Pages

Monday, 23 March 2026

The Other Bennet Sister and “diverse casting”

In my previous blog post about the TV series The Other Bennet Sister, I wrote about all the changes made to the characters of Pride and Prejudice, and the resulting loss of subtlety and complexity. Now I’d like to address the racial aspect of the series. 

In The Other Bennet Sister, Mary is the black sheep, the one bullied or at least neglected by everyone else in the family, the one assumed to have no prospects. The optician’s son however takes an interest in her, and asks her to dance with him at the ball, so she does, and she dances with him twice. Charlotte Lucas then tells Mary to be careful: two dances imply liking; the third time is going to be remarked upon. Then Mrs Bennet appears and, displaying a cruelty and harshness not seen in Jane Austen’s character, tells Mary not to dance with or speak to him any longer, as he’s an optician’s son, and an association with someone in trade would ruin the prospects of her sisters. 

The remarkable part here is that we can all see that he’s Indian, but nobody mentions his race, as though class is the only barrier. 

From what I can see, there are other non-white characters in the rest of the series, and this is something we see again and again: Netflix and the BBC and Channel 4 and ITV and other companies randomly cast black and brown people in adaptations of 19th century novels and other period dramas. This has gone on for years and seems to have become standard practice. And I have always disliked it. Why do you assume that I need to see someone “looking like me” represented on the screen? Why do you assume that I need to share the same race or ethnicity as a fictional character in order to find them relatable? Why do you assume that I would relate to a character just because we have the same race? What do I have in common with, for example, the characters in Crazy Rich Asians? Why would I want to see actors of the same ethnicity as me randomly cast in adaptations of classic European novels, like Hong Chau playing Nelly Dean in Wuthering Heights? Do we not have our own stories? Do we not have our own classics? Do production companies not understand how insulting this is? 

More importantly, “diverse casting” in period dramas is a whitewashing of history, as though 19th century Britain had been a colourblind society, as though people of all races back then had been equal, as though racism had never existed. If someone grows up watching these films and TV series—every single one has black and brown people as middle-class and upper-class characters, on equal footing with white characters—that person is going to have a very distorted understanding of the past. Bridgerton may have the excuse that it’s a fantasy world, but what excuses does The Other Bennet Sister have? 

I’m going to note too that this is very different from casting in Shakespeare. My favourite King Lear production has a black Lear (Don Warrington). My favourite version of Coriolanus has a black Coriolanus (David Oyelowo). Shakespeare’s plays are full of artifice—race-bending is no big deal as long as it doesn’t draw attention to itself and the play is taken seriously. But film and TV are supposedly more naturalistic; if it doesn’t present itself as a fantasy world as Bridgerton does (which I have never watched), it would be taken to be meant to be realistic; and the depiction of Britain in the late 18th, early 19th century as a colourblind society is unrealistic. I would even say that the erasure of the racial prejudice of the past—erasure of the experiences of victims of racism—is a racist lie. 

Unfortunately I seem to be the only one having these opinions. 

5 comments:

  1. I'm not sure the producers of these programs are trying to whitewash history in the sense of your post, I think they're deliberately changing the race of characters to keep on reminding the general public of their own virtue. The net result is the same, unwatchable garbage with all nuance lost. It's important to keep in mind that these people generally only see their own culture as a series of moral catastrophes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think that's the intention, no, but that is what they end up doing.

      Delete
  2. Martin Luther King would share your outlook. Note his commitment to judge a person “ not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character.” Further, for a dramatic production to enlist a black or brown character would require the adaptable context. “King Lear” is universal in its setting. “ Pride and Prejudice” depends heavily on the lineaments of the Georgian era. To cast, say, Chris Rock as Mr. Darcy might be a distraction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's true about King Lear, though I also don't mind when Coriolanus is played by a black actor. Theatre, especially Shakespeare, is not strictly naturalistic.

      Delete
    2. I would say though: in the David Oyelowo production, Coriolanus and his mother are black, everyone plays it straight, it doesn't draw our attention to race.
      In the Don Warrington production of King Lear, Lear and the 3 daughters are all black, again that doesn't draw our attention to race.
      But in the Antony Sher production, if I remember correctly, he is white, Goneril and Regan are white, but Cordelia is black, so that makes me think about race and raises questions.
      About last year, there was also a production of The Winter's Tale in London that did colour-blind casting, so the races (and genders) are all mixed up, and that drew attention away from other things in the play and became a mess.

      Delete

Be not afraid, gentle readers! Share your thoughts!
(Make sure to save your text before hitting publish, in case your comment gets buried in the attic, never to be seen again).