Justice for Blair Waldorf
Why Queen B Deserves More And We Do, Too
**Discussion of toxic/abusive relationships, assault, etc.**
Gossip Girl (2007–2012) never used to interest me. I was definitely a teenage girl, the target demographic, when it premiered, but I missed out. I at least knew the premise: several really rich, young friends get into trouble in the Big Apple and try to maintain their friendships and romances along the way. Simple curiosity prompted me to watch the pilot, and I blew through all six seasons in about a month. There is definitely a lot of fun with the teen soapiness of GG, including a bizarro snuff film, royal scandals, a vengeful fake cousin, and lame recurring waffle jokes.
I was also aware that Chuck Bass and Blair Waldorf were the star couple of the show. We can also see how important the relationship was to its creators. Co-creator Josh Schwartz, in a 2016 interview with Vulture, described the relationship as “fraught and often conflict-laden, but ultimately incredibly romantic and fulling for both the characters and the audience.”
Everything changed after I watched the pilot because Chuck sexually assaults two major characters: his frenemy, Serena van der Woodsen, and complete stranger, Jenny Humphrey. He doesn’t apologize to Jenny until close to the end of season 2, and only because she reminds him about what happened. He never apologizes to Serena. This is the guy that becomes the sex symbol of the show.
It’s possible that Chuck’s characterization, especially in Season One, is a bit messy because he was never intended to be a good guy. In Cecily von Ziegesar’s book series, he is a straightforward antagonist. However, according to Schwartz, his path was changed because of the (allegedly) electric chemistry between actors Westwick and Meester. So, it’s tough to figure out who he’s supposed to be from moment to moment as he flip-flops between a playboy monster and an antihero with daddy issues.
Blair Waldorf, on the other hand, is complex without all of the headache. She’s the princess of the Upper East Side and a fan favorite. She craves perfection; she wants to go to Yale, create an empire, and marry the perfect guy, but God help anyone who gets in her way.
She is definitely not a perfect person. One: she is irredeemably classist. Two: she regularly blackmails her friends, family, and even teachers and employers. Three: she degrades, shames, and attacks her female friends in order to uphold a misogynistic view on sex and relationships (which is probably why she’s able to overlook Chuck’s spotty history with women).
None of this is inherently bad; Blair, Chuck, and anyone else are allowed to be bad people, good people, good people with huge flaws, etc. This is fiction, after all, and the characters shouldn’t be saints. We need conflict in order to be entertained. Plus, according to “‘I Followed the Rules, and They All Loved You More’: Moral Judgment and Attitudes toward Fictional Characters in Film” (2010) by Film and Media Professor Carl Plantiga, we can still relate to a hugely flawed character because moral evaluations are not black and white. Despicable actions do not automatically bar a character from our sympathy.
However, there is a fine line to walk. Multiple psychological studies about “narrative transportation” have shown that fiction impacts us, including our world views and even personality traits, because we become extremely invested in stories. So, for me, this means that the context, framing, and resolutions of controversial situations in our media is crucial because someone can easily walk away from a T.V. show with a permanently altered perspective on these heavy topics.
So, how does GG walk that line with Chuck and Blair, an inarguably vicious couple? I would say there are some okay things and some very bad things, especially considering that, in a reality full of improbable scenarios, Chuck and Blair’s relationship is one of the most grounded, and therefore most influential, aspects of the show. What the show tries to sell as a romantic fantasy is often a romantic homicide, and Blair is the casualty.
Problematic Bass
As with any toxic relationship, the problems aren’t life-or-death in the beginning. There are plenty of things that could just be brushed aside as small character flaws or stepping stones to a healthier mindset. Yet, ultimately, they serve as bright red flags.
- In Season One’s “Victor, Victrola,” Blair, who just broke up with her long-term boyfriend, Nate, gets drunk at Chuck’s club. When he drives her home they have sex (it’s her first time and his millionth) in the limo. When she decides to call off their casual sex relationship to try and win Nate back, he sulks. Yet, “A Thin Line Between Chuck and Nate,” when Nate very harshly rejects her, and she turns to Chuck for support (and not realizing his genuine feelings for her), he spitefully calls her used goods.
- At the end of Season One, Chuck finally admits that he loves Blair and she’s thrilled. In “Much ‘I Do’ About Nothing,” she waits for him by his private plane so they can take a romantic trip abroad, but he decides to ditch her for some supermodels because he’s afraid of responsibility.
- In Season Two, Blair comes back from her solo trip abroad with a royal love interest (she meets a lot of royalty). In “The Dark Night,” Chuck spends an evening suggesting that her Royal BF isn’t sexually attracted to her, and then pretends that he is said Royal BF during a blackout so he can make a move on her. Granted, Blair suspects it is him and kisses him anyway.
They are fairly evenly matched at this point. They both emotionally and sexually torment each other all throughout Season Two (I love you, I don’t love you, I love you, etc.).
Plus, Blair waves her own red flags. In Season Three’s “Enough About Eve,” when they are officially dating, she tricks Chuck into kissing a male NYU alumnus because she wants to give a toast at a brunch (it’s a long, bewildering story). He is understandably hurt, but she apologizes and works to earn his trust, so he forgives her.
This is all morally dubious, but still entertaining in the heightened reality of GG.
The Chainsaw Bassacre
With very little provocation, Chuck switches from a problematic boyfriend to a dangerously unhinged partner.
- In Season Three’s “Inglourious Bassterds,” Chuck tries to trade Blair for a hotel. There’s a whole set of circumstances that motivate his actions, but there’s no excuse. Thanks to her own feelings of misplaced guilt and Chuck’s carefully placed manipulation tactics, she is pressured into having sex with his creepy uncle so Chuck can get his business back. The “deal” doesn’t go through, but it’s awful nonetheless.
- When she realizes that Chuck secretly helped plan the “deal” and confronts him about it, he accuses her of wanting to cheat on him and suggests that she should be willing to stand by her man. There is not an apology in sight. His betrayal mirrors the NYU incident from before, but it is undeniably worse, despite the show’s attempts to justify it. There’s some “you’re bad too, though!” line of reasoning in the following episodes. (There is some attempt at backpedaling later in the series, but the damage is already done.)
- Blair, somehow, wants to save the relationship. In “Last Tango, Then Paris,” Chuck gives her an ultimatum to meet him at the top of the Empire State Building at a certain time or else he’s done with her. She doesn’t make it exactly on time, and he doesn’t see her, so he has consensual (though potentially statutory and definitely icky) sex with Jenny Humphrey. Blair finally has everyone’s, including the audience’s, permission to break up with him.
- At the start of Season Four, Chuck meets a sweet French girl and she brings out “the best in him.” Blair is still feeling mixed up about her break-up, so, in “Touch of Eva,” she meddles and the French girl packs her bags. Chuck’s reaction proves that his new lifestyle wasn’t genuine. He blames Blair for destroying his desire to be good, thereby “forcing” him to go back to his evil ways, and vows to ruin her life.
- Chuck falls in love with another woman, breaking Blair’s heart. However, she steps aside, which is a real sign of her personal growth. Alternatively, she falls in love with a Prince and Chuck snaps. In “The Princesses and the Frog,” when she tells him about her engagement, he pins her down, breaks a window near her head, and a shard of glass cuts her face. Horrifyingly, he blames it on the alcohol and she accepts that as an apology.
Why does Blair take him back? She often says that she doesn’t like herself when she’s with him. Time and time again, she breaks up with him so she can focus on finding herself. The best explanation that the show is able to provide is that A) she and everyone around her believes that they are soulmates and B) she is responsible for saving him.
Season Four’s “Double Identity” is the perfect example of A and B. While on vacation in Paris with Blair, Serena finds Chuck, who has previously gone missing, and learns that he is taking a new identity and disappearing forever. According to Serena, the only person who can stop him is Blair. So, Blair, despite her trauma, abandons a date with a Prince (her future fiancé) so she can save him. She confronts and forgives him, thereby stopping him from symbolically ending his life. The fact that her best friend would coerce her into going is awful. That she really is his only hope is devastating. This is not an isolated incident.
Blair should not be responsible for her volatile ex-boyfriend, but because she is his supposed soulmate (and therefore his keeper, I guess), she cannot ever move on from him.
Schwartz said that Chuck and Blair change each other. Chuck is “the bad boy who was reformed by Blair. She taught and helped him become a better person.” Meanwhile, Blair was someone “who had all of her issues and was so uptight … you wanted to see her have something on her own that was fulfilling.”
I have to disagree. Blair did try (mostly unsuccessfully) to reform Chuck. But, while Chuck helped bring Blair out of her shell at first, she is objectively a worse person when they are together. She only improves herself when she is actively distancing herself from him. Even when Chuck does try to help her, it is often unwanted or something helpful but ultimately unnecessary.
I do think the show is aware that he has a negative influence on her; the problem is just never resolved. It’s a long journey, but Blair grows in interesting and satisfying ways. The only thing holding her back is Chuck Bass.
Case in point: the Chuck/Blair (Chair?) wedding in the series finale. In Season Six’s The Revengers,” Chuck does nothing while his (admittedly murderous) father falls to his death from the top of a building. Murder-through-inaction is obviously a crucial component of a redemption arc. Blair is, unfortunately, a witness. So, they get married so she can’t be forced to testify against him in a murder trial. The shotgun wedding in “New York, I Love You, XOXO” is their “fairytale” ending. They are both ushered away by the police right after Chuck kisses his bride, and we are supposed to believe Blair’s smiling face through it all.
Taking It Seriously
I know that GG is, at the end of the day, a melodramatic CW show. But, I’m so frustrated by these plot points because they’re bigger than Blair Waldorf. This idea that a toxic relationship = “sexy relationship and don’t you dare question it” is commonplace in our media and real-life rhetoric. Plus, there’s more than a dash of “you can fix him/her” thrown in there, and we all know how that goes. Blair’s romantic relationships in general are perhaps the most egregious and dangerous subject matter in the show because they are so ineptly portrayed and I’m kind of surprised that more viewers in 2007–2012 didn’t feel the same way.
I would like to believe that a modern interpretation of GG would do better, but I’m not so sure. Unlike excessive lip gloss, hair crimping, and overly plucked eyebrows, trends of shame, pressure, and double standards are not dead in this modern era. In our media, it’s okay for someone to put up with verbal, emotional, and psychological abuse if they are also learning how to be sexy and/or fall in love. Sometimes, all it takes for toxic relationships to be approved by our standards is a lesson learned. You can probably fill in your own examples: the nonexistent self-awareness of Fifty Shades of Grey, its look-alike After, the hollow Sierra Burgess is a Loser, the “she/he was asking for it” responses to a complicated #MeToo confession, etc.
If only we could see a version of Blair that acknowledges the part of her that is drawn to Chuck but learns to dedicate herself to her own happiness. Perhaps, in another world, Chuck could truly making amends before finally committing to her. Or, why not let Blair truly be Chuck’s match; let her be evil, instead of pretending she is while we actually watch her suffer in Chuck’s orbit. Any of these scenarios are more interesting, with greater potential for clear resolution in a teen drama, than what Blair actually got.
Blair Waldorf deserves better, and so do we all.
Thank you. Stay tuned for my upcoming GG rants:
- “Who is Vanessa?”
- “Jenny Isn’t That Bad, You Guys: Justice for Little J”
- “At Least 10 Reasons Why Dan Humphrey Must Be Stopped At All Costs”
