Dearest Gentle Reader, ‘Bridgerton’ has returned with improved representation

By Jendayi Leben-Martin ’24

Staff Writer

Graphic courtesy of Gabby Gagnon ‘24

At the beginning of 2021, I wrote a review of the first season of “Bridgerton” in which I expressed that I was less than impressed with the series. However, the recently released second season has flipped my perception of the show, so much so that I’ve even been recommending it to anyone I can. Set in the early 1810s of England’s Regency era, this season turns its focus from Daphne (Phoebe Dynevor), the eldest sister of the Bridgterton family, to Anthony (Jonathan Bailey), the family’s eldest son. Through Anthony’s journey to wed, viewers are introduced to new characters and new schemes, all with the same “Bridgerton” magic.

This season approaches race differently than the last. The first season of “Bridgerton” used colorblind casting and relied on insufficient justifications to explain the historically inaccurate racial diversity of London’s wealthy social scene, as the show suggested that racism ended when the king married a Black woman, making her queen. The second season, however, takes more care in exploring the narratives of its characters of color. Enter Kate and Edwina Sharma (Simone Ashley and Charithra Chandran), two sisters from India who have come to London for the courting season in order to marry off the youngest sister to a “respectable” man. Though there are times when they express their distaste for London — often portrayed by Kate’s hatred for English tea — the show depicts the two girls and their mother using traditional South Asian practices, and the representation is refreshing.

 Maahi Jaiswal ’24 spoke highly of the portrayal of a traditional wedding practice called a Haldi Ceremony, in which women rub turmeric on their skin. 

“I definitely think in other media in the past, that’s made by Western directors, it’s portrayed as really messy and really dirty,” Maahi said, referring to the ceremony. “But I think the way they portrayed it was really nice because they were together as a family. … It seemed really beautiful and respectful.”

While I have no complaints about the racial diversity this season, the show’s creators seemed to have done away with what little LGBTQ+ representation they had. In the first season, Benedict (Luke Thompson), the second eldest Bridgerton brother, had an ambiguous relationship with a married, gay artist, which threw his morality into question. However, this storyline is completely ignored in the recently released episodes. Of course, it is not expected that every detail from one season follows into another, but this change feels purposeful and — similarly to how this storyline was dealt with in the first season — not very thoughtful.

The new episodes of “Bridgerton” are a much needed redemption from those of the last season. They give viewers the same slow-burn, period piece romance that was featured previously, but with a bit less of the hyped up horniness — a welcome change. While this season showed improvement in its handling of race, it’s still not enough to be the show’s main draw. If you’re looking for a love story with endless drama, unmatched chemistry and stunning wardrobes, this season of “Bridgerton” is a must-see.

‘Bridgerton’ Review: Historical Fallacies Fall Flat

By Jendayi Leben-Martin ’24

Contributing Writer

“Bridgerton,” a show released on Netflix on Christmas, is a period drama and romance series that has become so popular it’s brought Regency-era jewelry back into style. The show centers on the wealthy Bridgerton family and the people surrounding them as they embark on a journey to find love in one of the most affluent towns in Regency London. With Netflix being recently criticized for a lack of diversity in its casts and its portrayal of characters of color (when they are cast), many eyes were on “Bridgerton.” The show comes close to breaking through the standard Netflix has set for storylines of Black and queer characters, but regrettably misses the mark. 

The drama features characters of all races living in historically inaccurate harmony in wealthy London. For several episodes, “Bridgerton” doesn’t acknowledge the question that seems obvious to me: How did this racial harmony come to be? 

The casting directors used a method called “blind casting” where they didn’t select actors based off of their race. While “Bridgerton” is not the first project to use this method (ever heard of a musical called “Hamilton”?), it is not as “woke” a decision as many might think. Aside from the pros and cons of blind casting itself, I thought that the writers and producers (including Shonda Rhimes, who is also responsible for TV sensations “Scandal” and “Grey’s Anatomy”) chose to completely ignore the idea of race in the show and simply have the characters interact with no mention of their differences. Though I can’t say I completely agree with this method or with blind casting in general, I initially thought that this was a refreshing way to produce a show. I appreciated that the Black actors did not play Black characters, but simply played characters. 

Unfortunately, just as I was making my way through the season and my respect for the show was growing, it all shattered in one scene. 

In the fourth episode, Lady Danbury (Adjoa Andoh) explains how racial relations in their society came to be. She reminds Simon (Regé-Jean Page) that the marriage between King George and Queen Charlotte, who is Black, has given Black people the opportunity to integrate seamlessly into society with no lasting negative effects or biases. While I understand that “Bridgerton” is a romance and that the creators are more committed to the sex scenes than they are to historical accuracy, the blatant disregard for race and the struggles undergone by people of color is hard to ignore. Put plainly, Black people have been literally risking their lives for hundreds of years just to be seen as equal to white people under the law, and in 2021, we are still so far from that goal. For the writers of “Bridgerton” to say that all racism and racial biases end with the union of a white king and an incredibly light-skinned queen is a slap in the face to the bitter reality of racism that has been at the forefront of many of our minds for the past year. 

Unfortunately, race is not the only heavy theme “Bridgerton” brushes over. When Benedict, one of the Bridgerton brothers, attends a party with his friend Henry Granville, who happens to be a successful artist, he finds Henry in a room making out with an unknown man. I had been anticipating something like this, as I sensed sexual tension between the two from the moment they met. However, the show does not go anywhere with this story. Benedict simply confronts Henry, who is married to a woman, and he responds with a short monologue that can be summed up along the lines of “love is love.” Of course, we can all agree that representation is important in shows and movies, but one of the troubles of trying to include different types of marginalized characters simply for the sake of including them is that the characters often fall flat. This is exactly what happens with Henry Granville. 

All in all, “Bridgerton” does a good job of creating a beautiful, whimsical world for viewers to escape into for eight episodes. However, shows shouldn’t haphazardly include Black or queer storylines that they are not prepared to flesh out. When writers, directors and producers add diversity to their casts and characters simply in order to say that they have done so rather than because they actually care about those stories, it shows. I regret to say that “Bridgerton” comes across as one of those projects.