I am enjoying this programme but there are a few little things that don't sit right. Her being in trousers at that time is one of them. The other is some of the language, for example "there must be a train station around here" - The term 'train station' is a modern thing, people back then would have simply said station.
shareI doubt true authenticity is not something they are aiming for here.
Its that man again!!
Actually I have dozens of photographs of my mother and her friends wearing slacks taken in the 50's so it wouldn't be so unusual.
Train station is an Americanism that has crept in recently but Railway station would have been the normal description at the time. I only Remember because I would be castigated regularly for not making it clear if it was the bus or the railway station I was arriving at.
I have heard that it features myriad of black and brown Britons, when in reality seeing a coloured person on the street then was an unusual exotic occurrence, meeting coloured professionals in the course of a day's work just did not happen.
They've also changed Albert from being a teenage boy to being a one armed man - perhaps because they have to include a disabled person in every BBC programme?
But yes, 'train station' really grated on me. There have also been quite a few 'OKs' and 'Yeahs' etc; plus its highly unlikely a 1950s Englishman would have worn a wedding ring. Women did wear trousers in the 50s but it was more of a casual thing; for a trip to 'town' a woman of Tuppence's age and background would have worn a dress or a skirt/suit.
'Monsters? We're British!'
Someone really needs to get off the 'political correctness gone mad hobby horse.' Its boring.
The series was not good, it was nothing to do with language, outfits or too many black people.
It was dull, unexciting and badly written.
Its that man again!!
I would argue anachronistic language comes under the heading of 'badly written'...
'Monsters? We're British!'