He kind of has that going for him in the TV show. He often states that he's "helping" these people from their lives and giving them eternal happiness. But yeah the brooding and malevolent act he has going on kind of conflicts with that notion.
In the lore of the book, Faeries and Humans are said to be opposites. In Humans, logic is strong and magic weak. With Faeries, they have strong magic, but by Human Standards are completely insane. Now theres also different types of insanity, the raving screaming lunatic, and the cold, calculating malevolence. The Gentleman is a perfect example of the latter.
The version of the Gentleman in the book lacks reason in a way that the TV show has omitted. He is incapable of perceiving morality as a human would and thus fails to rationalise the consequences of his actions as his understanding of human nature is inadequate. The book version is also friends with Arabella (she recounts many entertaining conversations with him with her husband) whilst the television version is not. The book version is possessed of a significantly more affable personality and is quite superficially charming but is also very narcissistic. He cannot comprehend that which does not have a relation to himself but he does intend to do good to people he likes and as Stephen says, he intended nothing but a kindness. The book version believes that by taking his friends away to Lost-hope he is doing them a favour and therefore would not ever consider removing the enchantment. In contrast, his television portrayal is perfectly capable of understanding that the presence of the enchantment is upsetting and tries to manipulate everything in his own favour. The television portrayal is not mad, he is perfectly aware of what he is doing. The book version also has a very unstable mood. He changes from murderous rage to happiness and from fear to rage in an instant and some incredibly mundane conversation can quickly turn to murder in addition to perceiving any small slight as murder whereas the television version is incredibly calm and controlled unless pushed severely so you cannot particularly compare the lore drawn from the book to the show.
@@lothbrok2770 His concept of goodness/morality is kinda incompatible with ours :P So it's like, maybe he thinks that giving gifts to his friends is good but he doesn't realise that murdering people for those gifts is evil. He might invite a friend to wine and dine but the vintages are from hell itself or caused by the suffering of other humans. He treats Stephen like Stephen's his best friend but no matter what Stephen says or does, but he doesn't really listen to Stephen and does what he thinks is good for Stephen. He might listen to some recommendations from Stephen when the mood suits him but he might forget about it in a heartbeat. The fairies also swing from one emotion (from pure joy to extreme depression/paranoia) in a heartbeat and they have a childlike emotional maturity which is what makes them absolutely terrifying to be around because they're essentially walking magical nukes.
@@lothbrok2770 Also he considers Stephen his friend but the magicians his enemies and is deadset on that no matter how much Stephen tries to bring him around to it.
@@lothbrok2770 Probably because by then he has realised that there is nothing that he can do or say to stop the Gentleman with Thistledown Hair killing. There's nothing he can do to make the Gentleman understand that his actions are wrong. The book doesn't let you see inside the character heads but I think that Stephen was always hoping to convince the Gentleman that Strange etc were his friends and he tries to remind the Gentleman of the time when he'd genuinely wanted to help the magicians before that hope is destroyed. Every time Stephen appears in the novel, he's pretty much always with the fairy. The go places, do stuff, eat food, Stephen gets gifts, the Gentleman goes hunting etc. The scenes with the Gentleman are often played off as black humour, for example there's a hilarious moment where the Gentleman is monologuing about how he can drive a person mad with a carpet and Stephen is trying very hard to damage control and prevent the fairy from killing people by telling the carpet seller that they're not interested in buying the carpets. Since Stephen's pretty persuasive, he usually steers the Gentleman off murder. But then Lady Pole's right in front of him, the Gentleman's one step away from killing her and Stephen has the power to stop the Gentleman. And Stephen finally realises, after all that time, that nothing he can say or do will ever change the Gentleman's nature. Despite the fact that the Gentleman's pretty much the only person who saw Stephen as anything more than his skin colour, despite the fact that he tried to do nothing except be genuinely kind to Stephen and even tried to find Stephen's name, he has to die. Not because he's evil, but because he will never understand fundamentally understand the difference between good and evil.
Arabella is the most respectable, loyal, and exquisite Lady, and Jonathan Strange was damn lucky to convince such a fine woman to take him as her husband.
Oh Thank you Thank You Thank You, BBC ! for making such a wonderful live action of this trilogy. *in tears* all the images are just rightly fit my imagination. Please make this available as collectible dvd after the tv broadcast is finished.
Yes it is, I thought I knew him from somewhere too and I googled it :-D And the two characters aren't very different from each other (in personality) if you think about it.
Hmmh, I've always imagined the Gentleman younger, prettier - like his kind usually is. Creepy, for sure, but more- otherworldly. The nails are perfect though. XD
Y'know, it occurs to me that the entirety of the "Man with the Thistle-down Hair" only proves Mr Norrell to be right about the inherent wickedness of fairies. Or at least some of them.
Yeah that's one big difference i found too, in the book he comes across as super joyful/enthusiastic but then goes from that extreme to the opposite in blink of an eye - to fear/paranoia/anger - then back to joyful like a child. The TV version is definitely well played, but a very different character, much darker.
@@decado7 I thought this character was easily the highlight of the TV show. I haven't read the book but I loved what the actor did with this role. malevolent but also just bordering on comical at the same time. I thought it was great fun.
In the book, the "rose" at her mouth is not mentioned until nearly the end. I mean, sure, the gentleman could have cast one on Arabella, but it's not mentioned anywhere in the novel that he did.
He's the king of Lost Hope aka The fairy king. See, in folklore, fairies are infamous for all kinds of trickery and offering deals. They're known to kidnap people as well, particularly beautiful young women, in this case Arabella and Lady Emma Pole. In the original fairytale Rumplestiltskin is heavily implied to be some kind of fairy.
