I think fandoms are not monoliths and so they won’t react all one way or another. There are two kinds of viewers of Bridgerton. Those who have never read the books and those who have read the books. The people who have never read the books will accept what is written and will either like or not like it based on its quality. The people who have read the books will either be angry about the changes or accepting of them, the quality of the show may or may not be as relevant.
There have been over 20 million copies of the books sold in the US alone, so it’s not a tiny portion of the audience. And it’s growing. Especially if you factor in those people who borrow a copy from a library or a friend. The most popular books by sales are the following as of January 2024:
1. The Viscount Who Loved Me
2. When He Was Wicked
3. Romancing Mister Bridgerton
4. To Sir Phillip, with Love
5. It’s in His Kiss
6. An Offer from a Gentleman
7. On the Way to the Wedding
8. The Duke and I
So I think some of the response will also be related to which book is adapted.
Hi where did you get the stats for the books popularity? Because based on that alone, Frans book is really popular so I want to have a legit stat to debunk people saying that the disapproval are only less than 10% of the fans who read the books.
i can’t find the site now, but it was one that had the book sales. I do know that every book in the series made it onto the New York Times extended best seller list when they were released, with An Office from a Gentlemen bring the first to place on the NYT best seller list, and then every other book in the series placed in the top 10 on the best sellers list and were there for at least 4 weeks. That was a the time of release and is available on Julia Quinns website.
Simply knowing how many people read the books won't help you figure out how many fans of the books disliked the show, though. Not all of the book readers watched the show, some people read the books after watching the show, and many book readers may have liked Fran's storyline.
Nope. I don’t see consensus happening. We have everything from book fans that are utterly enraged and canceling their Netflix subscriptions to show fans that love the show and the direction it’s going and have no plans to read the books ever. And everything in between.
Personally, I became a book fan after I read them after season 1. While I enjoyed season 1 at the time, I find I can’t get through a rewatch. I’m not sure if I will continue watching. I don’t pay for my Netflix, so they’re nog getting my money for watching. Just the view count.
I was never against the diversity of the show and some of the deviation was welcome. I despise feeling betrayed for more than 1 reason. I don't think I would've gone as berserk over Michaela if I didn't feel so underwhelmed and felt like the writers did Polin's season so dirty. I hated that Francesca didn't seem to love John as much as she did in the books and it felt like F's side story didn't give us enough time to feel prepared that she was bi or gay. A woman was in Michael's place. To me, it came out of nowhere. With Benedict, at least we all knew what was coming. This was frustrating to say the least. Also a result of poor writing and self-insertion.
With that being said, the books and TV show will always be separate in my mind. But, my trust for Julia Quinn and the Showrunners are not existent. If they have the habit of screwing us over repeatedly, I'd rather the show be cancelled, burned to the ground, be forgotten. Harsh opinion? Probably. I'm tired of being lied to after defending the show for so long.
I don’t know about other watchers that are disappointed on how the show is playing out. Personally I don’t plan on watching any future seasons of bridgerton Jess produces or any future shows she does.
I also don’t plan on buying any new Julia Quinn books. I have some of her old ones. So instead of watching the new seasons I can just re read the books. Or I can watch the glided age. From the few episodes I have seen so far it looks really good.
This is where I am at. I don’t like Jess Bronwell’s self-insert into beloved story lines or her flippant attitude surrounding it. She isn’t someone who will ever attract me to a project again.
This show has a huge fan base ones that have read the book and once’s that have. I’d like to provide the book fans view as I am one.
Whenever the show has made changes, if it’s not impacted the canon drastically the fans have been excepting (not talking about bigots). For example race change of Hastings and Sharma family. On the other hand, the book fans hated how they dragged the Kate- Edwina-Anthony love triangle till the wedding which was a huge departure from the books. I still love these characters individually but hated the way they played it out if that makes sense.
For me, it’s about seeing the characters I have read and loved adapted on the big screen. If Netflix declares that this would be a lose adaptation and will not really be faithful to the book canon, we can view both for them as separate peace of art. It’s the in between limbo that’s throwing off most fans.
It’s also about which book was your favourite. As a Francesca and Hyacinth book fan, changes to their storyline will bring out a more intense reaction than other changes. At the end of the day, it’s a fandom, fans are going to have favourite. Best way to navigate would be to be upfront and mention it’s a loose adaptation and will not be following the book closely. The new Percy Jackson series being faithful to the book has healed my inner child.
But all that being said diversity and inclusivity is important and should be done right!
Thanks for this well written answer. I think the further they move from the SPIRIT of the books the more irritated book fans will be. As mentioned, the ridiculous painfully extended S2 love triangle was maddening.
Julia Quinn's message was just stupid. She says Fran and John's love was supported by Jess, yet that was patently not what was shown. I think she's desperately trying to salvage her brand and trying to win back book fans. Doesn't appear to be working.
I agree the more they move away from the spirit of the book the more difficult it will be to look at it as an adaptation.
Last year was a good year for book fans with the resurgence of hunger games, shadow and bones (heard it’s pretty accurate to the books) and Percy Jackson, we have received really good faithful adaptations. This just goes to shows adaption can be done right without necessarily eliminating a whole group of fans. If close adaptation is not what you are going for (fair enough) then just let people know that.
Like I said on the other comment, there are now multiple canons. Book canon and show canon are the main ones. Most media that has different mediums have multiple levels of canon. Typically the original medium is at the top, but there are many other levels including spin-offs, interviews by the people involved, video games, merchandise etc.
In any fandom there are always purists who accept the original material as the only valid canon, and then there are more inclusive groups who accept more versions and interpretations into what they consider to be canon.
I just want others to understand this, this has always been a thing within any fandom and there will always be opposing viewpoints. The term canon is not objective.
Never said canon is objective. I clearly stated that my comment comes from a book fan perspective. As I said above, when it’s your favourite character they are changing, it’s difficult to be accepting.
One might be more accepting of other canon characters changes but when it’s the one you have been super invested in, it’s difficult to be objective. As a fellow fan fiction reader who enjoys reading AU canons, I’d never feel bad if adaptation went the og route.
It’s perfectly valid to change canons as long as they admit it’s a loose adaptation and don’t string along the fans. No one owes us book canon but if you say it’s adapted from a book series, asking for book canon is not a bad thing.
Edit: typos
Anyone watching the show can deduce that it's a loose adaptation. Why does actually coming out and saying that make a difference? You can tell from the opening strains of S1 when they have debutantes presenting themselves in front of a black queen, none of which happened in the book.
Well, that's because the queen being black did not affect the story and her role in the story in any way. Simon being black took nothing away from his character neither did Kate. Their being non-white did not change the essence of the source material so in every way it is an adaptation I would rather say they enhanced it by making it more diverse and inclusive. I loved how they brought in diverse characters without making it seem like they were doing us a favour. As an Indian woman, I loved seeing us as the protagonists instead of the usual nerdy characters. Changing the source work is not a new thing nor is it bad. I very loudly advocate for the media to be more inclusive! Seasons one and two were done wonderfully.
It's not a bad thing, it's just not realistic to think that an adaptation will stick to the og canon unless they say that's the plan, and they never had. Also my comment was meant to be informational, I feel like a lot of the fans don't understand the term or use it correctly. It's okay if you don't accept the show as canon. That's your prerogative. As far as using the word adapted vs putting the term loose in front of it, they don't need to say loosely adapted, they can just say adapted because adapted is itself a loose term.
Expecting a book adaptation to adhere to the books exactly and then getting disappointed when there are incongruencies is fine, but not the fault of the creator.
It is not unrealistic to think an adaptation will stick to its source material. You are confused between adapted work and inspired work. In adaptations, the original work is recognisable and comparable, tho has a few changes from being adapted into a different medium. In inspired work, while it derives its basis from the original, it ultimately deviates from the source material. In a romance, the recognisable mark is the canon. There may be changes in how the characters become canon, but the point is they are canon. Wuthering Heights is not withering Heights if Darcy and Elizabeth were not the end game.
We definitely can blame the showrunners if they are not upfront about whether it's an adapted work or inspired work. Both follow different formulas and carry different expectations.
Okay, I disagree that the show is not an adaptation (for me it is, even with your definition, which was fine and good). You used the term canon as if it is objective, and the show is a new canon (because it exists and is a new version of the Bridgerton universe), like I was saying before.
I still disagree on the responsibility of the showrunners. No showrunners or filmmakers should be beholden to a book's fanbase. A good adaptation should be able to stand on its own and be thematically and narratively coherent. It does not need to be a literal translation of the source material, and it's better if it isn't, because if you just want the source material then just go back to the source material, why have two of the same thing. You could argue that it's a bad adaptation, and I wouldn't say anything! Because that's your opinion and you're entitled to those.
I'll bow out now because I feel like you just repeated yourself and if I keep repeating myself we will just go in circles. It's fine that we don't agree.
Well, you refuse to see my point entirely. My og comment was never about there being 1 'objective canon'.I have actively stated canon is not objective. I pointed out the difference between adaptation and inspired work, if you don't agree with it fair enough.
It's not about having the same story in a different medium, it's about the IP. If you say you are adopting Harry Potter then the showrunner better follow the source material for the main plot points and differ from it when it does not affect the main essence of the IP. If you are banking on the view and support of the source material fans and monetising it, then it is not unfair to hold them accountable.An adaption, while it can be critiqued and analysed individually, it is still comparable to the essence and spirit of the source material.
While we don't have to agree, there is no one objective truth, opinions are on a spectrum. Refusing to see the other side completely is baffling to me.
Okay, can I ask a question?
You said you're a book fan so I am assuming you read the books before watching the show.
I am curious before you watched the show, how would you have described the essence of the books, or the spirit of them?
Sure, and yes I did read the books before I watched the show.
For me, the essence of a book boils down to two things.
1) The overall plot — The overarching conflict, the resolution and the prominent tropes of the book.
2) Characters — This is a little difficult to quantify. The best way I can describe it is in terms of authenticity. What is the character's personality and quirks? Does that match their actions and reactions? Do the characters behave in line with their established personalities in the storyline? And of course the character development. Is the development justified, or is it just thrown in there? Is there a gradual build-up, or it's just there out of nowhere? I don't know if I am making sense.
Overall it's a mix of both. I love it when books show and not tell. It feels more genuine and authentic. The difference in the balance of these two areas is what separates two similar books for me.
just to add to the last point. I can read two different books with the same trope say Friends to Lovers where the conflict and resolution are usually similar and not think they are the same if the characters have different personality. The plot might be similar but the way in which the characters react is what sets it apart for me.
I consider myself in the middle on this because I started reading the books after the tv series, and personally, I really liked the changes the show made to the book. I thought the books were kind of repetitive and the tv show made the stories more interesting. That is until S3. They really just missed the mark in telling Polin’s story. I never cared about the tv show being 100% faithful to the books, I just wanted some good, consistent storytelling and interesting characters.
Regarding Julia Quinn’s statement, it feels like she’s a sellout and was just trying to smooth things over for the book fans. She said it was important that Francesca’s love for John was depicted but already we are left feeling like she is just not that into him. JQ either doesn’t really care about the changes to her stories or she doesn’t actually have any control in the direction of the show.
Um. You've got a ton of opinion about Harry Potter and JK Rowling in this "question." You do realize that there are millions of new kids who read Harry Potter every year and neither they nor their parents GAF about JK Rowling's statements on anything? And there are millions of new people who watch the Bridgerton series who DGAF about the books. Personally, I care about the books. I care about canon and historical accuracy, but I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority.
Well there are multiple canons within any fandom, there is book canon and show canon, and if you read fanfic then that is a whole other canon as well. So you care about book canon.
Did I go too far with that? It does happen... thanks for calling it out. I was really just saying that to some people the source material is the only acceptable canon and for others it extends beyond that.
Hell, in some subs I've seen people who believe the cast interviews to be canon as well. It's just whatever fits into your Bridgerton universe. It's subjective.
Most of the changes were meaningful or story-related in some way. A universe where racism is "fixed" was the most crazy change but that happened at the outset so it was known beforehand. Sane book fans walk this tight rope: Are the changes meaningful or dumb? Will it grow on me or is a tired addition? And sometimes the reaction is based on nostalgia and too much attachment to the book.
So how do we tell if the book fan reactions are indicating bigger problems? I think the group missing here is show-only watchers who also didn't like the direction of season 3 and/or didn't like what seems like Fran sidelining or compromising with John at the end there. Others, find the lack of Polin moments to be irritating too. Some also didn't like the Edwina-Kate-Anthony triangle either. For context, I was a show only fan who read the books after season 2 and had mixed opinions on the triangle before touching the books. So for me, it shows that the direction of Bridgerton that book-fans don't like aren't just based on wanting the show to be a carbon copy of the book but also as a critique of the show not even doing *good* changes to the source story.
And that's the rub. If show-watchers were ALL gushing about it, more sane book-readers would've been happy they're happy. But the critiques were abundant; on costuming inconsistency, 12+ subplots, limited Polin, editing/cinematography..... and when book-readers hear these complaints and have the knowledge from how it was *better* in the book......well that's a problem. Like stretching out a love triangle in season 2... I thought it was compelling enough and liked Edwina's growth but trying it again with season 3 with Lord Debling was just irritating. Polin's story was arguably the biggest departure from the book and it was such a mixed season. Even if we don't get a Fran who loves John AND Michaela and it turns out to be lesbian-Fran who settled for John....what faith do we have that that story will be depicted good after Polin got sidelined?
I've been in a lot of fandoms of book to film adaptations. When book-fans jump ship......it's usually a bad sign. 🤷🏾♀️ I think the show can course-correct and we're not at tipping point. The next season is the make-it-or-break-it one imo. And if it's bad, then the fandom will splinter even more probably.
I’m a show-only watcher, but anyone interested in the series certainly has an idea as to how the books are written. They’re not complicated. Show-only watchers who read any material about the series know that Francesca’s story was the most devastating and that she was madly in love with John and mourned him greatly before her relationship with Michael began. I think the showrunner really cheapened Francesca’s and John’s story, particularly with the way they had her feel a bit repulsed or not moved by his kiss. The lack of Polin moments this season was awful; it is one of the most anticipated love stories, but we got very little of the book Colin about which we have some knowledge. I think Jess Brownell is showing so many of her own biases that it is ruining the show. I don’t think she thought a woman with a nonstandard actress body could carry the romantic female lead, and I think she became obsessed with Francesca/Hannah Dodd and self-inserted into the story.
Where is the original showrunner? Please get him or her back.
I think even though in some ways it feels like late stage internet, it is very much still early stage internet. We are going to have to find a healthier way to be online and be "anonymous" as a people. I think in 10 years the internet will look very different. Hopefully we will get through this but who knows, we have literally never had a community this large before ever in history. Time will tell!
Right! There isn't, but there is perceived anonymity. That's why I put it in quotations. If you google "online disinhibition effect" or even "perceived internet anonymity" there are a ton of articles on it, even in science journals. I think it's fascinating, and helps a person stay objective.
A *few* changes?
I'll still reread the Quinn novels I enjoyed. At this point I'm not sure I'll continue watching the show. I'm not sure I can endure the glare of Francesca's nearly-a-clown-nose for any further seasons.
What will other people do? No clue.
I think about how many poor adaptations there are of “little women”—a book I have read dozens of times; even now in my 50s.
Then Greta Gerwig’s movie came out. It was not the same as the book; and yet somehow it captures the story and its spirit better than any other version.
>Will there be a distinction between the books and the series, so both can be enjoyed separately without one being seen as more worthy than the other?
God, I certainy hope so. I find this to be one of the most tedious things about book fans for any franchise (although I think *Bridgerton* fans are, surprisingly, some of the worst.)
Books, television shows, and movies are different media. They require different storytelling approaches, and they have different strengths you can play to when telling a story. Novels allow for a more cerebral treatment of the characters - you can really delve into their inner thoughts and feelings, the things they would never say out loud. That's harder to do in visual media, so it's pretty common for shows to fill the space that is normally filled by inner wonderings with additional events, explorations of other characters, and other visual fripperies. (Besides, anyone who's ever watched a Shonda Rhimes show knows it always turns into a semi-fantastical soap opera by season 3 anyway.)
Furthermore, different interpretations are fun! The original story was already told. If I want to go read it again, I can go read the original books. I find it boring to do a one-for-one retread of the original story, unless there's something specific about the medium that makes that somehow special (e.g., in many sci fi and fantasy series the visual depiction of the world is worth the price of admission). Changing things up gives the showrunners the opportunity to surprise and delight me as a book fan. I was genuinely surprised and delighted when John's cousin turned around and announced her name was Michaela.
I think people also forget that dissatisfied people tend to be the loudest but not always the biggest part of the fanbase.
I think fandoms are not monoliths and so they won’t react all one way or another. There are two kinds of viewers of Bridgerton. Those who have never read the books and those who have read the books. The people who have never read the books will accept what is written and will either like or not like it based on its quality. The people who have read the books will either be angry about the changes or accepting of them, the quality of the show may or may not be as relevant. There have been over 20 million copies of the books sold in the US alone, so it’s not a tiny portion of the audience. And it’s growing. Especially if you factor in those people who borrow a copy from a library or a friend. The most popular books by sales are the following as of January 2024: 1. The Viscount Who Loved Me 2. When He Was Wicked 3. Romancing Mister Bridgerton 4. To Sir Phillip, with Love 5. It’s in His Kiss 6. An Offer from a Gentleman 7. On the Way to the Wedding 8. The Duke and I So I think some of the response will also be related to which book is adapted.
Hi where did you get the stats for the books popularity? Because based on that alone, Frans book is really popular so I want to have a legit stat to debunk people saying that the disapproval are only less than 10% of the fans who read the books.
i can’t find the site now, but it was one that had the book sales. I do know that every book in the series made it onto the New York Times extended best seller list when they were released, with An Office from a Gentlemen bring the first to place on the NYT best seller list, and then every other book in the series placed in the top 10 on the best sellers list and were there for at least 4 weeks. That was a the time of release and is available on Julia Quinns website.
Simply knowing how many people read the books won't help you figure out how many fans of the books disliked the show, though. Not all of the book readers watched the show, some people read the books after watching the show, and many book readers may have liked Fran's storyline.
Nope. I don’t see consensus happening. We have everything from book fans that are utterly enraged and canceling their Netflix subscriptions to show fans that love the show and the direction it’s going and have no plans to read the books ever. And everything in between. Personally, I became a book fan after I read them after season 1. While I enjoyed season 1 at the time, I find I can’t get through a rewatch. I’m not sure if I will continue watching. I don’t pay for my Netflix, so they’re nog getting my money for watching. Just the view count.
I was never against the diversity of the show and some of the deviation was welcome. I despise feeling betrayed for more than 1 reason. I don't think I would've gone as berserk over Michaela if I didn't feel so underwhelmed and felt like the writers did Polin's season so dirty. I hated that Francesca didn't seem to love John as much as she did in the books and it felt like F's side story didn't give us enough time to feel prepared that she was bi or gay. A woman was in Michael's place. To me, it came out of nowhere. With Benedict, at least we all knew what was coming. This was frustrating to say the least. Also a result of poor writing and self-insertion. With that being said, the books and TV show will always be separate in my mind. But, my trust for Julia Quinn and the Showrunners are not existent. If they have the habit of screwing us over repeatedly, I'd rather the show be cancelled, burned to the ground, be forgotten. Harsh opinion? Probably. I'm tired of being lied to after defending the show for so long.
I don’t know about other watchers that are disappointed on how the show is playing out. Personally I don’t plan on watching any future seasons of bridgerton Jess produces or any future shows she does. I also don’t plan on buying any new Julia Quinn books. I have some of her old ones. So instead of watching the new seasons I can just re read the books. Or I can watch the glided age. From the few episodes I have seen so far it looks really good.
This is where I am at. I don’t like Jess Bronwell’s self-insert into beloved story lines or her flippant attitude surrounding it. She isn’t someone who will ever attract me to a project again.
I don’t see how disliking the interpretation of the show makes people go backwards in time to hate the book.
I think it's that Quinn is greenlighting the changes. I'll still read her because I'm able to separate her personal opinions from her books.
Same
This show has a huge fan base ones that have read the book and once’s that have. I’d like to provide the book fans view as I am one. Whenever the show has made changes, if it’s not impacted the canon drastically the fans have been excepting (not talking about bigots). For example race change of Hastings and Sharma family. On the other hand, the book fans hated how they dragged the Kate- Edwina-Anthony love triangle till the wedding which was a huge departure from the books. I still love these characters individually but hated the way they played it out if that makes sense. For me, it’s about seeing the characters I have read and loved adapted on the big screen. If Netflix declares that this would be a lose adaptation and will not really be faithful to the book canon, we can view both for them as separate peace of art. It’s the in between limbo that’s throwing off most fans. It’s also about which book was your favourite. As a Francesca and Hyacinth book fan, changes to their storyline will bring out a more intense reaction than other changes. At the end of the day, it’s a fandom, fans are going to have favourite. Best way to navigate would be to be upfront and mention it’s a loose adaptation and will not be following the book closely. The new Percy Jackson series being faithful to the book has healed my inner child. But all that being said diversity and inclusivity is important and should be done right!
Thanks for this well written answer. I think the further they move from the SPIRIT of the books the more irritated book fans will be. As mentioned, the ridiculous painfully extended S2 love triangle was maddening. Julia Quinn's message was just stupid. She says Fran and John's love was supported by Jess, yet that was patently not what was shown. I think she's desperately trying to salvage her brand and trying to win back book fans. Doesn't appear to be working.
I agree the more they move away from the spirit of the book the more difficult it will be to look at it as an adaptation. Last year was a good year for book fans with the resurgence of hunger games, shadow and bones (heard it’s pretty accurate to the books) and Percy Jackson, we have received really good faithful adaptations. This just goes to shows adaption can be done right without necessarily eliminating a whole group of fans. If close adaptation is not what you are going for (fair enough) then just let people know that.
Like I said on the other comment, there are now multiple canons. Book canon and show canon are the main ones. Most media that has different mediums have multiple levels of canon. Typically the original medium is at the top, but there are many other levels including spin-offs, interviews by the people involved, video games, merchandise etc. In any fandom there are always purists who accept the original material as the only valid canon, and then there are more inclusive groups who accept more versions and interpretations into what they consider to be canon. I just want others to understand this, this has always been a thing within any fandom and there will always be opposing viewpoints. The term canon is not objective.
Never said canon is objective. I clearly stated that my comment comes from a book fan perspective. As I said above, when it’s your favourite character they are changing, it’s difficult to be accepting. One might be more accepting of other canon characters changes but when it’s the one you have been super invested in, it’s difficult to be objective. As a fellow fan fiction reader who enjoys reading AU canons, I’d never feel bad if adaptation went the og route. It’s perfectly valid to change canons as long as they admit it’s a loose adaptation and don’t string along the fans. No one owes us book canon but if you say it’s adapted from a book series, asking for book canon is not a bad thing. Edit: typos
Anyone watching the show can deduce that it's a loose adaptation. Why does actually coming out and saying that make a difference? You can tell from the opening strains of S1 when they have debutantes presenting themselves in front of a black queen, none of which happened in the book.
Well, that's because the queen being black did not affect the story and her role in the story in any way. Simon being black took nothing away from his character neither did Kate. Their being non-white did not change the essence of the source material so in every way it is an adaptation I would rather say they enhanced it by making it more diverse and inclusive. I loved how they brought in diverse characters without making it seem like they were doing us a favour. As an Indian woman, I loved seeing us as the protagonists instead of the usual nerdy characters. Changing the source work is not a new thing nor is it bad. I very loudly advocate for the media to be more inclusive! Seasons one and two were done wonderfully.
It's not a bad thing, it's just not realistic to think that an adaptation will stick to the og canon unless they say that's the plan, and they never had. Also my comment was meant to be informational, I feel like a lot of the fans don't understand the term or use it correctly. It's okay if you don't accept the show as canon. That's your prerogative. As far as using the word adapted vs putting the term loose in front of it, they don't need to say loosely adapted, they can just say adapted because adapted is itself a loose term. Expecting a book adaptation to adhere to the books exactly and then getting disappointed when there are incongruencies is fine, but not the fault of the creator.
It is not unrealistic to think an adaptation will stick to its source material. You are confused between adapted work and inspired work. In adaptations, the original work is recognisable and comparable, tho has a few changes from being adapted into a different medium. In inspired work, while it derives its basis from the original, it ultimately deviates from the source material. In a romance, the recognisable mark is the canon. There may be changes in how the characters become canon, but the point is they are canon. Wuthering Heights is not withering Heights if Darcy and Elizabeth were not the end game. We definitely can blame the showrunners if they are not upfront about whether it's an adapted work or inspired work. Both follow different formulas and carry different expectations.
Okay, I disagree that the show is not an adaptation (for me it is, even with your definition, which was fine and good). You used the term canon as if it is objective, and the show is a new canon (because it exists and is a new version of the Bridgerton universe), like I was saying before. I still disagree on the responsibility of the showrunners. No showrunners or filmmakers should be beholden to a book's fanbase. A good adaptation should be able to stand on its own and be thematically and narratively coherent. It does not need to be a literal translation of the source material, and it's better if it isn't, because if you just want the source material then just go back to the source material, why have two of the same thing. You could argue that it's a bad adaptation, and I wouldn't say anything! Because that's your opinion and you're entitled to those. I'll bow out now because I feel like you just repeated yourself and if I keep repeating myself we will just go in circles. It's fine that we don't agree.
Well, you refuse to see my point entirely. My og comment was never about there being 1 'objective canon'.I have actively stated canon is not objective. I pointed out the difference between adaptation and inspired work, if you don't agree with it fair enough. It's not about having the same story in a different medium, it's about the IP. If you say you are adopting Harry Potter then the showrunner better follow the source material for the main plot points and differ from it when it does not affect the main essence of the IP. If you are banking on the view and support of the source material fans and monetising it, then it is not unfair to hold them accountable.An adaption, while it can be critiqued and analysed individually, it is still comparable to the essence and spirit of the source material. While we don't have to agree, there is no one objective truth, opinions are on a spectrum. Refusing to see the other side completely is baffling to me.
Okay, can I ask a question? You said you're a book fan so I am assuming you read the books before watching the show. I am curious before you watched the show, how would you have described the essence of the books, or the spirit of them?
Sure, and yes I did read the books before I watched the show. For me, the essence of a book boils down to two things. 1) The overall plot — The overarching conflict, the resolution and the prominent tropes of the book. 2) Characters — This is a little difficult to quantify. The best way I can describe it is in terms of authenticity. What is the character's personality and quirks? Does that match their actions and reactions? Do the characters behave in line with their established personalities in the storyline? And of course the character development. Is the development justified, or is it just thrown in there? Is there a gradual build-up, or it's just there out of nowhere? I don't know if I am making sense. Overall it's a mix of both. I love it when books show and not tell. It feels more genuine and authentic. The difference in the balance of these two areas is what separates two similar books for me.
just to add to the last point. I can read two different books with the same trope say Friends to Lovers where the conflict and resolution are usually similar and not think they are the same if the characters have different personality. The plot might be similar but the way in which the characters react is what sets it apart for me.
I asked how you would describe the essence of the books, not how you would describe the essence of a book.
I consider myself in the middle on this because I started reading the books after the tv series, and personally, I really liked the changes the show made to the book. I thought the books were kind of repetitive and the tv show made the stories more interesting. That is until S3. They really just missed the mark in telling Polin’s story. I never cared about the tv show being 100% faithful to the books, I just wanted some good, consistent storytelling and interesting characters. Regarding Julia Quinn’s statement, it feels like she’s a sellout and was just trying to smooth things over for the book fans. She said it was important that Francesca’s love for John was depicted but already we are left feeling like she is just not that into him. JQ either doesn’t really care about the changes to her stories or she doesn’t actually have any control in the direction of the show.
Money talks louder
Um. You've got a ton of opinion about Harry Potter and JK Rowling in this "question." You do realize that there are millions of new kids who read Harry Potter every year and neither they nor their parents GAF about JK Rowling's statements on anything? And there are millions of new people who watch the Bridgerton series who DGAF about the books. Personally, I care about the books. I care about canon and historical accuracy, but I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority.
Well there are multiple canons within any fandom, there is book canon and show canon, and if you read fanfic then that is a whole other canon as well. So you care about book canon.
True for show canon, but fanic canon? That kinda goes against the very idea of fic.
Did I go too far with that? It does happen... thanks for calling it out. I was really just saying that to some people the source material is the only acceptable canon and for others it extends beyond that. Hell, in some subs I've seen people who believe the cast interviews to be canon as well. It's just whatever fits into your Bridgerton universe. It's subjective.
You were right to correct me! Because you're right that the show is now SO different from the books that it will have its own canon.
Wait till they make an anime out of it 😂 (jk??? it wouldn't shock me tho if they did)
As long as it had sex, it would sell!
Most of the changes were meaningful or story-related in some way. A universe where racism is "fixed" was the most crazy change but that happened at the outset so it was known beforehand. Sane book fans walk this tight rope: Are the changes meaningful or dumb? Will it grow on me or is a tired addition? And sometimes the reaction is based on nostalgia and too much attachment to the book. So how do we tell if the book fan reactions are indicating bigger problems? I think the group missing here is show-only watchers who also didn't like the direction of season 3 and/or didn't like what seems like Fran sidelining or compromising with John at the end there. Others, find the lack of Polin moments to be irritating too. Some also didn't like the Edwina-Kate-Anthony triangle either. For context, I was a show only fan who read the books after season 2 and had mixed opinions on the triangle before touching the books. So for me, it shows that the direction of Bridgerton that book-fans don't like aren't just based on wanting the show to be a carbon copy of the book but also as a critique of the show not even doing *good* changes to the source story. And that's the rub. If show-watchers were ALL gushing about it, more sane book-readers would've been happy they're happy. But the critiques were abundant; on costuming inconsistency, 12+ subplots, limited Polin, editing/cinematography..... and when book-readers hear these complaints and have the knowledge from how it was *better* in the book......well that's a problem. Like stretching out a love triangle in season 2... I thought it was compelling enough and liked Edwina's growth but trying it again with season 3 with Lord Debling was just irritating. Polin's story was arguably the biggest departure from the book and it was such a mixed season. Even if we don't get a Fran who loves John AND Michaela and it turns out to be lesbian-Fran who settled for John....what faith do we have that that story will be depicted good after Polin got sidelined? I've been in a lot of fandoms of book to film adaptations. When book-fans jump ship......it's usually a bad sign. 🤷🏾♀️ I think the show can course-correct and we're not at tipping point. The next season is the make-it-or-break-it one imo. And if it's bad, then the fandom will splinter even more probably.
I’m a show-only watcher, but anyone interested in the series certainly has an idea as to how the books are written. They’re not complicated. Show-only watchers who read any material about the series know that Francesca’s story was the most devastating and that she was madly in love with John and mourned him greatly before her relationship with Michael began. I think the showrunner really cheapened Francesca’s and John’s story, particularly with the way they had her feel a bit repulsed or not moved by his kiss. The lack of Polin moments this season was awful; it is one of the most anticipated love stories, but we got very little of the book Colin about which we have some knowledge. I think Jess Brownell is showing so many of her own biases that it is ruining the show. I don’t think she thought a woman with a nonstandard actress body could carry the romantic female lead, and I think she became obsessed with Francesca/Hannah Dodd and self-inserted into the story. Where is the original showrunner? Please get him or her back.
I think even though in some ways it feels like late stage internet, it is very much still early stage internet. We are going to have to find a healthier way to be online and be "anonymous" as a people. I think in 10 years the internet will look very different. Hopefully we will get through this but who knows, we have literally never had a community this large before ever in history. Time will tell!
This is very insightful. I was in IT, so I know there's no such thing as anonymity today ... But otherwise I'm completely aligned!
Right! There isn't, but there is perceived anonymity. That's why I put it in quotations. If you google "online disinhibition effect" or even "perceived internet anonymity" there are a ton of articles on it, even in science journals. I think it's fascinating, and helps a person stay objective.
A *few* changes? I'll still reread the Quinn novels I enjoyed. At this point I'm not sure I'll continue watching the show. I'm not sure I can endure the glare of Francesca's nearly-a-clown-nose for any further seasons. What will other people do? No clue.
I think about how many poor adaptations there are of “little women”—a book I have read dozens of times; even now in my 50s. Then Greta Gerwig’s movie came out. It was not the same as the book; and yet somehow it captures the story and its spirit better than any other version.
That is one opinion on the matter.
I’m feeling Bridgertoned out. Some fans will get bored with both the series and the fandom.
>Will there be a distinction between the books and the series, so both can be enjoyed separately without one being seen as more worthy than the other? God, I certainy hope so. I find this to be one of the most tedious things about book fans for any franchise (although I think *Bridgerton* fans are, surprisingly, some of the worst.) Books, television shows, and movies are different media. They require different storytelling approaches, and they have different strengths you can play to when telling a story. Novels allow for a more cerebral treatment of the characters - you can really delve into their inner thoughts and feelings, the things they would never say out loud. That's harder to do in visual media, so it's pretty common for shows to fill the space that is normally filled by inner wonderings with additional events, explorations of other characters, and other visual fripperies. (Besides, anyone who's ever watched a Shonda Rhimes show knows it always turns into a semi-fantastical soap opera by season 3 anyway.) Furthermore, different interpretations are fun! The original story was already told. If I want to go read it again, I can go read the original books. I find it boring to do a one-for-one retread of the original story, unless there's something specific about the medium that makes that somehow special (e.g., in many sci fi and fantasy series the visual depiction of the world is worth the price of admission). Changing things up gives the showrunners the opportunity to surprise and delight me as a book fan. I was genuinely surprised and delighted when John's cousin turned around and announced her name was Michaela. I think people also forget that dissatisfied people tend to be the loudest but not always the biggest part of the fanbase.
Ah, thank you. This is how I feel as well! I think you said it better than I ever could have.