The arrival of British dramas such as Downtown Abbey and Steven Knight’s Peaky Blinders demonstrate how period dramas have taken on new shape in recent years. While once a mere escape for those with little interest in the flashy superficiality of reality TV, British period dramas have begun to entice the nation with a world of darkness, lust and deceit.  They have succeeded in capturing our imaginations with the graphic use of blood and gore, explicit sexual references and raw human emotions; a reminder that life in the past was both vastly different and yet not so different at all.

Steven Knight’s latest work, Taboo, is no exception.  Along with the minds of Tom Hardy and his father, the late Edward ‘Chips’ Hardy, he has constructed a rich tale portraying grimy Georgian England, the war with America, and the East India Company. Meanwhile, the return of the presumed-dead adventurer James Delaney to London in 1814 becomes a major game-changer in the lives of both his family as well as Britain’s political situation.

Visually, Taboo is exceptional. The smoky cinematography and attention to historical detail reflect the harshness of eighteenth-century London: the sharp flashes of flesh being cut and organs being pulled out; the bustle of a brothel; and the far from glamorous characters who are dirtied and worn.  This is how a period drama can succeed: generating a theatrically grotesque atmosphere that is more evocative of the lives of people in 1814 than any history textbook.

The memorable array of characters in Taboo enriches the heavy historical element. Jonathan Pryce stands out in the first two episodes, playing the detestable Sir Stuart Strange, a representative for the dark dealings and colonial injustices of the East India Company, which he chairs. Alternating from formality to rage, Pryce is truly frightening to watch, and convincingly demonstrates the corruption of the EIC.

“What is unclear, however, is whether the race issue of Taboo is intended to be eye-opening or whether the exoticisation of people of colour is nothing but offensive”

Tom Hardy was equally enjoyable as antihero James Delaney, particularly in the first episode, where his brooding character sets up a suitable air of mystery. Nonetheless, by the end of the second episode, Delaney started to seem simply moody rather than mysterious and his lack of disclosure bordered on frustrating. However, provided next week’s installment moves a little faster, he should remain an intriguing figure.

What is unclear, however, is whether the race issue of Taboo is intended to be eye-opening or whether the exoticisation of people of colour is nothing but offensive. James Delaney’s flashbacks of his time in Africa show a nightmarish world of witchcraft, tribes and ‘savages’. Is this is an unfortunate and clumsy reinforcement of archaic stereotypes? Or perhaps Hardy and Knight will use these references as an insight into the horrifying discrimination that existed in Delaney’s time, no matter how uncomfortable it may be to watch. If this is the case, Taboo will act to show that the only real ‘savages’ were the EIC.

TV Round-Up: The OA

It is, of course, too early to determine how much of an accomplishment Taboo will be, but there is no reason to doubt it won’t be. Knight and Hardy have already succeeded in creating a period drama whose purpose isn’t just to be intellectual but to entertain through historical fiction. If the race issue is dealt with appropriately and the characterisation deepened, it’s likely it will continue to be an interesting show with the potential to become one of the greats of BBC drama. But what will the end result be? We’ll have to wait until next week with bated breath