Since its inception, Netflix’s Bridgerton has strived to create a candy-coated vision of the Regency era: an alternate reality, post-discrimination, where viewers can sink into cheesy, gossipy romance. But as the show introduces a new sapphic plotline, an outcry has risen from fans of the source material.
With Bridgerton being the unstoppable phenomenon it is, there’s no wonder the most recent season has completely captivated online discourse. The adaptation of Julia Quinn’s series of romance novels has won over audiences with how unapologetically it adapts the writing. Despite the constant criticism of “bodice-rippers” as less respectable media, Bridgerton never changes. The show’s dedication to serving a predominantly female audience by depicting women’s pleasure has won over a devoted fanbase. Unfortunately, as with any beloved media, this also marks any controversies as particularly cutthroat.
In the show’s most recent season, a surprising pivot from the source material has been made. Francesca, one of the sisters of the Bridgerton family, has been rewritten as a queer woman. In the novel, When He Was Wicked, Francesca originally marries the Earl of Kilmartin: John Stirling. However, when he dies around 20 pages into the novel, her story evolves to center around her romance with his cousin, Micheal Stirling. The novel explores themes of infertility, guilt, and grief. The Netflix series features the same plot, except for a gender-bent Micheala Stirling.
What is it about this change that seems to cause so much ire in the fanbase? A multitude of reasons have been cited for the discourse, but the resounding response is that the change from Micheal to Micheala was an unnecessary move that will erase important themes from the original novel. But is it possible that this backlash is actually preventing the show from becoming a more complex and powerful iteration of its origins?
Bridgerton’s unapologetic depictions of female pleasure are precisely what sets it apart from other streaming shows. In period pieces of the Regency era, viewers don’t always get to see a female perspective — much less a perspective that includes women of color. And there is nearly never an honest depiction of the misogynistic marriage mart: women who were kept innocent on purpose, and struggle to navigate romance without even knowing their own bodies.
So, if we allow Bridgerton to be progressive in these aspects, why not continue to ask more of our media, and encourage diverse stories to be told? The criticism of inclusion as “forgetting” the original themes seems to be a weak one. As showrunner Jess Brownell says, “I didn’t want to just insert a queer character for queer character’s sake. I want to tell a story that accurately reflects a queer experience.”
It’s true that giving Francesca a female love interest will alter the way her infertility struggles are depicted, so it seems completely fair for women who identify with that story to worry the adaptation won’t be faithful. But as Brownell says, Francesca has been rewritten as a queer woman precisely because of her story and struggles, not in spite of them. Queer narratives often center around similar themes to When He Was Wicked: guilt, shame, or struggles with having children and fitting the traditional family structure. Why not recognize that similarity and appreciate that this story can represent and connect with the greatest number of viewers possible?
There seems to be a need to reframe the issue: it is not an either/or problem, where the showrunners must decide to include the original story, or the queer iteration. Rather, including Francesca’s queerness gives rise to a more complex exploration of the themes at hand. In doing this, both queer and straight women are encouraged to connect to Francesca’s narrative and the show becomes a more powerful version of the novel.
Going forward, we should see Bridgerton as a singular cultural moment, and a huge opportunity for representation. Bridgerton is uniquely positioned, as a juggernaut of pop culture, to resist the backlash and continue in the path it is building. Whereas smaller productions with sapphic representation have ended seasons early (think Yellowjackets or A League of Their Own), Bridgerton has the support to remain in production for a long time. And now, more than ever, we need to encourage our media to push barriers, rather than remaining in the same comfortable places — that is to say, with Micheal, rather than Micheala.