Bridgerton Season 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this is going to enrage the "don't teach me history" people, but I'm just saw the most interesting fact. Apparently an extremely niche historical error in Season 4 is that Benedict is actually swimming a more modern stroke, the front crawl wasn't used in Britain until later in the 1800s, someone in that era would have been swimming breast stroke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_crawl
https://blog.myswimpro.com/2023/05/30/the-history-of-swimming-strokes/

As someone who learned to swim so young it honestly never even occurred to me that the swimming stroke we sort of consider default is pretty modern. I could have guessed that for something like butterfly but not front crawl.

So THIS is an interesting bit of trivia to add to the Bridgerton discussion.

Making every other post about Pamela Who Cares is not.

OMG stop. The plot is literally lifted from Pamela.

DP. That hasn’t been confirmed from the show’s writers though, has it?

It doesn’t need to be confirmed ….

It’s just a coincidence then. Also there is the Cinderella thing.

I don’t understand what you think this conversation is about? It is an artistic/literary production in a long traditions of getting inspiration from the historical era. Of course there are myriad influences visible including common plots and novels - I mean if you didn’t see the reference to Mr Darcy in the lake (which is actually from the miniseries and not the book!) I don’t know what to tell you. Nobody is claiming that they plagiarized or whatever but the influence of various sources (Pamela, Cinderella, the BBC Pride and Prejudice) are easy to see!

You seem to be trying to start something over nothing. Responding rudely if someone doesn’t 100 percent agree with you. It’s very odd. I think I know you. You are the Dr. Collins lover from the The Pitt thread. You like to stir up drama in turn every thread about a show.

I don’t watch The Pitt, so no. But yes I am pushing back against the PPs who claim that discussing the historical background and literary/artistic influences is somehow out of line.

No one said that. But you continue to go on and on in detail about regency history and this is supposed to be a fun discussion about the tv show itself. You were rude when someone asked who was Pamela, or who was Nelson, like how could they not know?

Do you want to actually discuss the show? Do you have opinions about the characters or plot lines? Or are you going to continue to just bring up history? Yes there are influences - we get that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this is going to enrage the "don't teach me history" people, but I'm just saw the most interesting fact. Apparently an extremely niche historical error in Season 4 is that Benedict is actually swimming a more modern stroke, the front crawl wasn't used in Britain until later in the 1800s, someone in that era would have been swimming breast stroke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_crawl
https://blog.myswimpro.com/2023/05/30/the-history-of-swimming-strokes/

As someone who learned to swim so young it honestly never even occurred to me that the swimming stroke we sort of consider default is pretty modern. I could have guessed that for something like butterfly but not front crawl.

So THIS is an interesting bit of trivia to add to the Bridgerton discussion.

Making every other post about Pamela Who Cares is not.

OMG stop. The plot is literally lifted from Pamela.

DP. That hasn’t been confirmed from the show’s writers though, has it?

It doesn’t need to be confirmed ….

It’s just a coincidence then. Also there is the Cinderella thing.

I don’t understand what you think this conversation is about? It is an artistic/literary production in a long traditions of getting inspiration from the historical era. Of course there are myriad influences visible including common plots and novels - I mean if you didn’t see the reference to Mr Darcy in the lake (which is actually from the miniseries and not the book!) I don’t know what to tell you. Nobody is claiming that they plagiarized or whatever but the influence of various sources (Pamela, Cinderella, the BBC Pride and Prejudice) are easy to see!

You seem to be trying to start something over nothing. Responding rudely if someone doesn’t 100 percent agree with you. It’s very odd. I think I know you. You are the Dr. Collins lover from the The Pitt thread. You like to stir up drama in turn every thread about a show.

I don’t watch The Pitt, so no. But yes I am pushing back against the PPs who claim that discussing the historical background and literary/artistic influences is somehow out of line.

No one said that. But you continue to go on and on in detail about regency history and this is supposed to be a fun discussion about the tv show itself. You were rude when someone asked who was Pamela, or who was Nelson, like how could they not know?

Do you want to actually discuss the show? Do you have opinions about the characters or plot lines? Or are you going to continue to just bring up history? Yes there are influences - we get that.

Do you, though?

DP

[Anonymous]

The writers have literally said this is based on the Cinderella fairy tale. The actors have also confirmed this.

This is completely different from the plot of Pamela.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this is going to enrage the "don't teach me history" people, but I'm just saw the most interesting fact. Apparently an extremely niche historical error in Season 4 is that Benedict is actually swimming a more modern stroke, the front crawl wasn't used in Britain until later in the 1800s, someone in that era would have been swimming breast stroke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_crawl
https://blog.myswimpro.com/2023/05/30/the-history-of-swimming-strokes/

As someone who learned to swim so young it honestly never even occurred to me that the swimming stroke we sort of consider default is pretty modern. I could have guessed that for something like butterfly but not front crawl.

So THIS is an interesting bit of trivia to add to the Bridgerton discussion.

Making every other post about Pamela Who Cares is not.

OMG stop. The plot is literally lifted from Pamela.

DP. That hasn’t been confirmed from the show’s writers though, has it?

It doesn’t need to be confirmed ….

It’s just a coincidence then. Also there is the Cinderella thing.

I don’t understand what you think this conversation is about? It is an artistic/literary production in a long traditions of getting inspiration from the historical era. Of course there are myriad influences visible including common plots and novels - I mean if you didn’t see the reference to Mr Darcy in the lake (which is actually from the miniseries and not the book!) I don’t know what to tell you. Nobody is claiming that they plagiarized or whatever but the influence of various sources (Pamela, Cinderella, the BBC Pride and Prejudice) are easy to see!

You seem to be trying to start something over nothing. Responding rudely if someone doesn’t 100 percent agree with you. It’s very odd. I think I know you. You are the Dr. Collins lover from the The Pitt thread. You like to stir up drama in turn every thread about a show.

I don’t watch The Pitt, so no. But yes I am pushing back against the PPs who claim that discussing the historical background and literary/artistic influences is somehow out of line.

No one said that. But you continue to go on and on in detail about regency history and this is supposed to be a fun discussion about the tv show itself. You were rude when someone asked who was Pamela, or who was Nelson, like how could they not know?

Do you want to actually discuss the show? Do you have opinions about the characters or plot lines? Or are you going to continue to just bring up history? Yes there are influences - we get that.

DP. Do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The writers have literally said this is based on the Cinderella fairy tale. The actors have also confirmed this.

This is completely different from the plot of Pamela.

DP: So what? Would you two stop arguing and make wild predictions?

Eloise will get into a lavender marriage. I read the book. I know where she really ends up but I would much rather her be married to some high-powered London-based gay man and bonus points if he's smokin' hot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The writers have literally said this is based on the Cinderella fairy tale. The actors have also confirmed this.

This is completely different from the plot of Pamela.

DP: So what? Would you two stop arguing and make wild predictions?

Eloise will get into a lavender marriage. I read the book. I know where she really ends up but I would much rather her be married to some high-powered London-based gay man and bonus points if he's smokin' hot.

What is a lavender marriage? Also, do you remember when she sort of was connecting with a newsboy at the print shop? I really liked that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this is going to enrage the "don't teach me history" people, but I'm just saw the most interesting fact. Apparently an extremely niche historical error in Season 4 is that Benedict is actually swimming a more modern stroke, the front crawl wasn't used in Britain until later in the 1800s, someone in that era would have been swimming breast stroke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_crawl
https://blog.myswimpro.com/2023/05/30/the-history-of-swimming-strokes/

As someone who learned to swim so young it honestly never even occurred to me that the swimming stroke we sort of consider default is pretty modern. I could have guessed that for something like butterfly but not front crawl.

So THIS is an interesting bit of trivia to add to the Bridgerton discussion.

Making every other post about Pamela Who Cares is not.

OMG stop. The plot is literally lifted from Pamela.

DP. That hasn’t been confirmed from the show’s writers though, has it?

It doesn’t need to be confirmed ….

It’s just a coincidence then. Also there is the Cinderella thing.

I don’t understand what you think this conversation is about? It is an artistic/literary production in a long traditions of getting inspiration from the historical era. Of course there are myriad influences visible including common plots and novels - I mean if you didn’t see the reference to Mr Darcy in the lake (which is actually from the miniseries and not the book!) I don’t know what to tell you. Nobody is claiming that they plagiarized or whatever but the influence of various sources (Pamela, Cinderella, the BBC Pride and Prejudice) are easy to see!

You seem to be trying to start something over nothing. Responding rudely if someone doesn’t 100 percent agree with you. It’s very odd. I think I know you. You are the Dr. Collins lover from the The Pitt thread. You like to stir up drama in turn every thread about a show.

I don’t watch The Pitt, so no. But yes I am pushing back against the PPs who claim that discussing the historical background and literary/artistic influences is somehow out of line.

No one said that. But you continue to go on and on in detail about regency history and this is supposed to be a fun discussion about the tv show itself. You were rude when someone asked who was Pamela, or who was Nelson, like how could they not know?

Do you want to actually discuss the show? Do you have opinions about the characters or plot lines? Or are you going to continue to just bring up history? Yes there are influences - we get that.

I like the history discussion.

[Anonymous]

I think the only reason people got mad initially is not that historical references were brought up, but that the poster or posters who brought them up mentioned them with zero context and then got annoyed by and insulted people who were like "who is Nelson? what is Pamela? what does this have to do with the show?"

I think it's fine to discuss the historical references but don't be a pedantic jerk about it. Not everyone is a history nerd and it is absolutely possible to watch and enjoy this show knowing literally nothing about Regency England. If you want to bring up historical references, be ready to explain it and give context, and try to do so with a good attitude.

Can we move on now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The writers have literally said this is based on the Cinderella fairy tale. The actors have also confirmed this.

This is completely different from the plot of Pamela.

DP: So what? Would you two stop arguing and make wild predictions?

Eloise will get into a lavender marriage. I read the book. I know where she really ends up but I would much rather her be married to some high-powered London-based gay man and bonus points if he's smokin' hot.

What is a lavender marriage? Also, do you remember when she sort of was connecting with a newsboy at the print shop? I really liked that.

I liked the newsboy arc. It had no parallel in the book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The writers have literally said this is based on the Cinderella fairy tale. The actors have also confirmed this.

This is completely different from the plot of Pamela.

DP: So what? Would you two stop arguing and make wild predictions?

Eloise will get into a lavender marriage. I read the book. I know where she really ends up but I would much rather her be married to some high-powered London-based gay man and bonus points if he's smokin' hot.

What is a lavender marriage? Also, do you remember when she sort of was connecting with a newsboy at the print shop? I really liked that.

A lavender marriage is a hetero marriage where one or both partners is gay (or just not hetero) and the marriage is platonic. People in this situation might get married to gain social acceptance, in order to have kids in a time when gay people weren't allowed to adopt, or even just for companionship if there was no opportunity for them to pair off with someone they were actually sexually interested in.

I disagree with PP that Eloise will wind up in a lavender marriage though. First, I don't think Eloise is gay -- so far she just reads as asexual, but she's never expressed romantic interest in any of the women on the show, including Penelope, her best friend. And second, Bridgerton is about love and romance. Eloise's story in the books is about her having agency in her choice of partner, and flouting social rules that require women's love lives and marriages to be brokered through their male relatives. It's an empowerment story, but not an LGTBTQ+ story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the only reason people got mad initially is not that historical references were brought up, but that the poster or posters who brought them up mentioned them with zero context and then got annoyed by and insulted people who were like "who is Nelson? what is Pamela? what does this have to do with the show?"

I think it's fine to discuss the historical references but don't be a pedantic jerk about it. Not everyone is a history nerd and it is absolutely possible to watch and enjoy this show knowing literally nothing about Regency England. If you want to bring up historical references, be ready to explain it and give context, and try to do so with a good attitude.

Can we move on now?

This is it exactly!!! Thank you!

For the record, I’m the one who was asking who were those people. I am not a history nerd and generally don’t like history. I was taken aback by the rudeness of the replies when I asked for context. It seems like maybe that person doesn’t have appropriate affect?

I would love to move on though and get back to discussion of the show!!!

[Anonymous]

I have not read Pamela. A quick google search led me to this description:

Pamela tells the story of a fifteen-year-old maidservant named Pamela Andrews, whose employer, Mr. B, a wealthy landowner, makes unwanted and inappropriate advances towards her after the death of his mother. Pamela strives to reconcile her strong religious training with her desire for the approval of her employer in a series of letters and, later in the novel, journal entries all addressed to her impoverished parents. After various unsuccessful attempts at seduction, a series of sexual assaults and an extended period of kidnapping, the rakish Mr. B eventually reforms and makes Pamela a sincere proposal of marriage.

This doesn’t sound like the Cinderella storyline of Bridgerton at all to me. Kidnapping, sexual assault and she’s only 15. And actually works for Mr. B. Completely different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this is going to enrage the "don't teach me history" people, but I'm just saw the most interesting fact. Apparently an extremely niche historical error in Season 4 is that Benedict is actually swimming a more modern stroke, the front crawl wasn't used in Britain until later in the 1800s, someone in that era would have been swimming breast stroke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_crawl
https://blog.myswimpro.com/2023/05/30/the-history-of-swimming-strokes/

As someone who learned to swim so young it honestly never even occurred to me that the swimming stroke we sort of consider default is pretty modern. I could have guessed that for something like butterfly but not front crawl.

So THIS is an interesting bit of trivia to add to the Bridgerton discussion.

Making every other post about Pamela Who Cares is not.

OMG stop. The plot is literally lifted from Pamela.

DP. That hasn’t been confirmed from the show’s writers though, has it?

It doesn’t need to be confirmed ….

It’s just a coincidence then. Also there is the Cinderella thing.

I don’t understand what you think this conversation is about? It is an artistic/literary production in a long traditions of getting inspiration from the historical era. Of course there are myriad influences visible including common plots and novels - I mean if you didn’t see the reference to Mr Darcy in the lake (which is actually from the miniseries and not the book!) I don’t know what to tell you. Nobody is claiming that they plagiarized or whatever but the influence of various sources (Pamela, Cinderella, the BBC Pride and Prejudice) are easy to see!

You seem to be trying to start something over nothing. Responding rudely if someone doesn’t 100 percent agree with you. It’s very odd. I think I know you. You are the Dr. Collins lover from the The Pitt thread. You like to stir up drama in turn every thread about a show.

I don’t watch The Pitt, so no. But yes I am pushing back against the PPs who claim that discussing the historical background and literary/artistic influences is somehow out of line.

No one said that. But you continue to go on and on in detail about regency history and this is supposed to be a fun discussion about the tv show itself. You were rude when someone asked who was Pamela, or who was Nelson, like how could they not know?

Do you want to actually discuss the show? Do you have opinions about the characters or plot lines? Or are you going to continue to just bring up history? Yes there are influences - we get that.

Do you, though?

DP

No need to be rude. Already answered in the post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The writers have literally said this is based on the Cinderella fairy tale. The actors have also confirmed this.

This is completely different from the plot of Pamela.

DP: So what? Would you two stop arguing and make wild predictions?

Eloise will get into a lavender marriage. I read the book. I know where she really ends up but I would much rather her be married to some high-powered London-based gay man and bonus points if he's smokin' hot.

What is a lavender marriage? Also, do you remember when she sort of was connecting with a newsboy at the print shop? I really liked that.

I liked the newsboy arc. It had no parallel in the book.

Yes! Did they show that ending in any way?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The writers have literally said this is based on the Cinderella fairy tale. The actors have also confirmed this.

This is completely different from the plot of Pamela.

DP: So what? Would you two stop arguing and make wild predictions?

Eloise will get into a lavender marriage. I read the book. I know where she really ends up but I would much rather her be married to some high-powered London-based gay man and bonus points if he's smokin' hot.

What is a lavender marriage? Also, do you remember when she sort of was connecting with a newsboy at the print shop? I really liked that.

I liked the newsboy arc. It had no parallel in the book.

Yes! Did they show that ending in any way?

No they just completely dropped it.