Jump to content

Taboo: Tom Hardy's historical drama (BBC1/FX) [spoilers]


AncalagonTheBlack

Recommended Posts

Good post by Zorral.  I was going to type something like it myself.  The EIC was a huge geopolitical force through trade and armies for a couple of centuries and it extended far beyond India.  The tea-opium-silver triangle dominated the English economy for a while: China would only accept silver for tea, England ran out of silver as tea became a huge import, so the EIC formed opium plantations and processing plants and sold opium via smugglers to China for silver in order to continue buying tea.  Eventually they smuggled tea plants out of China to grow in plantations in India too.  And the EIC's duty free tea imports (part of their state-protected monopoly) to America undercut domestic growers, prompting the Boston Tea Party.

Anyway, second ep is a slow burn but still very well made.  I'm relieved to hear it will eventually pick up pace.  I don't want it to become a prolonged legal battle with the widow like the Downtown Abbey entail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who believes that Lorna isn't the one who claims to be? I noticed that when James said that he doesn't liked theater she said that she spend little time in German brothels, which it seems to me that she means Helga. How else she could know about Helga if she hasn’t at least kept tabs on him?

Of course she isn't. It seems like she is High Sparrow's puppet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Iskaral Pust said:

Good post by Zorral.  I was going to type something like it myself.  The EIC was a huge geopolitical force through trade and armies for a couple of centuries and it extended far beyond India.  The tea-opium-silver triangle dominated the English economy for a while: China would only accept silver for tea, England ran out of silver as tea became a huge import, so the EIC formed opium plantations and processing plants and sold opium via smugglers to China for silver in order to continue buying tea.  Eventually they smuggled tea plants out of China to grow in plantations in India too.  And the EIC's duty free tea imports (part of their state-protected monopoly) to America undercut domestic growers, prompting the Boston Tea Party.

Anyway, second ep is a slow burn but still very well made.  I'm relieved to hear it will eventually pick up pace.  I don't want it to become a prolonged legal battle with the widow like the Downtown Abbey entail.

Ah -- here it is, the Nootka Crisis, between Spain and Britain, over fur, of course.

And yah, it was sea otters that were massacred for their pelts there, not seals.  I mis-remembered what I'd read -- sea otters, sea otters, sea otters.

Quote

Spain established a military post, San Lorenzo de Nutka, at Yuquot 1789-95. The fur trade declined in the 1790s and essentially ended at Nootka.

Netflix / Discovery Canada's Frontier series is up now, and I watched the first two eps before crashing headlong into oblivion. Frontier's set among conflicts between the Hudson's Bay Co. and others wanting in on the extraordinarily lucrative industry of fur.  Time period is very end of the 18th -- just after the end of the War of Independence, though I can't quite tell if it's after the ratification of the Constitution, at least not yet. But the Canadians and Brits refer to the neighbors down south as "Americans" which didn't happen until after the War for Independence began -- not even the former colonists called themselves that until the run-up to the war. 

The various clans and tribes of the Cree, the Natives Frontier centers.,were spread fairly from coast-to-coast. This is a long way of saying I was thinking about Frontier in connection with Taboo because there are so many similarities, not least that like Hardy's protagonist, one of the primary protags of Frontier had a Native / Cree mother -- and he's very dangerous.  No supernatural elements -- though it is shot very dark -- some scenes are barely visible, so dark are they shot. 

However there is lots of action in Frontier and we know what's going on -- things are going on, which seems to be the criticism of Taboo, that we don't know what's going on, or even if anything will ever go on.  Taboo though, may -- or may not be -- deeper.  Who knows at this point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Am I the only one who believes that Lorna isn't the one who claims to be? I noticed that when James said that he doesn't liked theater she said that she spend little time in German brothels, which it seems to me that she means Helga. How else she could know about Helga if she hasn’t at least kept tabs on him?

Of course she isn't. It seems like she is High Sparrow's puppet.

I disagree with this. Certainly the EIC intends to use her. But she isn't in on that, IMO. They are merely taking advantage of an unexpected opportunity. Her existence is news to the EIC, or they wouldn't have bargained so fiercely with Zilpha and her husband.

Nothing really points to her not having married Delaney Sr. Her mention of Helga and German brothels merely means that she is either having James followed, or did a bit of digging around to learn about him. Makes sense really if she is going to contest the will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, HelenaExMachina said:

I disagree with this. Certainly the EIC intends to use her. But she isn't in on that, IMO. They are merely taking advantage of an unexpected opportunity. Her existence is news to the EIC, or they wouldn't have bargained so fiercely with Zilpha and her husband.

Nothing really points to her not having married Delaney Sr. Her mention of Helga and German brothels merely means that she is either having James followed, or did a bit of digging around to learn about him. Makes sense really if she is going to contest the will.

Maybe not High Sparrow's but Pettifer’s pawn? It seems very strange how she appeared suddenly when they needed her most. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Maybe not High Sparrow's but Pettifer’s pawn? It seems very strange how she appeared suddenly when they needed her most. 

Not that strange. The man wasn't long dead, and they we're only just reading the will. Little reason for her to show up before that really, save to attend the funeral (and, who is to say she didn't?) Anyone who claims to benefit from the estate is an asset to the EIC, and such people can only make an appearance once the will has been read

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/16/2017 at 8:49 AM, SpaceChampion said:

In the scene he meets "Winter" and she takes him to a ship...  what was that all about??  I think she told him it belonged to someone who wanted to kill him, so he just burns it down without finding out any actual facts and whether Winter was telling him the truth or not.   That seemed pretty random.  What did I miss?

Also, Tom Hardy is playing a character that is suppose to be nearly 20 years younger than his actual age?  I'm enjoying it but I don't know what to make of these things.

Tom Hardy is 39. You think he's playing a character who's 19/20? And he's been in Africa since he was 8 and joined EIC when he was a toddler?

The show takes place in 1814 (that's when the Treaty of Ghent was signed). The EIC people said that James was enrolled as cadet in the EIC when he was 11, in 1798. So, he was born in 1786/1787, and he's now about 27/28. We don't know how much younger the sister is, but probably not that much, just a couple of years probably. They said he went to Africa in 1802 - that would make him around 15 or 16 at the time. 

On 1/18/2017 at 6:49 PM, DireWolfSpirit said:

Just finished episode two. I'm still thinking the sound is a bit low on a lot of dialogue and may start viewing this with captions. I'm a bit lost on the interaction between the brother and sister. I cant read the sisters feelings towards the brother at all. Does she despise him or love him or lust him or resent him or some combination of all of the above? They keep hinting at some mysterious past, but I havent pieced together what shape that past was between the two (brother and sister) of them? If she, deep down, has a love for the brother, she shows zero support to him outwardly and in front of her spouse.

Has she put the spouse up to having a hand in the fathers poisoning, in other words has she been a architect of some of this or has she simply been going along because shes fealt powerless to do otherwise? Its still a bit mysterious to me.

Definately going to do a episode 2 rewatch tonight.

I thought it was pretty clear, especially after the second episode, that they had been in love as teenagers and still are. She has to put up a front of not caring about him, but she clearly still loves him - and not in the sisterly way, there was a lot of sexual tension in that scene, and she  implied she had no problems with him expressing his feelings in itself, as long as it was not in public/society. But she made it clear she wanted to have a normal and respectable life, though I get a strong impression she doesn't love her husband and puts on a mask whenever she's with him. I get the sense that he may have mostly married her because he was hoping for inheritance from her father, while she married him for respectability and security.

The boy is strongly hinted to be the son of Delaney and his sister, who got passed as a bastard of the old Delaney and a mistress as a cover story. I don't know why people think the father has anything to do with it - there's evidence at all of the old Delaney abusing his daughter, and it would be a bit too much incest. I don't know exactly she meant by "he disgraced me", but she sure couldn't have meant that he impregnated her, because in that case, she would keep that a secret and would never speak about it in public, to protect her reputation! 

Someone said that the husband would know that she had had a child before marriage. Would he? He's not a medical doctor and presumably hasn't given her a gynecological exam.

I expect we'll get to see the Delaney dad either in flashbacks or visions or as a ghost - they sure wouldn't have cast Edward Fox just to appear as a corpse.

I've been enjoying the show so far, especially the first episode. It's quite compelling and atmospheric. It's also nice to have antagonists (the EIC) that are so thoroughly annoying and unlikeable, just petty, greedy, terrible people, especially when the protagonist is dark, morally ambiguous, kinda scary and interesting.

It will be interesting to see if the ghosts are meant to be real, just visions/representations of Delaney's dark past, or Delaney really is batshit insane.

I tend to think that the title refers to more than one thing. The incest is very obvious, then there's cannibalism, and mistreatment of remains is also mentioned (not so much done by the protagonist, but he does have his father exhumed in order for a forensic exam into his death to be performed, which in that time would be quite inappropriate to say the least), but there are probably other things, too - maybe things like ghosts, magic, supernatural etc.? I think it could be generally about things that are seen as taboos, and the fact that the protagonist seems to have broken so many taboos and is seen as an outcast to the polite society - and even maybe an allusion to the fact that the EIC, have done so many horrible things - enslavement, rape, murder, dehumanization of fellow humans, but they are seen as acceptable and a part of the establishment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enjoyed tonight's episode. It's a dialogue heavy show but I don't feel it's moving too slowly. And once again the atmosphere was brilliant throughout. I do have minor quibbles but nothing that ruins the show for me. And I watched for the first time without subtitles this week. Still no trouble understanding Hardy. *shrug*

Don't have too much to comment on at the moment, I want to save that for when I rewatch later in the week. One quick comment:

Well done to whoever it was said Godfrey may end up being a spy. Not exactly right, but close

:cheers: 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Annara Snow said:

Tom Hardy is 39. You think he's playing a character who's 19/20? And he's been in Africa since he was 8 and joined EIC when he was a toddler?

The show takes place in 1814 (that's when the Treaty of Ghent was signed). The EIC people said that James was enrolled as cadet in the EIC when he was 11, in 1798. So, he was born in 1786/1787, and he's now about 27/28. We don't know how much younger the sister is, but probably not that much, just a couple of years probably. They said he went to Africa in 1802 - that would make him around 15 or 16 at the time. 

I thought it was pretty clear, especially after the second episode, that they had been in love as teenagers and still are. She has to put up a front of not caring about him, but she clearly still loves him - and not in the sisterly way, there was a lot of sexual tension in that scene, and she  implied she had no problems with him expressing his feelings in itself, as long as it was not in public/society. But she made it clear she wanted to have a normal and respectable life, though I get a strong impression she doesn't love her husband and puts on a mask whenever she's with him. I get the sense that he may have mostly married her because he was hoping for inheritance from her father, while she married him for respectability and security.

The boy is strongly hinted to be the son of Delaney and his sister, who got passed as a bastard of the old Delaney and a mistress as a cover story. I don't know why people think the father has anything to do with it - there's no reason to think that, and it would be a bit too much incest. I don't know exactly she meant by "he disgraced me", but she sure couldn't have meant that he impregnated her, because in that case, she would keep that a secret and would never speak about it in public, to protect her reputation! 

Someone said that the husband would know that she had had a child before marriage. Would he? He's not a medical doctor and presumably hasn't given her a gynecological exam.

I expect we'll get to see the Delaney dad either in flashbacks or visions or as a ghost - they sure wouldn't have cast Edward Fox just to appear as a corpse.

I've been enjoying the show so far, especially the first episode. It's quite compelling and atmospheric. It's also nice to have antagonists (the EIC) that are so thoroughly annoying and unlikeable, just petty, greedy, terrible people, especially when the protagonist is dark, morally ambiguous, kinda scary and interesting.

It will be interesting to see if the ghosts are meant to be real, just visions/representations of Delaney's dark past, or Delaney really is batshit insane.

I tend to think that the title refers to more than one thing. The incest is very obvious, then there's cannibalism, and mistreatment of remains is also mentioned (not so much done by the protagonist, but he does have his father exhumed in order for a forensic exam into his death to be performed, which in that time would be quite inappropriate to say the least), but there are probably other things, too - maybe things like ghosts, magic, supernatural etc.? I think it could be generally about things that are seen as taboos, and the fact that the protagonist seems to have broken so many taboos and is seen as an outcast to the polite society - and even maybe an allusion to the fact that the EIC, have done so many horrible things - enslavement, rape, murder, dehumanization of fellow humans, but they are seen as acceptable and a part of the establishment.

Re: the title, I'm not sure if you have seen tonight's episode yet, but something jumped out at me

Zilpha's husband's talk with Delaney, and how he takes such pleasure in this idea of "wickedness" in his wife, that she committed this "Taboo" by having sex with her brother. I guess that is also connected to the title, the idea that this forbidden thing can be so enticing. Of course he was also trying to play mind games with Delaney - I know you want her, but she's mine, I'm going to punish her and hurt her and take great pleasure all the while.

Or maybe I read too much into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Annara Snow said:

Tom Hardy is 39. You think he's playing a character who's 19/20? And he's been in Africa since he was 8 and joined EIC when he was a toddler?

The show takes place in 1814 (that's when the Treaty of Ghent was signed). The EIC people said that James was enrolled as cadet in the EIC when he was 11, in 1798. So, he was born in 1786/1787, and he's now about 27/28. We don't know how much younger the sister is, but probably not that much, just a couple of years probably. They said he went to Africa in 1802 - that would make him around 15 or 16 at the time.

No, I've never thought he's 19/20, it was said and I heard he left at 15 and came back 10 years later, so 25.  That he's only apparently 27 or 28 is not much difference, and 12 years younger than his actual age.   Since he's a fictitious character, why would they have to make him him so much younger than the actor?  The character could have easily been written as born twelve years earlier in 1774.  Unless they're planning on jumping ahead 10 years in the timeline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/1/2017 at 9:52 PM, HelenaExMachina said:

Not that strange. The man wasn't long dead, and they we're only just reading the will. Little reason for her to show up before that really, save to attend the funeral (and, who is to say she didn't?) Anyone who claims to benefit from the estate is an asset to the EIC, and such people can only make an appearance once the will has been read

Then it seemed stranger just to me. You are most probably right but for me it was strange. Sorry if I was bothering you….

Spoiler

Now can the woman James sees be his mother? I don’t know why but I believe that she will play, if she hasn’t already done it, a big role in his life and his behavior. Also this effing brother in law will die in agony. Or at least I hope so. Did Zilpha told him “a new child”? Does it mean that they had lost one or he might know something about the other one? She said new china and I understood new child.

Something that I cannot understand about timeline;

James was born circa 1788

Anne died in 1795

In 1798 His father has been married again and when he was 11 he was sent as a cadet at the EIC military seminary in Woolwich.  

In 1799 his efficiency was “Exceptional” at everything.

In 1800 he started to be “mad” and rebelling.

In 1802 he went to Africa.

Circa 1804 he disappears somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean close to Africa.  (16 years old)

In 1814 he appears again.  (26 years old)

 

If his father married his new bride sometime between Anne’s death (1795) and when James went to the EIC military seminary (in 1798) wasn’t enough time for Zilpha to be born. That means to me that she isn’t James’ biological sister, but maybe adoptive sister and that it will be the excuse about the incest. What do you think? Am I wrong? What I have missed?

 

Also something that I noticed is that James in one of his letters mentions that he doesn’t care about his allies not even about Brace.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Iskaral Pust said:

The British viewers of this are lucky: the volume and frequency of commercial breaks on FX' broadcast is maddening, plus we have to wait an extra three days and avoid spoilers. 

Ha, boots on the other foot now! :D Usually the UK is the one getting the show later. The lack of advert breaks is really great too, I feel brraks just make the show feel too disconnected

 

@Jon's Queen Consort (various points from this weeks episode under the spoiler tag)

you werent bothering me. Just offering my views. But especially following last nights episode i'm inclined to say you are wrong about Lorna. What about the situation do you find strange, in particular? 

And yes its almost certainly his mother. I guess she is telling him things when he "sees" her. I'm inclined to say the supernatural stuff is going to become more important and explicit as we go on.

And i've not looked closely at the timeline. But Zilpha is explicitly called his half-sister. And i got the impression there isnt supposed to be any 'excuse' for the incest. Its not widely known (basically just James, Zilpha, and Zilpha's husband know. Oh and their servant) but its supposed to be a big deal. So i dont think they will go the adoptive sister route. I'll see what i can make of the timeline and get back to you. Just off the top of my head though, Anne was supposedly confined and mad at the end, so its possible Zilpha's mother was pregnant before they married.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:

Then it seemed stranger just to me. You are most probably right but for me it was strange. Sorry if I was bothering you….

  Hide contents

 

Now can the woman James sees be his mother? I don’t know why but I believe that she will play, if she hasn’t already done it, a big role in his life and his behavior. Also this effing brother in law will die in agony. Or at least I hope so. Did Zilpha told him “a new child”? Does it mean that they had lost one or he might know something about the other one?

 

Something that I cannot understand about timeline;

James was born circa 1788

Anne died in 1795

In 1798 His father has been married again and when he was 11 he was sent as a cadet at the EIC military seminary in Woolwich.  

In 1799 his efficiency was “Exceptional” at everything.

In 1800 he started to be “mad” and rebelling.

In 1802 he went to Africa.

Circa 1804 he disappears somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean close to Africa.  (16 years old)

In 1814 he appears again.  (26 years old)

 

If his father married his new bride sometime between Anne’s death (1795) and when James went to the EIC military seminary (in 1798) wasn’t enough time for Zilpha to be born. That means to me that she isn’t James’ biological sister, but maybe adoptive sister and that it will be the excuse about the incest. What do you think? Am I wrong? What I have missed?

 

Also something that I noticed is that James in one of his letters mentions that he doesn’t care about his allies not even about Brace.

 

 

 

Spoiler

I'm pretty certain that the woman is indeed Anne.

 

The timeline as we know it was very tight for James to have a child with his younger half-sister, but now we know Anne died as late as 1795 it surely is impossible. Was it definitely stated that Zilpha is his half-sister? And younger than him? I seem to remember it was, but could be mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, HelenaExMachina said:

@Jon's Queen Consort (various points from this weeks episode under the spoiler tag)

  Reveal hidden contents

 

you werent bothering me. Just offering my views. But especially following last nights episode i'm inclined to say you are wrong about Lorna. What about the situation do you find strange, in particular? 

And yes its almost certainly his mother. I guess she is telling him things when he "sees" her. I'm inclined to say the supernatural stuff is going to become more important and explicit as we go on.

And i've not looked closely at the timeline. But Zilpha is explicitly called his half-sister. And i got the impression there isnt supposed to be any 'excuse' for the incest. Its not widely known (basically just James, Zilpha, and Zilpha's husband know. Oh and their servant) but its supposed to be a big deal. So i dont think they will go the adoptive sister route. I'll see what i can make of the timeline and get back to you. Just off the top of my head though, Anne was supposedly confined and mad at the end, so its possible Zilpha's mother was pregnant before they married.

Spoiler

 

My mistake then.

About Lorna; I don't know how to explain it. It was mostly the timing she appeared and that no one knew about her. Brace had no idea of who she was and he seemed to know everything about James and his family. But yes after 3rd episode it seems that she isn't someone's puppet.

About Anne; Yes that is what I was thinking. I think that his story is about finding his routs among other things. Also it would be interesting to see what does the symbol on his back which seems like the one Anne had created in the fireplace means.

About the incest; I didn’t meant in universe excuse, I meant for the audience. I believe that they will try to make people want for James and Zilpha to be together and it might not be very easy with them being biologically related.

About timeline; James is around 26, looks much older tho, Zilpha seems to be at least in mid 20s too. What it seemed strange to me is that in the first episode Wilton the Records officer said "his exhausted father and his new bride ...". Which would mean that James' father and Zilpha's mother were married sometime around 1798. 

 

36 minutes ago, Horse of Kent said:
  Hide contents

I'm pretty certain that the woman is indeed Anne.

The timeline as we know it was very tight for James to have a child with his younger half-sister, but now we know Anne died as late as 1795 it surely is impossible. Was it definitely stated that Zilpha is his half-sister? And younger than him? I seem to remember it was, but could be mistaken.

 

Spoiler

It was said that she was his half sister, not younger tho but she definitely doesn't look older than James, and it was said that they shared a father. Maybe she wasborn out of wedlock?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Jon's Queen Consort said:
  Hide contents

 

My mistake then.

About Lorna; I don't know how to explain it. It was mostly the timing she appeared and that no one knew about her. Brace had no idea of who she was and he seemed to know everything about James and his family. But yes after 3rd episode it seems that she isn't someone's puppet.

About Anne; Yes that is what I was thinking. I think that his story is about finding his routs among other things. Also it would be interesting to see what does the symbol on his back which seems like the one Anne had created in the fireplace means.

About the incest; I didn’t meant in universe excuse, I meant for the audience. I believe that they will try to make people want for James and Zilpha to be together and it might not be very easy with them being biologically related.

About timeline; James is around 26, looks much older tho, Zilpha seems to be at least in mid 20s too. What it seemed strange to me is that in the first episode Wilton the Records officer said "his exhausted father and his new bride ...". Which would mean that James' father and Zilpha's mother were married sometime around 1798. 

 

  Hide contents

It was said that she was his half sister, not younger tho but she definitely doesn't look older than James, and it was said that they shared a father. Maybe she wasborn out of wedlock?

 

 

Spoiler

That is a possibility. Would Zilpha ever have been able to inherit if she was illegitimate? Even if she was able to, the social stigma would surely have been huge, especially as she had an illegitimate child herself. Would Thorne ever have married her in that situation? 

Hardy certainly looks older than Chaplin, but as he is playing a character over ten years younger than himself, it is hard to tell whether that is intentional.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I imagine that

 

the whole thing about Zipha's husband complaining that she cannot conceive their child (I love how it doesn't enter his head that it could be HIM who is lacking somehow) is to show that in fact it is her husband that cannot conceive and not her, because we think she already had a child? Unless she is doing a Cersei and somehow contriving to not conceive with her husband even though technically she could. I guess it will help his claim to the money if he has an heir, as he could then off his wife (and BIL, and MIL...).

Anyway, the husband is a massive tool and I can't wait for something bad to happen to him.

I came across Frontier on Netflix at the weekend. Might start watching that too.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...