maghrebitch - Tumblr blog

maghrebitch · 2 years

Text

It grinds my gears when people say that Anthony being in love before Kate does not take away from Kanthony because it really does. It ruins Anthony’s characterization because it makes his season 2 arc much less believable. How am I supposed to sit here and believe this man's trauma is such a big deal, such a big obstacle in his relationship with Kate, when it wasn’t with Siena? How am I supposed to believe he had always sworn off love since his father’s death when he apparently had not done so with Siena and only swore it off because she dumped him? Where was his trauma then? In season 2 he is saying that he could never put someone through what his mother went through. So either Anthony’s season 2 arc is not to be taken seriously and the stakes are made up (does that sound like good storytelling?), or it IS to be taken seriously because he never actually loved Siena. The only way you can take his season 2 behavior seriously is by saying he never loved before, he simply believed he did. Which completely gels with season 1 anyway because Siena dumped him because she knew in her heart that he was never going to take care of her because he is lost. And he literally told her she was right and apologized for leading her on. Even without his admittance, hints to his lack of true investment in her are numerous throughout the season: always checking the time, insulting her, false promises, kicking her out onto the streets. The pocket watch motif also serves as a hint that his trauma was already there in season 1. Him swearing off love in season 1 was him simply admitting what he had always sworn off in his heart already and Siena simply pushed him to admit it with his head. Which is why he is more upfront about it in season 2, so the relationship with Siena still served his character development and is therefore not useless. It literally makes so much more sense this way! It ties his season 1 and 2 arcs together beautifully, no contradictions.

#bridgerton #anthony bridgerton #siena rosso #kate sharma

15 notes · View notes

maghrebitch · 2 years

Note

it sucks that bridgerton wrote their only fat girl character in such a way :( as much as bridgerton likes to tout it's diversity and representation, those characters are either treated bad or written poorly or shafted. like what daphne did to simon in s1 and he had to apologize. in s2 the love triangle with kate and edwina that hurt both their characters, and mary being nonexistent. lady danbury and the queen are iconic but they're supporting characters. and penelope's actions as whistledown (but i have hope for character development and i personally love messy women)

I both agree and disagree with this. I appreciate the writers taking risks and doing something different, although sometimes they fall short. But I also think the fans are as much to blame for how these characters are treated for their inability to accept any nuance.

For example, I think both Kate and Edwina were written EXCELLENT in season 2. They were given conflict, which is a necessary part of entertainment. You cannot have a story without conflict. But both had sympathetic perspectives. Regardless of whose side you took in the argument the other side isn't unforgivable and you can tell they still love one another. This issue is that FANS absolutely refuse to digest nuance and subtly. They refuse to allow dark-skinned girls to be imperfect. And they refuse to allow two dark-skinned girls to be main characters at the same time. (I say this because after everything Penelope or Portia have done, Edwina is still the most disliked character right now. Portia who abuses her daughters, and Penelope who runs a gossip column that ruins lives and is proud of it, are both more liked than Edwina whose only crime was to be ignorant and get mad at Kate once.) So to fans, either Kate or Edwina MUST be in the wrong and be manipulative, selfish, stupid, or whatever else they're saying about them on Twitter. (I literally saw a Tweet calling Kate a groomer and I’m not even going to get IN to the fuckery of that statement.) The truth is the narrative never favored or disfavored either side of the argument. The writers made sure to show both perspectives and to make both characters sympathetic and understandable, and I know they succeeded because if they didn’t we wouldn’t be having these debates about who was right or wrong in that situation.

Edwina was actually given a personality with wants, needs, and motivations that she didn't have in the book. Book Edwina wasn't even a character. She was a hollow shell, a yes-girl with no distinguishable personality. I almost laughed when I read the book because Edwina went from “I’m going to marry Anthony because he’s a wealthy gentleman and he’s interested. Stop being so rude to him, Kate!” to “You're engaged? I always knew you two were in love. Also I’m in love with a random man I’ve never mentioned before so you know I’m not at all bothered by this turn of events.” The complete lack of literally anything from her was astounding. She was “Go girl, give us nothing!” the whole damn book. She only existed as a plot device for Kanthony’s relationship.

And Kate was given a far more nuanced and complex motivation in the show than she was in the book. In the books she’s considered plain next to Edwina’s beauty so no one wants her. In the show her being single is a choice because she refuses to consider herself before her family is secure. In the books she is jealous of Edwina always being considered first (and she’s ashamed of being jealous), in the show she’s not only not jealous, but incredibly PROUD of Edwina AND is responsible for helping Edwina become the perfect diamond. When people compliment Edwina in the show Kate feels nothing but joy and pride. In the books Kate has a traumatic memory of her mom dying in an incredibly weird way during a lightning storm, which was honestly kinda silly. In the show, she has older sibling trauma that SO MANY older siblings, particular older female siblings, can understand and relate to: when your parents make you a de facto parent to your own siblings and force you to grow up earlier than you want or deserve. It’s a trauma Anthony himself relates to: “There are times I had to be your father when all I wanted to be was your brother.” I could go on and on forever, but show Kate is remarkable and I absolutely adore her!

Regarding Mary: she was made more a person than she was in the books. She had some great dialogue and scenes, she’s fleshed out well enough for a supporting character. Remember that her entire identity in the book was “mom”. Mary of the show has a spicy little backstory and her own love story and tragedy to flesh her out, also her own guilt and shame she needs to contend with.

I cannot sit here and agree that Kate, Edwina, or Mary are examples of characters being wronged by the writers, because I don’t simply disagree, I wholeheartedly disagree and actually feel the opposite -- that they are examples of the writers EXCELLING. My only complaint about season 2 are the side plots falling flat and lacking any emotional depth. But if we’re only talking main story and Kanthony I think it’s near perfection.

With Penelope... I do feel she was done quite dirty, but I don’t think it was intentional. The writers wanted to do something unique and creative with Lady Whistledown, and in their credit, they did. LW framing the episodes is fun, it makes the show stand out among all the other regency period dramas out there. And the exposés she writes propels the show’s plot along. It makes for a really good story. I’ve said this before but I will be sad if we ever lose LW because this show’s gonna get a lot less interesting. But unfortunately when you use LW in such a manner and you have her cross lines like she did with Marina, you make her a bad person. And even more unfortunately, Penelope is LW. And that’s a detail they kept from the books, so it’s not like they were intentionally targeting Penelope. I think Penelope is a victim of the writers choosing intrigue and excitement over characterization. Penelope’s kinda a shitty person as LW, and I don’t think the writers even realize they did that. It just sucks that they’ve created a situation where a fat girl in a romantic regency drama is hated as she is, when she’s quite literally breaking barriers with her mere existence. Quite honestly, I wish the writers said fuck the books and made LW someone else, perhaps completely anonymous and never revealed. Because I adore her mischief but I don’t adore what it’s costing Penelope. Ofc at the end of the day people don’t give a fuck about fat girls regardless, and tbh I think Penelope could be the perfect model citizen and still be disliked by some.

But I’m very much with you when you said “I like messy characters”. I adore messy characters, it’s the reason I loved season 2 so much, because you can’t get more self-sabotaging person than Anthony Bridgerton. So I’m not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater and give up on Penelope. (Or any of these characters.) She can still be redeemed, but that would have to involve a subplot where she acknowledges how being LW has harmed her friends and understands it was wrong. I think she also needs a scene with Marina for closure. Although I will be quite sad when Penelope stops being LW (or if she doesn’t quit, “tames” LW). Because LW is sooo much fun and I really enjoy the chaos she causes.

That all being said I agree with you about Simon. His voice was completely silenced after Daphne's assault and his perspective totally lost in the last two episodes. But I will point at that the same can be said for the book. So the show writer’s crime may actually be following too closely to the books. Because let’s be real, that scene shouldn’t have been adapted period.

#bridgerton

25 notes · View notes