Book vs. Series: On The Shelf

[moonorchid]

12 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Love the use of quotation marks around plainness.  One of my least favorite romance tropes is the heroine being plain and the only person who finds her beautiful is the hero.  Rarely is the heroine ever described as beautiful unless the plot involves knocking her down a few pegs before finding her HEA.  All romance heroines are average at best.  I get it and it goes back to the way Jane Austen describes Elizabeth Bennett, but I don't like it.

Not my favorite aspect of the book. It all feels rather dated now a days so I’m glad shondaland ditched it. Both Kate and Edwina in the show are massively beautiful and the only reason Kate isn’t heavily pursued is one, she’s not out for the season and two, she’s too old for their standards. For the time frame I can accept that. 

I know this aspect met with mixed reviews but I liked how there was the added mix of needing Edwina to marry a British man for the inheritance to she and her mother would be taken care of. It still falls under the umbrella of Kate feeling tasked with making sure her family was taken care of without it just being about marrying her off to do so. 
 

Oh! I forgot my favorite detail the show scrapped. Anthony sucking out the venom of Kate’s bee sting and then getting caught in a compromising position and then having to marry her. It’s a retread of “the Duke and I” and I’m thrilled we didn’t have to see it, lol.

Edited March 30, 2022 by moonorchid

[bijoux]

Yeah, a lot of the changes make sense. And doing away with Anthony's conviction of his untimely demise and focusing on his duties also brings with it not highlighting Kate's fear of storms. There's no awareness od mortality as their bond, it comes down to daft older sibling who must make the world run.

It's also exciting in a way because I honestly don't know what to expect. Current events greatly influence what happens in the future. For instance, in Eloise's book the brothers go to sort stuff out and Eloise is all, Anthony, what are you doing, convincing me to marry a man I don't know, I wanted a love match like you got. And Anthony rightfully points out that he got married because of him and Kate being caught by Portia. Yes, she's his entire world but the circumstances of them getting married weren't that romantic. That's just not true in the show. They both know completely that they love each other when they get married. Even the argument of ruined reputations is ground to dust since Kate refused Anthony's first proposal which she viewed as colored by that. So the conflict between Eloise and Anthony can't remain the same 

Somebody brought up the possibilty of Marina not dying, but running away with someone. My first thought was, that won't work, Phillip and Eloise wouldn't be able to marry. But what if this Eloise, the one who reads Wollstonecraft, actually wants to be with Phillip even without marriage and that's the conflict. Her family thinks it's insane and just another 'rebellion' but she actually really loves this dork.

[Nire]

17 minutes ago, bijoux said:

Yeah, a lot of the changes make sense. And doing away with Anthony's conviction of his untimely demise and focusing on his duties also brings with it not highlighting Kate's fear of storms. There's no awareness od mortality as their bond, it comes down to daft older sibling who must make the world run.

It's also exciting in a way because I honestly don't know what to expect. Current events greatly influence what happens in the future. For instance, in Eloise's book the brothers go to sort stuff out and Eloise is all, Anthony, what are you doing, convincing me to marry a man I don't know, I wanted a love match like you got. And Anthony rightfully points out that he got married because of him and Kate being caught by Portia. Yes, she's his entire world but the circumstances of them getting married weren't that romantic. That's just not true in the show. They both know completely that they love each other when they get married. Even the argument of ruined reputations is ground to dust since Kate refused Anthony's first proposal which she viewed as colored by that. So the conflict between Eloise and Anthony can't remain the same 

Somebody brought up the possibilty of Marina not dying, but running away with someone. My first thought was, that won't work, Phillip and Eloise wouldn't be able to marry. But what if this Eloise, the one who reads Wollstonecraft, actually wants to be with Phillip even without marriage and that's the conflict. Her family thinks it's insane and just another 'rebellion' but she actually really loves this dork.

I just hope they include all the brothers showing up.  So many humorous parts in that bit of the book.  

[RachelKM]

1 minute ago, Nire said:

I just hope they include all the brothers showing up.  So many humorous parts in that bit of the book.  

My favorite part of that exchange is Eloise incredulity that Gregory is part of their "rescue" and refers to his 22 year old self as an "infant."

[iwantcookies]

Remember Bella from twilight? Lol 

Edward the stud vampire falls for plain/clutzy Bella Swan…

[bijoux]

2 minutes ago, RachelKM said:

My favorite part of that exchange is Eloise incredulity that Gregory is part of their "rescue" and refers to his 22 year old self as an "infant."

I'm just checking that part and he's 23, thank you very much. Which means Hyacinth's book actually happens really close to this one, as I think she's in her very early 20s during her story. It came as a surprises, I thought there was a bigger gap.

[Conotocarious]

8 minutes ago, iwantcookies said:

Remember Bella from twilight? Lol 

Edward the stud vampire falls for plain/clutzy Bella Swan…

And Edward sucks his venom out of Bella! Like BookAnthony and the bee venom.

SO glad they changed that.

[SonofaBiscuit]

I want to enjoy a completely blissful Anthony next season - it would be wonderful to see him more relaxed, less burdened by his "duties," and more playful with his siblings. With regards to Kate, she can vex him daily and sex him nightly, ha (I don't get the impression he's going to stop lusting after her anytime soon). I'm envisioning more intense versions of what his desire for Kate did to Anthony this entire season, but with actual follow through! Miss me with the ladder and stair sex, please. And a baby announcement at some point might be welcome. Just no drama, please. They deserve their happily ever after. 

[eleanorofaquitaine]

3 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Love the use of quotation marks around plainness.  One of my least favorite romance tropes is the heroine being plain and the only person who finds her beautiful is the hero.  Rarely is the heroine ever described as beautiful unless the plot involves knocking her down a few pegs before finding her HEA.  All romance heroines are average at best.  I get it and it goes back to the way Jane Austen describes Elizabeth Bennett, but I don't like it.

Eh, I actually liked that element of the book - in part, because I liked the contrast of Edwina as beautiful-but-nerdy and as a decent explanation as to why she's the one they are pushing to make the best match. Plus I liked how it confounded Anthony to find himself attracted to someone who wasn't considered the most beautiful. 

IIRC, Kate wasn't even really unattractive, it was just that in comparison to Edwina, she shone a little less brightly.

Anyway, I am okay with the changes they made. But I do miss a bit of that dynamic. 

[RachelKM]

On 3/30/2022 at 3:44 PM, eleanorofaquitaine said:

IIRC, Kate wasn't even really unattractive, it was just that in comparison to Edwina, she shone a little less brightly.

This is my recollection as well.  Kate wasn't plain.  It was just that Edwina was an out and out beauty and dubbed the season's "Incomparable" with classic English rose coloring of blond hair and blue eyes to Kate's brown hair and eyes. Kate considered herself "not pretty enough to overcome her lack of dowry." She was also already 21, very delayed for a first season but they couldn't have afforded to have 2 seasons and Edwina was just old enough at 17, and she was tall and moved athletically instead of dainty and gliding.

Edited April 2, 2022 by RachelKM

[Atlanta]

3 hours ago, iwantcookies said:

Remember Bella from twilight? Lol 

Edward the stud vampire falls for plain/clutzy Bella Swan…

IMO, Bella wasn't plain, but saw herself that way. Also, him not hearing her thoughts is what intrigued him, and as far as every guy asking her out when she first moved to Forks... Well, I grew up in a small town and when a reasonably attractive girl starts the new high school, the guys are drooling and talking about how hot she is. That part of the Twilight book is legit. I saw that firsthand.

[quarks]

Because no one - no one - asked for this, my Minor Francesca Conspiracy Theories!

On a second season rewatch I noted that:

1. Francesca is present in the first three episodes, either standing by Hyacinth or playing the piano. Her presence is easy to miss, since she has very few lines.

2. After that, she vanishes without explanation for the last five episodes, including the wedding scene (where Hyacinth and Gregory are present), the promenade (where Hyacinth is present but Gregory isn't), and the Bridgerton/Sharma group dance scene.

I initially didn't attach much significance to this, given that she was also absent for most of the first season, and she wasn't the only character suspiciously absent from the wedding scene (hi, Simon!). But then I noticed that the family group dance scene is suspiciously uneven - almost everyone is paired up, but there's one extra person, so the final group dances as a threesome instead of a pair. And that unlike last season, this season, no one bothered to drop a single word of dialogue to tell us that Francesca was conveniently off screen (last season someone did, explaining that Francesca was off studying the piano - presumably why in most of her few scenes this year, she's playing the piano.)

So my guess is that Francesca was supposed to appear in that scene, and probably in the wedding and promenade scenes as well. That would make sense, given her probable age on the show - presumably about 15 or 16. (Eloise is apparently 18, Gregory 13 or 14, and Hyacinth 12 or 13.) That is, old enough to presented to the Queen and start attending these balls by season 4 - a season we know Netflix has already ordered.

This also sorta fits with the books, where Francesca marries her first husband before Colin and Penelope get together - something I'm assuming will happen in season 3 or 4. Which in turn would suggest that Francesca would start going to balls in season 3 or 4.

So I think the plan was to have Francesca appear throughout the season in limited scenes - the wedding, the promenade, the family/group dance (where she would have had the benefit of seeing how distressed Eloise was at feeling she had just ruined her family), and in the final Pall Mall scene - if just on the sidelines. And then for whatever reason - probably Covid - the actress wasn't available, and since none of this was exactly crucial to this season's plot, her scenes were eliminated.

I have now probably put more thought into Francesca than this season's writers did.

[Roseanna]

15 hours ago, SonofaBiscuit said:

I want to enjoy a completely blissful Anthony next season - it would be wonderful to see him more relaxed, less burdened by his "duties," and more playful with his siblings.

Adult persons can't be blissful, relaxed and playful all the time since they have duties. This season's fault wasn't that Anthony had duties but that they weren't real but only in his imagination. Thus, there was no real stakes in his choices.  

[Conotocarious]

8 hours ago, quarks said:

Because no one - no one - asked for this, my Minor Francesca Conspiracy Theories!

On a second season rewatch I noted that:

1. Francesca is present in the first three episodes, either standing by Hyacinth or playing the piano. Her presence is easy to miss, since she has very few lines.

2. After that, she vanishes without explanation for the last five episodes, including the wedding scene (where Hyacinth and Gregory are present), the promenade (where Hyacinth is present but Gregory isn't), and the Bridgerton/Sharma group dance scene.

I initially didn't attach much significance to this, given that she was also absent for most of the first season, and she wasn't the only character suspiciously absent from the wedding scene (hi, Simon!). But then I noticed that the family group dance scene is suspiciously uneven - almost everyone is paired up, but there's one extra person, so the final group dances as a threesome instead of a pair. And that unlike last season, this season, no one bothered to drop a single word of dialogue to tell us that Francesca was conveniently off screen (last season someone did, explaining that Francesca was off studying the piano - presumably why in most of her few scenes this year, she's playing the piano.)

So my guess is that Francesca was supposed to appear in that scene, and probably in the wedding and promenade scenes as well. That would make sense, given her probable age on the show - presumably about 15 or 16. (Eloise is apparently 18, Gregory 13 or 14, and Hyacinth 12 or 13.) That is, old enough to presented to the Queen and start attending these balls by season 4 - a season we know Netflix has already ordered.

This also sorta fits with the books, where Francesca marries her first husband before Colin and Penelope get together - something I'm assuming will happen in season 3 or 4. Which in turn would suggest that Francesca would start going to balls in season 3 or 4.

So I think the plan was to have Francesca appear throughout the season in limited scenes - the wedding, the promenade, the family/group dance (where she would have had the benefit of seeing how distressed Eloise was at feeling she had just ruined her family), and in the final Pall Mall scene - if just on the sidelines. And then for whatever reason - probably Covid - the actress wasn't available, and since none of this was exactly crucial to this season's plot, her scenes were eliminated.

I have now probably put more thought into Francesca than this season's writers did.

I read an article that said the actress had commitments to another TV show so that’s why she disappears halfway through. Otherwise she would have been more heavily featured.

[katha]

41 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

Adult persons can't be blissful, relaxed and playful all the time since they have duties. This season's fault wasn't that Anthony had duties but that they weren't real but only in his imagination. Thus, there was no real stakes in his choices.  

I think I disagree. ;-) Anthony as the head of the family is expected to marry well and to marry someone who can keep the Bridgertons running. So he was not wrong that him choosing someone not suitable (as defined by their time and social standing) would have great repercussions not only on himself, but on the whole family. Where it became wrong-headed is that his trauma/being swamped by duties since he was a teenager had given him really skewed ideas how he should go about finding a bride and that his feelings don't matter/are evil. IMO what was interesting, if perhaps not quite intended by the show, is that Anthony/Edwina didn't look absurd. 

Yes, it would have been a marriage of convenience. But they liked each other all right and both seem decent enough sorts that they would have tried to treat each other well, learned to care for each other and make the marriage work. Obviously Kate and Anthony are in love, but because they are so alike that has the potential for problems and conflicts, as seen during the season. Edwina was too naive and conventional perhaps, but Kate is inflexible and unwilling to adjust/compromise, by what we have seen of her. Both approaches have positive and negative aspects once you become the lady of the house. 

[quarks]

50 minutes ago, Conotocarious said:

I read an article that said the actress had commitments to another TV show so that’s why she disappears halfway through. Otherwise she would have been more heavily featured.

That makes sense, but also makes me wonder why they didn't add in a quick line of dialogue explaining why she wasn't at the wedding? I mean, maybe they didn't want to draw still more attention to Simon's absence from the wedding, but still, they did add a quick line to explain why Daphne wasn't around for the family group dance and the final Featherington ball.

I just feel that her later absence wasn't completely expected. 

[Roseanna]

3 hours ago, katha said:

I think I disagree. ;-) Anthony as the head of the family is expected to marry well and to marry someone who can keep the Bridgertons running. So he was not wrong that him choosing someone not suitable (as defined by their time and social standing) would have great repercussions not only on himself, but on the whole family. Where it became wrong-headed is that his trauma/being swamped by duties since he was a teenager had given him really skewed ideas how he should go about finding a bride and that his feelings don't matter/are evil. IMO what was interesting, if perhaps not quite intended by the show, is that Anthony/Edwina didn't look absurd. 

Yes, it would have been a marriage of convenience. But they liked each other all right and both seem decent enough sorts that they would have tried to treat each other well, learned to care for each other and make the marriage work. Obviously Kate and Anthony are in love, but because they are so alike that has the potential for problems and conflicts, as seen during the season. Edwina was too naive and conventional perhaps, but Kate is inflexible and unwilling to adjust/compromise, by what we have seen of her. Both approaches have positive and negative aspects once you become the lady of the house. 

The crux of matter is not whether Anthony could marry for love - of course he could. In fact, there was nothing to prevent him, except his own imagination.

There is a reason why romances have a happy ending or rather, romances end in the moment when the couple is happy. If the story continues, life can't be continued bliss - if such life even existed, it would boring to read or watch. Every couple has problems and disagreements as well joys, either of them can die or children can die (indeed, some of them were likely to die even in the richest families in the 19th century) or cause problems. Drama needs ordeals. 

[methodwriter85]

I know it's not canon but my god I loved Eloise/Theo.

"I'm Theo Sharpe." "I know." "You know?" *swoon*

Edited March 31, 2022 by methodwriter85

[eleanorofaquitaine]

2 hours ago, Roseanna said:

The crux of matter is not whether Anthony could marry for love - of course he could. In fact, there was nothing to prevent him, except his own imagination.

There is a reason why romances have a happy ending or rather, romances end in the moment when the couple is happy. If the story continues, life can't be continued bliss - if such life even existed, it would boring to read or watch. Every couple has problems and disagreements as well joys, either of them can die or children can die (indeed, some of them were likely to die even in the richest families in the 19th century) or cause problems. Drama needs ordeals. 

I think I fall somewhere between you in this discussion. I don't think it is quite fair to say that Anthony's roadblocks in terms of marrying for love were all in his imagination. That downplays his grief and trauma, which is very real to those who experience it.

My father died when I was 18. I was a freshman in college and also had a much younger sibling. Thankfully, unlike Violet, my mother did not retreat from the world and so I was able to continue with school and what have you. But I understand still feeling like I had a responsibility to do everything right to not add any more stress on my mom and feeling responsible for supporting my younger brother. 

Grief changes you, especially at that age. And so I understand the story they were trying to tell with Anthony. After years of feeling like you have to keep everything under control, it can be difficult to feel comfortable enough to feel vulnerable to another person. 

All of that being said, Anthony was probably also using his responsibilities to not deal with his issues. No one was preventing him from doing that but himself. 

[Nire]

16 hours ago, quarks said:

Because no one - no one - asked for this, my Minor Francesca Conspiracy Theories!

On a second season rewatch I noted that:

1. Francesca is present in the first three episodes, either standing by Hyacinth or playing the piano. Her presence is easy to miss, since she has very few lines.

2. After that, she vanishes without explanation for the last five episodes, including the wedding scene (where Hyacinth and Gregory are present), the promenade (where Hyacinth is present but Gregory isn't), and the Bridgerton/Sharma group dance scene.

I initially didn't attach much significance to this, given that she was also absent for most of the first season, and she wasn't the only character suspiciously absent from the wedding scene (hi, Simon!). But then I noticed that the family group dance scene is suspiciously uneven - almost everyone is paired up, but there's one extra person, so the final group dances as a threesome instead of a pair. And that unlike last season, this season, no one bothered to drop a single word of dialogue to tell us that Francesca was conveniently off screen (last season someone did, explaining that Francesca was off studying the piano - presumably why in most of her few scenes this year, she's playing the piano.)

So my guess is that Francesca was supposed to appear in that scene, and probably in the wedding and promenade scenes as well. That would make sense, given her probable age on the show - presumably about 15 or 16. (Eloise is apparently 18, Gregory 13 or 14, and Hyacinth 12 or 13.) That is, old enough to presented to the Queen and start attending these balls by season 4 - a season we know Netflix has already ordered.

This also sorta fits with the books, where Francesca marries her first husband before Colin and Penelope get together - something I'm assuming will happen in season 3 or 4. Which in turn would suggest that Francesca would start going to balls in season 3 or 4.

So I think the plan was to have Francesca appear throughout the season in limited scenes - the wedding, the promenade, the family/group dance (where she would have had the benefit of seeing how distressed Eloise was at feeling she had just ruined her family), and in the final Pall Mall scene - if just on the sidelines. And then for whatever reason - probably Covid - the actress wasn't available, and since none of this was exactly crucial to this season's plot, her scenes were eliminated.

I have now probably put more thought into Francesca than this season's writers did.

In the books Francesca is a year younger than Eloise and they're the closest in age of all the siblings.  She should be presented next season.  However the actress practically being an extra is probably a good thing if they decide to recast her.  

[methodwriter85]

The actress who played Francesca got another role and left.

[bijoux]

It's also possible that show Francesca is younger. In the books there's a bigger age gap between Daphne and Eloise, and on the show they're just a year apart.

[RachelKM]

1 hour ago, Brn2bwild said:

The Bridgertons are wealthy, as many families were in those days, but they were wealthy for a reason - they kept the wealth concentrated in the hands of the eldest son so that he could preserve the estate.  That's why estates were generally entailed and not divided between the sons (and daughters). 

I understand how primogeniture and entailments work.  As described in the books, the Bridgertons were exceptionally wealthy and had very well managed estates. It was one of the reasons they had so much influence among the Ton even though Anthony is only a viscount. 

As mentioned in other posts, yes, younger sons generally had a career- soldier (commission purchased), clergy, or law/politics.  But that wasn't the case for the Bridgerton sons. I believe both Benedict and Colin ended up with their own estates and I think they were either willed or were gifted by Anthony.  (I assume this was true of Gregory, but I completely forget.)

1 hour ago, Brn2bwild said:

Again, it's possible Colin was drawing from his own funds, but it sounds like he drew from some vague "family" fund for his investment money. 

Whatever the purpose of the account, it was apparently an account that Colin had access to but Anthony still had oversight of.  Colin having access to money is consistent with the books and the way the family operated.

[Roseanna]

15 hours ago, eleanorofaquitaine said:

I think I fall somewhere between you in this discussion. I don't think it is quite fair to say that Anthony's roadblocks in terms of marrying for love were all in his imagination. That downplays his grief and trauma, which is very real to those who experience it.

My father died when I was 18. I was a freshman in college and also had a much younger sibling. Thankfully, unlike Violet, my mother did not retreat from the world and so I was able to continue with school and what have you. But I understand still feeling like I had a responsibility to do everything right to not add any more stress on my mom and feeling responsible for supporting my younger brother. 

Grief changes you, especially at that age. And so I understand the story they were trying to tell with Anthony. After years of feeling like you have to keep everything under control, it can be difficult to feel comfortable enough to feel vulnerable to another person. 

All of that being said, Anthony was probably also using his responsibilities to not deal with his issues. No one was preventing him from doing that but himself. 

Yes, Anthony had a trauma. Actually, its birth was fairly well described. The problem was that its consequences became (almost) absurd. 

As for Anthony's responsibilities - we have never seen him managing his estates. As for his family, in the first season he almost ruined Daphne's chances to a good match while having an affair with the dressmaker. In this season he treated eligible young women like they were cows in the market - not like a gentleman does. The scene with Gregory was the only exception where he really acted like the head of family and in the same time like a loving big brother.

Although Simon's trauma was in the first season treated in an even more absurd way than Anthony's, his relationship with Daphne included also friendship and mutual help whereas the bond of Anthony and Kate was based chiefly on sexual attraction.   

[Roseanna]

6 hours ago, RachelKM said:

As mentioned in other posts, yes, younger sons generally had a career- soldier (commission purchased), clergy, or law/politics.  But that wasn't the case for the Bridgerton sons. I believe both Benedict and Colin ended up with their own estates and I think they were either willed or were gifted by Anthony.  (I assume this was true of Gregory, but I completely forget.)

Whatever the purpose of the account, it was apparently an account that Colin had access to but Anthony still had oversight of.  Colin having access to money is consistent with the books and the way the family operated.

If the younger Bridgerton sons have no financial worries, that has two unfortunate consequences: many possible courting plots can't be used and these men seem just idlers.   

[Conotocarious]

12 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

Yes, Anthony had a trauma. Actually, its birth was fairly well described. The problem was that its consequences became (almost) absurd. 

As for Anthony's responsibilities - we have never seen him managing his estates. As for his family, in the first season he almost ruined Daphne's chances to a good match while having an affair with the dressmaker. In this season he treated eligible young women like they were cows in the market - not like a gentleman does. The scene with Gregory was the only exception where he really acted like the head of family and in the same time like a loving big brother.

Although Simon's trauma was in the first season treated in an even more absurd way than Anthony's, his relationship with Daphne included also friendship and mutual help whereas the bond of Anthony and Kate was based chiefly on sexual attraction.   

Anthony had an affair with the opera singer. Benedict had the dressmaker affair.

[eleanorofaquitaine]

18 minutes ago, Roseanna said:

Yes, Anthony had a trauma. Actually, its birth was fairly well described. The problem was that its consequences became (almost) absurd. 

As for Anthony's responsibilities - we have never seen him managing his estates. As for his family, in the first season he almost ruined Daphne's chances to a good match while having an affair with the dressmaker. In this season he treated eligible young women like they were cows in the market - not like a gentleman does. The scene with Gregory was the only exception where he really acted like the head of family and in the same time like a loving big brother.

Although Simon's trauma was in the first season treated in an even more absurd way than Anthony's, his relationship with Daphne included also friendship and mutual help whereas the bond of Anthony and Kate was based chiefly on sexual attraction.   

I am not really sure of the point you are trying to make here. In any case, we do see Anthony doing paperwork in his office quite a bit and this season he mentioned getting the planting in before the ground gets cold. I assumed that the paperwork scenes were him managing the estate stuff.

[quarks]

2 hours ago, Roseanna said:

As for Anthony's responsibilities - we have never seen him managing his estates. As for his family, in the first season he almost ruined Daphne's chances to a good match while having an affair with the dressmaker. In this season he treated eligible young women like they were cows in the market - not like a gentleman does. The scene with Gregory was the only exception where he really acted like the head of family and in the same time like a loving big brother.

We've frequently seen Anthony working in his office and managing the estates. Based on the family fortunes, he seems to be very good at it - the family owns at least two large houses, can provide decent dowries for Daphne, Eloise, Francesca and Hyacinth, can throw grand balls without worrying about the expense or having to defraud the ton, and can provide a substantial stake in the art school. We're told this season that Anthony, unlike several others in the show, doesn't have to marry for money, and we never see any of the Bridgertons worry about money - in major contrast to the Featheringtons, the boxer and his family, the dressmaker, the Sharmas, and even to an extent the Cowpers.

In terms of acting as the head of the family - he quietly provided a large financial stake in the art school to help out Benedict. Someone paid for Colin's trip, and although aristocrats at the time frequently lived abroad because that could be cheaper, Colin was touring and presumably spending money - and we've never seen Colin doing any work whatsoever. Did he bungle Daphne's chances by being overprotective? Sure. Did he almost marry her off to that one horrible guy? Also sure. But she still ended up a duchess - and this season, he seems to have learned his lesson; he barely interferes with Eloise at all, and never pressures her to make a match. He also regularly joins his family in the drawing room, lectures various younger siblings, and escorts his sisters to balls and presentations and things. All very Head of Family stuff.

And in terms of interviewing potential brides - yeah, that was kinda awful, but it was also very much part of being responsible. Anthony is terrified of falling in love and facing a repeat of the trauma of losing a loved one. But he also knows that he needs to marry, so he does the responsible thing and starts searching for one. 

So I think we're meant to read him as overly responsible and serious most of the time, and arguably too aware of and involved with his responsibilities as the head of the family, not the opposite.

[AG921]

I've only read the first three books, Francesca has made no impression on me either in the books or so far in the tv series. Any chance you think they will just skip her storyline entirely?

[RachelKM]

1 hour ago, AG921 said:

I've only read the first three books, Francesca has made no impression on me either in the books or so far in the tv series. Any chance you think they will just skip her storyline entirely?

I think they may have skipped her book even if they hadn't indicated they were departing more from the books going forward.  Her book takes place in Scotland with virtually no interaction with her siblings. So Francesca, to the extent that we know her at all, would be the only familiar character.

I suppose it could be moved into England.  But the story is still relatively isolated in that it takes place pretty much on a single estate. No Ton scenes. 

Edited April 1, 2022 by RachelKM

[eleanorofaquitaine]

On 4/1/2022 at 1:40 PM, quarks said:

So I think we're meant to read him as overly responsible and serious most of the time, and arguably too aware of and involved with his responsibilities as the head of the family, not the opposite.

I completely agree with this. In fact, I would guess that we're supposed to understand that the trauma of losing his father (and being forced into the head-of-household position so young) is WHY he's so good at managing the estates. Because throwing himself into that role is both what kept him from falling apart and helped him shut off his emotions. 

Anyway, I think that the "rake" thing is misleading people into thinking he was irresponsible but in both the book and the show, we see that he compartmentalizes his sex life and his life with his family. He's not a dissolute rake who spends all of his money on liquor, mistresses, and gambling. He does those things but in moderation and he never takes his eye off the ball when it comes to his family responsibilities. 

(I confess, the serious hero is one of my favorite tropes in romance novels. I will take a serious hero over a reformed rake any day, though Anthony's character is basically both).

Edited April 2, 2022 by eleanorofaquitaine

[OlderThanDirt]

I think the younger adult brothers had allowances paid quarterly as is part of the Regency Canon. But the Napoleonic Wars are apparently not a thing.  But then the weren't mentioned in the 8 Bridgerton books, were they? 

[bijoux]

George died in the Napoleonic Wars, didn't he? I think that's the biggest mention in either the books or the show so far. There may have been some small references like Anthony telling Violet that one of her recommendations thought Napoleon was fighting for Spain and does she really not expect more from the mother of her prospective grandchildren. To with Ruth Gemmell responded with one of her awesome blinks. Well, shit.

[Door County Cherry]

12 hours ago, Roseanna said:

In this season he treated eligible young women like they were cows in the market - not like a gentleman does. 

He treated them like he was interviewing them for a job--which is what it essentially was.  Marriages were usually business arrangements and being married to a well-off titled man who was not too old and was considered handsome would have been a coveted position. He was definitely in a more powerful position but he was evaluated for things other than his personality as well. 

5 hours ago, RachelKM said:

I think they may have skipped her book even if they hadn't indicated they were departing more from the books going forward.  Her book takes place in Scotland with virtually no interaction with her siblings. So Francesca, to the extent that we know her at all, would be the only familiar character.

I suppose it could be moved into England.  But the story is still relatively isolated in that it takes place pretty much on a single estate. No Ton scenes. 

Isn't this also the issue with Eloise's book?  I haven't read Francesca's book yet (although it's the one remaining book whose premise really intrigues me) but I think they've departed enough from the source material that they could move things to London.  Or have an episode or two in a Scottish castle.  This year, when they were at Ashbury, they'd still go back to London to show the Featheringtons so they could split locations. 

[scarynikki12]

Even if Francesca and Eloise end up with their book spouses I think the locations will be moved to London so they can interact with society.

I wouldn't be hard to bring the drama since Michael is the cousin and heir of Francesca's late husband and has malaria. There could be whispers about whether the two behaved themselves while John was alive once people see how they feel about each other (ala Anthony and Kate dancing at the Featherington ball). Or there could be rumors as to why he disappears for days at a time due to him keeping the illness a secret. 

For Eloise they could play up the Cowpers and other judgmental people remembering that Lady W revealed Marina was pregnant before she and Philip got engaged and looking down on her twins. There could be some judgment about Eloise raising children that weren't biologically hers. I can see Eloise losing her temper when faced with that judgment and that could cause some issues since women were supposed to behave certain ways. 

They could go entirely different directions with both characters and their love interests but I do think they'll be present in London society if only to keep Lady Danbury, Queen Charlotte, and the various recurring ton members involved. 

[Roseanna]

12 hours ago, quarks said:

We've frequently seen Anthony working in his office and managing the estates. Based on the family fortunes, he seems to be very good at it 

Making much money doesn't make a man responsible in my eyes, as we aren't shown how his tenants fare. 

Yes, I understand that this is a soap so we aren't supposed to care.  

[Roseanna]

12 hours ago, quarks said:

And in terms of interviewing potential brides - yeah, that was kinda awful, but it was also very much part of being responsible. Anthony is terrified of falling in love and facing a repeat of the trauma of losing a loved one. But he also knows that he needs to marry, so he does the responsible thing and starts searching for one. 

 

5 hours ago, Door County Cherry said:

He treated them like he was interviewing them for a job--which is what it essentially was.  Marriages were usually business arrangements and being married to a well-off titled man who was not too old and was considered handsome would have been a coveted position. He was definitely in a more powerful position but he was evaluated for things other than his personality as well. 

I don't think that Anthony's searching for a wife was responsible at all. What right had he to demand personal perfection from women as he wasn't a perfect person himself, except in status and fortune?

He never cared for Edwina's feelings. She was a young and inexperienced girl who supposed that the man who courted him loved her. The marriage with an emotionally cold man would have been a great disappointment to her. That could have led her to seek for love from other men, even elope with somebody she had fallen in love, which would have caused a scandal.  

It was only a bit before the end of their relationship that he spoke the truth that they should marry because he was the most eligible gentleman and she was the best debutante of the season. He should have tell before he proposed to her that their marriage was only a business deal and that after she had given birth to a heir and a spare she would be free to have affairs provided they were conducted discreetly. 

Even better, he should have chosen a wife who was just as cold and calculating as he. 

[bijoux]

Just here to add this great reaction to the Napoleon mention.

 

 

[quarks]

11 hours ago, Roseanna said:

Making much money doesn't make a man responsible in my eyes, as we aren't shown how his tenants fare. 

Yes, I understand that this is a soap so we aren't supposed to care.  

Bridgerton is definitely more interested in the upper classes than in what's going on with the tenants (if memory serves, tenants have so far only shown up in one out of 16 episodes). Which makes it a bit hard comment too much on tenants, but I think it's interesting to compare Anthony to the other men we've seen so far on the show:

1. Simon. 

Simon starts the show announcing to Lady Danbury and the audience that far from heading out to check his estates, he plans to take off again, ignoring his responsibilities. We are later told that Simon rarely visits his estates, and knows so little about them that he and Daphne end up unintentionally offending their tenants out of ignorance. We are directly told that he is seriously behind on paperwork and on understanding what he has to do as part of managing the estates.

Score one for Anthony.

2. Lord Featherington Number One.

Not seen with any tenants, but is not exactly overly polite when placing the fixed bet with a couple of lower class folks, or with the boxer - and his plan to fix that bet not only gets him killed, but helps put some lower class people in potential danger.  

The Featheringtons are not doing well financially, and we can assume that the estates aren't making any money, which may or may not be good for the tenants. I'm going with probably not.

Score 2 for Anthony.

3. Lord Featherington Number Two:

Spent the season trying to con his fellow aristocrats; seems to have ignored the tenants - though to be fair to him, at this point it's not clear if the Featherington estates have any tenants left. 

Score 3 for Anthony.

4. Sir Philip

Not seen with any tenants. We are explicitly told, in script, that he is out checking on/studying his plants, not running the estate.  

That said, Sir Philip came forward to marry Marina and provide for her kids, making him arguably the most honorable/responsible person we've seen yet on the show, and he's clearly not indulging a desire to go off and look at Greek plants. 

Score 1 for Sir Philip.

5. Prince

Is in England, not doing anything for his tenants. 

Since he's German, and he arrived in 1813, his tenants are probably still trying to recover from the Napoleonic Wars which severely ravaged the area from 1803-1812. Rather than focus on marrying a wife who could bring him a large dowry to help pay for rebuilding efforts, or who could help him make necessary alliances, he goes after Daphne (not royal) and is now getting matched up with Edwina (not royal AND has no money, though Lady Danbury and Queen Charlotte might manage to provide a dowry.)

In about 34 years, assuming he's still alive, many of his tenants will violently revolt against him.

Score 4 for Anthony.

6. Benedict

Was at least sorta maybe kinda trying to improve his life through art, so I'll give him a bit of a pass here. Definitely not helping any tenants. Like Simon, explicitly called out in script for neglecting his responsibilities. 

Let's call this one a draw.

7. Colin

Went off traveling; later, without consulting the head of the estate, took out a sum of money to invest with a con man.

Score 5 for Anthony.

8. Benedict's bisexual artist friend from last season

Doesn't have any tenants. Is working for a living - a rarity on this show - but also having sex with men (highly illegal at the time) without locking a door to make sure that no one sees this.

Let's call this one a draw.

9. Boxing dude!

Actually works for a living! A rarity on this show! Sure, his wife constantly has to tell him to be responsible - something no one has to tell Anthony - and also, sure, he fixed a boxing match. But since he learned something from that match and has now invested in a business, I'll give this one to him.

Score 1 for boxing dude!

10. Brimley, Queen Charlotte's courtier. Again, actually works for a living! A rarity on this show. 

But since I've mentioned him in the context of tenants, I think that while it's clear that the guy is devoted to the Queen and her best interests, and is certainly responsible in the sense of carrying out his job duties and arriving to places on time, there is zero evidence that he has any concern for tenants.

Draw.

11. King George

It's not mentioned on the show, but a number of King George's subjects rather famously felt they weren't faring all that well.

Score 6 for Anthony.

12. The Bridgerton footman

Another man who works for a living. Notably, in the context of this conversation, he seems genuinely concerned about the Bridgertons and specifically Eloise, suggesting he's pretty happy with his job.

Since I mentioned the footman, however, it's only fair to note that yes, in the last episode of the season, we are told that three servants have just left. But we are also told, in script, that this is because of the scandal - not because of the way Anthony (or anyone else) treated the servants. And the trigger point for that is not the scandal of the failed Anthony/Edwina wedding, which the Bridgerton servants weren't involved with. Indeed, the camera made a point of showing us just how many servants were helping to put together the ball, which came afterwards, but the scandal of Eloise taking off to visit radicals.

Eloise didn't take those trips alone. She took servants with her. Including the footman, who is making sure that Eloise is safe. 

Score 1 for the footman!

13. Mr. Finch and his father Mr. Finch: We don't see them with any tenants, but we do know they are struggling financially, to the point where young Mr. Finch can't afford to get married without a dowry, and they are desperate to receive the Featherington's non-existent money.

Score 7 for Anthony

14. Theo

Yay, another worker! Shows up on time! Prints things!

But otherwise, not all that responsible! Even leaving aside the association with radicals, after getting interviewed by palace investigators, continues to meet a young, unmarried aristocratic woman without a chaperone, and tries to kiss her.

Probably score one for Theo, but arguably a draw.

15. Lord Sheffield (Lady Mary's father)

Not seen with any tenants. Wealthy, but also completely neglecting his responsibilities to his own daughter and granddaughters - we are explicitly told that the daughter and stepdaughters have no money and are being sponsored by Lady Danbury, not their wealthy grandfather.

Score 8 for Anthony.

15. The other artists Benedict meets

Definitely not managing any tenants.  Producing art, yay, but also doing a lot of partying. The school itself seems to be at least partly funded by donations from wealthy people like Anthony, which in turn is allowing the artists to party on.

But since the artists are at least producing art in between the parties, I guess we'll score one for the artists.

16. Other aristocratic men

Not seen with any tenants, but we do know that at least one of them got a servant pregnant and didn't plan to marry her or provide for the kid until he was publicly shamed into doing so. 

Otherwise, we mostly see the aristocrats going to parties, wandering around parks, and falling into lakes. 

Score 9 for Anthony.

17. The men who murdered Lord Featherington number one

Probably don't have any tenants. But absolutely, 100% focused on responsibility and specifically interested in ensuring that everyone pays their debts on time and doesn't cheat.

Not sure how to score this one. Let's move on to

18. Anthony's father

Not seen with any tenants or doing any work, but seen actively encouraging his son to be careful, thoughtful and responsible. Failed to leave clear instructions about funeral arrangements, but, still.

Score 1 for Anthony's father.

Beyond this, the flashback scenes showed that the servants felt that even at 18, in the shock of major grief, Anthony could be trusted to make decisions. And, despite his severe grief, Anthony did, for the most part, took responsibility and made those decisions. The only time he didn't was when Lady Bridgerton was giving birth, and she made a compelling argument that she, not he, should be making those decisions - something I agree with.

So in the context of the show, Anthony is one of the more responsible men. And sure, this is partly because the show is making a not very subtle case that despite living in a society that gives most of the control to men, the women are all having to take responsibility because the men in their lives are failing to do so. We seen this again and again with the Hastings housekeeper, Queen Charlotte, Lady Featherington, Penelope, Lady Mary, and Madame Delacroix, and it's strongly implied to be happening with Lady Cowper and Cressida as well. 

But that, to me, just makes Anthony stand out more.

Edited April 2, 2022 by quarks

[PatsyandEddie]

Nicely laid out @quarks! You put a lot of thought into that. 👏🏻

[eleanorofaquitaine]

Yeah, it's hard to determine Anthony's relationships with his tenants because the show is, you know, a Regency romance and not a treatise on class differences and the impacts of colonialism and imperialism on wealth in Georgian England.

That being said, practical experience has taught me that well-managed enterprises that are growing wealth are usually well-managed because the employer knows how to treat employees well. Anthony is not shown to be abusive to either staff or family, just a little emotionally distant. I imagine that is how he is in dealing with tenants.

[quarks]

10 hours ago, Roseanna said:

 

I don't think that Anthony's searching for a wife was responsible at all. What right had he to demand personal perfection from women as he wasn't a perfect person himself, except in status and fortune?

 

As multiple characters on the show note, finding a wife and producing an heir is absolutely, 100% one of Anthony's major responsibilities. For good reasons - Jane Austen is just one of many, many people who noted what happened when estate owners failed to do this for whatever reason, including only having daughters. 

Spoiler: this generally didn't work out well for most people involved or for the estate.

The only character who doesn't subscribe to this is Simon, because Simon wants to destroy his father's legacy - the estate. The implication is pretty obvious: to save the estate, the estate owner needs to be married. 

Were the interviews awful? Sure. As we've seen, Anthony is often a jerk. But he was interviewing these women as part of fulfilling his get married, have an heir, protect the estate duties. 

[Roseanna]

1 hour ago, quarks said:

As multiple characters on the show note, finding a wife and producing an heir is absolutely, 100% one of Anthony's major responsibilities. For good reasons - Jane Austen is just one of many, many people who noted what happened when estate owners failed to do this for whatever reason, including only having daughters. 

Mr Bennet's estate was entailed, which is why daughters couldn't inherit It, but Lady Catherine Bourgh's daughter was a heiress.

Anthony had three brothers, so It wasn't necessary that just he must marry an beget a heir of somebody if his brothers did that. 

[bijoux]

Yes, and when Anthony refers to that Violet asks if he's going to rely on his brothers to bail him out. So it obviously was very much  seen as part of his duties. 

[quarks]

It's not just the Bennets in Pride and Prejudice, but also at least three subplots in Sense and Sensibility; mentioned and discussed multiple times in Mansfield Park and Emma, and is part of what's gone wrong in Persuasion. Thackeray, Dickens and George Eliot also addressed this, as did Downton Abbey more than a century later. 

As far as relying on his brothers, and the importance of choosing someone suitable now, Anthony had a pretty dramatic example right in front of his eyes.

George III's oldest son, George IV (who has yet to appear on this show for whatever reason) secretly and very illegally got married to a non-royal woman. George III panicked, and married his second son, the Duke of York, off to a German princess in 1791. This marriage was a complete disaster, and the two legally separated - but didn't divorce - three years later.

In 1795, George III finally got legally married to a royal princess, and had a child, Princess Charlotte of Wales. With the succession supposedly secure, the rest of George III's many sons didn't bother to get married. 

As a result, by 1814-1815 - that is, Bridgerton's second season - the country was facing the very real prospect of a break in the royal succession and even the possibility of having another non-English speaking monarch on the British throne, something that had helped contribute to armed rebellions in 1715, 1719, and 1745. The failure of George IV to do his duty and reconcile with his wife, and for his younger brothers to get legally married, was widely unpopular and heavily criticized. It's not directly mentioned in Bridgerton, but when Queen Charlotte, Lady Danbury, Brimley, Penelope and Eloise are discussing the popularity/stability of the crown, this is part of what they are referring to.

And the criticism had a point. Princess Charlotte died in 1817, during childbirth, at the tragically young age of 21. At that point, the rest of the brothers finally rushed to get legally married, directly leading to Queen Victoria's birth in 1819. Victoria had much better doctors during her births, so the rest is history. 

I have no idea how much the Bridgerton writers know - or care - about any of this. Probably not much, since historical accuracy doesn't seem to be one of their major goals. But Bridgerton is drawing fairly directly from Jane Austen and Georgette Heyer, both of whom did care, and who argued that estate owners had a duty to marry appropriate partners and provide legal heirs for their estates.

So yeah, against that background, Anthony knows that he can't necessarily rely on his brothers for heirs, and he does have duty to get married.

Those interviews at the start of the season, though, NOT THE WAY TO DO THIS, Anthony! Yikes. 

(and apologies for the lecture; I'm procrastinating!)

[eleanorofaquitaine]

I mean, I think it is a little strange to argue that remaining single is, like, the selfless action here. @quarks is correct, Anthony absolutely understands that continuing the line is part of his responsibility as first born son, especially because of the ways that Britain's inheritance laws were structured at the time.

Sure, he could rely on Benedict or Colin (or Gregory) to carry on the line but that would absolutely be read by society and his family as Anthony acting selfishly. Remaining unmarried and placing that burden on his brothers for what? Because he is too afraid? Because he wants to visit prostitutes? would be a selfish act.

Edited April 3, 2022 by eleanorofaquitaine

[Ohiopirate02]

The future George IV as known as Prinny is probably never going to appear on the show @quarks.  He is the antithesis of a romance hero.  Most Regency romances ignore his odious person.  The show has also decided to ignore Charlotte's daughters.  Her ladies in waiting should be the daughters she or Prinny never arranged marriages for. 

[katha]

What I think both the book and the series do well is also establish that the Bridgertons being such a good-natured, well-off and generally happy lot is closely tied to how much Anthony takes on for them all. To the point that they don't even notice and poke fun at their overly protective and fussy brother. Only once Anthony starts hurting himself because he takes on too much and in wrong-headed ways does it dawn on them that this all comes at a cost for him. I liked Violet, Daphne and Benedict all getting a bit of a reality check on this. Colin didn't because as opposed to the book for whatever reason they don't write anything useful for Colin. . ;-)

So while I quibbled with some of the changes from the book, even as I understood the reasoning behind it, that was well translated. Benedict doing his art stuff, Colin swanning around Europe, Eloise feeling free and protected enough to be as openly defiant as she is, all of that is possible because Anthony does all the boring stuff they don't have to do. Including keeping their estate flourishing over a decade after their father's death. In that timeframe, mismanagement would have already started showing severe consequences. But the Bridgertons are doing better than ever. The series nicely laid that out without getting bogged down in the technicalities of it.

Edited April 3, 2022 by katha

[quarks]

2 hours ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

The future George IV as known as Prinny is probably never going to appear on the show @quarks.  He is the antithesis of a romance hero.  Most Regency romances ignore his odious person.  The show has also decided to ignore Charlotte's daughters.  Her ladies in waiting should be the daughters she or Prinny never arranged marriages for. 

Bridgerton has already had a few decidedly unromantic characters, but yeah, I agree with this. They've had two seasons to introduce the Prince Regent/George IV and mention his disastrous marriage, and they've clearly chosen to ignore him, the same way they are ignoring the ongoing Napoleonic War.

(If they stick with one season per year, we should be hearing some mentions of Waterloo next season, but I doubt we will. Advantage of not trying to be historically accurate.)

[kittykat]

On 4/2/2022 at 6:57 PM, katha said:

So while I quibbled with some of the changes from the book, even as I understood the reasoning behind it, that was well translated. Benedict doing his art stuff, Colin swanning around Europe, Eloise feeling free and protected enough to be as openly defiant as she is, all of that is possible because Anthony does all the boring stuff they don't have to do. Including keeping their estate flourishing over a decade after their father's death. In that timeframe, mismanagement would have already started showing severe consequences. But the Bridgertons are doing better than ever. The series nicely laid that out without getting bogged down in the technicalities of it.

The books heavily imply that Anthony is incredibly adept at managing the family estate.  He has dowries for not only his sisters but I believe also gives a dowry for Edwina, Sophie and Posy. 

Regarding Francesca, they should weave her story in with the others.  If S3 is Benedict/An Offer from a Gentleman, they could have a side plot with Frannie coming out and meeting John Stirling since she marries about a year after Benedict.  

I wonder if they plan on doing the seven year time jump between events of books 3 & 4.  I would think by the time they get to Hyacinth and Gregory they would be of age.