Will Holt ‘23
Staff Editor
Bridgerton. This word has haunted me since I accepted this assignment early last week. At first, it brought a sense of unease, as I was unsure of how to fit eight hour-long episodes into a week already consumed by classes, readings, interviews, and other obligations. However, upon commencing my viewing, the word’s utterance would usher in a feeling akin to nausea, for I have not seen a greater bastardization of a beloved film or television setting since I saw J.J. Abrams’ Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker. Bridgerton not only adopts a nearly criminal degree of creative license when it comes to its interpretation of Regency England, it plasters a predictable plot, one-dimensional characters, and obtuse storytelling on top of it. Suffice to say, I was appalled.
For the benefit of readers who are unfamiliar with the show, permit me to provide a brief introduction. Based on Julia Quinn’s best-selling series of the same name, Bridgerton focuses on the lives of London debutants during the 1813 social season. It explores the scandalous dealings and unbearable social pressures that existed beneath Regency London’s plush and grand exterior. Preying upon the affinity for impropriety and unbridled anglophilia of unwitting Americans, Netflix and producer Shonda Rhimes, the creative force behind such shows as Grey's Anatomy, Scandal, and How to Get Away with Murder, set themselves up well for a bombshell hit. When released on Christmas Day 2020, Bridgerton skyrocketed up the charts and, with a viewership of eighty-two million households, ultimately claimed the title of Netflix’s most watched show. Even I cannot fail to be impressed by the enormous success this production has found in such a short period of time. Such success makes it all the more important that you, the consumer, receives an honest and unbiased critique. I will do my best.
As a student of history, perhaps the most jarring part of watching Bridgerton for me was the treatment of its historical setting. I am not speaking about the failure to remove roadway lines and other editing gaffs, nor the decision to feature a racially-diverse cast. My primary grievance is the creative team’s apparent failure to conduct even the most basic historical research. Errors range from the modest, such as characters smoking factory-rolled cigarettes in a time when even hand-rolled cigarettes were considered novelties, to the egregious, such as the male lead’s consistent failure to wear situationally appropriate clothing. You may deem these errors to be trifling or irrelevant, and, if they were isolated, you’d be right. However, the mistakes abound in such numbers as to make it nearly impossible to enjoy what little entertainment value the story has to offer. What makes it worse is that the creators seem to have embraced such shocks. In fact, the show at times goes out of its way to abandon historicity and instead attempts to exude some bizarre aura of modernity. The first example that comes to mind is when the musicians at the evening balls play modern music by the likes of Ariana Grande and Shawn Mendes on their violins and cellos. I am not a great fan of either of these artists at the best of times, but I cannot describe the inclusion of their music in a Regency period piece as anything other than vulgar. Yet, as tasteless as this creative decision was, neither it nor the previously mentioned errors render the show totally irredeemable. Yes, they come off as tacky and cheap, but good storytelling could have salvaged the situation. Unfortunately, the show had little to offer in this realm either.
I will not dive into the plot because I respect the desire of many readers to avoid spoilers, but, suffice it to say, I found the narrative to be quite predictable, albeit with the occasional humorous twist (I found the conclusion of the “Lady Whistledown” storyline to be worth a chuckle). However, I will dig into its characters and storytelling. The former range from acceptable to tiresome; I found some of the secondary characters to have redeeming qualities. The sweetness of Penelope and Colin make the rest of their fictional world a little less detestable, and the Queen can claim some entertaining moments. Unfortunately, most of Bridgerton’s stars leave little in the way of positive impressions. Anthony is the pinnacle of incompetence, his mother is a bore, and whoever plays Eloise—I couldn’t be bothered to look up her name— appears as if she is expecting a laugh track after each of her lines. Most tragically, the two leads prove to be walking tropes. Simon Basset is the deep and unobtainable rake with a dark past but a heart of gold, while Daphne Bridgerton lives her naive and innocent life until grown up problems force her to grow a backbone and defy expectations. In other words, we’ve seen them a million times, in a million places.
Now, I must be fair. A conventional character can be extraordinary when a creator presents their narrative in a sophisticated way. Unfortunately, the storytelling in Bridgerton does nothing to help its protagonists as its character-building is blunt and obnoxious. For instance, when the show wants to make Basset seem tough and masculine, it throws in a bare-knuckle boxing scene (which conveniently leaves him totally unbruised and unbloodied). If Daphne needs to appear pure and flawless, it literally has the Queen declare it before all of her court. There exists no subtlety, no grace. And those are the exact qualities that should be abundant in a production set during the Regency. Ultimately, Bridgerton’s greatest flaw is there exists a rift between its goals and how it tries to achieve them. It leverages popular affinity for English history, yet it deliberately undermines its accuracy. It tries to channel the charm and nostalgia of Jane Austen, but applies none of her sophistication. It tries to make a statement, but it can’t decide on what to say. The end result is a confusing, disjointed production that can’t seem to achieve anything. And so, I am perplexed by its popularity. I can understand why people watch the Bachelor or Bachelorette. They are trashy, and embrace it. Bridgerton doesn’t. Why? I haven’t a clue.
---
wjh4ew@virginia.edu
