Jane is NOT amused
These past two weeks I have been anticipating Downton Abbey daily, getting ready for PBS’s presentation of the series, researching historical tidbits that will add to the reader’s enjoyment, and eagerly anticipating the U.S. audience’s reaction.
Then The Daily Mail (or The Daily Fail, as an astute reader called the tabloid) published an article, Downton Downsized, accusing PBS of cutting 2 hours from the original 8 hour U.K. presentation. Writer Chris Hastings not only pointed to the edits with glee, but accused PBS of dumbing down the series for American audiences. Hastings quoted PBS Executive Producer Rebecca Eaton as admitting “that American audiences demand a ‘different speed’ to their shows.”
The article was an insult to the American viewing audience, and PBS for that matter. It did not take into account that PBS shows no commercials (as ITV does), which means that the U.S. And U.K. Versions of Downton Abbey are practically the same length, even with minor editing. Neither did it acknowledge that PBS viewing audiences are sophisticated, patient, well-read, and well-traveled, as well as knowledgable about history and social customs in the U.K.
I watched the first two ITV episodes of Downton Abbey, to compare them to the so called edited PBS version. I saw so little difference, even with the discussion about inheritances and the British entail, that I wondered what this across-the-pond kerfuffle was all about.
When Sarah Crompton from The Telegraph, wrote her opinion about The Daily Fail’s article, she gave me hope that relations between U.S. and U.K. viewing audiences are still friendly and filled with mutual respect. Crompton wrote:
“Anyone who has read any of the novels of Edith Wharton will know that the statement from PBS executive producer Rebecca Eaton that “we thought there might be too many references to the entail… It is not a concept people in the US are very familiar with” is simply untrue. The difficulties of fortune and inheritance power whole tracts of American 19th-century fiction.”
Crompton goes on to say with confidence that educated American audience would have no trouble following Downton Abbey’s plot. She also found Eton’s statement extraordinary, mentioning The Wire and The Larry Sanders Show as two examples of intelligent, complex and creative television shows that originated in the U.S. and that our audiences have supported.
“This is, after all, the country that gave us The Wire, possibly the most complex series of plotlines ever devised. Are we really to think that US audiences understand drug-dealing in Baltimore any better than they grasp 19th-century legal shenanigans? Of course not. PBS is just being silly.
It is, ironically, the sophistication of the best of American television that I most admire.” – Sarah Crompton, The Telegraph, Americans Understand the Wire, So Why Simplify Downton Abbey for Them?
Insulted by The Daily Mail’s stance, I placed a poll about the edits on my regular Sunday Throwdown feature on Jane Austen Today, asking readers what they thought. The results of that poll demonstrate that PBS viewers do not want to watch a changed version of this British show or any British show for that matter. We feel confident that we can take the slow-pokey, esoteric passages as well as any Brit and not yawn half-way through or lose our way because we don’t understand British social customs or legalities.
The comments left by those who voted in the poll show that the PBS brass might be overreacting to our willingness to sit through exposition. I suspect that in talking about needing a faster-paced plot, Ms. Eaton was discussing the new viewers PBS is courting, but this is only a guess. Be that as it may, in their comments the poll voters expressed mostly their hurt from The Daily Mail’s view about American audiences and the nasty tone of the article. Here is a sampling:
If we Americans can watch 8 hours of Bleak House and Little Dorrit and love it, then we should be able to handle [Downton Abbey]. As for the plot being complicated, Americans flocked to “Inception” and loved it. No way “Downton Abbey” can be more complicated than that.
Rebecca Eaton should know that the attention span problem she refers to does not apply to “her” audience!
I’m very disappointed. Below the Daily Mail article sits a parody for American viewers to help us “understand” the series.
“…although it seems the beautifully nuanced portrait of pre-First World War upper-class life could prove just a little too complex for the transatlantic audience.” How insulting!
I am offended by anyone who would feel the American audience can’t support good drama.
I was weaned on Masterpiece Theatre and PBS and this pains me to see this reaction by Eaton. I have seen the UK version. It is not that complicated.
I am really hurt by this attitude! England means the world to me. How can they say Americans need these shows dumbed down?
This is typical ignorance on the part of the Brits. I say that as an American of much experience and relatives in UK. Annoyed as hell.
Don’t underestimate the size of the American audience who are longing for something other than arid, mindless TV fair geared to a 10 year old audience!!!
I think The Daily Mail article brought up two issues that raised hackles and confused readers, who assumed that PBS shared Chris Hastings’ disdain for the American viewing audience and that we require dumbed down versions of British T.V. shows in order to understand them. Since this mentality was shared by Joe Wright, who directed Pride and Prejudice 2005 and who offered an insulting “American” ending for U.S. audiences, no wonder we are baffled.
The second issue is one that many of us who adore PBS imports from Britain have noticed all too often recently. When purchasing the BBC (or ITV) and PBS versions of the same movies, PBS films are routinely shorter, with scenes that have been cut out. Why? These edited versions (sometimes only one or two scenes are missing) lend credence to Rebecca Eaton’s assessment that U.S. audiences demand a different pace. I would love for this PBS executive to explain her statement more fully, for I must admit that the differences between the first two episodes of ITV’s version of Downton Abbey and PBS’s first 100 minutes are so minor as to be barely noticeable. If this is the case, and if the change in pace is barely perceptible, and if Matthew Crawley still shows up in the first 90 minutes, why make the changes at all?
Other bloggers who have written about this controversy:
Jane Austen's World 
Those who say Americans don’t understand entails and such forget that we have had years of reading Jane Austen’s novels and seeing them turned into films. Also, in my experience the average Briton doesn’t understand entails and inheritance laws any better than the average American. Of course in the USA, PBS viewers are not average.
What’s particularly odd about this is that Downton Abbey was made for ITV – which traditionally is more mainstream, and therefore less high-falutin’, than the good old BBC. So, in some ways, Downton Abbey was already considerably more accessible than your average BBC bodice-ripper (which, as a Brit, I can find pretty turgid myself).
And I assume that Rebecca Eaton – who’s been co-producing this stuff for WGBH Boston for decades – is American. Double-weird.
That said, they did change the title The Madness of George III to The Madness of King George in the States – allegedly because American movie execs were worried American audiences would think it was a sequel and clamour to see George I and George II. So maybe the problem is American execs underestimating their own audiences?
Well, how arcane and predictable of us all! The British last stand is always that Americans are ignorant. It has been the war cry since the Revolution, has it not? Once, whilst discussing a Pontormo Deposition in Santa Felicita with a group of Taiwanese students, a terribly thin, rather down at heel British expat proclaimed, ” Oh look, it is an American teaching the Japanese about art!” in a cynical, nasty voice. E. M. Forster could not have written a better scene! Are Americans Barbarians? I would have to yes on many levels. Are the British priggish, xenophobic sore losers? Indeed….will it stop me from watching this long awaited new series….of course not! Will it spoil my annual London theater trip in February? (I have room, Yanks, if you wish to go, e-mail me.) Has everyone seen My Boy Jack? Out of the muck and misjudgment of the war that spawned all 20th and 21st century wars, comes this exquisite piece of film/theater. One has to hope for more grace and compassion through the arts. What else can we do?
Just to add to the list of inanities- Ian Rankin’s mystery novel set in Edinburgh *Fleshmarket Close* is published in the United States as *Fleshmarket Alley*…on the other hand I was told by one of my students that his middle school teacher marked him down on a book report he submitted of Kenneth Clark’s companion work *Civilisation* for spelling errors- with the “s” in the title circled throughout the paper.
*Sigh*
What scenes were edited out exactly? Please bring on the information to us uncultured Americans. We already know that PBS dumbs down the news as well as any MSM network, so it figures that they’d show no respect to the audience for an author’s original script.
In response to Mary – “sore losers”? What was the game, exactly?
Love Jane bug-eyed! Started my day with a laugh. (From an American rube)
Blimey!!!!
Vic, if you want, when the English version of the series(maybe there will ONLY be the English version ) comes out in DVD, I’ll buy a copy for you, send it to you and you can hire a film theatre for the night and hold a showing.
What an insensitive newspaper the Daily Mail is. It’s right wing conservative you know. I’d not touch it with a barge pole.
The Guardian is a much more erudite read with a better political outlook too. They would never write something like that. They write sensible analytical reviews.
I think you should write to that PBS exectutive though, Vic. There is a phrase for somebody who writes a complaint to a newspaper over here, “Angry of Tunbridge Wells.”You could be “Angry of Richmond,” or something.
In full support,
Tony
I find Rebecca Eaton’s comments perplexing. I Claudius was certainly complicated, trying to keep all those names straight and who was related to who, but Americans seemed to have no problem with it, or listening to Cornish accents in both series of Poldark. Masterpiece Theatre is now 40 years old, so most of us have grown up watching these shows, particularly those of us who are Anglophiles and who have read widely in both classic and contemporary English literature. Stupid people don’t watch these shows, and I kind of resent being talked down too as if we can’t still still long enough to get the nuances.
Interesting! This is the first I’ve heard of this controversy, and I don’t feel like I understand enough about the American vs. British audience enough to have anything intelligent to say. I’d probably be tempted to make generalizations rife with inaccuracy, so on a completely random note, I started watching Miss Marple last night (on Netflix instant play) and so far the episode is veeeery slow moving. But I like it that way! It gave me ample snuggling time with my husband, and neither of us have any idea who the murderer is. We’ll probably find out tonight . . . =)
If, and I say that with trepidation, there is a silver lining to this brouhaha, bad press can bring attention to Downton Abbey where it might have been overlooked AND drive home the fact to PBS that we are not ninnies and want each and every moment of British co-produced dramas. Co-produced is the operative here. Remember that Masterpiece is a co-producer of many of the dramas produced for its Masterpiece series. They do have a say in what is put on screen and what it removed.
Their edits have been a flea in their ear for years. Now that UK versions are so accessible internationally through DVD’s and online sources, they cannot get away with these cuts for much longer. It is because they do make minor cuts and have a bad rep for doing so that this kerfuffle started. If they need proof that changing original content fails, I will remind them that Ted Turner’s experiment at colorizing classic black and white movies in the 1970’s is an prime example that American do not like their art tampered with. It is best not to mess with mother nature and leave the original artists vision as is.
Regarding Brits thinking Yanks are numskulls, we shall always be the naughty child who can do no good. They have been looking down at everyone for centuries. That does not stop me for one moment from enjoying there literature, movies and culture.
You’re right, Elizabeth, and that is the material point (that stupid people don’t watch these shows). There are certainly many uneducated Americans (as I would assume there are Brits, as well), but these are not the people who would be watching Masterpiece Theatre! If one is going to make a serious program, one must assume that only serious viewers will be interested, and direct it toward that audience, not a general one. There are dolts as well as literati on both sides of the pond.
American, incensed.
Oh, and funnier than the bug eyes was the thought of Jane saying, “Whaa!?!”
Heavens to Betsy! If they send us a production of Hamlet, will they first have it translated into English?
Oh Laurel Ann,
“Naughty child,” and, “They have been looking down at everyone for centuries. ”
That’s the first I’ve heard of it.
It’s not even worth discussing Laurel Ann.
Tony
My goodness Tony, have you never heard a few of the jokes told by the Brits at Americans’ expense? Here are some my own Edinburgh friends have told me-
How many American’s does it take to screw in a lightbulb. 100- one to screw it in and 99 to cheer “We’re number 1!”
What is the difference between yogurt and America? Yogurt has a living culture (to be fair I also heard this said by a Scot about England)
America- From barbarism to decadence with no intervening culture.
Wow, I really enjoyed reading the give and take of this conversation. My husband and I have formed a friendship with a retired British cop and his wife and they are forever teasingly insulting us as Americans. We love them and tease them back but I really have heard a tremendous amount of America bashing when I’ve been over there. I have often wondered if I should now open my mouth so I might not be suspected to be an American. I haven’t felt threatened, physically, but intimidated in conversation at times. I’ve definitely felt “looked down upon” for being an American. Yet, I am still an Anglophile and proud to be so.
Shame on you, fellow Americans, for contributing to the negative talk about who we are. Our political leaders do enough of this. Let both sides agree that we are different and have things to offer the other, literature, sport, whatever. There’s my two cents.
OOPS! That was supposed to say not open my mouth.
[“So maybe the problem is American execs underestimating their own audiences?”]
Personally, I suspect that many movie and television producers in the U.S., the U.K. and other parts of the world; have a problem with underestimating their audiences.
As for the belief that Americans are mental midgets . . . hmmm. I’m certain there are some mental midgets in the U.S. I’m certain there are mental midgets in the U.K. And I’m certain there are plenty of intelligent people in both countries. Is it really necessary to make assumptions about people, based upon their country of origin?
The only ‘mental midgets’ are the TV execs, no matter what side of the pond……
Rod, you should be honoured. The English, The Irish and the Scots have been telling those jokes pointedly about each other for generations. The English are particularly good at telling jokes about the Irish and the Irish are even better about telling jokes about the English. Usually we all have a good laugh about it. You should feel honoured there are jokes told like that. It means we regard you as on of the family. Ha!! Ha!!!!
All the best and lots of love,
Tony
The silly thing is I doubt the average British viewer knows any more or less about entails and other idiosyncrasies of archaic inheritance law than the average American viewer. Besides, what one doesn’t know, one Googles.
The next time The Daily Mail publishes opinions like this – don’t waste your time taking it seriously! It’s a scurrilous rag. (Let them sue me!)
Ron Dunning
A Londoner (An adopted one, that is.)
Sometimes the Americans themselves are the ones who misunderstand and underestimate their country-folk. I had a novel – a sixteenth century Irish detective story – published by Pan Macmillan in the UK under the title of ‘Michaelmas Tribute’and the American publisher, St Martin’s Press ,insisted on renaming it ‘ A Secret & Unlawful Killing’ on the grounds that Americans would not understand the word ‘Michaelmas’. Dozens of Americans have taken the trouble to write to me saying what nonsense that was.
PS Tony: It is ‘Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells’ I think.
I don’t know what Michaelmas is. I work at an American branch of Macmillan and just polled my floor. Nada. Sorry.
Thanks Cora, I think you are right. It is such a long time since I used that phrase.
Just in case you were wondering why people in Tunbridge Wells are picked out to be the spokesmen for everybody else in the country, it’s because over the years all the surveys done on opinions of every sort the people ofTunbridge Wells have come out as the median of all opinion, political, social etc in the country. So if , ” Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells,” has an opinion you bet it’s going to be the overall general opinion of the whole country.
SORRY!!! I’ve just explained that to death haven’t I.
PS You don’t have to live in Tunbridge Wells to use it!!!!!!!!
Try it out in the States. It might be useful Ha!Ha!
I am Irish and live in the remote west of Ireland but spent twenty-five years in England, mainly in the Kent/Sussex area.
Between 1985 and 1993 I lived a few miles from Tunbridge Wells and did all my shopping there. A very charming town!
Can anyone offer suggestions for where to look for the original, unedited/unAmericanized versions – one example I was hoping to find someday is the British version of the 2005 Pride & Prejudice. Depending on what’s available, do I have to worry about whether or not it will work on my DVD player (in terms of DVD Regions and such)? Any pointers would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance. :-)
What I cannot understand is why everyone is attacking the Daily Mail when Rebecca Eaton is the one who insinuated Americans are too stupid to follow a show as “complicated” as “Downton Abbey” when she said “American audiences demand a ‘different speed’ to their shows.”
PBS butchers all the British imports, e.g., “Inspector Lewis,” in which several minutes are cut from each episode to accommodate Alan “Tight Pants” Cumming and his fatuous introductions! Rebecca Eaton is the culprit here, not the Daily Mail! Instead of taking out their frustrations on the Daily Mail, people should be petitioning PBS to fire Rebecca Eaton and replace her with someone who has a higher opinion of PBS viewers.
Anyone wishing to see the uncut versions of “Downton Abbey,” “Inspector Lewis,” or whatever, can order the DVDs directly from Amazon.UK. All they need is a region-free DVD player (which can be ordered online from Amazon) and now, most TV-DVD-combos sold in the US are region-free.