smh.com.au
The Gilded Age": A Satirical Look at Wealth and Class in 1880s New York
Julian Fellowes's "The Gilded Age", set in 1880s New York, follows the clash between "new money" industrialist George Russell and "old money" elite Agnes van Rhijn, offering a satirical look at wealth and social class, currently airing its third season on HBO and streaming on Paramount+ in Australia.
- What makes "The Gilded Age" a unique and successful period drama, setting it apart from similar shows?
- The Gilded Age", a new period drama set in 1880s New York, surpasses its predecessor, "Downton Abbey", in its portrayal of two wealthy families—the new money Russells and the old money Van Rhijn-Brooks—and their clashing lifestyles. The show's success lies in its satirical approach to the rich's petty rivalries, offering escapism rather than triggering anxieties about wealth inequality.
- How does the show's setting in 1880s New York City contribute to its satirical approach and overall impact?
- By contrasting the lifestyles of "new money" industrialists and established elites, the series explores societal shifts during America's Gilded Age. The show's setting in bustling New York City provides a more relatable context than the isolated English estates of "Downton Abbey", enabling satire of the wealthy's trivialities. This satirical approach makes the show engaging and prevents it from becoming a depressing commentary on wealth disparity.
- What are the potential strengths and weaknesses of the show's attempts to explore broader social issues beyond the central conflict between the wealthy families?
- The series' ambition extends beyond the central conflict, attempting to incorporate subplots about the African-American upper class, domestic servants, the temperance movement, and women's suffrage, although these aspects are less developed. Future seasons could benefit from expanding these subplots to offer a more nuanced portrayal of Gilded Age society, enriching the narrative and broadening its historical scope. The show's popularity suggests a growing appetite for historical dramas that offer both escapism and social commentary.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing of the review is overwhelmingly positive towards "The Gilded Age." The overwhelmingly positive tone and emphasis on the show's lavish aspects and entertaining characters overshadows any potential criticisms. The description of the show as "better than its predecessor" is a strong example of this.
Language Bias
The language used is largely positive and enthusiastic, employing words like "lavish," "riveting," "hilarious," and "utterly engrossing." While this creates an engaging review, it lacks the objectivity of a neutral analysis. The use of terms like "schlock" to describe other shows also reveals a subjective judgment.
Bias by Omission
The review focuses heavily on the wealthy characters and their conflicts, potentially omitting the struggles of other social groups in Gilded Age New York. While it mentions subplots involving African-Americans, servants, and social movements, it doesn't delve deeply into their experiences or the complexities of those issues. This omission could create an incomplete picture of the era.
False Dichotomy
The review presents a somewhat false dichotomy by contrasting "old money" and "new money" families as if these were the only significant social groups in 1880s New York. It simplifies the social landscape, overlooking the presence and experiences of other classes and ethnicities.
Gender Bias
The review focuses primarily on the female characters, particularly Carrie Coon and Christine Baranski, highlighting their performances and contributions to the show's entertainment value. While this isn't inherently biased, it could benefit from a more balanced discussion of male characters and their roles in shaping the narrative.
Sustainable Development Goals
The show depicts the stark class divisions of the Gilded Age in America, highlighting the inequalities between the old money elite and the newly rich industrialists. By satirizing the pettiness and rivalries of the wealthy, the show implicitly critiques the systems that perpetuate such inequalities and indirectly promotes a discussion on fairer wealth distribution and social mobility. The inclusion of storylines focusing on the African-American upper class and the struggles of the working class further emphasizes societal disparities and encourages reflection on the need for greater equality.