This is a two-part piece, with the second part in collaboration with Lost in the 21st Century, a podcast tackling 21st century problems from the personal to the trending.
Includes some spoilers to Bridgerton
Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past few months, you’ve probably watched or at least heard of Netflix’s Bridgerton, popularly referred to as a ‘Pride and Prejudice meets Gossip girl’. The show’s creator, Chris Van Dusen, transports us back to the Regency-era of London in the peak of the courting season but, unlike most period dramas, this one includes not an all-white cast
Now the reason I am writing this post on Bridgerton, despite the enormous amount of praise and success it has received by avid viewers, is because part of the premise of the show according to its creator was to show a Regency London as ‘multicultural’. Van Dusen himself said that ‘colour and race were part of the show’. It’s not often we’re promised of a British based period drama where race and ethnicity are key elements of the show. But, we were disappointed (well, I was at least). Not only did the trailer paint a picture of this society infused with grace, decorum, romance and eloquence (minus the very raunchy sex scenes) with black people being a part of it (something we don’t usually see with period dramas), it showed a realistic portrayal of the Regency period.
In the early 1800s there were people of African Ancestry in London because of colonialism, as well as a large South Asian population because of British Imperialism. This meant that people from all over the world were part of this 1800s 'British culture' we often see as fully white in period dramas.
The reason many have thought Bridgerton used race-baiting is because, going off of the trailer and from the beginning of the show, it’s assumed that colour-blind casting was used. This is casting without considering the actor/actresses ethnicity/ skin colour but basing it purely on meritocracy. That wasn’t the case with Van Dusen saying “that [colour-blind casting] would imply that colour and race were never considered when colour and race were part of the show". So colour-casting was not used, presumably because the very race of the character is salient to their storyline, right?
The reason many have thought Bridgeton used race-baiting is because, going off of the trailer and from the beginning of the show, it’s assumed that colour-blind casting was used. This is casting without considering the actor/actresses ethnicity/ skin colour but basing it purely on meritocracy. That wasn’t the case with Van Dusen saying “that [colour-blind casting] would imply that colour and race were never considered when colour and race were part of the show". So colour-casting was not used, presumably because the very race of the character is salient to their storyline, right?
My problem with Bridgerton is that race is not a clear issue brought up, and while there were many opportunities to do so, it just didn’t happen. The only times there were whispers of race were heard is when Lady Danbury says to Simon in episode 4 "We were two separate societies divided by colour until a king fell in love with one of us. Look at everything it is doing for us, allowing us to become". That’s it. That’s all we get. Clearly here the characters acknowledge that this society is integrated (the extent to which is disputed, based on colourism). So why was this the only time race was mentioned?
Indeed, the shaky relationship between Simon, the only light-skin male central character, and his father, one of the few dark-skin supporting characters who happens to be the most evil character, has deep ties to race; the fact that as a child Simon is pressured to be this perfectly gifted male heir, incorporating the deeply entrenched notion that black people need to work twice as hard to get half as much as what white people just happen
to be born with by the grace of whiteness. This subplot could have been so complex and nuanced and could have added so much depth to Simon’s character, who is otherwise mainly depicted as a promiscuous ‘rake’ type figure with real daddy issues.
While the cast did consist of a few black characters, on a whole the cast was not diverse at all. There is near to no Asian characters with speaking roles- I believe there is one Asian woman with a speaking part- and the majority of the black characters check the light skin or ‘racially ambiguous’ box.
With the non-white characters we do see, like Lady Danbury and Will Mondrich (the Duke’s best-friend) their stories could have been nuanced to include race, but they weren’t which makes me question whether the creator’s even wanted to include race discussions at all, or whether race-baiting was done simply to check the ‘diversity’ box and increase media interest.
To make this a larger conversation, I asked the hosts of Lost in the 21st Century their views on this show that’s got the nation addicted to regency romance (the girls also wrote a very informative piece on race in Bridgerton, posted on @lostinthe21stcentry on Instagram). To read the girl's responses, stay tuned for part two!
If you enjoyed this piece, like this post and subscribe to Empathos Blog <3
Comments