Rooster Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 5 hours ago, unJon said: Just that he gave the Americans information in exchange for "?" Stuff that James needed and wanted. A definite marriage of convenience. I agree with this entirely. The reason I made my remark was that I understood your revelation to be that Delaney had been on the American's "side" all along. I disagree with that (he is on his side alone), but I seem to have misunderstood your point. The connection that Delaney had been doing work for the Americans was actually revealed earlier in the episode, during a conversation between Lorna Bow/Delaney and Countess Musgrove: "James Delaney also says to tell Colonnade that you do, indeed, have a leaky ship. But he's found the leak and will fix it, as long as you cooperate". It also gives indication why the London agents were not aware of Delaney. (1) He was asked to find out if there was a traitor amongst them, and (2) he's not exactly trustworthy. I think the second point is emphasized by the fact that Delaney essentially blackmailed the letter of safe passage from the head of secret correspondence under threat of exposure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iskaral Pust Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 I'm not yet convinced that Delaney was an American agent from the start but it's possible. He certainly had implausible knowledge of Ghent and the American spy network at the outset. The remainder is explained in-story, and the attempt on his life contradicts it. I found it deeply implausible that Delaney could pull together a gang of ruffians to stand and fight to the death against British soldiers. That was always going to be a suicide mission for most of them, and they didn't have a strong enough motivation to embrace almost certain death. This sounded expensive to produce when it was just based in Wapping. I don't think it was popular enough to justify a second season with production costs for a nautical adventure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 3 minutes ago, Iskaral Pust said: I'm not yet convinced that Delaney was an American agent from the start but it's possible. He certainly had implausible knowledge of Ghent and the American spy network at the outset. The remainder is explained in-story, and the attempt on his life contradicts it. I found it deeply implausible that Delaney could pull together a gang of ruffians to stand and fight to the death against British soldiers. That was always going to be a suicide mission for most of them, and they didn't have a strong enough motivation to embrace almost certain death. This sounded expensive to produce when it was just based in Wapping. I don't think it was popular enough to justify a second season with production costs for a nautical adventure. If it is picked up for a second season I suspect they would cut out much of the production costs by not having much of a nautical adventure, and showing the bare minimum of the sea travels, or sticking to the ship's cabins. The majority could take place, uh...the islands he said he was going to (which I've already forgotten, oops) or America, or Nootka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince of the North Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 9 minutes ago, HelenaExMachina said: If it is picked up for a second season I suspect they would cut out much of the production costs by not having much of a nautical adventure, and showing the bare minimum of the sea travels, or sticking to the ship's cabins. The majority could take place, uh...the islands he said he was going to (which I've already forgotten, oops) or America, or Nootka Ponta Delgado is in the Azores. I had to listen to Delaney mumbling his way through it a few times before I figured it out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talleyrand Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Overall pretty okayish, not great but not hugely dreadful. Big fight at the end seemed a bit unnecessary and I'm not sure if the Royal Navy don't exist in this universe given the fact they just seemed to have been able to sail off from London no bother. But something's been bothering me about the American Doctor being a spy for the EIC. He knew where Delany was keeping the powder and used that knowledge to make them speed up the production so why did the EIC have to wait until the farmer went to the priest? surely the Doctor would have told them well in advance where the powder was and they would have caught Delany red handed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbunting Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 On 3/4/2017 at 11:13 PM, Annara Snow said: Uh, no?? Governments can't actually do whatever they want, and legality does matter. And as a matter of fact, we know from history that USA were not able to simply take Nootka, because they never did. As for why it was important, they only explained and stressed that some 150 times during these 8 episodes, going on and on about how crucial it is for trade, especially with China. Actually, yes they can. Imminent domain or war are the names used and it's been happening for as long as someone in power decided to take something that they couldn't have. As to the importance for trade with China, this was my ignorance. I had misread the map when it was first shown, I thought it was on the East coast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annara Snow Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 44 minutes ago, dbunting said: Actually, yes they can. Imminent domain or war are the names used and it's been happening for as long as someone in power decided to take something that they couldn't have. As to the importance for trade with China, this was my ignorance. I had misread the map when it was first shown, I thought it was on the East coast. Firstly, they still need to find a legal justification for it, and secondly, when two powerful countries are fighting for the same strategically or economically important piece of land, as in this case (and many others - wars have been fought over things like that), then it's certainly not as simple as "why doesn't one of these governments just take it". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Eminent domain isn't relevant here. That applies to a government taking possession of private property within its own territory for public use. The point about Nootka is that it isn't clear, legally, that it is the territory of either side. If it were indisputably in either British or American territory then yes, the relevant country could simply take possession, though they'd have to pay the Delaneys: but they wouldn't even need to, in those circumstances, because there would be no dispute. As for war, that's what the two countries want to avoid. They're trying to end the war, not fight a battle. To do that, they need a clear, indisputable legal recognition that the land is in their territory. With that, the other side are forced to acknowledge possession and there's no cause to go to war over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbunting Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 29 minutes ago, mormont said: Eminent domain isn't relevant here. That applies to a government taking possession of private property within its own territory for public use. The point about Nootka is that it isn't clear, legally, that it is the territory of either side. If it were indisputably in either British or American territory then yes, the relevant country could simply take possession, though they'd have to pay the Delaneys: but they wouldn't even need to, in those circumstances, because there would be no dispute. As for war, that's what the two countries want to avoid. They're trying to end the war, not fight a battle. To do that, they need a clear, indisputable legal recognition that the land is in their territory. With that, the other side are forced to acknowledge possession and there's no cause to go to war over it. Ok, but at this point in what we are seeing, there still is war being waged. The Amercans have a blockade around England IIRC. IDK it just seems like there are far worse things that have been done to people by all governments that taking some land that they saw as being critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 2 hours ago, dbunting said: Ok, but at this point in what we are seeing, there still is war being waged. The Amercans have a blockade around England IIRC. IDK it just seems like there are far worse things that have been done to people by all governments that taking some land that they saw as being critical. Oh, absolutely, but that's not my point. The point is, either the Americans or the British could seize Nootka by force. But the other side would know it had been acquired by force, and would therefore have an excuse not to recognise the occupation as legal, and that's assuming they didn't retaliate in kind, which would prolong the war. And as long as the title is disputed, the occupying power has a weak hand in negotiations. What both the Americans and the British want is clear legal title to the land. That's why James is so desperate to find the treaty. He needs it to make his own claim watertight. In the end, the Prince Regent does lose patience with the whole dance, of course. But in so doing he knows he's effectively handing over Nootka to the Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philokles Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Second series confirmed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncalagonTheBlack Posted March 8, 2017 Author Share Posted March 8, 2017 More details for S2 Quote BBC One and FX have ordered a second season of period drama “Taboo,” Variety has learned. Like the first season, Season 2 of “Taboo” will consist of eight episodes. “Tom and Steve and the show’s brilliant producers are promising something daring, different but equally unmissable and I’m delighted that the BBC is partnering with FX once again to roll ‘Taboo’ out to audiences across the world,” said BBC Drama controller Piers Wenger. The first season was a modest performer in the U.S., drawing an average audience of 1.24 million and a 0.4 rating in the 18-49 demographic, and generally doubling that in Nielsen’s Live+3 numbers. In the U.K., the BBC says each episode was watched by 5.8 million people within seven days, and 7 million beyond seven days, and that the premiere drew the third-highest audience of any series on BBC iPlayer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceChampion Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 That seems like great numbers for the UK. I guess it's popular with the young'uns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 The BBC has a yoose for you still, Taboo Crazy how the UK has around 5x more viewers than the US. It shows the difference bewteen being aired on a well known/easily accessible channel. That or the Brits are suckers for period dramas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 2nd season....Cool ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince of the North Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 Yes, I'm glad we'll get at least one more season of it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.