathetic qualities, especially later in his life, he still never can escape being the control freak, who both raped and stalked the woman he loved.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] catbookss 9 years ago

Her betrayal of June was awful and a major flaw. June had been her only friend and confidant.

Flaunting her affair with Bosinney in that intimate dance at the ball and humiliating Soames, in front of all of his peers, was both selfish and reckless.

When June came to Bosinney's apartment looking for him, she should have shown June remorse for betraying her, but she showed none.

I liked Irene and was sympathetic to her in many ways, but she, like all the others, was flawed. I liked this, too, because it made the characters real. Young Joleyn was overall sympathetic and likable, but he too had flaws.

I did come to feel for Soames. First when he fell to pieces, later when he was so moved by the birth of his daughter, when his daughter was so unfeeling towards him when she didn't get what she wanted, despite what it cost him, and when he and Irene finally came to a peace with one another.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

Her betrayal of June was awful and a major flaw. June had been her only friend and confidant. Flaunting her affair with Bosinney in that intimate dance at the ball and humiliating Soames, in front of all of his peers, was both selfish and reckless.

But when you consider what Irene's life was like at the time, can you blame her for wanting some happiness? Why yes, it was unfortunate that June got stuck in the middle. But there was no stopping what happened.

When June came to Bosinney's apartment looking for him, she should have shown June remorse for betraying her, but she showed none.

Irene felt a lot of remorse for this. And if you read the books, you will see that she didn't reconcile with June for years, because she was so ashamed of what she had done to her, that she couldn't bear to face her.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] catbookss 9 years ago

But when you consider what Irene's life was like at the time, can you blame her for wanting some happiness? Yes, it was unfortunate that June got stuck in the middle. But there was no stopping what happened.

I didn't say I blamed her, and yes I can understand why she'd want some happiness after losing her parents, enduring her stepmother, and being stuck in a loveless marriage with someone whom she was eventually repulsed by. But that doesn't negate the fact she betrayed her closest friend and only champion, and caused her a great deal of pain. That was something she chose to do; it didn't just happen. She may not have been able to control the way she felt about him, but she could control whether or not she took action on it.

Irene felt a lot of remorse. And if you read the books, you will find that she didn't reconcile with June for years, because she was so ashamed of what she had done to her, that she couldn't bear to face her.

I haven't read the books, I've only seen this version (2002) of it, and in this version, she never shows June remorse.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

But when I consider her situation at the time, there is no way that I can judge her for her actions. And I have to say even in this adaption, Irene looks very remorseful to me in the scene where June confronts her. She knew so well that she had hurt her best friend, but it seems like things had simply gotten out of her control. No, I won't say that Irene showed a perfect behavior during her affair with Bosinney. But when I only can feel deep sympathy for her even then, when she arguably showed her worst side... Well, then I can also call her the least flawed character in this series!

And either way, shouldn't you judge Bosinney just as much as you judge Irene for what happened? After all, not only did this guy cheat on his fiancée, but he also wanted to act like he didn't even know her when they met in the street! Even if he had never loved June like he loved Irene, that was a really ***hole and cowardly thing to do! Not that I was glad that Bosinney died, like some people on this board were. But there was something about him, that made it hard for me to like him. He was good though when he saved Irene from Monty's forced advances, and I was glad to see her happy with someone for once...

Intelligence and purity.

[–] catbookss 9 years ago

And I have to say even in this adaption, Irene looks very remorseful to me in the scene where June confronts her.

Uh, no. Not at all, and actually the opposite. Irene went out of her way to hurt June.

Right after Irene lets June know she and Bosinney are together, without any thought or consideration of how shocking and hurtful it would be to her, June is very hurt and angry and says Irene’s been a false friend to her. Irene smiles slightly, and her smug response was “What did you used to tell me? That you cannot force love where there is none.” She follows with “You said Soames tried to buy me body and soul. Had you stayed with Phil, you’d have been guilty of the same.” Good god. She intended to hurt June. She knew June loathed Soames -- ironically, in part because June had taken Irene's side because she disliked how Soames treated Irene! Irene not only shows June no remorse, she was overtly cruel to her.

Irene's behavior was so far from perfect with June and Bosinney, it was terrible. Selfish, callous, and dishonorable.

I don't fault her for falling in love with him. But rather than betraying her best, closest, and only friend in such a horrible way, she should have let Bosinney end things with June, and then broken it to her very gently. June deserved that. For that I could have respected her.

And either way, shouldn't you judge Bosinney just as much as you judge Irene for what happened? After all, not only did this guy cheat on his fiancée, but he also wanted to act like he didn't even know her when they met in the street! Even if he had never loved June like he loved Irene, that was a really ***hole and cowardly thing to do!

I do judge Bosinney. It was awful that he was such a coward and avoided June the way he did, even before only tipping his hat to her and walking on that day he saw her on the street. But I don't judge him as much as Irene, because Irene she'd been such a good friend to for years, only to be betrayed by her, and then to be so deliberately cruel to her. At least Bosinney didn't do that.

[–] ShannonTriumphant 9 years ago

Interesting debate about Irene and June....and Bosinney! I had to jump in. I agree with both you and furienna, with a couple of exceptions. I used to think Irene was a total victim after seeing the 1967 version, and then reading the novel. I thought that for many years. But somehow, over time, I saw her as somewhat selfish, not then, as much (though her treatment of June was wretched, in my view), but later, toward Fleur and Jon.

The way I view the whole thing now is that Irene and Bosinney had a weaker version of the same flaws that gripped Soames and June: desire without understanding and a case of possessiveness. June was always written by Galsworthy as being very much like Soames, but tempered by her grandfather's compassion and possibly the fact that she's a woman. Is she a rapist like Soames? No. But she is quite possessive of Phil; she pursues him even when she knows he doesn't want her. Old Jolyon is so upset that he bursts out at her, "I believe you'd have him if he were dead!" Ironically, he DOES die shortly after that.

Galsworthy has the omniscient voice and some characters, like June herself, wonder if Bosinney would eventually have tired of her suffocating attentions, no matter how much she loved him. I think he would have.

That being said, his behavior toward June was abominable. I saw him as very selfish, cowardly and even cruel. All he thought of was Irene and his own passion. He could not help falling in love any more than Irene, or June, but at least he could have faced June and broken the engagement. So why didn't he? Perhaps Irene's actions provide a clue.

Likewise, Irene is not to be blamed for falling in love with Bosinney, nor (in my opinion) for acting on it. Soames left her no way out. Passion like that is a VERY hard thing to deny! But at least she should, like Phil, have spoken to June and had it out with her. My guess is that her natural passivity made her afraid of a scene with someone who had every right to be furious with her. Like Bosinney, she dodged it. That's reprehensible, but still nothing like what Soames did! I think that June eventually understood, or she would not have forgiven Irene. She also continued to love Phil for the rest of her life.

That scene between Irene and June, after Phil is gone, is so terribly written, compared to the book! In that scene, Irene hardly says a word, while June rails at her, shouting. She tells Irene that she has no right there and Irene answers, "I have no right anywhere....I have left Soames, as you said I should." June starts asking about it but then says, "No! Don't tell me!" She can't bear the truth. If Irene really left Soames, then the love between Bosinney and her becomes real; June can't face it.

She tells Irene to leave and she does, silently, weeping, with her head down. June calls out after her but Irene is gone. That's it! On some level, June knows she pushed it too far with a man who didn't want her. In my mind, they are ALL at fault!

Nobody in this story is blameless. All are victims of their own desires, possessiveness, blindness, denial and cowardice. Galsworthy portrays them--even Soames (perhaps especially him, in the end)--not as monsters or evil, but as victims of a broken, sick society that kills natural impulses (like sharing true feelings), while creating rigid institutions and sick urges like ownership and control over others. What he basically writes here is a classic tragedy. Everyone has a fatal flaw and all of them have a destiny (which Soames, Jolyon and Irene call "Nemesis") that they cannot escape, no matter how they try.

Only some of the lucky ones, like Val and Holly, escape relatively unscathed.

Don't get me wrong...
It might be unbelievable,
But let's not say so long

[–] djxb-1 9 years ago

...but she, like all the others, was flawed...

Well, who isn't?

I would almost think sometimes from reading these boards that people only know perfect people who've never done a hurtful or selfish thing in their lives. Except I know better.

I hope for their own sakes that people are more tolerant of human frailty in real life than they are of these fictional characters.

[–] heartsinwonderland 9 years ago

It's like June said, "You [Irene] are a leech." Irene sucks the life out of people.

I feel like the audience was supposed to hate Soames, but the miscast of Irene made him seem sympathetic.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

For real? Did you read what I've been writing during the last week? Irene was pushed and bullied and tricked into her marriage to Soames. And he battered her, raped her and stalked her. And you still think that she is the bad person?

Intelligence and purity.

[–] scamper67 9 years ago

Irene wasn't bullied into marriage by Soames, he had pretty much given up the idea when she approached him with that ridiculous condition.

It's hard for me to say which one of them was worse, but Irene used Soames right from the beginning and later told him to his face that she always loathed him, really what did she expect would happen? He wasn't to blame for her situation and he did not put a gun to her head to force marriage on her.

I'm not defending Soames actions but in his own way he was also a victim, he loved someone who only used him to put a roof over her head and you just cannot play games with someone's emotions and expect to get away unscathed.

I don't like Irene at all and I am having a hard time finding someone in this series that I can like, I guess I keep watching to see if someone will finally crawl out of the dirt and start acting right for a change.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

Irene wasn't bullied into marriage by Soames.

Soames had actually made a deal with Irene's stepmother, that no other suitor would be allowed to come near her. Does that sound fair to you?

He had pretty much given up the idea when she approached him with that ridiculous condition.

How was it ridiculous? Irene knew already by then that something was wrong with Soames, so yes, she would try to give herself some security. But alas, she should have understood that he would never keep such a promise.

It's hard for me to say which one of them was worse, but Irene used Soames right from the beginning and later told him to his face that she always loathed him, really what did she expect would happen?

Excuse me? Soames battered, raped and stalked Irene. And I don't know which show you have watched, if you think that she did anything to him, that can be compared to that!

He wasn't to blame for her situation and he did not put a gun to her head to force marriage on her.

Yes, he pretty much forced it upon her with his deal with her stepmother.

I'm not defending Soames actions but in his own way he was also a victim, he loved someone who only used him to put a roof over her head.

True, Soames was the victim of his own personality (he might have had some disorder, that made it difficult for him to grasp other people's feelings). And he also was the victim of the ways of the Victorian age in general (when the poor women were supposed to just please their husbands) and of his family in particular (James had in no way been a good role model for his son). But still, you have to face the consequences of your own actions. And it would take Soames twenty years after their divorce to regret what he had done to Irene. Soames had fallen deeply in love with a woman, who was wrong for him right from the start. So yes, I can feel some sympathy for him. Until I remember that Irene was pretty much forced into the marriage by her stepmother, and that Soames came to abuse her.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] scamper67 9 years ago

You misunderstood me, I meant he wasn't to blame for the loss of her parents and needing to marry or, gasp!, get a job.

Aside from the rape, which was wrong of course (but then so if flaunting your attraction to someone else in front of his whole family, not to mention cheating.) but he did not "batter" her during the marriage, even she admitted that.

As for the promise she asked of him, yes it was ridiculous. In other words she was saying, "I'll take the protection of your name until I no longer need you, then I expect you to just step aside and let me be free", how fair is that? She knew how he felt about her so she was indeed using him.

It is true that marriages of convenience were common in those days, but it was with the understanding that the wife provide an heir, but Irene being the selfish b--ch she was made sure that wouldn't happen, and that look she gave him when he saw her pregnant with another man's child was nothing short of cruel.

She treated him with contempt right from the start, if indeed she knew something was not right about him, that would be tantamount to poking a stick at a wounded animal, don't expect not to get bitten.

Although I don't really like him, I have no sympathy for Irene either, I think that at least being his friend and showing compassion to him would have helped the situation a lot more then being the frigid b she was.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

You misunderstood me, I meant he wasn't to blame for the loss of her parents and needing to marry or, gasp!, get a job.

But he was responsible for making a deal with her stepmother, so she wouldn't be able to find another man to marry. And as for her getting a job, what kind of job could she get? You have to remember that as a professor's daughter in the 1880s, she wasn't supposed to work at all, except maybe as a teacher or lady's companion. Or maybe as a nurse, because the work of Florence Nightingale had made that occupation more respectable. But at the time, Irene needed a quick way to escape her stepmother. So in a way, Soames did take advantage of her sad situation.

Aside from the rape, which was wrong of course [...] he did not "batter" her during the marriage, even she admitted that.

He showed a clear violent side towards her even before the rape (even if that didn't start until he had understood that she had an affair). He pushed her forcibly against a wall at one point, and he also yelled at her and almost beat her up while they were in a carriage together.

As for the promise she asked of him, yes it was ridiculous. In other words she was saying, "I'll take the protection of your name until I no longer need you, then I expect you to just step aside and let me be free", how fair is that? She knew how he felt about her so she was indeed using him.

Of course it was a marriage of convenience, and I don't see how Soames could have ever missed that. If he thought that Irene would start loving him back, he was only fooling himself. So no, I don't feel sorry for him at that point.

It is true that marriages of convenience were common in those days, but it was with the understanding that the wife provide an heir, but Irene being the selfish b--ch she was made sure that wouldn't happen.

But that marriage was a mistake right from the start. Irene must have tried to make it work at first, but she could never stop feeling repulsed by Soames.

And that look she gave him when he saw her pregnant with another man's child was nothing short of cruel.

But stalking her all the way to France was totally all right, of course? 

She treated him with contempt right from the start, if indeed she knew something was not right about him, that would be tantamount to poking a stick at a wounded animal, don't expect not to get bitten.

Like I said, Irene needed a quick way to escape her stepmother. And she was still really young and naive. I guess that she hoped that the marriage would become decent, even if she wouldn't love Soames back. Or at least that he would actually keep his promise to her...

Intelligence and purity.

[–] scamper67 9 years ago

You seem to have an excuse for her at every turn. I just don't like either one of them and she is no more blameless then he. Getting a job as a ladies maid or governess, or perhaps a music teacher would have been better than what they ended up with. I don't agree about the stalking, a man going after his slutty wife is not the same thing as just any guy following her, and he was not even doing that at the time he saw her pregnant, he had no idea she was there so that does not count as stalking.

I respect your opinion I just don't agree, those time he did react to her, she did things that would make any man upset, so to put all the blame on him just isn't fair. There was one point where he simply wanted a divorce so he could marry someone else but she refused, which of course stirred the whole thing up again and that was why he was "stalking" her, to get some kind of proof so that he could divorce her, she was too busy being mean and vindictive to make things simpler so they could each go on their way.

I'm sure you have yet another excuse for her on this count too but it doesn't really matter, when all is said and done neither one of them had clean hands and to me neither was worthy of anyone decent because they sure weren't.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

Getting a job as a ladies maid or governess, or perhaps a music teacher would have been better than what they ended up with.

Yes, that is clear to us in 2015. But the strict conventions of the Victorian era made it hard for Irene to choose a job over marriage. Even if a few occupations had become respectable even for "ladies", women in the upper classes still mostly refused to work as long as they could. They simply got married as soon as a good enough man turned up to court them. Or if they found no husband, they lived on their inheritence or on the good will of their families. So when you consider that Irene had only £50 a year after her father, and her only family was her cold-hearted stepmother, what could she do? Sure, maybe she could have looked for a job. But you have to realize that everybody around her expected her to get married, especially when a gentleman like Soames had proposed to her. And after her stepmother had threatened to throw her out of the house, a marriage to Soames to be the easiest way out. But alas, she was too young and naive to realize that she had only thrown herself into yet another nasty situation.

I don't agree about the stalking, a man going after his slutty wife is not the same thing as just any guy following her.

Okay, hold it! Irene had not had a man in her life for twelve years when Soames started stalking her. So how exactly was she a slut? But I guess that you also cheer on those men today, who keep on stalking their ex-wives. So I guess that I shouldn't expect too much from you...

There was one point where he simply wanted a divorce so he could marry someone else but she refused, which of course stirred the whole thing up again and that was why he was "stalking" her, to get some kind of proof so that he could divorce her, she was too busy being mean and vindictive to make things simpler so they could each go on their way.

Eh... wrong! Irene couldn't give Soames a divorce because she didn't have a lover. The law of the time didn't allow you to just get a divorce because you wanted it. You needed a ground for it. Soames could so easily have gotten a divorce twelve years earlier, way back when Bosinney still was alive. But she hadn't had any man in her life since then, so there was no ground for divorce anymore. And I can't believe that you support Soames's stalking of her! 

Intelligence and purity.

[–] scamper67 9 years ago

When I say slutty I mean her affair with June's fiance, which I'm sure you will also defend, that is how she was a slut, but I'm sure you can make up excuses for that as well, at least he was faithful to her.

She could have still given him a divorce if she admitted to the affair she had in the past, plus there is the matter of desertion.

No I do not cheer on men today who stalk their ex-wives, as you pointed out divorce was much harder to get back then then it is now so he had to go after her, these days you can get a divorce if your spouse looks at you funny. You keep going on about stalking but what about her infidelity? Oh wait, she is miss perfect so I guess that is someone else fault as well.

I am NOT on his side, I'm just not on hers either. In spite of the scheming step mom she could have gone into service rather than marry but she chose not to. Whether you admit it or not she used him to get out of a tough situation and it didn't go well for either one, her infidelity did not help anymore than his possessiveness.

For some reason you think I am defending his actions but I am not, I'm just saying that she was no better than him. Anyone who would stab a friend in the back, a friend who showed her only kindness and loyalty, with a man who was not even man enough to confront June but instead avoided her, does not deserve your fierce defending of her.

In spite of our different view points I have enjoyed our debate, I just don't think we will see eye to eye on this, so lets just agree to disagree.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

When I say slutty I mean her affair with June's fiance.

How does that make her a slut twelve years after his death, when she hadn't had a man in her life since he died?

which I'm sure you will also defend

Things will happen, even if they will hurt someone in the beginning. Irene had become stuck in a suffocating marriage, so she was desperate for some happiness. Bosinney had never loved June as much as she loved him, so he would probably had cheated on her anyway with someone else sooner or later, if Irene hadn't been willing to have an affair with him. True, June was really unfortunate to get stuck in the middle of that mess. But there still was no stopping what happened, and it would finally give Irene the strength to leave Soames. And as for June, did you miss that she forgave Irene after she found out that Soames had raped her?

at least he was faithful to her.

Yeah, that must have given her so much joy when he battered her, raped her and stalked her. 

She could have still given him a divorce if she admitted to the affair she had in the past

She had never denied that she had had an affair. But after twelve years, it was no longer valid as a ground for divorce in court.

plus there is the matter of desertion.

That was not valid as ground for divorce either, appearantly.

You keep going on about stalking but what about her infidelity?

Irene's marriage to Soames was a pure disaster from the beginning. Then she met a man, who clearly was a much better match for her. What are you suggesting that she should have done? Just lie back and think of England while being raped by Soames and never be happy? That is not how people work...

In spite of the scheming step mom she could have gone into service rather than marry but she chose not to.

Did I not explain this to you in my earlier post? Women in that social class weren't supposed to go into service, especially not if there was a good enough suitor around. Irene wasn't even in a position to wait and see if any job offers would come to her, as she was close to being thrown out on the street by her stepmother.

Anyone who would stab a friend in the back, a friend who showed her only kindness and loyalty, with a man who was not even man enough to confront June but instead avoided her, does not deserve your fierce defending of her.

Like I said above, things will happen. Marriages will not always work out, and there will some times be infidelity. And in the end, June would even forgive Irene, because she understood the situation that she had been in.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] scamper67 9 years ago

How does that make her a slut twelve years after his death, when she hadn't had a man in her life since he died?

I'm not sure what you mean by that, 12 years after who's death? She had the affair while still living with her husband, that's the one I'm referring to.

Things will happen, that's some defense. You keep going on about his abuse of her, but in her own way she was just as abusive, and just because marriage is the way women of high society went does not mean she had to do it, she sure didn't do what was expected of her when she prevented pregnancy and took on a lover, which she actively pursued.

You seem to gloss over the reason for his rough treatment of her in the carriage, that was just after he watched her humiliated him by dancing a waltz with another man in front of his family, if you have any sense of fairness at all you won't try to defend that, it was all uncalled for and he did apologize for losing his head with her in the carriage, whether you admit it or not she brought that on herself.

As for June, yes I know she forgave her but that still don't make it right. I just don't see any goodness or decency in her, had she just been a friend to her husband and given him a child I don't think either of them would have been put through all they did, but she wanted everything her own way just as he did, I think they deserved each other and I don't like either character.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

I'm not sure what you mean by that, 12 years after who's death? She had the affair while still living with her husband, that's the one I'm referring to.

What I mean is that it wasn't until twelve years after Bosinney's death, that Soames had met Irene again and started stalking her. You called it "going after his slutty wife", as if that could ever be a good thing. And I just can't see any woman, who has not had a man in her life for twelve years, as a slut.

You keep going on about his abuse of her, but in her own way she was just as abusive.

Excuse me? Since when is Irene the one, who was the rapist or who stalked somebody even abroad? I'm sorry, but she had never been in any position to abuse anybody. She was the victim.

and just because marriage is the way women of high society went does not mean she had to do it

But at the time, she saw no other option than accepting Soames's proposal. You simply don't seem to get how hard life could be for a young woman in the upper classes back then, if the poor thing had lost both her parents and only had a very small inheritence. Like I have written elsewhere on this board, I also read a Swedish novel about a girl in a very similar situation (she too was a young orphaned professor's daughter) during the very same time period (the 1880s). She could never just get a job either, and she too was pushed and bullied into marrying a rapist. Because that is how sick things were back then!

she sure didn't do what was expected of her when she prevented pregnancy

As far as I can tell, that part was an invention of the 2002 adaption. But it was explained that Irene understood that she couldn't bear the thought of carrying Soames's children. And I can guarantee you that even in the novels, she got a separate bedroom. And in the 1960s version, we got a scene where she couldn't stop crying on their wedding night. So you have to realize that the marriage was a mistake from the beginning, and that Irene is not to blame for "not making it work".

... and took on a lover, which she actively pursued.

I have no freaking idea what you mean by this. Irene had never planned to take a lover, before Bosinney came along and all those things started happening.

You seem to gloss over the reason for his rough treatment of her in the carriage, that was just after he watched her humiliated him by dancing a waltz with another man in front of his family, if you have any sense of fairness at all you won't try to defend that.

But if Soames had been a good husband to her, he would have just let her go at that moment, like he actually had promised that he would do. But no, he had to possess her and rape her and later on even stalk her!

As for June, yes I know she forgave her but that still don't make it right.

June was the one, who had been hurt in this situation, not you. So if she wanted to forgive Irene, it was her right to do so. And you seem to gloss over the fact that Irene had actually been raped, and that Bosinney had been killed in that accident. June knew that Irene's marriage to Soames had been a disaster, and now she knew that she even had been raped, not to mention that her fiancé (the man who she still loved, even though I agree that he did not deserve it anymore at this point) was killed during his attempt to punish Soames for his brutal act of violence. And as a feminist, June couldn't side with the rapist over the rape victim. And even if Soames hadn't murdered Bosinney, June would still blame him for his death. To be fair though, you can see in the books that it took Irene several years to reconcile with June, because she was so ashamed of what she had done to her that she couldn't bear to face her.

Had she just been a friend to her husband and given him a child I don't think either of them would have been put through all they did.

This is yet another thing, that you seem to not understand: that Soames and Irene were never right for each other. There was no way that their marriage would work out fine. Irene had surely tried to adjust herself to her new situation, but she could never be happy with Soames. And even if there had been a child, I don't see how that would have solved anything either. Remember that Young Jolyon had a daughter (June) with his first wife, and that was not enough to make them happy together.

But she wanted everything her own way just as he did, I think they deserved each other and I don't like either character.

Irene wanted love and respect from her husband, and we know that Soames could never give her those things. He could never stop seeing her as a part of his property, and can you really blame her for not being happy? They did not deserve each other at all. And if you don't like Soames, why are you defending all of his awful actions?

Intelligence and purity.

[–] all4sunni 9 years ago

In 1874 the only three jobs available to women were governess, maid and prostitute. You can see how the Forsytes think about governesses by their treatment of Young Jolyon and Helene. Maids and prostitutes were treated much worse. Irene really had no options when she married Soames. It's gasp worthy, but not in the way you intended.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

In 1874 the only three jobs available to women were governess, maid and prostitute. You can see how the Forsytes think about governesses by their treatment of Young Jolyon and Helene. Maids and prostitutes were treated much worse. Irene really had no options when she married Soames. It's gasp worthy, but not in the way you intended.

I guess that you could also add nurses and seamstresses to the avaible occupations for the women at the time. But still, a young woman from the upper middle class was not supposed to take any job if she could only avoid it. Especially not if a respectable gentleman (which everybody just assumed that Soames was) turned up to ask for her hand in marriage. But it seems like people have a hard time to understand that nowadays, when women have gotten way more freedom and plenty more options.

Ironically enough, Irene would have had more freedom if she had been a working class girl. Then she could have gotten a job as a maid or in a factory, and that would have been just fine. But as she was a professor's daughter, she had been raised to be above all that. And then, her stepmother had threatned to throw her out of the house. So I can totally see how a marriage to Soames, despite the fact that she couldn't return his feelings, still seemed to be the most sensible choice at the time. She was too young and naive to understand that she had only thrown herself into yet another bad situation, and too desperate to find time to try any other options.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] m_rehtse 9 years ago

I have been reading all the postings under this thread so I am replying to you, as Irene's most ardent defender. Why is it that Irene's actions can be justified by the times she 'lived' in, but Soames are not? Even now, a rape within a marriage is pretty much UN-prosecutable (but, like all rape, morally disgusting), because no DA will touch such a case in most of today's modern world. And Irene could have gone into (gasp!) Show business with her amazing ability to charm men and also to play the piano. She did not seem to mind scandal, and that was a more PERSONALLY upstanding way to make her own path in life. Divorce, as she made a point of wanting an open door to in her marriage to Soames, was a fairly uncommon and scandalous way end a marriage in those times.

But the worst part of Irene is how deeply she had her hooks into her son that she was responsible for the unhappiness another generation. He and Fleur had no stake in the anti-Soames drama, but the wimpy-ness of her son made his letters sound like they were written by a man twice his age. And I see no reason for her husband to have been so angry at Fleur just because she did not identify herself when they first met. He should have thought of what he told her "don't let anything come between you and your true love" and NOT interfered between the two young people. After all, he himself married a woman who was divorced from a member of his own family.
I agree with those who see Irene as a user of people, and if Soames is an obsessive personality, Irene only seems to feel her own hurts,and manipulate others into seeing things her way, which is a sign of a true psychopath.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

Sigh... Yet again, I don't even know where to begin.

I have not denied that Soames's dispicable actions make some twisted sense when you consider his personality, how his father had raised him and the time period in question. But that is only an explanation for how the rape could happen, not some kind of excuse for him doing what he wanted to Irene. And you have to remember that even three of Soames's male relatives (Jolyon Sr, Jolyon Jr and George) despised him for how he treated Irene. So even though raping your wife was practically legal at the time, it was not seen as a morally right thing to do. But it seems to me like you can feel no pity for Irene, who was the victim of an act of severe domestic brutality, but that you want to defend Soames instead, even after you stated that all rape is morally disgusting. And I hope that I totally misunderstand you here, but that is how you come across to me.

And show business was not an option for a naive upper middle class girl, who had spent her life being sheltered from the world in the comfort of her father's house. Even if she was charming and awesome at playing the piano, that was out of the question. I have lost the count now of how many times I have tried to explain (obviously to blind eyes) that getting a job, any job, would have been a bit odd for a girl in Irene's situation, especially when a respectable gentleman (which is what Soames appeared to be to most people) had come and proposed to her. She was only supposed to find herself a husband, not become an independent woman, who had gotten a career of her own. Irene would never had caused any "scandal" either if she had not ended up in this disastrous marriage, found a much more suitable lover and been raped by her husband.

Neither do I understand your accusations of Irene having "her hooks" into her son. It is very much possible that this was different in the novels, and also in the 1967 adapation, so I guess that you would have had a point there. But if we only look at this version, Irene hardly was glad that Jon had gotten involved with Soames's daughter, but she was still prepared to let him make his own choice and pursuit Fleur. It was other members of his family (Jolyon and June, maybe even Holly), who never could stop putting doubts into his head.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] hilaryjrp 9 years ago

Sigh... Yet again, I don't even know where to begin.

You shouldn't have. The flawed inductive logic on which a defense of rape is built because it wore Damian Lewis' (not a fictional character's) face is particularly gruesome and far beneath your intelligence. The post is one of the more frightening I've read on this board--and oh, is this board EVER a bellwether to show how misogyny knows no era and will never know an end.

Not on this planet, it won't.

[–] furienna 9 years ago

Yeah, it makes you wonder what's up with some people.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] pccordes 9 years ago

Read the books and find out the reasoning behind each character ... then watch the original Forsyte Saga which is a million times better than this half baked ... and erroneous .. version. So much is left out that it is impossible to make sense of it without prior knowledge.

[–] bwestbroker 8 years ago

In the original version they at least had an attractive woman playing the part.This woman was in ALL ways the epitome of the cold fish self involved woman.I could NEVER look at her in this part without wondering why in the world they thought SHE was going to work.It's a role designed for you not to "like" her but pretending she's "attractive" was pushing it.Had a vampire role presented itself anywhere in the midst...SHE would be "it" to perfection.

[–] furienna 8 years ago

Okay, now you're just being mean towards Gina McKee. She can't help that you happen to not find her attractive. And even if Nyree Dawn Porter was more like how Galsworthy described Irene, I came to really love Gina in the role as well.

Intelligence and purity.