RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: acceber on Wednesday 12 August 09 21:07 BST (UK)
-
Kim Cattrall, star of the Sex and the City TV series and film, has started her genealogical quest now on BBC 1.
acceber
-
Thanks! ;D
-
It was very interesting if different - and a difficult subject as it affects people who are still very much alive and, pressumably have no idea of what kind of person George Baugh really was.
Carole
-
Interesting! A bit more like Heir Hunters than WDYTYA but an interesting episode and I understand why Kim wanted to know the answers.
I really admired the strong women in that family and maybe now I shall have to watch an episode of S** in the City. Kim was not at all how I expected her to be.
Kerry
-
I found this interesting. I noticed that the 3 sisters did actually meet their half siblings.[ Maybe another programme there!]
I hope no one complains about emotional reactions, or the fact that they only went back two generations!
Kooky
-
Made a great TV prog. Never mind if she didn't go back that far, it was interesting.
Mind you, my Grt. Grandfather deserted three sets of children before he settled down with his fourth family. Perhaps the BBC would like to fill in some of my gaps!! ;D
-
I thought it was really moving,
my granddad , also left his family in the early 1930's, when my mum was 4 years old,
He had a bigamous marriage,
the children from this marriage did,nt know about their half siblings, even though they all lived in the same town,
when I found out a few years ago, it was a very emotional journey, talking to lost relatives and putting all the piece's together,
"There's nowt stranger than folk "
Eilleen.
-
Sounds like a lot of us have a 'George Baugh' in the family. I thought it was very interesting and well done.
-
What a completely selfish and arrogant man, who did not deserve his fine and decent first family.
I admired the behaviour of the ladies at the end of the programme - no histrionics, but just quiet acceptance of George Baugh's disgraceful behaviour.
They all turned out to be fine and respectable people, and we should all take our hats off to Marion, who did a sterling job on her girls.
Margaret
-
excellent program honest and really felt for the family.
its not all about how far we go back ,more about what we find on the way
-
I found this interesting. I noticed that the 3 sisters did actually meet their half siblings.[ Maybe another programme there!]
I hope no one complains about emotional reactions, or the fact that they only went back two generations!
Kooky
As one who has moaned about only going back a couple of generations ::) I found this programme absolutely rivetting! Personally, I felt that this one was different to Kate Humble for example because in this instance no one had any idea about George Baugh. Therefore, even though they were looking at 'living history' I didn't sit there thinking 'if you had asked them at the time, you would know all of this'.
And I agree with margaret103 that Marion did an absolutely fantastic job raising the 3 girls on her own.
Brilliant programme, and on the whole I'm thoroughly enjoying this series!
-
I found this programme absolutely riveting!
Possibly because my own maternal Grandfather abandoned his wife and nine children during WW2 & married bigamously...
Other parallels with this episode were that he then also took his second family to Australia, - (after a spell in Brixton Gaol for bigamy:-)
I've never heard of Kim Cattrell, but as others on here have mentioned, I was also impressed by the strong women in her family...& would love to see a 'follow up' episode.
Romilly.
-
I really enjoyed this programme as did my OH. I did think that if George's 2nd family was still in the UK, they would look at the TV and learn that their father was a bigamist. However, of course, the 2nd family in Australia had obviously been contacted and forewarned.
I was happy for Kim Cattrell had made contact with George's sisters, I think it made it somewhat easier for the family to realise that he had deserted his mother and sisters too. Hopefully, they are catching up on lost time too.
I'm surprised the 3 women weren't bitter, realising how much they and their mother struggled, whilst their father and his 2nd family were living quite a happy life.
Lizzie
-
I don't think there could be any complaints about the search only going back a couple of generations - many of us have a mysterious disappearing relative on our trees, and the fact that it is relatively recently doesn't actually make the search any easier. The most annoying 'absence' in my tree is not someone back in the 1800s, but my great-grandfather, so I could really relate to this episode.
I like the variety of histories that have been included in this series. I think something for everyone. Hopefully next week will provide something different againl.
-
It appears that I must be alone in being very dissappointed with this episode.
It is true that this story was very sad and the grandfather was an absolute cad but spending nearly the whole hour focusing on one ancestor meant they had to pad it out. And pad it out they did; it is no wonder the sisters became weepy, I certainly would if I had a camera on my face for that long whilst hearing such awful news.
Even the old lady (the grandfather's sister in law I think) I am sure felt awkward just sitting there with the cameras on them for so long, so what do you do when you feel awkward? offer to put the kettle on!! Great TV - not!
Last week's episode was much better.
-
I didn't like lats weeks at all i thought some of the earlier one was better then that one
-
I found it interesting too. I was also on laptop so kept wondering if I had missed bits because events suddenly seemed to happen.
The relatives in Durham must have been forewarned as they seemed to know and it may have been too upsetting but you could see Kim C's genuine emotion as she discovered things.
It would be very sad and a great shock too for the Australian family and presumably they would have had to agree to the programme's transmittance. It could have caused lots of anguish there I'm sure.
I thought too that the three sisters looked wonderful :D
-
Heywood i agree with you,its not the second familys fault,there are vitams just lke the 3 sister
-
I cannot wait to see this episode, as my Mam had her wedding reception in the Green Tree and lived only a few doors away when she was young. She knew Maisie and her husband Billy, I think that was his name and his sister Margaret.
-
I liked this one as i have ancestors in that area
-
Interesting episode.
I missed the very beginning (3-year-old watching a DVD I forgot it was on!) so I will have to catch that on the repeat next week.
I was a bit dissapointed that it did only go back to Kims grandfather, but then as the story panned out we were all interested in what they were finding out.
I did feel sorry for Kims mum & her aunts as the story opened out, must have been very upsetting for them to see those photos, but they are definatly a credit to their mother and the upbringing she gave them.
It was interesting hearing the grandfathers sisters story too, how sad he cut his entire family out of his life, such a shame kims grandma and her grandads family didnt know earlier, the story of the girls reading about the wedding dress and knowing by rights they should have been entitled to wear it was very poignant.
I also couldnt help feeling for the 2nd wifes family - how must they have felt that this man they thought they knew turned out to be someone totaly different to the man they thought they knew, you could actually see the confusion in the faces and the conversation they were having with Kim.
I just found it very very sad that one self-centred man could cause so much upset in 3, maybe 4 families (his Mum & sisters, Kims Family, and the family of the 2nd wife he decided to make emigrate, and we dont know what he was like with his 'second' family)
Not a lot of generations, but all in all, quite interesting, I realy felt that Kim was 'involved' in this, some of the celebrities just seemed to be along for the ride.
Gaille
-
BBC iPlayer has all the episodes online and even shows them live when the programme is being broadcast on television. It only shows programmes owned/made by the BBC but you can see a lot of programmes on there.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00m42gr/Who_Do_You_Think_You_Are_Series_7_Kim_Cattrall/
Personally, I thought George was a bit of a sociopath. I cannot comprehend why he would leave his wife and three children and not only try to move thousands of miles away, but actually remarry whilst still married to his first wife and act as if he had no past life. Good on the family though for being strong, and good to know that they got in touch with their half-siblings.
Stephen :)
-
It was a very moving episode though maybe it wasn't genealogy.
I was weird that he tried to run away before but came back and had another daughter. Incredible.
I noted George's address on his (bigamous) wedding cert was Bredbury in Cheshire where my Mum was born. so he wasn't that far from home.
it was rivetting
-
How emotionally draining that must have been for Kim, her Mother and Aunts.
Re-telling the stories the 3 sisters shared when they were children was so very sad. Their own Mother should be very proud of herself in raising 3 young children and keeping them all together.
I wonder what George Baugh's own father and mother were like? Im not excusing his behaviour for one second, but it would have been interesting to see where he came from and what was going through his mind when he left his young family, if anything. What a selfish man.
It was a happy ending for Kim and her close relations, when we discovered that they had met up with their new family in Australia.
It would be nice to see a "catch up" programme. Not just with Kims family reunion, but with all the celebs in the series. A nice way to end each series, just to tie up the loose ends. I would certainly find that a worthy programme on its own to view.
Hazel
-
I thought it was an interesting episode .. not very much family history research, but finding out about someone who did not want to be found.. probably more difficult.
I have a similar ancestor - my gg-grandfather vanished in the 1890s and left his wife and 8 children. The youngest child died around the time he left. The family story was that he went to Australia, but I've always suspected that he remarried somewhere closer to home.
The strange thing is if he hadn't left I know my story would have been altered - my g-grandfather changed jobs to help out financially. If he had not done this he would never have ended up in Dublin .. and my grandparents would never have met!
Shane
-
I wonder what George Baugh's own father and mother were like?
They did say that his father liked to drink and had a temper. Times were hard.
Life was different then and divorce wasn't an option but I think that leaving his family penniless was unforgivable. He may no longer have loved his wife but, as always, children can be innocent victims when a marriage breaks down.
-
I really enjoyed this episode and half way through I unusually found myself hoping that they were not going to switch to other family lines, but stick with finding the answers to George's disappearance.
I agree that a follow programme about the meet up in Australia woud be good.
OH's family have the opposite history, his grandmother appeared here from Germany with no past, even the copy of her birth certificate has her parents names cut out.
Sharpie
-
I like Kim Cattrall from SATC but she seems very different in real life - a nice person ;D
A very interesting episode though I agree there was some 'padding' with lingering shots on the faces of the people involved. It was a fascinating story but I felt a bit voyeuristic when Kim was telling her mum and aunts at the end as it was so personal. This was their father afterall...
At the end though I felt this man was so despicable in his behaviour he didn't really deserve all this effort made for him - though of course I am sure it was great to have closure for the family to finally know what happened. And as others on here have mentioned it was probably more common than we realise. Still leaving a wife is one thing but to cut off young children... >:(
-
I really enjoyed this episode. It must have been a relief to know after all these years, even if the truth is unpleasant.
I have a similar story too, my Great-Grandmother was abandoned, by her mother though. Her father died when she was 5 and her mother just vanished. She was brought up by aunts and uncles (all on her father's side) and was very much loved by them, but she was always hurt by her mother's actions.
I've been trying for a long time to find out what happened to her, I'd wondered if she'd had a breakdown but my Great-Grandmother's surviving children believe she remarried. I have been unable to trace her on the 1901 and 1911 censuses, nor can I find a marriage or death record so it's a mystery!
-
I've been trying for a long time to find out what happened to her, I'd wondered if she'd had a breakdown but my Great-Grandmother's surviving children believe she remarried. I have been unable to trace her on the 1901 and 1911 censuses, nor can I find a marriage or death record so it's a mystery!
Why don't you post a request on the appropriate board about your elusive relative. I'm sure the peeps on here will be able to help you. :)
Evie
-
Hi Evie, thanks that's a good idea, I'll give that a go!
-
I enjoyed this one! so what if they padded out the hour, I think it would have been a mistake to try and squeeze in another generation or another line...it was after all the answer to the question that Kim's family had wanted to know all these years.
I think it should also serve as a reminder that it's not just how many names and how far back you can go but that our ancestors were real living breathing people, however nice or nasty they were :D !
Suey
ps two bigamists on my tree and looking likely that there were four in oh's :o......simply couples who could not afford to divorce and who just married someone else after their first marriages failed.
-
Brilliant episode, very poignant, moreso for me because my great grandfather did the same thing at the same time.
-
I enjoyed it and it gave me the idea that my gt gt grandparents where up to some think not right in 1900
-
Hi, following the theme of the above posts, I too thoroughly enjoyed this episode. What an unforgiveable, dispicable, self-centred, irresponsible specimen George Baugh was. I was a little puzzled tho that George's family - mother and sisters - also ignored those three little girls and their mother ... shame on them .......... or did I miss something here? OH says the sisters looked a little shame faced but I must have missed that too.
Polly
-
The prize for the most over-the-top acting must go to the neighbour of one of the relatives, whose jaw dropped almost down to her knees when she opened the door to Kim and didn't close again for what seemed like several minutes., when she said it was "the best day of my life"! ;D Had she really not been primed??
A really interesting episode, and it's good to see the programme varying the formula a bit. I don't think we even saw a family tree, nor did we hear too much of Mark Strong's funereal tones.
Gillg
p.s. I do hope someone's passing on all our comments to Kim - she and her mother and aunts have had nothing but well-deserved compliments here. :)
-
Following on from what Polly said,
I guess that Kim may also have been wondering why George's mother didn't step in if she herself felt that his actions were reprehensible. Perhaps she was too full of grief. :-\
George's sister was 8 (?) when she last saw him, so even if she felt that it was wrong for him to desert his wife, what could she do about it? And then I guess as time goes by, it's perhaps easier to leave things be.
-
I thoroughly enjoyed this episode, but then I guess I would any genealogical programmes!
It didn't feel like a usual episode though, as someone has said, no family trees, hardly any narration and only a couple of experts.
One thing that did wrangle though - how could they be sure sure the stowaway on the boat to the US was THE George. Wasn't the birth date only an approximation? And there was no other co-oberating evidence was there?
-
Personally, I thought George was a bit of a sociopath. I cannot comprehend why he would leave his wife and three children and not only try to move thousands of miles away, but actually remarry whilst still married to his first wife and act as if he had no past life.
It's not uncommon for men (and women?) to do that today - difference is, nowadays divorce is fairly easy, but just as difficult for the abandoned children.
I feel this is an unpopular point of view on this thread, but I do think there are two sides to every story. We're all assuming the abandoned wife was a saintly creature, but who knows what went on in the marriage? The husband did go to see his mother, to tell her he couldn't go on with the marriage - maybe that was his 'cry for help'? Perhaps he was just a very weak character, who was unable to stay and sort things out? People who spend their lives running away are often insecure rather than villains.
I'm glad for the sisters that they found out what happened to him, though. It's the not knowing that hurts most.
-
It was a very sad and moving story, but hardly genealogy. I sat there waiting for a twist in the story which never came. I really hoped that nasty Mr Baugh would get his "come-uppance" before his story ended, but alas it didn't happen.
-
It was a very sad and moving story, but hardly genealogy. I sat there waiting for a twist in the story which never came. I really hoped that nasty Mr Baugh would get his "come-uppance" before his story ended, but alas it didn't happen.
But surely genealogy, as we know it today, is about the people in our families and the events around them. I thought Kim's mother and aunts were incredibly brave- not just for airing their story but for having the courage to want to know what actually happened to the father that abandoned the family no matter what might be found.
-
It was a very sad and moving story, but hardly genealogy. I sat there waiting for a twist in the story which never came. I really hoped that nasty Mr Baugh would get his "come-uppance" before his story ended, but alas it didn't happen.
But surely genealogy, as we know it today, is about the people in our families and the events around them. I thought Kim's mother and aunts were incredibly brave- not just for airing their story but for having the courage to want to know what actually happened to the father that abandoned the family no matter what might be found.
Yes, but (as has already been demonstrated in this thread) there must be thousands of people in this country with a similar tale to tell. I watch WDYTYA more for the aspect of digging out quite elusive ancestors and comparing them to the famous subject of the programme. Although I sympathised with the family on last night's show, and I felt desperately sad for the poor children, it did seem to me that it was more a case of hanging out dirty washing in public than actual genealogy, but I suppose we all look at it from different ways.
-
i missed this one and really wanted to watch it as i have similair story in my tree.......
my great grandfather abandoned my great grandmother and her 3 children ...
my gran being one of them....
gran then my mother searched for years (he disappeared in 1919) with no luck......
then 18 months ago i made contact with his daughter in australia....yep a whole new family i am now in contact with a great aunt i never knew i had just wish gran was alive as she would of loved to of known what happened to him....bigamist yes but closure on a family mystery... so never give up warkz
dee
-
It sounded as if George had run away when things got difficult for all of his life. His sister said he kept running away as a child.
I too thought his three daughters by his first wife were admirable. One of them at least looked as if she had suspected he would have married again. Can you imagine though, never having seen even a photograph of your father? No wonder the youngest daughter was in tears.
The people I really felt for were the relatives of George's second wife - and especially his family in Australia. What a terrible shock it must have been for them, and all because of a TV programme. By the way, I think it just said that Kim's mother and aunts had been in touch with the half siblings, not that they had met them.
I did enjoy it, although I hadn't expected to when I read it was to do with living or recently dead people.
-
One thing that did wrangle though - how could they be sure sure the stowaway on the boat to the US was THE George. Wasn't the birth date only an approximation? And there was no other co-oberating evidence was there?
On the immigration form, I think it said his occupation was a Baker ... as far as I can see, both his father (George 1885) and grandfather (John 1860) were bakers.
-
Hi, following the theme of the above posts, I too thoroughly enjoyed this episode. What an unforgiveable, dispicable, self-centred, irresponsible specimen George Baugh was. I was a little puzzled tho that George's family - mother and sisters - also ignored those three little girls and their mother ... shame on them .......... or did I miss something here? OH says the sisters looked a little shame faced but I must have missed that too.
Polly
I suppose it is quite believable that the mother told them where to go after being abandoned by their son/brother - we will never know.
It has certainly proved an interesting programme for it's emotional content. I have no problem with it not having family trees etc- 'Who do you think you are?' - we are all products of what has gone on before and that in a way does make us who we are.
My grandad used to tell me how nasty his father was and then I began this interest and thought that the man concerned had been widowed and times were hard etc.
Then when my 2nd cousin in USA told me that her grandmother had said that her father was horrible (same man) I felt a bit affronted somehow. I had forgiven him, yet really have no idea what his behaviour was like.
Going back to Kim Cattrall - her love for her mother and aunts was so lovely and it must have been so hard to take that he had stuck by his other family.
-
One thing that did wrangle though - how could they be sure sure the stowaway on the boat to the US was THE George. Wasn't the birth date only an approximation? And there was no other co-oberating evidence was there?
On the immigration form, I think it said his occupation was a Baker ... as far as I can see, both his father (George 1885) and grandfather (John 1860) were bakers.
Yes I can remember seeing that too, but I would need a lot more to convince me that he was my ancestor other than a shared occupation and roughly the same birth date. They surely must have had more evidence than that though??
Don't think anyone has mentioned it yet but i LOVED the photograph of George where is he just peeping out of the window. It was such a haunting image and I'm sure it must have 'haunted' the three girls for many years too. The photograph pretty much summed up his life.
-
I presume that since his surname was quite uncommon along with the approx age match, port of departure being near his home and occupation matching that the the odds are very good that it was the same George.
Shane
-
I've just watched this on iPlayer.
I had/have no idea who the actress Kim is, but what a programme ! I was rivetted ... such hard information to take and digest; no wonder there were long pauses as it sunk in with all the women concerned. A great programme ... the best and most interesting one of the series so far.
(And what a NASTY man her grandfather was ... a right bas***d !!
-
The passenger manifest (arriving in NY) listed George as stowaway and single although address of wife and then something about refusing to answer any more questions was mentioned. George also appears on a incoming UK list as returned stowaway going to his home address.
-
Sounds like a lot of us have a 'George Baugh' in the family.
I have a George Baugh in mine, my mothers granddad who did something similar and left the family.
I thought this was probably the best episode I have ever seen on WDYTYA, It was superb from start to finish and I am just pleased for her mum and aunt that they can finally have some sort of closure on this.
As others have said I can't believe somebody would just walk out one day never to return, I just can't imagine anyone in their right mind doing this.
And then he goes and up roots his second family to Australia never to be heard of again. Incredible stuff.
-
It did cross my mind that he might have moved to Australia so abruptly because he thought someone was onto him about the bigamy. He must have lived his life terrified of that catching up with him. Maybe he saw someone from his old life in the street somewhere?
I also thought that he might have left his first wife because Isabella had already become pregnant, but I don't know the relative dates of their marriage and the daughter's birth.
I thought this was an amazing story, and well told too. I think it was right to concentrate just on this story, rather than diluting it with details of other ancestors. It had a huge impact simply by taking you through the effect this man had on those he knew all the way through his life.
-
One thing that did wrangle though - how could they be sure sure the stowaway on the boat to the US was THE George. Wasn't the birth date only an approximation? And there was no other co-oberating evidence was there?
On the immigration form, I think it said his occupation was a Baker ... as far as I can see, both his father (George 1885) and grandfather (John 1860) were bakers.
George (1908) was also listed as a baker on the marriage certificate relating to his second marriage to Isabella.
I thought this episode was very interesting, despite the lack of research into other generations. I couldn't help wondering about the possibility of some mental illness/scarring/trauma on the part of George Baugh though - he ran away frequently according to his younger sister and "couldn't stay in one place for long", then he runs out on his family with no notice, only to settle down for a while before making a snap decision to emigrate to Australia some years later. Sounds like a man trying to out-run himself, in my opinion.
-
I recorded this programme and have just got round to watching it. I really felt for Kim and her mother and aunts. I cannot wait to see Mam and hear what she has to say about him as she was brought up in the same village where they lived and their youngest child was actually born the same year as me. It will be interesting what she thought of him.
-
I thought this episode was excellent... it epitomises the little scraps of information many of us have to use to piece everything together.
However I have a really big criticism: She did not, or the BBC did not show her talking about what happened to her grandfather to her newly found great aunts. She said right at the end of the programme it was about finding family she didn't know she had. I don't think for a minute that she did not contact them and tell them what happened. But, George left not just her mother and aunts, but also his own family and it's a very self-centred way of showing the episode: It wasn't only their family that was affected. I'm sure George's sisters would have liked to have known what happened to him and see the photos of him.
-
I thought this episode was excellent... it epitomises the little scraps of information many of us have to use to piece everything together.
However I have a really big criticism: She did not, or the BBC did not show her talking about what happened to her grandfather to her newly found great aunts. She said right at the end of the programme it was about finding family she didn't know she had. I don't think for a minute that she did not contact them and tell them what happened. But, George left not just her mother and aunts, but also his own family and it's a very self-centred way of showing the episode: It wasn't only their family that was affected. I'm sure George's sisters would have liked to have known what happened to him and see the photos of him.
In the titles at the end it did say that they had since contacted the Australian branch, i guess at the time of filming they may not have wanted to appear on TV after having the bomshell about their father dropped on them,
also lets not forget when being to Harsh on George that MAYBE one day his Australian Family may do some searching and find their way to this forum, and seeing their Father/Grandfather being called all kinds will hardly encourage them to post lol.
As above the programme was a bit vague about when the child in Manchester was born and if this was the main reason why he eventually left his first family, i was glad to see that despite the start Kims Mother and sisters must have had, that George if he was to see them now would rightly so have serious regret (to put it mildly) on the way his first family turned out, and whatever you think without his actions they wouldn't exist.
I think the natural way for most to think is to side with the first family, but those in Australia are as innocent in Georges actions
as Kims Branch were ;)
sorry just reread the post above and realised you were talking about Georges OWN family, yes not sure why they didn't continue BUT in my local paper a few weeks ago i do know they did contact some family local if you go to Google and type in her name and then the place Burscough it tells you a bit more, again this is not the side you mention but does show there is more going on behind the scenes ;)
-
I think an awful lot of the contacting happened off-camera in that episode. It said afterwards that Kim's mother and aunts had contacted the family in Australia, and I'm absolutely certain that they would have contacted their own aunts as well as the sister in law and niece in Co. Durham. I'm sure all those photos were well copied and distributed, but it just wasn't shown in the programme.
-
The point of the programme was to find out for her mother and aunts - not the Baugh family.
On the face of it, the girls were abandoned by this side of the family so it must have been difficult to approach them anyway.
I'm hopeless and forget very soon what I have seen, but there did seem to be some 'sudden events' in the programme to me. I recall wondering, 'how has that happened' etc. For example, when going to Durham, it was plain that the meeting was prearranged and by then the lady and her daughter had been informed of his bigamy.
I do feel for the Australian family- the youngest child will only be 50 yrs or so and might have had a wonderful relationship with his father we don't know yet.
-
I also thought that he might have left his first wife because Isabella had already become pregnant, but I don't know the relative dates of their marriage and the daughter's birth.
The marriage was Q3 1939, the birth was Q3 1940. Didn't he clear off in 1938?
-
The marriage was Q3 1939, the birth was Q3 1940. Didn't he clear off in 1938?
Was that when he was recorded as a stowaway to the US
-
The marriage was Q3 1939, the birth was Q3 1940. Didn't he clear off in 1938?
Was that when he was recorded as a stowaway to the US
Yep, the Americans sent him packing, and "wife" #2 stupidly took him back ::)
-
I think he was a stowaway in 1935 and it was wife number 1 who took him back and then they had their last daughter.
Thanks for clearing up those dates, Geoff. I still think think he'd already met Isabella when he left his first wife (whose name I've now forgotten).
-
Yes he was a stowaway in July 1935
-
He was a returned stowaway on the same ship the same month going back to Liverpool address
-
I really enjoyed this episode!
What a horrible,horrible,self centred and irresponsible man! >:(
To think that he was with his second family while his three children were sleeping on flea infested matresses wondering where the next meal was coming from :(
I was really hoping that he would have been caught out and sent to jail!
It was very sad at the end to see those three ladies in their mid to late seventies crying over their father that they really never knew,still scarred by his desertion of them,now knowing that he went off to play "happy families" with his second family while they lived in poverty!
At least now they have closure
Annette
-
The marriage was Q3 1939, the birth was Q3 1940. Didn't he clear off in 1938?
Was that when he was recorded as a stowaway to the US
He arrived as a stowaway 15 July 1935 aged 26 ... so the age was correct (birth reg Q4 1908)
at 21+ mins in the broadcast http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00m42gr/Who_Do_You_Think_You_Are_Series_7_Kim_Cattrall/
-
I really enjoyed this episode!
What a horrible,horrible,self centred and irresponsible man! >:(
..................
I find it really depressing how some people have bought into the line that George was an absolute heel with no redeeming features whatsoever ::).
Life is never that simple.
If George's first wife was little miss innocent why did his family refuse to have anything to do with her and their grandchildren after George left?
-
It was an interesting programme from the point of view of "where did he go, what did he do?" but I tend to agree with whoever it was that temerously suggested it wasn't really genealogy. It certainly was family history, and I can see that nearly everyone has taken the virtuous side and castigated the poor man within an inch of his life.
Surely one of the main facets of genealogy, is understanding our ancestors in the circumstances that they lived at the time. This man was selfish, yes, but none of us know the situation he was in. Divorce was out of the question, so what was he to do? How do we know that he didn't regret leaving his children for the rest of his life, but was clearly frightened of being imprisoned for breaking the law by his bigamous marriage?
I don't condemn him because I didn't know him. We couldn't ask him for his side of the story and, to me, this was little better than a witchhunt. Still, I suppose the dead can't sue!
I just hope that WDYTYA has now got this kind of programme out of it's system, and will return to it's more usual format. (I suspect this one may have been made in the same batch as last series when they seemed to concentrate on fathers and grandfathers' generations).
You may have guessed that I didn't really care for it!!
Jill
-
I find it really depressing how some people have bought into the line that George was an absolute heel with no redeeming features whatsoever ::).
Life is never that simple.
If George's first wife was little miss innocent why did his family refuse to have anything to do with her and their grandchildren after George left?
It's always difficult to get all the facts in cases like this but there are many explanations for lack of contact between first wife and George's family. In my own family, around this same period, the 1st wife took back errant husband (which only lasted a short while) and then most of his family 'disowned' her because they thought she shouldn't have taken husband back. The children from 1st marriage are still very upset and bitter about what happened and the way their mother was treated so I can well understand how difficult it was for Kim and her family to allow their story to be made public.
-
...................... I can well understand how difficult it was for Kim and her family to allow their story to be made public.
Maybe, but at least they had a choice which is more than the poor second family in Australia had.
In my opinion besmearching the dead is not something WDYTYA should be about, and the fact that the dead are so recently departed (1974) doesn't help either
-
What we don't know is if the family in Australia were given details before the episode was shown, or even filmed. Perhaps they agreed to details, like birth records, being shown but didn't wish to appear on film.
-
...................... I can well understand how difficult it was for Kim and her family to allow their story to be made public.
Maybe, but at least they had a choice which is more than the poor second family in Australia had.
In my opinion besmearching the dead is not something WDYTYA should be about, and the fact that the dead are so recently departed (1974) doesn't help either
I have no problem with "besmearching the dead" when they are nasty people, but as I've said before, I don't see that it is much to to with genealogy either.
-
I have no problem with "besmearching the dead" when they are nasty people, but as I've said before, I don't see that it is much to to with genealogy either.
There are (at least) two things wrong with that statement
1. You do not know the dead person was nasty. All you have is a one sided hatchet job on them.
2. That shows a wanton disregard such besmearching has on the living - and all in the name of entertainment.
I think its all rather sad and if this is the level WDYTYA has sunk to then I think it would be better if they stopped making it
-
Nick, perhaps it wasn't genealogy in the sense as we know it, but I would imagine that for Shane and her sisters their childhood without their father shaped 'who they think they are' - which is the point of the programme.
-
I think I second previous threads in that I enjoyed the programme and all that it entailed - we all have "odd" people in our trees who do things unexpectately but I was a bit disappointed in not going into other sides of the family, but when the programme went into more detail I was glad it was sorted out - and what a funny picture to see a face peering out behind a curtain!!
Kim definately wasnt what I was expecting (I know she isnt her character!!!) - what a lovely family the Mum and Aunts have turned out to be! - I think no matter what our genes are it just goes to show we are what we are and what we make of our own lives and kim and her Mum and Aunts seem to have overcome all the odds and turned out really well!
-
Have to say I thought it was the best of the series so far.
It reminded me of my own search to find out what happened to my maternal grandmother, who abandoned her first family and remarried, althought not bigamously. My mother was about 5 when her own mother disappeared, she never knew what happened to her, she did not even know what her mother looked like.
It was a hugely emotional journey finding out about her, how she had died and also that my mother has 6 half siblings she never knew about. And that she was 17 years old when her mother died.
I dont think that anyone should make judgements, however tempted they are to do so. People are, however entitled to know the facts, however painful they may be.
I think it was best that they stuck to the one story, maybe that's all Kim wanted to know. It doesnt make it any less interesting or valid as an episode of WDYTYA. Personally sometimes when they drift back further and further into previous generations my interest starts to wane.
And I thought Kim Catrall was lovely. A real lady. I did giggle a bit when I saw her struggling with the "Stick shift" car though...
-
A very interesting programme, I'm reminded of the episode featuring Amanda Burton where she also wanted to solve a mystery about a disappearing relative (an Uncle), it's good to see the programme cover more of the reasons people take up this hobby, not just to discover their roots or see how far they go back but to solve family mysteries or uncover the truth about a family member. These are all the events that make us what we are and the programme is fully justified in telling these stories.
I didn't catch how close to his first marriage date his first daughter was born, could it be that he married his first wife under pressure from his or her family? As for his family abandoning Kim's, that would be strange considering that his Mother told him to stick with her, I would have thought they simply lost touch. Living on the poverty level probably meant changing address frequently and as others have pointed out, the mother had a young family of her own (was her alcoholic husband still alive?) Maybe George assumed they would look after them and that's why he cut them off.
I find programmes like Heir Hunters and this episode very helpful, after all these are real events played out by real people and there are comparisons to be made.
Maybe I'm just in a charitable mood but I do think that all the people involved in this , yes even George, regretted losing touch with the 3 sisters but as time goes on it becomes harder and harder to bridge that gap. I think George's actions were those of a guilty man, he could have changed his name but he didn't, (maybe he hoped one day his daughters would find him) if he had been completely without scruples what was he running away from? Time and again I have heard stories of men abandoning children and yet going on to be superdad for their second family, as if this makes up for previous shortcomings, so I too would not write George off completely. He appears to have been a cowardly man but it appears he provided a good life for his second family and that has to count for something doesn't it?
-
I don't believe that as genealogists/family history researchers we should be in the business of casting blame. Things happened, sometimes awful things happened and we simply don't know the reasons beind them or the circumstances which led to them. We can see the effects of situations like this on those affected by them, but we can't know the whole picture. Some of the messages here have been way too judgmental, when we have only seen half of the story and from the point of view of those damaged by George Baugh's behaviour.
It was sad to see how the lives of the three ladies had been blighted by their father's desertion. I do hope their contact with their half-siblings and other relatives has helped them deal with their understandable bitterness and that they can feel proud of their mother and what they have achieved in their lives.
Gillg
-
I really enjoyed this episode!
What a horrible,horrible,self centred and irresponsible man! >:(
..................
I find it really depressing how some people have bought into the line that George was an absolute heel with no redeeming features whatsoever ::).
Life is never that simple.
If George's first wife was little miss innocent why did his family refuse to have anything to do with her and their grandchildren after George left?
I somewhat agree. After she found out he was a bigamist, she was acting as if he was going to desert his new family as well. However sitting there watching it, I was thinking more that his first marriage was clearly an unhappy one, and that he'd found someone who he could be happy with.
Maybe he was worried that he would be found out and thought it best to leave the country?
-
Isn't there an expression, 'when poverty comes through the door, love goes out the window' i think in this case thats what happened. Life under normal circumstances can be very difficult, but in the 1930's doubly so. Families had to pull together to get through the hardships. However the facts speak for themselves don't they, George abandoned three children and that can never be right.
-
Some of the messages here have been way too judgmental, when we have only seen half of the story and from the point of view of those damaged by George Baugh's behaviour.
Gillg
What can be the excuse of a grown man, an adult, a father, that abandons three small children for whatever reason before they are grown and able to fend for themselves ....... unhappy he may have been but that is no excuse ... he was selfish and irresponsible. Too easy to give in and b..... off ........ and hang the consequences of his actions. Fortunately those he left behind were made of stronger stuff and survived against the odds!!
I have no sympathy for him.
Polly
-
What intrigues me is to why he asked - was it Kim's mam - to go with him when he first left his family?
-
What intrigues me is to why he asked - was it Kim's mam - to go with him when he first left his family?
Yes, I wondered the same, was it a genuine offer or just the guilt? S'why I wouldn't rush to condemn him without being able to hear his side.
I've heard excuses from other men in this situation (not directly I'll add) such as "their Mother will have told them all sorts of lies about me", "they're better off without me", "if I turned up now it would only dredge up all sorts of hurt" or "they'd find me if they wanted to", I'd hope I would behave in a more responsible manner given the situation, but who am I to judge? The past is a differant country....
Barnaby's so cute by the way!
-
I have no problem with "besmearching the dead" when they are nasty people, but as I've said before, I don't see that it is much to to with genealogy either.
There are (at least) two things wrong with that statement
1. You do not know the dead person was nasty. All you have is a one sided hatchet job on them.
2. That shows a wanton disregard such besmearching has on the living - and all in the name of entertainment.
I think its all rather sad and if this is the level WDYTYA has sunk to then I think it would be better if they stopped making it
Well, two comments....
1. I did not do a "hatchet job", because I have nothing to do with the programme, or its makers. And I don't see anything "one sided" about abandoned children wanting to tell their story, when the facts are true, and well documented. I didn't particularly enjoy the episode, but only because I prefer the episodes where they dig a little deeper, but others did, and I respect that.
2. If the BBC stopped making programmes which a few may find offensive, then the screen would be blank 24/7. If you don't like what you see, may I suggest the use of the OFF button ?
-
As the original poster, can we try and keep the messages on this thread to general discussion on the Kim Cattrall programme.
Personal heated discussions or arguments should take place outside of this thread (I suggest you carry it on if you wish via private message or the chatroom), and I will lock this topic if they persist.
Please do not spoil it for the majority of people who just want to post their thoughts and opinions on the programme, and who do not want to get caught up in angry debate.
Many Thanks,
acceber
-
I'm not getting angry, acceber. But when someone makes untrue allegations, I am entitled to reply :)
-
Well, two comments....
1. I did not do a "hatchet job", because I have nothing to do with the programme, or its makers. And I don't see anything "one sided" about abandoned children wanting to tell their story, when the facts are true, and well documented. I didn't particularly enjoy the episode, but only because I prefer the episodes where they dig a little deeper, but others did, and I respect that.
2. If the BBC stopped making programmes which a few may find offensive, then the screen would be blank 24/7. If you don't like what you see, may I suggest the use of the OFF button ?
Nick 29,
I have no objection you taking my posts to pieces all I ask is that you deal with what I said not what you misconstrue.
I did not say you did a hatchet job. I said all you have is a hatchet job ie the programme - afterall that is what we are discussing here
What is "one side about abandoned children wanting to tell their story, when the facts are true, and well documented" is when they are dealing with truth by omission. The full story was not told just one side of it and I rather suspect that the three sisters will regret the programme in time to come when they fully reflect on it - but that is just my opinion.
-
I think you're both right. I understamd Nick's point about the abandoned children - whatever else is true or untrue the fact that they have lived their lives with this rejection is clearly true. But as davidft says, they (and we) only knew half of the story. I can say from experience that abandoned children are often given a very biased story, which they grow up believing is true. I think the sisters may well form a different view of their father when they meet their half-siblings.
It's possible their father was a half-crazed psychopath; it's also possible the day he had to leave his little girl behind haunted him for the rest of his life - and we'll never know which is true.
I think it's credit to the programme makers that they produced an episode that so many family historians can relate to.
-
I have just finished watching and must say i really enjoyed this episode I think the history of our grandparents is just a exciting as our ancestors further back in time i may be biased as a lot of my grandfather is a mystery.
George was indeed a selfish despicable man as there is no excuse for abondoning your children even if life with your spouse has fallen apart although he show some guilt by asking Shane to go with him but still put himself first. It must of been heartbreaking for the sisters seeing the photos of their father playing happy family's without them while they were living in poverty and probably feeling unloved and confused their mother must of been a incredible woman looking after them the way she did. I felt sorry for his family too his mother was clearly upset about him leaving and maybe she felt guilty on his behalf and the shame stopped her from staying in touch with her grand children and daughter in law. It must of been shocking for his second family to find out about his life before them he just seemed to leave a trail of hurt with no thought of anyone else other than himself i just hope he thought about his daughters a bit when with his new family and surely he must of felt a bit of remorse.
Louise
-
On the surface it does seem that George was "of not nice character". As I mentioned in my earlier post on this thread, my Grt. Grandfather abandoned three of his families before settling down with his fourth! That then would make him far worse than George!
As divorce was rare amongst the ordinary people, to run away and start again was the only way. It still happens today. Parents split up, father has contact with children for a while, then starts a new family, moves and gradually, loses touch with his first children.
-
lol i notice a couple that think he is an absolute "bounder"
have previously posted about their own searches and think those with "colourful" pasts are brilliant,
as Cad says and a couple of others who are we to judge until we have walked in their shoes,
it is interesting to have an opinion about a TV show or an opinion on the people we have seen,
yet seems so much easier to "hate" someone seen on TV than maybe someone in your own family who has done the same/similar,
On what i saw and heard George did to his family it would SEEM he took the cowards way out,
but being the supreme optimist as i said earlier i hope maybe one day some of his family (not sure which lol)
will come via this forum to search for their history and for them not to think we are another version of the
Ku Klux Klan, my right to call my Grandad etc whatever i want, but would be most upset to see others judge jury....................
i have always found this forum to be one of the best for reading others posts and replying
in a level headed manner, compare with the "forum" on GR (i have never posted on it but have laughed a lot at the antics) i despair if this one ever goes the same way, i think one of the differences is, that people on this forum tend to read others posts/opinions and THEN reply
Maybe as i said i am being over optimistic in thinking there was more to Georges reasoning for what he did,
i have a cousin and her Father remarried, things were tough for her Mum etc even though Her Dad was a successful business man, she lives close to him now and recently saw photos of expensive holidays he had with his 2nd wife and children, which for a while devestated her, she now has got over that and realises throwing the toys won't alter things and maybe spoil the relationship she has with her Dad, obviously Kims Mum and her sisters have far greater issues as they didn't ever get the chance to get over what George did as they didn't know him, but i am sure they seem like a really nice family and they will be thankful they have each other, and made good lives for themselves despite the start they had.
-
I watched this last night and found it interesting and very moving. The pain that the three sisters must have went through over the years doesn't bear thinking about nor the pain they must have felt when they found out the story of their fathers life,but i did laugh at the end when Kim was saying that George was in the navy but only on the docks and her mother just says "figures"! They are three very strong and amazing women!
Tony
-
Hi folks, I've just watched my recording of this episode while browsing the forum, it was very good. Several folks have commented that it 'wasn't genealogy' and queried why they didn't research further back. My feeling is that it was a great example of researching the recent past. Often it can be easy to locate information beyond the 50, 75 and 100 year restrictions that we have to live with, but finding details of people in the recent past can be frustrating. This is a good example of modern genealogy.
I have one concern about the show, Kim employed a researcher who mailed her a copy of George Baugh's bigamous second marriage certificate, but this was taken at face value. Why was there no proof that this was the correct George? While it is not a common name it's not that unusual. A quick check in the 1901 census showed that there were almost 1400 people with the surname Baugh, 40 of whom were named George, it wouldn't be that much different 40 years later. I would like to see some proof that this was the right person, otherwise Kim's research may have followed a wholely wrong line.
-
I have one concern about the show, Kim employed a researcher who mailed her a copy of George Baugh's bigamous second marriage certificate, but this was taken at face value. Why was there no proof that this was the correct George? While it is not a common name it's not that unusual. A quick check in the 1901 census showed that there were almost 1400 people with the surname Baugh, 40 of whom were named George, it wouldn't be that much different 40 years later. I would like to see some proof that this was the right person, otherwise Kim's research may have followed a wholely wrong line.
i am pretty sure that any more checks would have been done before airing, and the remaining was just done for effect,
ie a couple of weeks ago someone said they had JUST received a certificate from Southport, then pulled it from a sealed large brown envelope with no address, and most will recognize the envelope from Southport and that wasn't one, as i say just for effect ;)
-
ie a couple of weeks ago someone said they had JUST received a certificate from Southport, then pulled it from a sealed large brown envelope with no address, and most will recognize the envelope from Southport and that wasn't one, as i say just for effect ;)
The one that made us laugh was the one birth cert that was 'Faxed' to someone (I think it may have been Chris Moyles but I cant remember)........................ it must have been a realy amazing fax machine the hotel had cos the cert that arrived was on the Records office pale pink watermarked paper !
Gaille
-
i am pretty sure that any more checks would have been done before airing, and the remaining was just done for effect,
I'm sure you are correct, BUT, the programme suggested that simply finding the right name is enough and we all know how misleading that can be.
-
i am pretty sure that any more checks would have been done before airing, and the remaining was just done for effect,
I'm sure you are correct, BUT, the programme suggested that simply finding the right name is enough and we all know how misleading that can be.
i think if we looked into the programme since it started it all makes this family history lark so easy lol
as Gaille said above they make it sound as if you can just ring up and bingo you have your certificate, or just walk into the Archives place and be led by the nose to every snippet about your family, or jump on a plane to Russia and someone just happens to be waiting in a records office for you, i always thought my computers were top of the range, i really need to get one of those they all seem to use that find the records in 20 seconds :P
maybe they should add something at the end to state that months of research have gone into the searches,
watching Heir Hunters it does sort of make it clear the amount of work that goes into the tracing,
lol or try ringing them up and stating you are from WDYTYA ;)
Maybe an idea for a spin off how they went about tracking such and such.
-
i am pretty sure that any more checks would have been done before airing, and the remaining was just done for effect,
I'm sure you are correct, BUT, the programme suggested that simply finding the right name is enough and we all know how misleading that can be.
Maybe an idea for a spin off how they went about tracking such and such.
That's a great idea, I'd love to see that - I want one of those instant finding computers as well :-)
-
its repeated tonight at 6 or 7 on BBC2
-
Are you certain toni*?
My tv magazine list for BBC2......... Athletics until 8.00pm, then Coast. :-\
Nanny Jan
-
I must be mistaken then sorry :-[
The programme is usually repeated on Tuesdays at 7 on BBC 2 but not this week
-
I'd been expecting it to be repeated this week!
Let's hope they show it next week .
Nanny Jan
-
Kim's programme is repeated on Tuesday 25 August at 7pm on BBC 2 (just got my new TV mag). It wasn't repeated this week because of the athletics
-
if you have sky +h/d its on wed' 12am
-
Just a comment about terminilogy.
My dictionary describes genealogy as
history of the descent of families; the pedigree of a particular person or family
In other words, long lists of people and how they are related.
What most of us are interested in is Family History. Not just how people are related but where & how they lived, what work they did and so on.
Surely WDYTYA is about how people have become who & what they are? So Family History, not just genealogy, which would be pretty boring :D
BTW I enjoyed the programme
Linda
-
Very moving for me...lots of similarities with my own family :(
Dolly
-
Having now read all of this terrific thread, I really want to see the episode. My grandparents weren't married as he was already married - and my mum never knew.
We've only just had the David Suchet episode here in Aus (btw it was pretty good!) with the new local series starting soon. Should be good.
-
Just taught i would let you know its posted on youtube
Kim Cattrall WDYTYA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVGoYC4RO1Y)
Ger
-
Ger,
Just wanted to say thanks for posting that link. I've finally had a chance to watch it - it was really interesting! Fascinating stuff. I thought Shane and her sisters seemed very calm and collected when Kim was relating all the info.
Julie
-
I love that programme! Where's it gone all of a sudden? It was all repeated recently but I missed loads. Last one I saw was wotsisface the athlete.
Will have a look on youtube though! :D
-
The series finished a month or so back, there are usually only 6 or so at a time. They are apparently filming the new one know if believe the posts elsewhere on these boards.
-
Did anyone else think the the second wife MUST have known about the first wife. The fact that George tried to take his older daughter is the key. He would not have taken her without consent from the second wife. He was confident he could take her. That to me says it all. How would he have explained her to his mistress?