[This approach to period pieces does not only erase historical
racism and homophobia. It also erases our joy. Accurate historical
representation and less trauma in stories about marginalized people
are not opposing goals.]
[[link removed]]

PORTSIDE CULTURE

APPLE TV+’S “THE BUCCANEERS” RUINS EDITH WHARTON AND FAILS
HISTORY  
[[link removed]]


 

Drew Burnett Gregory
November 8, 2023
Autostraddle
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ This approach to period pieces does not only erase historical
racism and homophobia. It also erases our joy. Accurate historical
representation and less trauma in stories about marginalized people
are not opposing goals. _

Josie Totah as Mabel and Mia Threapleton as Honoria in The
Buccaneers,

 

_This review of THE BUCCANEERS contains mild spoilers._

Before I discovered any models of queerness, I discovered Edith
Wharton.

As a creative spirit dulled by the rules of suburbia, I latched onto
her tragic characters — especially Lily Bart in _The House of
Mirth_. Wharton’s work was filled with people my angsty teen self
could relate to; people whose lives were ruined by the expectations of
society. But, off the page, Wharton had chosen happiness. She had
affairs. She got divorced. She moved to Europe. This made bitter,
relatable characters like Bart so much sweeter. If Wharton could
escape their fate, maybe I could too.

Despite my literary standom, I never read Wharton’s final,
unfinished novel, _The Buccaneers_. Most available copies are not
only her text, but rather the controversial “completed” version
co-written by Wharton scholar Marion Mainwaring.

Adaptation can capture the spirit of an unfinished novel in a way even
the most skilled scholar never could. That’s why I was so excited
when Apple TV+ announced they were releasing a television series based
on and inspired by _The Buccaneers_. Unfortunately, an ingenious idea
is not always matched by ingenious execution. Throughout its
eight-episode first season, the show fails to capture Wharton’s
voice and, more disastrously, fails to find a voice of its own.

_The Buccaneers_ is about five American girls from new money families
who travel to Europe to find husbands. Old New York treats them as
inferior but Old Europe is too desperate for resources to turn down
fruitful marriages. The girls are desired by the men and by the
families, while also being dismissed as frivolous and crass. Will the
girls be able to find true love despite expectations and cultural
differences? Does true love even matter?

Kristine Froseth stars as Nan St. George, the free-spirited lead who
does not care about men but nevertheless ends up in the show’s most
important love triangle. Imogen Waterhouse plays her sister Jinny, a
girl whose eagerness for marriage leads her toward a frightening
match. Alisha Boe is their friend Conchita, who begins the series
marrying a nobleman for love, and is the first to experience the
constrictions of European society. Finally, there are sisters Lizzy
and Mabel, played by Aubri Ibrag and Josie Totah. Lizzy is the first
to experience the wrath of Jinny’s fiancé. Mabel is our token gay.

I am not a purist when it comes to adaptations or portrayals of
history. Every period piece, no matter how classically done, is as
much a portrait of the time it is made as the time it takes place. My
issue with this show is not the pop music, or the multiracial casting,
or the inclusion of queerness. My issue is the complete lack of
perspective brought to any of these decisions.

This is not a new debate
[[link removed]].
It has become standard to alter the history of period pieces in favor
of a broader sense of inclusion. Some view this as an opportunity for
people of color to be granted the same range of stories as white
people. Others view it as an erasure of history that ignores the
realities of, say, 1870s high society. No matter where you land in
this discussion, I feel especially critical of a show like _The
Buccaneers_ whose writing and directing team is almost entirely white
cis women, and who frame their show as politically important.

Nan St. George and her compatriots are constantly proselytizing about
the subjugation of women. In an early episode, Nan is appalled by the
way women are paraded like cattle in front of suitors. Wharton’s
complex portrayals of womanhood and society are reduced to easy
feminist talking points, but, even worse, these talking points fail to
land because the writers ignore race. It’s painful to watch someone
who looks like Kristine Froseth rant against the social power of men
in the 1870s as the camera cuts to images of men of color with darker
skin than any of the lead actors.

The show also doesn’t seem to know if it wants to ignore race
altogether or create an alternate world where the racism that exists
in the 1870s is the same as the racism that exists today. At one
point, Conchita tells her mother-in-law she knows she is judged
because she looks different. In another scene, she worries that her
in-laws will treat her baby poorly because the baby will look more
like her. These two brief moments seem to hint that Conchita is not
meant to be white, but otherwise the show ignores race altogether.

Well, it sort of ignores race. Our two female leads, Nan and Jinny,
are, of course, white. Even if race is not discussed, the characters
played by white actors are prioritized. During the first three
episodes, Alisha Boe appears to be the second lead. But as the season
continues, she yields more and more screen time, until she’s merely
a supporting character in the lives of Nan and Jinny.

The same treatment is given to _The Buccaneers_‘ queer storyline.
Casting a trans actress to play a queer cis woman is one of the few
inspired choices the show makes. It’s an example of bridging the
past with the present, drawing connections between queer people
ostracized a century and a half ago and queer people still ostracized
today. Unfortunately, this choice is diminished by how little
attention is paid to Mabel’s storyline.

Mabel and noblewoman Honoria, played by Mia Threapleton, have all the
beats of a lesbian subplot with none of the time to make it work.
Neither character is well-developed and the arc of Mabel’s queerness
is grounded in a present-day queer politic. Given the way the show
approaches coming out and the possibilities of queer life, they might
as well have let Mabel be a trans girl. It would’ve made just as
little sense in 1870 as Mabel’s relationship to her queer sexuality.

This approach to period pieces does not only erase historical racism
and homophobia. It also erases our joy. Accurate historical
representation and less trauma in stories about marginalized people
are not opposing goals. People of all identities have always existed
and found pockets of joy in certain locations. The now canceled _A
League of Their Own_
[[link removed]] series was
a rare exception in understanding this truth. It took the realities of
its characters seriously while still prioritizing fun and joy. With
enough skill, creativity, and research, that balance is possible. To
settle for plopping “diverse” actors into white and cis stories is
to ignore the complexity of our histories.

All of these issues would feel less acute if _The Buccaneers_ was
just well-costumed fluff. Instead, its feminist aspirations lead to
storylines about multiple types of physical and sexual abuse. This is
in addition to the true-to-Wharton internal torture of forced
marriages and empty lives. Is this a show where pretty people prance
around castles? Or is this a show meant to examine the pain caused by
upper class society in the 1870s and today? It tries to be both. It
fails at both.

The entire plot hinges on misheard information, characters having
secrets, characters trying to share their secrets and getting cut off,
and other easy contrivances. My political issues with the show’s
approach pale in comparison to its failings on a mere craft level. The
writing is bad in terms of plotting and in terms of dialogue. The
actors — who have almost all given lovely performances elsewhere —
appear totally lost with words that are not past and not present, and
in plots that are at once too simple and too convoluted.

Maligned upon its release, Sofia Coppola’s brilliant 2006
film _Marie Antoinette_ has emerged as the most influential period
piece of the 21st century. In recent years, shows like _Dickinson_
[[link removed]] and _The Great_, and
movies like _The Favourite_, have copied aspects of Coppola’s
approach with varied results. At the same time, the success of the
musical _Hamilton_ has led many to copy and worsen that play’s
already questionable politics. These two projects have converged to
their worst conclusions in _The Buccaneers_.

A trans girl lesbian in an Edith Wharton adaptation is like something
out of my wildest dreams. Too bad _The Buccaneers_ is such a
mediocre nightmare.

_The first three episodes of THE BUCCANEERS are now streaming on
Apple TV+._

Before you go! AUTOSTRADDLE RUNS ON THE READER SUPPORT OF OUR AF+
MEMBERS. If this article meant something to you today — if it
informed you or made you smile or feel seen, will you consider
joining AF+ [[link removed]] and
supporting the people who make this queer media site possible?

JOIN AF+! [[link removed]]

* the buccaneers
[[link removed]]
* edith Wharton
[[link removed]]
* apple tv+
[[link removed]]
* diversity
[[link removed]]
* performativity
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit portside.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 



########################################################################

[link removed]

To unsubscribe from the xxxxxx list, click the following link:
[link removed]