Shortly after finishing Bleak House, I decided to start the 2005 BBC limited series adaptation of the book. I was curious to know how faithful an adaptation it might be given the book’s sprawling narrative, and how the visual aspect of a book to TV adaptation might change my perspective. I was also interested in reading reviews written at the time, keenly aware that adaptations bring up many social, political, and fandom issues (Aislin’s post from earlier this semester examines some contemporary discourse around adaptation, I hope to add to that discussion).
The class disparities that Dickens critiques in the novel are thrown into harsh relief in the show. As with many Victorian period dramas, we see fabulous gowns and stately homes, but given Bleak House’s focus on class, we also see people on the streets in dirty clothes and shadowy, overfilled apartments. During scenes with Mrs. Jellyby—a particular interest of mine—her house is so dark it is hard to get a sense of the space, and in the claustrophobic rooms, the chaos of the screaming children takes over the screen, drawing viewers in. Mrs. Jellyby’s character comes across even worse in the show, with her blithe tone of voice and dramatic movements rendering her both foolish and callous. Her scenes are even played for a bit of humor, since the juxtaposition between her attitude and her material reality is so stark. While this is true to her characterization in the book too, the show brings it to life in a visceral way. The other particular strength of the show, in my opinion, is that it hammers home the youth of Esther and Ada, and the burdens placed upon them from a young age. Just seeing their young faces (Ada is played by a very young Carey Mulligan; this show was released the same year as her first feature film) made everything we read feel more emotional.
The show feels like a fairly comprehensive adaptation, but I turned to critics to lend insights. Perhaps unsurprisingly, a key topic of discussion was the very concept of watching an adaptation at all; many argued that a TV show could not in any way add to the story of “the greatest novel in the English language” (words from Philip Hensher’s negative review in The Guardian. Hensher’s language is disparaging, framing reading the novel as inherently superior to watching the show. Last year, I took a class on adaptation, and we learned about the concept of the fidelity model, where film and TV is seen as most legitimate when it imitates literature as closely as possible. Film and TV are often seen as inferior to literature, and adaptations are often viewed only through how closely they resemble their source text, ignoring the unique political factors, production systems, and artistic choices that make the adaptation an entirely new text, joining a broader conversation.
The Bleak House miniseries is fairly uncomplicated to analyze through the lens of adaptation struggles. It does try to closely adapt the text, and any changes or omissions seem to have been made out of narrative necessity. I enjoyed it as a show that successfully brings the book we have done so much work on to life, and found moments in it that genuinely tugged at my heartstrings. But it also made me think about adaptations more generally, in an era when so many acclaimed directors are choosing to adapt famous works of Victorian literature. To me, it will always be worth asking what is lost and what is gained when we watch or read adaptations. Victorian literature has always been a site to examine class, gender, race, and politics, and every bit of scholarship or creative adaptation builds upon that. Our discussions about hating Victorian Studies properly prove that even calling for a deconstructionist approach to an entire field moves the needle forward in important ways.
Overall, I enjoyed the experience of viewing the show through the lens of multiple concepts I’ve learned throughout college, and recommend to anyone who feels like returning to Bleak House.
Works Cited:
Hensher, Philip. “You’ll Never Catch Me Watching It.” The Guardian, The Guardian, 7 Nov. 2005, http://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/nov/07/broadcasting.arts. Accessed 11 Nov. 2025.
Victorian Visual Culture 
I would be interested to watch this show. I had a hard time with Bleak House and can’t really understand why some think it is the greatest novel in the English language. I am also reading Middlemarch for another class and I much prefer that book. While I can appreciate what Dickens was trying to achieve with a realist novel, I don’t think he captured it quite well enough as his constant shifts are tiresome. I’d also be curious to see how closely this show follows the original text and if it aids in following the complex set of characters.
By: Angel Crow on November 15, 2025
at 3:22 pm
Since I also struggled at points while reading Bleak House, I wonder whether watching a TV series adaptation might help me keep track of Dickens’ many characters and clarify some of the plot threads. Your argument about adaptation is really interesting, and it’s something I’ve thought about as well. I immediately thought of Pride & Prejudice (2005). From what I remember, the 1995 BBC miniseries is typically considered closer to Austen’s text, whereas the 2005 film takes more stylistic liberties. I haven’t seen the series myself, but I find the film incredibly aesthetically pleasing. Another factor is that I saw the movie long before I read Austen’s novel, which probably gives me some bias towards that adaptation, especially since, at the time, I didn’t know the original story and had nothing to compare it to.
By: Maire K on November 17, 2025
at 10:14 pm
I am hugely biased towards the 1995 series…definitely recommend!
By: Sasha Shishov on November 18, 2025
at 8:28 pm
I never considered what a Bleak House visual adaptation would look like, and now I’m totally tempted to watch as your post poses some interesting questions. Reading the novel, I felt that it was important that the reader saw scenes of poverty, like the Jellyby home, through Esther’s eyes. There was something personal about this method of accessing. I wonder if a visual adaptation would turn the effects of poverty into a spectacle, without Esther’s intervention.
By: Sasha Shishov on November 18, 2025
at 8:27 pm
This is a really interesting question! I find this fetishization of both extreme wealth and extreme poverty to be common in period media (among others, of course) where these images are exoticized compared to contemporary culture. (Thinking here of shows like Bridgerton, which are obviously historically inaccurate but designed to be pure spectacle and fantasy from another time, ignoring most of the hardships of the era.) I absolutely agree that Esther’s perspective is what gives these scenes their humanity, and I like your use of the word “personal.” I found Esther to be curiously lacking in screen time in the show, and sidelined when she is present in large ensemble scenes, so it is a far cry from being in her head. However, I did like her performance and felt like it hammered home her youth and sense of adjusting to a new world.
By: Sophie Frank on November 18, 2025
at 9:42 pm
Hi Sophie! This is such an interesting post. You highlight the tensions inherent in producing an adaptation of a literary classic really well. I think the format of Bleak House definitely lends itself to a T.V. show adaptation more than a movie adaptation due to the length of the novel and the sheer amount of (often dizzying) changes in location. A movie might not be able to capture that aspect of Dickens’ writing.
You also bring up interesting points when talking about how literary adaptations are received by the general public. I wonder if it might be a more helpful framework for critics to consider the original literary text and the new adaptation as being in conversation with one another, rather than expecting that the adaptation remains faithful to every aspect of the original text. Additionally, literary inconsistencies and historical inaccuracies can actually work very well when conscientiously applied. Per Aislin’s post about the controversial Wuthering Heights adaptation, I’m actually very excited to see a fresh take on that novel that may deviate in significant ways from the actual story. However, I do agree that casting a white actor to play Heathcliff means that an integral piece of his characterization and the plot will be completely ignored. This decision is problematic in numerous ways, and is also disappointing, as that aspect of Heathcliff could be more thoughtfully explored in visual form given our modern understandings of the structural nature of racism.
By: hanso23e on November 25, 2025
at 10:12 am
Thank you so much for your thoughts! I totally agree with everything you’ve said here, and agree that there is a central tension in this new Wuthering Heights adaptation that may unfortunately go unexplored. I really like your point about how exploring Heathcliff’s race would be inherently different in a visual form than in literature (and made during a different time than the novel). I am eager to know what the film will actually be like, and how press coverage may shape the narrative around it, as much of the discourse up until now, while valid, has seemed frustrating and unproductive, which is just the nature of social media.
By: Sophie Frank on November 25, 2025
at 6:23 pm