Gossip Girl and Euphoria both went viral, reaching a wide audience due to their promotion of certain issues. These shows put relatable characters in incomparable situations to influence critical thinking, allowing relatability from their viewers in completely unique ways. Scandals involving sex and drugs occur everywhere, but those in societies with less boundaries show the extent to which they could reach if the setting was changed. With Gossip Girl displaying a rich upper-class society and Euphoria displaying an unconventional LA suburb, the characters grew up without the rules that keep most viewers grounded.
Los Angeles Suburb | New York City
Being raised in large and intense cities, the main characters of both shows are exposed to dark realities at young ages, forcing them to grow up substantially by the time the show starts in their junior year of high school. With absent parents, mental illness, and early exposure to trauma, these characters are born into lifetimes of difficult decisions. Solely because they knew harsh truths at a young age, these characters are never given the parental or societal support young adults need, often causing them to act out beyond what most viewers experience.
The actions of the characters in both shows are at deep debate due to their developmental journeys in environments we can’t relate to. We allow ourselves to like the characters of Gossip Girl and Euphoria because it’s refreshing to know young adults aren’t always going to make the most rational decisions, especially when so many emotions are at stake. These shows are meant to inspire thought about humanity and how circumstance may be a larger influence on one’s actions rather than personality. I think we oftentimes dislike characters’ actions, but can’t guarantee we’d differ if we were in such situations.
MaddY and cassie | Blair and Serena
Playing into the “brunette vs. blonde” trope, both shows subconsciously pressure their female viewers to “pick” one of the two it-girls by giving them similar backgrounds but different styles of expression. Viewers differentiate between the girls’ aesthetics to uncover who they’d match up with better in such a society. Maddy and Blair, being the assertive brunette best friends, maintain an image as unrelatable “queen bees.” Cassie and Serena, being the flighty blonde best friends, come off as more “down-to-earth” but unobtainable due to their reputations. Though this inspires competition between the friends, most of the time neither “wins” since they’re competing for completely different images. This works as a commentary on differences in feminine expression and their lack of comprehensive value due to constantly changing societal standards.
The differences in the best friends’ backstories are often explanation for their differences in expression. Blair and Maddy’s backstories rely on their parents’ marriages; they fear feeling bored, which creates a boldness and boundary issues. Blair and Maddy act manipulative and intensely on their actions, but they never lose sight of why they do so. On the other hand, Serena and Cassie’s backstories rely on their daddy issues; they fear being abandoned or unloved, resulting in insecurity and attachment issues. Cassie and Serena are more prone to make rash decisions, and it often comes back to their expedition for male validation in any form to fill a void. This is also probably why both writers decided to have the blonde hook up with their brunette best friend’s long-term boyfriend, in order to present how self-destructive they could be for male validation. It’s also possible that the reason they fell for these men specifically was that the guys’ dedication was proven, as the affairs occurred at the expense of something important.
Lexi | Dan
Lexi and Dan both serve as one of the few unproblematic characters, but decide after a certain point that they’ve had enough of their counterparts’ actions. Characters like Lexi and Dan break the fourth wall in these shows by saying what the audience is thinking, allowing us to immerse ourselves in the experience. Both exposés were in the form of literature, perhaps because things get lost too easily on social media or to add to the “fourth wall.” I found it ironic that they chose to confide in characters who’d started off as a representation of society’s deepest issues. Dan isolated from everyone besides Chuck, who’d first seemed broken and shallow, while Lexi went to Fez, who’d been blamed for Rue’s addiction. It seems as though in shows where all the characters are deeply flawed, it’s easier to forgive those who were open about it from the start, especially as other characters’ secrets slowly come out. It makes sense for Lexi and Dan to come to these characters with their exposés because Fez and Chuck were the ones who were open to the truth from the start.