Shelley Galpin is a lecturer in digital media and culture education at King’s College London. OPINION A couple of years ago, I was chatting to a friend about our recent television consumption. She was extolling the virtues of the US crime drama Breaking Bad .
Not having seen it at the time, I didn’t have a great deal to say. “I’m loving Bridgerton at the moment,” I ventured. “ Bridgerton is just fluff,” she replied.
“ Breaking Bad is art.” No doubt many readers would agree with her, although as a scholar of period drama, this response caused a number of protestations to bubble up within me. In the name of friendship I swallowed them, so am unable to tell you exactly what my friend considered “fluffy” about Bridgerton .
It could be the heavy emphasis on romance , or maybe the lavish and pastel-toned aesthetics. It could even be the anachronistic approach to historical representation . What I do know is this assessment of value will be familiar to many, whether they’re fans of Bridgerton or not.
As many feminist screen theorists have pointed out, there is a persistent application of gendered value judgments that see genres which are often male-dominated such as crime or gangster-themed dramas as worthy of serious attention. Meanwhile, “feminine” genres such as family melodramas or period dramas are looked on with either patronising indulgence or belittling scorn. However, fluff or not, the reception of Bridgerton - including record-breaking numbers o.