I know I will get flamed for this but I can’t understand this level of in-depth analysis about a second season TV show. Yes, it entertaining and clever in some aspects but I don’t even think the creator gave it this much thought.
Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for this but I can’t understand this level of in-depth analysis about a second season TV show. Yes, it entertaining and clever in some aspects but I don’t even think the creator gave it this much thought.
Maybe it’s just me!?
We are all bored. It's like book club online. And it takes everyone away from their own life problems for awhile (and work).
Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for this but I can’t understand this level of in-depth analysis about a second season TV show. Yes, it entertaining and clever in some aspects but I don’t even think the creator gave it this much thought.
Maybe it’s just me!?
I’m a huge fan of the show and was totally into this thread until about 5-6 pages back. The Daphne/Harper analyses have sort of lost me. Come to think of it, though, I think a huge portion of the drama on DCUM is Daphnes vs. Harpers, so if makes sense.
Anonymous wrote:I’m LOLing at the idea that some of you have that Daphne or Lucia have more power than the men. Open your eyes. Cameron is not a saver. He makes a lot but clearly spends a lot too. He’s dodging paying Lucia the money he owes her probably because he knows he doesn’t have enough to cover it. If he and Daphne get divorced, she’ll be the typical cliche. A formerly pretty, now middle aged, housewife on the prowl for husband #2 before her alimony runs out. If she can’t find one, she’ll have to become a realtor or secretary or cashier. something desperate like that.
And Albie is leaving Italy within the week to go back to his bright future as a Stanford grad with rich parents. Lucia has no power over him. She’ll stay in Sicily, getting older and older, losing her looks, trying to make money through sex.
Cynical? Yeah but this is what real life is like. At the end of the day, wealth and gender finger power.
I disagree it's that straightforward. Sure, maybe that will be Daphne... but what will happen to Cameron in that situation? If he's not a saver and he's broke, then if he divorces Daphne he will truly have nothing at all -- no gorgeous wife, no kids, no money. And if he doesn't have money, how does he get the rest back? If his power lies in his money, and he's broke, and he didn't save for a rainy day... Cameron is screwed. Daphne has a very winning personality and I think it's more likely she lands on her feet, likely with help from her parents.
And while I agree in general that Albie is likely to make it out of this situation unscathed, I do think Lucia has real power because she is reading Dom pretty well. I absolutely think she has plans to gently blackmail him for cash to bankroll her own dreams. Whether this backfires or not is up in the air -- blackmail is dangerous. But Lucia is using her position of transactional intimacy in order to collect information and access, and she is at least attempting to play it to her advantage. I do think she has some power, the question is whether it will be enough to overcome the power Dom has. Dom is rich but has a fatal flaw, which is his weakness for sex and women. He is vulnerable.
Similarly, Mia is using her charm and attractiveness to wheedle job opportunities. And she has real talent. Is this massive power? No, but she's going to work it for all she's got.
I think one point of this season is that there are more kinds of power than just money or being a man. Women DO have power. Smart, insightful people DO have power. It takes more work and creativity to wield it than just being a rich white guy, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Seriously, WHERE are you getting this from? We know nothing about Daphne’s background. The notion that her parents will surely be able to help is based on NOTHING.
Her parents are the ones watching the kids while they're in Italy (Daphne mentions this in an early episode when she talks about talking to the kids before bed and how much she misses them), so her parents are in the picture and stable and with it enough to take care of a couple small kids for like 10 days? Two weeks?
In other words, I'm getting this from watching the show we're talking about.
The vacation is a week. Caring for two children for one week is quite different from taking on financial responsibility for a grown woman and two children. If Cameron goes broke and her parents aren't all that financially well off, she will be in a bad situation quite quickly and the rosy picture you're painting of her life seems unlikely. What skills and education does Daphne have? Did she ever work? Why don't you make up some more stuff about her backstory out of whole cloth, so that your little fantasy of her works out?
Hi. Calm the eff down. It is a television show, I am speculating about a fictional character for fun and because it is interesting. The whole point is that you can read what you want into things and there are no "right" answers. I disagreed with your assertion that Daphne would be screwed without Cameron -- my impression of her character is that she is resourceful and has better interpersonal skills that Cameron, and seems to have a good relationship with her parents from what we've seen. Cameron seems like an a$$hole who burns bridges, treats even those closest to him like dirt, and gets caught up in toxic pissing matches to a point of self-destruction. So yes, my money is on Daphne having more resilience than Cameron.
You are welcome to have a different take, and welcome to share it here. But berating people for "making up" stuff about FICTIONAL CHARACTERS, like there's some rule you can't speculate about the imaginary backgrounds about imaginary people, is ridiculous. Grow up.
Hi. I'm calm. I just think your speculations are specious. Grow up? I'm not the one playing make believe here.
We're all "playing make believe." It's a fictional show. No one can be totally wrong about these characters' backgrounds, motivations, or futures because those things aren't real and never will be. Everything in this thread is an interpretation of the "text" -- the dialogue and the portrayals by the actors and the way the show is edited and shot. One person can have a "rosy picture" of a character and another can see something deeply sinister or sad, and neither are right or wrong. It's all just interpretation and opinion.
You can disagree with someone's interpretation but you can't accuse them of being wrong. There is no right/wrong in this game. It's all make believe, though we can draw what we believe to be truth from the make believe.
There's just no evidence that Daphne comes from a rich background or has a trust fund.
Disagree there is no evidence that Daphne comes from money. For me, she has a very strong vibe of someone who has never really had to worry about money before, who is very comfortable around wealth and spending money, and has that air of total detachment from the workaday world that people usually only get if they have never really had to work for a living. I definitely get the sense that she is from, if not wealth, a UMC background. She reminds me of women I have known who grew up the favorite daughter of doctors or lawyers in midwestern cities where that money goes a long way. Very nice public schools if not private schools (usually Catholic but sometimes not), college paid for at a place like Vassar, Notre Dame, a Seven Sister, Baird, maybe Reed if they are crunchy. Maybe grad school (a masters or law school, not med school even if they have a doctor for a parent because med school is hard and long and a huge commitment and these women are used to a softer life). Then a brief professional career in a city like NY, Boston, DC, SF, LA, Chicago, Houston, Miami, or Atlanta. Ideally a city where there are a good number of young men working in finance, law, consulting, or on a corporate ladder. The goal is to marry one of those, have a couple kids, get the big house and the nice vacations to exclusive resorts with first class airfare. They have carefully curated IG feeds that go from world travels with their hot, successful boyfriend/fiance, to world travels with their new family of three or four. They are "foodies" (#michlinstar), they all have at least one hobby that is really an excuse to exercise to stay hot and also get out aggression. Preferably as part of an exercise cult -- they don't do yoga at home or just hit the gym alone, they are SolidCore devotees or they talk about their trainer all the time (ahem) or they've taken up something nice like aerial silks or pole dancing, which they feel makes them more interesting and distinguishes themselves from the other rich finance/law/consultant wives. They might pretend to care about politics or feminism, but these things have no real bearing on their lives, so it's always a feint. They've never really had to worry about that stuff. They are throwbacks -- they went from daddy's bankroll to their husband's. They are like housecats. They can be smart, insightful, resourceful (sometimes scarily so), but they are also pretty useless and rely on others for every aspect of their care and feeding.
Yes, I think Daphne comes from money of some kind. She's not some plucky working class kid who lucked into marrying a rich finance bro. Those guys don't date Cinderellas, sorry.
OMG, I'm so embarrassed for you that you've thought this much about it and took the time to type all that out.
She sounds jealous like Harper. Lol
Y'all read it and are talking about it. Some people are fast writers/thinkers and stuff like this doesn't take time to type into this little HTML box. Grow up, or go mean girl somewhere else.
Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for this but I can’t understand this level of in-depth analysis about a second season TV show. Yes, it entertaining and clever in some aspects but I don’t even think the creator gave it this much thought.
Maybe it’s just me!?
What is more strange:
1) Enjoying a television show and talking/speculating about it and the characters online between episodes.
2) Reading that talk/speculation and then popping in to post that you think this is too much thought to put into it.
Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for this but I can’t understand this level of in-depth analysis about a second season TV show. Yes, it entertaining and clever in some aspects but I don’t even think the creator gave it this much thought.
Maybe it’s just me!?
I’m a huge fan of the show and was totally into this thread until about 5-6 pages back. The Daphne/Harper analyses have sort of lost me. Come to think of it, though, I think a huge portion of the drama on DCUM is Daphnes vs. Harpers, so if makes sense.
Daphne and Harper are pretty similar people, so that tracks. DCUM is full of women with very similar lives but *slightly* different circumstances and backgrounds yelling at each other and trying to prove they are superior to the other. That's the gist of the SAHM v. WOHM, one kid v. multiple kids, city v. suburb, etc., debates. "Oh no, someone in my same SES class with a lot of similarities to me but a few differences made different choices than I did! THEY MUST BE STOPPED!"
Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for this but I can’t understand this level of in-depth analysis about a second season TV show. Yes, it entertaining and clever in some aspects but I don’t even think the creator gave it this much thought.
Maybe it’s just me!?
We are all bored. It's like book club online. And it takes everyone away from their own life problems for awhile (and work).
Got it. Thanks for your response (and for not calling me dense).
Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for this but I can’t understand this level of in-depth analysis about a second season TV show. Yes, it entertaining and clever in some aspects but I don’t even think the creator gave it this much thought.
Maybe it’s just me!?
I’m a huge fan of the show and was totally into this thread until about 5-6 pages back. The Daphne/Harper analyses have sort of lost me. Come to think of it, though, I think a huge portion of the drama on DCUM is Daphnes vs. Harpers, so if makes sense.
Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for this but I can’t understand this level of in-depth analysis about a second season TV show. Yes, it entertaining and clever in some aspects but I don’t even think the creator gave it this much thought.
Maybe it’s just me!?
I’m a huge fan of the show and was totally into this thread until about 5-6 pages back. The Daphne/Harper analyses have sort of lost me. Come to think of it, though, I think a huge portion of the drama on DCUM is Daphnes vs. Harpers, so if makes sense.
Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for this but I can’t understand this level of in-depth analysis about a second season TV show. Yes, it entertaining and clever in some aspects but I don’t even think the creator gave it this much thought.
Maybe it’s just me!?
I’m a huge fan of the show and was totally into this thread until about 5-6 pages back. The Daphne/Harper analyses have sort of lost me. Come to think of it, though, I think a huge portion of the drama on DCUM is Daphnes vs. Harpers, so if makes sense.
I’m a Harper that low key wishes I was a Daphne.
I'm a Harper too. I think a lot of us have Daphne fantasies. I don't ACTUALLY want to be Daphne (though I do want to look like her!) but there is some appeal to the idea of kind of floating through life being sunny and pleasant and kept
Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for this but I can’t understand this level of in-depth analysis about a second season TV show. Yes, it entertaining and clever in some aspects but I don’t even think the creator gave it this much thought.
Maybe it’s just me!?
I’m a huge fan of the show and was totally into this thread until about 5-6 pages back. The Daphne/Harper analyses have sort of lost me. Come to think of it, though, I think a huge portion of the drama on DCUM is Daphnes vs. Harpers, so if makes sense.
I’m a Harper that low key wishes I was a Daphne.
I’m a Harper who knows a lot of Daphnes and I’m totally good with myself.
Anonymous wrote:I know I will get flamed for this but I can’t understand this level of in-depth analysis about a second season TV show. Yes, it entertaining and clever in some aspects but I don’t even think the creator gave it this much thought.
Maybe it’s just me!?
I’m a huge fan of the show and was totally into this thread until about 5-6 pages back. The Daphne/Harper analyses have sort of lost me. Come to think of it, though, I think a huge portion of the drama on DCUM is Daphnes vs. Harpers, so if makes sense.
Daphne and Harper are pretty similar people, so that tracks. DCUM is full of women with very similar lives but *slightly* different circumstances and backgrounds yelling at each other and trying to prove they are superior to the other. That's the gist of the SAHM v. WOHM, one kid v. multiple kids, city v. suburb, etc., debates. "Oh no, someone in my same SES class with a lot of similarities to me but a few differences made different choices than I did! THEY MUST BE STOPPED!"
I honestly don't think Harper and Daphne at similar at all, aside from being married to wealthy men
Anonymous wrote:Ethan is a really interesting character to me. It's hard to tell what his real personality is - he was obviously a totally different guy with Harper during their early marriage and courtship than he was with Cameron in college. It seems like he didn't have strong personality of his own, and turned into whoever the people around him wanted him to be. But now with all this money he doesn't have to go along to get along - who will he turn into?
Was he? I feel like he's always been kind of a nerd and that he and Harper are both trying to navigate their new identity as wealthy people, but that it's so new they don't really know how. I mentioned Harper's wardrobe in a previous post. I find it to be very "old" for her, like she went to an expensive clothing store where she thought she should shop and the 60 year old stylist picked out clothes she thought looked young.
It is very clear to me that Ethan and Cameron have fallen back into a very familiar pattern and that Ethan is now remembering how much he actually hated that dynamic. Which is why he makes that mimetic desire speech and insults Cameron.
Sure, he's always been a nerd, but the person Harper thinks she married would not have wanted to be friends with a douchey bro like Cameron. Ethan was not only friends with him, he wanted to be friends with him badly enough that he put up with all kinds of bad treatment from him. The Ethan who married Harper is much more self-serious, political, etc....like Harper. But who is the new Ethan going to be?
I don't see that. I don't think Ethan or Harper has dealt with not being the cheerleader (Daphne) or football star (Cameron). I think it's a very common experience for people that have been the nerds and then succeeded to feel thrown right back into that dynamic.
Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand people who stan Daphne. Her marriage is a horrible shit show. Getting knocked up by your trainer and passing it off as your husband’s is not some cool power play. If she ever gets found out, she’d ruin that kid’s life.
OMG is that why she showed Harper the picture of the kids rather than the trainer?
I don’t think so. She talked about the trainer to make herself out as not being a victim. She may or may not have a trainer she sleeps with, but at the end of the day, it’s her kids who give her the motivation to get over whatever Cameron does and not focus on it.
Eh, she says my trainer has blond hair and blue eyes, want to see a picture? Then shows a picture of a blond haired kid. Cameron has brown hair. Google it.
She’s calling the kid her trainer. She’s making some innuendo about her life, that she’s not a victim because she can do whatever Cameron is doing and have sex with whomever she wants. She makes that point to Harper. Then when she shows her the picture, it’s her kids- the point is that she doesn’t want to cheat, that’s not what actually makes her feel better about it. She just wants her happy, very comfortable life with her kids and her husband. People are reading way into this. Her trainer did not father her children.
Also, even if Cameron had brown eyes, hasn’t anyone ever heard of recessive genes? My dad has blue eyes and my mom has brown. I’m one of four kids and only one of us have brown eyes. The rest of us have blue and green.
I think you and I are the only ones that see this in this thread. I tack it up to personal life experience and age. Sigh.
The scene is purposefully ambiguous. They had her go on and on about this adorable trainer with blonde hair and blue eyes, two recessive genes. And then show a photo of a blonde haired blue eyed kid. I'm not SURE the trainer is the dad, but the show is clearly leaving the ambiguity there, putting the question out there. This is a show where all the background choices are dripping in meaning. There is a photo of St. Lucia in one of the rooms.
GOOD LORD!! Daphne has light hair and blue eyes. Cameron only has to carry the recessive gene for blue eyes and they can definitely have blonde hair and blue-eyed kids.
I'm a brunette woman with two teenage blonde blue-eyed sons that definitely came from me. My husband is blonde. A blonde/red-head and a brunette can definitely make a blonde kid---and many of these kids are blonde as kids that turn darker as they get older.
People assume dark hair is dominant, but my sister also has two blonde kids and one brunette and her hair is jet black. Her husband is a blonde.
Yeah that is why I said it is AMBIGUOUS. Do you know what the word ambiguous means? The show is basically swimming in ambiguity but when they want something to be clear they do show it (ie we know Ethan did not cheat on Harper that night with Cameron).
I'm not saying the kids aren't Cameron's, I'm saying the scene is ambiguous. Are you also the poster that thinks the only way people can love each other is sunshine and rainbows and happiness and Daphne is just some poor lovestuck lady crying herself to sleep every night?
No. I'm the person saying Cameron and Daphne love each other--even with his flaws and infidelity.
Well then we agree on that! But I honestly don't see how anyone could not at least acknowledge that the scene was intentionally ambiguous. It was a pivotal scene where Daphne was being vague. It could mean anything.
BUT I don't think it has any bearing on the deaths for two reasons.
1) The whole point Daphne is making is, IMO, immaterial to whether she is having an affair or whether she gets her purpose from her kids. Her point is that she sees Cameron for who he is and instead of letting it ruin her, she does what she wants and lives how she wants and copes with this unhappiness by getting fulfillment elsewhere. It isn't important who the father is or if there is or isn't a trainer. Her point is that she finds a way, and Harper can find a way too, and that they, as women, shouldn't depend on imperfect men to determine their lives and happiness.
2) I don't think the conflict that results in a death will be between Daphne and Cameron. They have both decided that they can handle their demons and suppress their unhappiness to be together. Neither has unresolved anger towards each other. It is processed accepted and dealt with. Unlike say Harper and Ethan who have an elephant of tension standing in the room with them. Cameron and Daphne don't have that. I think the only thing that could send them over the edge is Cameron being broke, but I honestly still think she would likely just join him in trying to pull a scam rather than walk away. Daphne has coping mechanisms and uses them. I think she's capable of murder honestly, but I don't think she has any desire to murder him
I didn't find that scene ambiguous in the least. I do find it really interesting that people are making up an entire psyche for Daphne where she makes up an entire other person as a symbol for her kids instead of just talking about her kids. What she did was not vague at all. It was very intentional. She's not foggy or confused. She's actually very focused.
And when they went to Noto Daphne was crystal clear that her motivation for staying overnight was to mess with/punish Cameron. All this romanticism that she's so sweet and just really lives for her kids so she couldn't be having an affair is a backstory we haven't seen other than her wanting to call her kids again. It can be both.
I love how suggesting that they Facetime the kids one time (and not actually doing it!) has made her supermom in the eyes of DCUM. She has a new(ish?) baby and has jetted off to Italy for a week+ leaving the two little kids with the grandparents. I'm not saying that makes her a bad mom or anything but it's not "my kids are my whole life" behavior
She did it to please her husband. He’s the one telling her to forget the kids, have fun. She is torn and misses him. She wouldn’t send him alone knowing he cheated before.
LOL - all Cameron said was the kids are fine and you don't need to Facetime them a second time on the first day of vacation.
Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
).