Skip to content

‘Bridgerton’ Paves the Way for Romance Novels to Be Adapted to Screen

Graphic by Sarah McCrimmon

If you haven’t been living under a rock, you have probably noticed that “Bridgerton,” one of Netflix’s newest series, is performing extremely well on the streaming service. Since its release on December 25, the show has amassed 82 million household views in its first four weeks, surpassing Netflix’s original estimation of 63 million views. It is the most-watched new Netflix series ever, and its success has secured its renewal for a second season. 

If you haven’t watched the show, you might be rolling your eyes. Sure, they have pretty dresses and a diverse cast, but what’s so special about “Bridgerton”? Why should I care about rich people in Regency London?

Dear Reader, I’m delighted you asked! See, the difference between “Bridgerton” and so many other TV series and films is that it’s based on an actual series of romance novels, “The Bridgertons” by Julia Quinn. Typically, everyone — from bestselling authors to indie bookstore owners to that random woman on the street — will disparage romance novels for being trite, fluffy and not worth one’s intellectual effort. But in the case of “Bridgerton,” people can’t seem to get enough of it.

“Bridgerton” isn’t necessarily “period drama”; its lack of bonnets and plethora of sex scenes make it very different from other shows and films set in the Regency era. But it is based on a fictionalized Regency series of books, and authors are allowed to take some liberties when they write historical fiction.

Actress Phoebe Dynevor plays this season’s leading lady, Daphne Bridgerton. Dynevor explained that unlike so many other shows, this one focuses on the female gaze rather than the male one. The male gaze is the view that many works of literature and film take in which the viewer sees things through the male perspective, and women are often objectified. Works with a female gaze show what women see rather than what men do, and since very few producers are women, this is uncommon in film and television. Instead of nude scenes in “Bridgerton” focusing on the woman’s body, the audience sees from the female perspective — and that means a lot more glimpses of men from behind than full-frontal female nudity. 

The female gaze is one main feature of romance novels since the vast majority of authors and readers of romance are women. Adapting this woman-centric style of writing to TV opens the medium up to even more romance novels. 

“Romance” is certainly a theme in many TV shows and films, from “Twilight” (paranormal) to “The Fault in Our Stars” (contemporary). But I’m talking about something very different — adult romance novels, the ones that were bodice-rippers in the ’80s and ’90s. In the same way mysteries require a puzzle to be solved by the end, romance’s two requirements are a central love story and a happily-ever-after (which “The Fault in Our Stars” certainly doesn’t have).

For example, Starz has successfully turned “Outlander” — a TV show featuring a love story between Claire and Jamie with so many other side plots — into a multi-season show. However, its Goodreads page lists it as historical fiction more often than romance. The main plotline isn’t the romance between Jamie and Claire but their lives in general. Additionally, another popular book-turned-movie series, “Fifty Shades of Grey,” doesn’t count as the romance genre previously described since it leans toward erotica and originated as erotic “Twilight” fanfiction rather than from the author’s own imagination.

Sure, some Christmas romances have become Hallmark movies — but they suffer the same (or worse) judgment of quality that their written counterparts do.

For series like “The Bridgertons,” the most important part of each book is the relationship growth and romance between the two main characters; in this case, each book centers on a different Bridgerton sibling. Quinn’s books are not alone in their themes or style — I can easily think of a dozen other romance authors with similar series.

Students at Fordham University, the university I attend, have one such romance novelist in their midst: Eloisa James, known in real life as Mary Bly, a professor in the English department. So when my friends who love Bridgerton’s ballgowns and courting rituals ask for recommendations, my first thought is Julia Quinn’s close friend, Eloisa James. I know of countless Fordham students who see James’ writing as “mommy porn” — but they’re the ones enjoying books just like hers.

With all the flak that romance receives from readers of “real literature,” I’m excited by the positive reception “Bridgerton” has had. However, it shouldn’t be that surprising because romance is a billion-dollar industry with extremely devoted readers who purchase and read books within the genre at least once a week (much more frequently than other genre readers).

This doesn’t mean that the “Bridgerton” books are the pinnacle of romance series. They are iconic in the world of 2000s romance, but they are not without their significant issues. The books feature no diversity, and the first novel and the TV adaptation have a certain scene that depicts rape. If I were the one to choose a romance series to be made into a TV show, I might pick anything by Sarah MacLean, Tessa Dare or Joanna Shupe. These women’s books, all more recent than Quinn’s “Bridgertons,” are more conscious of diversity and include discussions of consent in their books set in the 1800s.

But because “Bridgerton” has succeeded in the public market on Netflix, it opens up a world of possibilities for other romance novels like Quinn’s to be adapted for a television audience. 

Stigma against romance could decrease if people enjoy the TV versions, romance could enter indie bookstores that notoriously exclude it, and I could explain my favorite books to people without seeing their judgmental looks. It’s a win for feminists everywhere for “Bridgerton” to succeed because, finally, a woman’s voice and perspective on romance are being shown in the public sphere.

As the 82 million viewers of “Bridgerton” have seen, true romance provides a guaranteed positive ending and a much-needed escape from real life. There’s nothing wrong with wanting books with happy endings, and statistics have shown that people enjoy them despite the bad rap they receive. 

“Bridgerton” can open the door for romance novels — contemporary, historical or paranormal — to be adapted to TV and lessen the stigma against loving books about love.