Answering Your Bridgerton Season 2 Questions!
I get a lot of questions from all of you about some things that happened in Bridgerton Season 2. Some are wondering why, some are critiques, and I’m here for them all! And here to answer them as best I can. So here we go.
Why did the show change things from the book?
A show by necessity has to change things from the books because it's a different medium. If it's just a dramatization, that's boring. And it would take about three hours. They have to make a whole show. Characters have to expand and change. And they have an artistic responsibility to make that they best they can, to follow the stories and themes that authentically spring up. Keeping the spirit of the story is what's important, not making the details the same. And even that, when the show will go on as long as this and have so many new threads and changes, matters less. I would so much rather have it depart dramatically but serve the Characters as they are on the show well than cling to some, often outdated, and thematically poor for the story they've crafted, source material. What would be the point? We've already gotten the story as is in the book. We need something fresh and different and uniquely Beautiful that only this show and these people could bring to life. That's where the magic comes from, not from being limited by the source material.
Why did they keep going forward with the wedding?
Yeah, I get why this could be troubling to some. I think the conversation with Kate in the woods broke Anthony. He was ready to give up honor for this feeling but now its just too far and he's grasping on his last threads of what he imagined his life to be with everything he has. Meanwhile, Edwina keeps taking steps forward right when Kate is ready to confess, right as it hovers on the brink of too much to tip the scales. Each time Kate and Anthony do something that might warrant a confession, Edwina unknowingly gives Kate another reason to stay quiet. They did an amazing job of matching it so that every time Kate wanted to tell Edwina, Edwina ramped up her feelings and made it harder for Kate to be honest. It really was the best version of that storyline I could imagine. Absolutely it doesn't happen in the book. But I think with the theme of the show being about duty, the biggest thing that could be would be the failed wedding. It was the clearest way to make Anthony have to confront things, to ask himself what he wants if no one else is there. Which is of course Kate. It's so much more intense because the show seemed to write so devotedly from that theme.
So, does Edwina bear any responsibility for what happened?
The short answer? No.
The longer answer? I think we all were Edwina when we were 18, or at least most of us would be if we'd grown up that sheltered. I think that should inspire empathy, both toward Edwina and to ourselves. You can’t blame her for not seeing their feelings for each other because honestly, they don’t see it either, not in any clear way. Edwina thinks they hate each other, and trying to get them to spend time together does not mean she's responsible for the behavior. It’s incredibly sweet that she wants them to get along, and it’s pretty hard to identify sexual tension when you might not even know what sex is. Edwina also doesn't see who Anthony really is, mostly because he hasn't showed her. Also not her fault. Finally, she doesn’t listen to Kate, who tells her not to pursue Anthony, but Kate doesn’t give Edwina the real reason, so that doesn’t fall on Edwina either. Here’s my analogy: Kate is telling Edwina not to eat a cookie because it will make her gain weight. Edwina says she knows her body, what she wants and needs, so she’ll eat the cookie anyway, and does. Then if Edwina keels over and dies because the cookie was poisoned, it’s not Edwina’s fault she died just because she didn’t listen to Kate. Kate didn’t give her the real reason. So no, I don’t think we can blame Edwina in any way.
Why the love triangle/interrupted wedding trope?
I have read many reviews taking issue with this aspect, and have heard many people complaining about it as well. Those who do tend to miss the central idea that Bridgerton is a celebration of romance, romance novels, and romance tropes. Fake relationships, enemies to lovers, friends to lovers, best friends brother...stopping a wedding...those are rife throughout the series. Is it a little ridiculous? Of course! It's supposed to be. That's not a vice, especially as it's so intentional and handled so well. Of course I don't think it was perfect and I have some criticisms, but it was done very well. Moreover, the sisters were never pitted against each other. Kate gave of herself unendingly for Edwina, and when Edwina makes her choice about whether to marry Anthony, that's about her and her life, not Kate and really not even about Anthony. They aren't fighting over a guy. And the reason Edwina is so angry is because Kate lied. They do an amazing job of dissecting and remaking the love triangle trope into something much deeper and more powerful. Is a love triangle what I thought I wanted? Of course not. But I did end up really appreciating what they did with it. It felt like a wonderful homage to so many romance tropes, and done with so much depth and care. It never felt like fighting over a guy to me, but fighting over truth and agency, which is what made it not feel like a classic love triangle but something for more complex and interesting.
How is this season from a feminist perspective?
The role of women does get called out and questioned in several ways this season. Primarily, it is examined through Anthony’s Madonna/whore complex where he puts women into categories. Kate isn't part of it at all and she and Anthony fall in love when he starts giving her respect as a whole person. Even Lady Whistledown at least pays some lip service to feminist ideas and queen early feminist herself, Mary Wollstonecraft, and Eloise is still Eloise, even with a love interest. I think the show is remarking on how our modern hookup culture in some ways is not so very different, and is trying to give some agency to the young ladies of that Era, which is important. I was impressed with how they big choices of the season went to women, while the growth went to everyone as fully fleshed out characters. I think it overall is a really strong example of a feminist romance show, particularly with such a strong female gaze and the diversity of female characters.
Why does Kate sometimes act so rudely?
Kate definitely is often strong and brusque, and inhabiting the masculine role. We even see this in her attire early on, with dark colors, structured, almost masculine jackets, and her role as the protector for her family. She is just like Anthony but often received differently. For example, how Kate doesn’t really acknowledge Violet when Lady D tries to introduce them is there to mimic Anthony with Daph at the beginning of S1, and to show Kate in the same overprotective role Anthony was. Is it perfect? Of course not, but it is understandable. And as for the interaction when they first meet Lady Danbury, well, Lady D is being downright offensive. She assumes the Sharmas will be uncivilized and need to be "trained" which is at least ignorant, definitely ethnocentric, and maybe a little racist especially knowing how British people tended to view Indians at the time. If Kate were a man, we would not only expect but demand that he stand up for his sister. Instead, people call Kate a bitch over it.
Why didn’t we get a Kanthony wedding?
Obviously I would have loved a Kanthony wedding, but I was happy with what we got. I think they could have done something really good showing the contrast to his wedding to Edwina and show how much better it fit him and these two than a huge event like the Queen threw. But we already saw Anthony and Kate totally committed to each other. Not in this moment at the wedding, though its a great one, but at the I love you. That was the emotional catharsis, and while a Kanthony wedding would be amazing, it also would have just been extra. I would love the extra but it wasn't, I don't think, strictly necessary to make the plot or character development work. For more on this, I wrote a “Why We Didn’t Get a Kanthony Wedding” post that you can read!
Why were there fewer Kanthony moments?
In short: there weren’t. I did a whole post about it (Go Check Out “Were There Actually Fewer Kanthony Moments in Season 3?”) It could have had more, and as a fan of them, I want that. But honestly, I don’t think I wanted more. I think showing that every time they were even close to alone, things came rapidly to something scandalous, showing that they couldn't be in each other's presence without it being a powder keg, did so much for the story. If they were ever able to be together and simply be, that breathless feeling, the desperate need, would have been lessened. It drew out the tension perfectly, and I wouldn't want that broken I think people would feel better if the subplots would be a bit less. Almost every ep could have had 5-10 minutes cut out and would have been better for it. I think that would be the difference.