It is a complete mystery that thousands of people would like to have solved. I have wondered it there is a major transference going on between the writer and the actress/character. Why would a mature, professional writer agree - prior to filming - to change an individual in the story so greatly that the alterations begin (and continue) to derail many aspects of the saga? We spoke about this many times at IMDb and there was no logical answer.

It may be inadvertently offensive, yet it still sadly leaves many of us counting the episodes until Elizabeth bites the dust.

In the original series, the situation was very different. I loved Jill Townsend and how she played Elizabeth. She was so brittle at times and yet, I felt like some injury had been done to her as an only, beautiful child on whose tiny shoulders the future fortunes of the family rested. It had to be suffocatingly lonely to know that your person has no value to your family except as a cash cow. I always felt and thought that the 1970 Elizabeth had a lot going on inside of her behind that gorgeous, calm, chilly demeanor.

Heida Reed claims she thought, as written, Elizabeth was too cold, and they changed the role for her. And I wonder why? I'm not impressed by her acting. And she doesn't even look physically right for the part. I also don't feel Reed is the ravishing beauty that Elizabeth is supposed to be. She just has ordinary looks, nothing to enthrall all these men. She doesn't look anymore attractive than Demelza does and the only difference is she's better dressed. Reed also claims she had the VBT toned down, as well.

My feeling is an actor is to portray the part as written and if you can't do that you need to step aside and let someone who can do the part right do it. DH is just lucky Winston Graham is dead because I think he'd be having a fit about DH's version of Elizabeth.

Graham tweeting DH You sodding twit! Elizabeth would never come and nurse Demelza. It goes totally against her character!

Secret, do you think that some writers fall in love with the opportunity for their personal imprint to be placed on a new version of a beloved character or book and simply forget the original?

Debbie's take on the books has been to rewrite a major character because of a decision she made with Heida prior to filming (for whatever reason seemed important to her at the time.) Even when you and I and many thousand others hate what she has done with the books, there are equally a fair number of people who never saw the original series or read the books. They love this incarnation of Elizabeth and cannot understand our fretting and frustration.

If we still lived in a time prior to 1995, our frustration would be limited to friends and family. After 1995, only twenty-six/seven years ago, when the the Internet, the WWW, and social media were blossoming, we could speak with anyone connected in the world who shared our interests. This is tool is now the driver for pleasure and discontent. People were far safer from examination and could plod along making their changes like Debbie has. If a percentage of people did not like their work, their displeasure might not be measured against the programs because their opinions might never be captured.

As I said in my other post, I am waiting until George become a widower and hope that things will regain a semblance of the Winston Graham's canon. Rather ridiculous, isn't it? I'm not upset enough to stop watching, yet there is not much pleasure in half of each episode.

I answer that question by relating it to daytime dramas aka soap operas. When I first started watching them as a kid they were great. The writing and acting was sometimes better than the stuff on prime time, but they had to do it five days a week. Then the people they knew how to write and produce these shows either died or were replaced by there people that didn't know how to write them. These new people decided they would remake the industry and remake the shows in their own image, and what they managed to do was destroy it instead. ABC used to have 5 soap operas, NBC 3 and CBS 4. Today ABC has 1, NBC has 1 and CBS has 2 and I try on occasion to watch them but they're just crap compared to what they were when I was a kid.

So, yeah, I could imagine DH thinks she's making the series better with her changes.

Personally, I think she has two favorite characters: male is Ross and female is Elizabeth. There was no reason plot-wise to Jenny pregnant and to have Ross to tell [I can't recall his name at the moment] to marry her. And she had to know the big stink the original series got in doing the riot on Trenwith and still she put that in when it isn't in the books. The original series got the idea for it from what Ross says to George when he comes to confront him about what happened to Demelza and Garrick. I can understand why the original series did it. They wanted George to suffer some payment for all the dirt he did and it was satisfying watching him tossed out of the Poldark home and having to go off with his tail between his legs. But I think DH did it solely to make Ross look good. Ross rides up like the Lone Ranger and with a mighty hi ho silver the rioters go away. And while I always wanted Ross to come save Demelza from the sea when she went into labor, the point was she didn't need to be rescued by a big brave man, she could save herself. DH changed it to, once again, to make Ross look good.

It's kind of why I don't think Demelza is DH's favorite character because if she can take something from Demelza to make Ross or Elizabeth look good, she'll do it. Like how it was only Demelza who was working behind the scenes to try and save Ross, but DH changed it to it being Demelza and Elizabeth trying to save Ross.

Ultimately, I ended up liking Book Elizabeth with all her flaws and faults over DH's version of Elizabeth. Seriously, I still start laughing when I remember how big bad George terrorized poor victim Elizabeth into marrying him by sending dirty miners to dig up her lawn.