Though “Bridgerton” is most known for the iconic romances, there are more than just love and family bonds that go beyond the meaning of the show.
The production company Shondaland has done lots of work behind the scenes to make “Bridgerton” an inclusive show that takes place during an exclusive time period.
REPRESENTATION FOR CULTURES:
It’s heartwarming to see so much diversity and inclusivity throughout all four seasons of the show, as well as in the Queen Charlotte spin-off. If we compare the books to the show, there are not many diverse storylines or characters in the original work. That’s why it’s great to see that the show is not a direct adaptation of the book and is claimed to be “inspired by” the books instead. It’s a great way to please the book lovers as well as start a new, progressive era of period dramas.
Shondaland has been very careful when selecting its cast over the last five years, giving representation to many different cultures and heritages. The most prominent so far have been major roles for women of Asian heritage: Kate Sharma played by Simone Ashley and Sophia Baek played by Yerin Ha and African Americans: Simon Bassett played by Regé-Jean Page and Queen Charlotte played by India Amarteifio/Golda Rosheuvel.
REPRESENTATION FOR THE LGBTQ+ COMMUNITY:
Fans have also praised the LGBTQ+ representation in “Bridgerton” that was never present in the book. This representation is even seen in smaller roles such as Henry Granville from Season 1, who was confirmed as gay and the LGBTQ+ couple, young Brimsley and Reynolds, in Queen Charlotte. The production team changed the plot entirely to make not one, but two Bridgerton siblings bisexual. Benedict, being one of the siblings in question, was a surprisingly great shock to the fans. Many expected it to be Eloise, but representation also stems from not giving in to stereotypes.
Francesca’s future romance with Michaela Stirling, who was originally a male in the book, has caused a split between fans. Many love the direction Shondaland is taking, as it gives focus to the LGBTQ+ community in a main role. But many fans, in particular some who have read the books, think that it was unnecessary to change Francesca’s storyline since it focuses on her desire to have a child of her own.
Despite this discourse, editing the original story of all heterosexual characters into one that spotlights a queer couple is meaningful in its own way.
REPRESENTATION FOR THE DISABLED:
Speaking of Francesca, readers noticed that her personality differs in the adaptation, which made her relatable to a broader audience. Fans have headcannoned her and her late husband, John Stirling, to have signs of autism. In the book, Francesca is more outgoing, witty and upbeat. In the TV show, she is more reserved and keeps to herself, tending to be quiet. It can be appreciated that each character has a distinct personality, allowing show watchers to relate to the characters through the screen.
In the Queen Charlotte spinoff, King George is portrayed as having a mental illness, which is one of the main storylines of the show. Hazel, a maid with a limb difference, is featured in Season 4.
In Season 3, Lord Remington can be seen in a wheelchair. Alice Devlin and Jude Powell use sign language, and Lady Danbury has mobility issues throughout the show.
There is no meaning behind casting these roles. Nobody bats an eye despite the time period. Shondaland is trying to show us that these characters are just as normal as you and me and should be treated as such.
REPRESENTATION FOR MOTHERS:
Seeing Violet find love for a second time can comfort women and mothers who may be feeling guilty or hesitant about starting their lives over again after the death of a loved one. She represents so much more than the woman who brought the Bridgerton children into the world.
If you have not read the book, you would have never known how toxic the Bridgerton men truly are. Producers toned down their toxic, possessive and aggressive behavior and turned it into soft desire and yearning. In the show, they are more empathetic, understanding and vulnerable in order to make sure toxic masculinity is not a problem with the adapted characters. Despite this, Colin, Benedict and Anthony still exhibit some frustrating, toxic behaviors, particularly because of scenes in the book that need to be translated on screen where they lash out.
REPRESENTATION FOR WOMEN:
More so, “Bridgerton” has shown women’s frustration with the patriarchy in the 19th century. Eloise, for example, breaks barriers with her constant statements that she will become a spinster and refuses to get married regardless of what anyone says. She can be defined as a feminist and an advocate for women throughout the show. Many women in the series have pointed out the unfortunate standards they face from men of the era, and they have not felt afraid to speak out against them. In the Regency-era, this most likely would not have gone over well, and the women would have ended up punished. I appreciate how “Bridgerton” continues to break barriers in order to rid the show of as much toxicity as possible.
Shondaland has used the “Bridgerton” books as source material rather than direct scripts for its production. The setting, plot and characters remain the same, but there are many differences that casual viewers would never know are different from its base material. Lots of time and effort has clearly been put into the beautiful, diverse cast we all know and love.