|
|
Post by lovemondays on Nov 1, 2014 19:57:08 GMT
I'm waiting for the full scene, but maybe, just maybe. I'm waiting too. Only 2 more sleeps!!!!!!! The look on William's face and it says to me "Oh please Dad...not the talk!! You're too late but I'm NOT going to tell you that! |
|
|
|
Post by fan2tvshows on Nov 3, 2014 9:47:11 GMT
I'm considering that as Brackenreid's answer to the question!  I think that if William himself doesn't say that he is a virgin, people will continue to have doubts and I hate this idea. |
|
|
|
Post by fan2tvshows on Nov 3, 2014 9:49:46 GMT
I'm waiting for the full scene, but maybe, just maybe. The writers described the character of William MURDOCH as a fervent/devout Catholic in the TV show and that's enough for me to say that he is a virgin. He often has almost blindy respected the principles of his religion and his beliefs made his relationship with Julia very complicated. And therefore, if I learnt that he wasn't a virgin, I would think that he is the biggest hypocrite. However I don't care if I'm right or wrong, it doesn't really matter. The point is I like facts and not suppositions. If he wasn't a virgin, there would be more questions (when and with who) and of course, there would be questions that we will never have clear and indisputable answers. So yes I will wait for watching the full episode. |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 3, 2014 10:03:55 GMT
I'm waiting for the full scene, but maybe, just maybe. The writers described the character of William MURDOCH as a fervent/devout Catholic in the TV show and that's enough for me to say that he is a virgin. He often has almost blindy respected the principles of his religion and his beliefs made his relationship with Julia very complicated. And therefore, if I learnt that he wasn't a virgin, I would think that he is the biggest hypocrite. However I don't care if I'm right or wrong, it doesn't really matter. The point is I like facts and not suppositions. If he wasn't a virgin, there would be more questions (when and with who) and of course, there would be questions that we will never have clear and indisputable answers. So yes I will wait for watching the full episode. As a historian, it wouldn't surprise me if William were a virgin. However, I think many modern people - even Catholics- have trouble imagining this. I have a male friend in a Catholic country, and I'm watching MM with him to get his perspective. He doesn't even think virginity is an issue until I bring it up. So I think historical context actually weighs more than Catholicism in the balance. |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 3, 2014 10:09:45 GMT
I'm considering that as Brackenreid's answer to the question! I think that if William himself doesn't say that he is a virgin, people will continue to have doubts and I hate this idea. I don't think it's fair to insist that William confirm one way or another. Either way some segment of fans will be disappointed. Why should one segment of fans be pleased while another is disappointed? It doesn't hurt anyone if someone else believes something different. But it does hurt EVERYONE to reduce the audience of the show, which increases the chances of it being cancelled. IMHO, it's better to let other people have doubts and believe what you want to believe.  My own preferred backstory right now is William sewed some wild oats when he was young, but he didn't sleep with Liza or Julia - he was more cautious once he joined "proper Victorian society". |
|
|
|
Post by fan2tvshows on Nov 9, 2014 19:14:13 GMT
The writers described the character of William MURDOCH as a fervent/devout Catholic in the TV show and that's enough for me to say that he is a virgin. He often has almost blindy respected the principles of his religion and his beliefs made his relationship with Julia very complicated. And therefore, if I learnt that he wasn't a virgin, I would think that he is the biggest hypocrite. However I don't care if I'm right or wrong, it doesn't really matter. The point is I like facts and not suppositions. If he wasn't a virgin, there would be more questions (when and with who) and of course, there would be questions that we will never have clear and indisputable answers. So yes I will wait for watching the full episode. As a historian, it wouldn't surprise me if William were a virgin. However, I think many modern people - even Catholics- have trouble imagining this. I have a male friend in a Catholic country, and I'm watching MM with him to get his perspective. He doesn't even think virginity is an issue until I bring it up. So I think historical context actually weighs more than Catholicism in the balance. I'm not a historian but I already mentionned this point in one of my comments that you can read below. "To finish, at this time, it was normal to remain a virgin for men and women who believed in social mores/decency until their weeding and whatever their age. Read more: murdochmysteriesfans.proboards.com/user/376/recent?page=7#ixzz3IbHI7tne". And this is another reason that I don't understand why it would be so uncredible that William is still a virgin. |
|
|
|
Post by fan2tvshows on Nov 9, 2014 19:18:06 GMT
I'm waiting for the full scene, but maybe, just maybe. And now, what do you think? |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Nov 9, 2014 19:47:27 GMT
I'm not a historian but I already mentionned this point in one of my comments that you can read below. "To finish, at this time, it was normal to remain a virgin for men and women who believed in social mores/decency until their weeding and whatever their age. Read more: murdochmysteriesfans.proboards.com/user/376/recent?page=7#ixzz3IbHI7tne". And this is another reason that I don't understand why it would be so uncredible that William is still a virgin. There is another factor at play here. One of the "revolutions" in recent historical scholarship has been to focus more social history and the experiences of everyday life. Historians have also become more aware of how the judgments and morals of previous historians throughout history might have distorted our picture of past times. For instance, if we get our picture of Victorian history only from a book written in 1900 called Correct Manners for Proper Young Ladies written by Lady Queasely - we are only only going to get the aristocratic point of view, laying down what they believe to be the correct morals and manners for everyone else. We won't get what people were actually doing. On the other hand, when you look at evidence like what people were being prosecuted for in the courts or how sexual diseases were spreading or private letters, then suddenly you get a populace that's a lot more sexually active - that's defying what we've been "told" about the Victorian era. As I understand it from Peter Mitchell's interview, one of the things the writers like to do with Murdoch Mysteries is bust a few myths about the era. Julia's abortion was a huge myth-buster, for instance. So they are always balancing what the audience believes the Victorian era to have been like (actually the Edwardian era now - but who even knows what that is, lol) with some information about what it "really" might have been like. According to Peter Mitchell's interview, the writers themselves disagree on whether William was a virgin a lot. I think that's terrific, because it meant that they could never write a story to confirm it one way or another, and they always left that matter to the judgment of their fans. I don't think history puts a "lock" on it either way. History only reveals that people were flesh and blood human beings back in the Victorian Era. Men were still scamming on women, but both men and women had many more dangers to consider and many more cultural messages of "just don't do it" coming at them. The evidence of the show presents William as a very cautious and a religious man. Does that mean he was too cautious to have sex or does that mean he was cautious when he had sex: we don't know. That's why fans get to choose which story they prefer! |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Nov 9, 2014 21:37:48 GMT
I'm waiting for the full scene, but maybe, just maybe. And now, what do you think? I'm currently supporting the notavirgin!William, but not with Julia. |
|
|
|
Post by mrsbrisby on Nov 10, 2014 19:27:58 GMT
As a historian, it wouldn't surprise me if William were a virgin. However, I think many modern people - even Catholics- have trouble imagining this. I have a male friend in a Catholic country, and I'm watching MM with him to get his perspective. He doesn't even think virginity is an issue until I bring it up. So I think historical context actually weighs more than Catholicism in the balance. I'm not a historian but I already mentionned this point in one of my comments that you can read below. "To finish, at this time, it was normal to remain a virgin for men and women who believed in social mores/decency until their weeding and whatever their age. Read more: murdochmysteriesfans.proboards.com/user/376/recent?page=7#ixzz3IbHI7tne". And this is another reason that I don't understand why it would be so uncredible that William is still a virgin. In the 19th century it was common for both bride and groom the be virgins when they wed. There are many reasons for this including fear of pregnancy, little or no opportunity to be alone due to lower population, social more, and much higher church attendance it was more common than not. |
|
Jan 30, 2013 21:44:55 GMT