Do the gay and lesbian things do anything to advance the plot, or are they just pandering? If anyone's read the book, was there any homosexuality in there?
...then whoa, differences...
In the book, Caris does have a dalliance with Sister Mair.
But Yes, it was pretty much just pandering. But then so was the lengthy shot of Oliver Jackson-Cohen's nekkid backside.
Pandering- to gratify or indulge an immoral or distasteful desire, need, or habit or a person with such a desire, etc.
The mini series is being correct in thinking there might be have been at least 1 gay or lesbian relationship back in the day. It's absurd for you to think it's somehow wrong to include a group of people that existed then just as they do now in the storyline.Trying to include a group who were present is representing what was real. Is it pandering to include heterosexual affairs? Why those but not gays and lesbians? They both existed. They exist now so why shouldn't the gay community be represented as the heterosexuals are? Yes, there are fewer gays than heterosexuals and the movie reflects that by having only 1 homosexual coupling in the entire series.
It's quite sad that you live in the present, where the gay community is being more widely accepted and even allowed, in too few areas, the same basic rights as heterosexuals. Yet you apparently aren't one of those accepting people. Nor have you noticed that gays marginalized, disenfranchised. One who recognizes that too few gays are represented in non-stereotypical ways on tv. Why shouldn't there be a same sex couples in a "historic" drama when they existed!!
BTW, pandering is a word to be used carefully if not rarely. I put the definition on the top of the page, straight out of the dictionary so you would read it straight away. I'm not terribly PC according to my daughter but even I know not to use this archaic word when discussing gays or people of color being properly represented in a movie. I would be ashamed for writing,in such a bigoted manner.
Edward II's dad seems to have been in at least 2 homosexual relationships himself. I think we can safely say that homosexuals were in the courts of the king even after Edward I died.
shareEDWARD II is presumed to be a homosexual. I apologize for not being careful in my writing of historical accounts.
shareSeveral British kings were probably homosexual. The ones I've identified as likely to have been gay:
William II
Richard I, Lionheart (Yes, the hero king from Robin Hood.)
Edward II
Richard II
In the book, Thomas Langley was a married man with children, and although I could only bring myself to skim the book not truly read it, I don't recall any indications that he was gay. And if the script writers really wanted to make such a departure from the original source material as they did with Thomas Langley's story, it would have been nice if they had made more of an effort to have the people involved acting more medieval and less modern. The modernity of attitudes in the writing was palpable and far more jarring to me than the occasional anachronistic phrase.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
Thomas Langley was gay. He was described as having a somewhat effeminate look, and Caris thought to herself that she was not uncomfortable being over-familiar with him as she would have another man (due to sexuality was heavily implied). After Godwin took the monks to St. John in the Forest to escape the plague, and Caris caught up with them, she asked Thomas about the health of his lover, another monk named Matthew (or Mathias, I forget).
although I could only bring myself to skim the book not truly read it
I don't know Ken Follett. Why would I dislike him?
But his book was pulp fiction. His characters are neither believable or sympathetic.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
Oh, get off your high horse. I don't have any problems with people sleeping nude in the privacy of their bedrooms, but I still considered the lengthy shot of Oliver Jackson-Cohen's naked backside to be pandering. Just because people sometimes sleep in the nude is no reason why it has to be shot that way for the show. There was no reason to shoot the scene that way other than fanservice. The scene would have the exact same significance if they had kept the camera above his waistline. And seriously, if you can tell me how a scene of Sister Mair groping Sister Caris on a battlefield had any storytelling value beyond fanservice, I'd love to hear it.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
There were a ton of homosexual references in the book. Thomas, Bishop Henri, Mair, random men having sex during the desperation of the plague, many of the nuns, Philemon, some of the other monks... it existed then as it exists now. The book depicts the importance of sex in society, and I think it would be unrealistic not to include it.
share** SPOILERS AHEAD **
It was made very plain in the mini-series that Thomas Langley and Matthias were having an affair. This was kind of an important plot point that needed to be there, just like Ralph's rape of Annet. Remove either one from the story and you have different characters in a different story.
Sister Mair groping Sister Caris on the battlefield ... not so much. And that whole "God won't mind if it's done for love" bit? I kinda doubt anyone in 14th century England would ever have said such a thing.
You know what else? Sex is always important in every society. That doesn't mean that every movie in which the characters belong to a society need to be shown having sex. You know what else is done by all the people of every society all over the world at every single point in human history? Excreting waste material. It's an essential function for health and life. But we don't need to see that in every movie either.
Bottom line: unless a sex scene is essential to the plot or reveals information about a character that can't be shown as well another way, the sex scene is just fanservice.
If you guys would just admit that it's fanservice and that you're okay with that because you enjoy the fanservice that much, you wouldn't be half as annoying. Most of us like a little fanservice now and then, but let's be honest enough to admit it when that's all it is.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.