Emily in Paris and Younger are the same show and here's why.
This post contains light spoilers for Sex and the City (1998-2004), Something's Gotta Give (2003), The Gilmore Girls (2000-2007), Younger (2015-), and Emily in Paris (2020-).
Emily in Paris has caused a stir on the internet. People are criticising the show for its many failings, but many more are watching. I have seen the “Emily's style is awful,” take all over Youtube, in which stylish vloggers muse on the many awful/exorbitantly expensive outfits and accessories Lily Collins, who plays Emily, wears on the show.
I have seen the “this is not the real Paris,” take, which is a good one. The best takeaways were that Emily in Paris is not ethnically diverse, unlike the actual Paris. Also, the Paris of the show is too clean and sparse. Parisian viewers have pointed out that the famous streets of the city have been made to look more aesthetically pleasing with the use of CGI.
I have been to Paris, twice actually, and this image of a pristine Paris in TV and movies couldn’t be further from the truth. I have smelt the urine-soaked streets, I have dodged the piles of dog poo. It’s a living, breathing city, and it’s nasty.
There’s even a phenomenon known as “Paris Syndrome”, in which tourists, especially Japanese tourists, experience depression after realising that Paris is not the clean, perfect city they have become accustomed to seeing in media.
The idealisation of Paris is pervasive. In simple terms, there are two versions of Paris in American media. There’s the pristine wonderland Paris of Emily in Paris, which looks like a Hollywood lot. I say this to simply make a point, but it seems the filming actually took place in Paris. Also, see the Paris setting in Nancy Meyer's Something's Gotta Give (2003).
Then, there is the rude, awful, and unwelcoming Paris of The Gilmore Girls or Sex and the City. In the Sex and the City episode set in Paris, Carrie is plagued with unpleasant experiences one after the other. At one point, she gets whacked on the head by a passing French child on her dad’s shoulders, because you know, French children can spot an American on sight and then choose to torture them. Lorelai, in The Gilmore Girls, is cruelly laughed at by a local when she inquires about where to source food late at night. This is a laughably bad representation of the city and its culture.
Speaking of Sex and the City, Emily in Paris was brought into being by the same creator, Darren Starr. I was formerly a massive fan of Sex and the City, but it’s common knowledge that the show is so ridiculous that it borders on the surreal. I don’t need to get into it here but I encourage you to check out this article and watch this scene from the show in which a woman falls out of a window and dies.
Sex and the City may be Starr’s most well-known brainchild to date, but he created another show which I think has stronger parallels to Emily in Paris. That show is Younger. I am also a fan of Younger and my hot take is that these two shows are the exact same show.
If you don’t know Younger, it’s about a woman in her 40s who wants to return to the workforce after separating from her husband and her daughter has subsequently left for college. She soon finds that work in her chosen industry, publishing, is hard to come by. She is certain she is being discriminated against for her age and time away from the industry. To test her theory, she attempts to land a job in publishing by posing as a woman in her 20s. This plan works, but the issue is that she must pretend to be a woman in her 20s and has to maintain a lie with everyone she works with and also a new love interest.
It’s a pretty fresh concept, and it’s relevant to many women, who experience an early shelf life in the workforce. This discrimination is very real and Liza’s deception of others doesn’t seem malicious, but necessary for her to achieve her dreams. So Younger gives us a capable and sympathetic protagonist. Her dilemma is perfect for establishing conflicts and the lie about her age becomes increasingly elaborate over the many seasons of the show.
Emily, as a lead protagonist, shares a lot in common with Liza. She is also an ideal character for conflict, she is an ex-pat dropped into a luxury goods marketing firm in the middle of Paris without speaking a word of French. This immediately puts her on the back foot with her colleagues. Emily struggles to gain favour with her new colleagues, which means she is given less responsibility at work. Liza is also overly eager to earn recognition from her colleagues after kick-starting her career at a publishing company.
Both leads in Younger and Emily in Paris are similar in their ability to effortlessly win people over and are real career women at work. But what about the other characters? Surely the supporting cast creates a point of difference. Wrong. The supporting characters also follow similar character types in Emily in Paris as they do in Younger.
Emily mysteriously makes friends with a young Aupair named Mindy in a park. It’s one of those instantaneous friendships that only take place in TV shows and movies. Our characters' have an instant witty repartee that has them bonding over their mutual ennui, with no hint of social awkwardness or distrust of strangers, which we frequently encounter in real life. Not only is Emily unexpectedly great at her job, but she is also exceptionally good at making friends and influencing people all over Paris, all without even riding the Metro.
Mindy is a worldly woman, having spent time in China, the United States, and now France. We learn that she was cut off financially from her well to do family because she went against her family's wishes and didn’t complete business school. We also learn that she is somewhat of an infamous internet celebrity after a poor performance on China’s got talent or something to that effect.
Mindy is essentially escaping her problems and her bad reputation in Paris, but she also plays the important role of guiding Emily in her new Parisian life. Although, Emily rarely listens to Mindy’s cautions, and continues to step on the toes of every Parisian she encounters.
Mindy is also extremely similar to Younger’s Chelsea. Chelsea is the sassy, super confident close friend to Liza, who quickly rises up the ranks of their publishing company in her late 20s. If that’s not enough to make you feel inadequate, then perhaps you are as devoid of feelings of inadequacy as Chelsea, or her identical Emily in Paris counterpart, Mindy.
Sure, Mindy may create a point of difference within a mostly white cast as an Asian American actor. But, her habit of always having a one-liner ready, always being the good-time girl, and her penchant for telling it like it is, makes her the archetype of the best friend character these two shows can’t seem to do without.
Sylvie is also Emily in Paris’ answer to the uptight career woman, which is also in Younger with the character of Diane. Sylvie is the top dog at the marketing firm where Emily works, she is also a professional thorn in her side and shoots down almost every idea Emily brings to the table. In Younger, Liza works as an assistant to Diane, who is essentially the same character except less French and with more statement necklaces. Both characters are endlessly disapproving of our lead characters. They have also obviously worked hard to be in their position in life, and they won’t let anyone forget it. Yet strangely, there is something kind of badass about these characters, who won’t let the men around them compromise their ambitions.
Younger and Emily in Paris also follow the same rule book for jokes. Both shows seem to pride themselves on being raunchy with many of the plot points relying on sexual encounters. Emily blows the fuse in her building by trying to plug in her American massager in an attempt to masturbate. Liza in Younger is also treated to many ridiculous sexual liaisons, including the time she dates a sheep farmer only to run away when she ostensibly catches him in a moment of ecstasy with one of his sheep. This disturbing plot point is never resolved, making it all the more ridiculous. Emily ends up in similarly ridiculous sexual situations, including accidentally having sex with her friend's teenage brother.
Of course, both shows rely heavily on love triangle plot developments. I’m feeling too exhausted with this trope to even go into why this is lazy writing. I will say that Emily in Paris is far too reliant on taking advantage of the French stereotype of a love for the ménage à trois.
In Sex and the City (SATC from hereafter), New York is often named the “fifth character”. SATC’s New York is opulent and trendy. Carrie and company are often brunching on the weekend and going to exclusive clubs and restaurants at night. Their New York is aspirational, Carrie spends thousands on shoes on a writer’s salary, the rest of her friend group are just as liable to go on a spending spree. Yet, we see some hints at the less desirable aspects of the city, Carrie is kept up at night by chickens being left on the roof of a veterinary clinic in one episode. In another episode, her shoes are stolen by a mugger.
The same is not true of Younger’s New York, nor of Emily’s Paris. The settings for these shows are pristine and glossy. The lighting and camera use in both of these series are uncannily similar.
You’re probably wondering what my point is in explaining that these two shows are alike. Well, my point is that Darren Starr and Co have clearly developed a formula for their shows making them near identical. The premise may be different, but the details are eerily similar.
Mindy is also extremely similar to Younger’s Chelsea. Chelsea is the sassy, super confident close friend to Liza, who quickly rises up the ranks of their publishing company in her late 20s. If that’s not enough to make you feel inadequate, then perhaps you are as devoid of feelings of inadequacy as Chelsea, or her identical Emily in Paris counterpart, Mindy.
Sure, Mindy may create a point of difference within a mostly white cast as an Asian American actor. But, her habit of always having a one-liner ready, always being the good-time girl, and her penchant for telling it like it is, makes her the archetype of the best friend character these two shows can’t seem to do without.
Sylvie is also Emily in Paris’ answer to the uptight career woman, which is also in Younger with the character of Diane. Sylvie is the top dog at the marketing firm where Emily works, she is also a professional thorn in her side and shoots down almost every idea Emily brings to the table. In Younger, Liza works as an assistant to Diane, who is essentially the same character except less French and with more statement necklaces. Both characters are endlessly disapproving of our lead characters. They have also obviously worked hard to be in their position in life, and they won’t let anyone forget it. Yet strangely, there is something kind of badass about these characters, who won’t let the men around them compromise their ambitions.
Younger and Emily in Paris also follow the same rule book for jokes. Both shows seem to pride themselves on being raunchy with many of the plot points relying on sexual encounters. Emily blows the fuse in her building by trying to plug in her American massager in an attempt to masturbate. Liza in Younger is also treated to many ridiculous sexual liaisons, including the time she dates a sheep farmer only to run away when she ostensibly catches him in a moment of ecstasy with one of his sheep. This disturbing plot point is never resolved, making it all the more ridiculous. Emily ends up in similarly ridiculous sexual situations, including accidentally having sex with her friend's teenage brother.
Of course, both shows rely heavily on love triangle plot developments. I’m feeling too exhausted with this trope to even go into why this is lazy writing. I will say that Emily in Paris is far too reliant on taking advantage of the French stereotype of a love for the ménage à trois.
In Sex and the City (SATC from hereafter), New York is often named the “fifth character”. SATC’s New York is opulent and trendy. Carrie and company are often brunching on the weekend and going to exclusive clubs and restaurants at night. Their New York is aspirational, Carrie spends thousands on shoes on a writer’s salary, the rest of her friend group are just as liable to go on a spending spree. Yet, we see some hints at the less desirable aspects of the city, Carrie is kept up at night by chickens being left on the roof of a veterinary clinic in one episode. In another episode, her shoes are stolen by a mugger.
The same is not true of Younger’s New York, nor of Emily’s Paris. The settings for these shows are pristine and glossy. The lighting and camera use in both of these series are uncannily similar.
You’re probably wondering what my point is in explaining that these two shows are alike. Well, my point is that Darren Starr and Co have clearly developed a formula for their shows making them near identical. The premise may be different, but the details are eerily similar.
We are essentially being given the exact same show on a different platform and of all the critiques of Emily in Paris, I haven’t heard anyone talking about this. I think this says a lot about the show. It’s finely tuned to viewers’ tastes. With the advantages of a widely used platform such as Netflix and the glossy easy to watch quality of these Starr shows means that these shows will always find an audience.
I’m not trying to argue that Emily in Paris won’t attract a more informed viewer. I like to think that I am knowledgeable about Paris. It’s impossible to study art, literature or the trajectory of the type of western-centric history that is taught at university, without learning a lot about Paris. I studied art history and in some ways, that helps inform my understanding of French culture, history, and the luxury industry, which this show appears to be based on. Does my small knowledge of Paris in any way help my viewing here? No, not really. But I digress.
My point is that Emily in Paris is likely to attract a less informed viewer and give a false impression of Paris. It’s not all affairs, Chanel bags, and trips to the Opera. If you keep this image of Paris in mind, you will be sorely disappointed when you go to the actual city and realise, just like New York, London and Tokyo, famed cities always have their problems. It’s a timely reminder that we should always be critical of what we watch.
Like it’s predecessors, SATC and to a greater extent, Younger, Emily in Paris is aspirational. Let us briefly return to the Chanel bags, like Carrie’s shoes in SATC, it would just be absolutely impossible for Emily to own that many designer bags. This show is escapism, plain and simple. Maybe we can now go to the supermarket, but we can hardly travel to Paris. With Emily, we can not only travel to Paris through our screen but instead, a Disneyland-like version of Paris to boot. But even Disneyland has more tourists than in this show.
But maybe, there is something real at the core of Emily in Paris, just as there is in Younger. In Younger, Liza is struggling to find work in her dream industry later in life. It instantly endears her to the viewer that she must lie about her age to support herself and achieve her dreams. In Emily in Paris, Emily is suffering from a very real ennui that comes along with the life of an immigrant. It’s a feeling I find very relatable. Emily is experiencing transition shock, which is very true to the experience of moving away from your comfort zone.
I did find it somewhat awkward that Emily, a white woman, is struggling with culture shock surrounded by a predominantly white cast. She is not a sudden minority in this show and it is, after all, a privilege to move overseas.
I know that many have it much worse, they are forced out of their home countries by conflict or they are searching for a better quality of life. This isn’t Emily’s experience by a longshot. Emily suffers from the very white, middle-class sense of entitlement that I too feel. Yet, I think it is character building to leave your comfort zone and realise that you won’t be instantly embraced by other cultures. That you too can always struggle. I think the show captures this feeling very well, if not the actual reality of moving to another country without speaking the language.
Would I recommend this show? Sure, it’s pretty, Lily Collins is lovely, and it’s an easy watch. Of course, know that it’s hardly an accurate representation of Paris, or even of an expat’s relationship to Paris. You may feel good, or you may feel annoyed, and that’s all part of the fun I think. This show irks me, but it is easy to watch and fun to complain about later, just like a real Parisian. This show is as easy to consume as a croissant drenched in butter. Let me just say, this show is hardly a work of art, I don’t judge you if you like it or dislike it. In my opinion, this show deserves all of its critiques. Like the croissant, this show is excessive, but every now and again we all deserve a treat.
You can watch Emily in Paris right now on Netflix. Bonne chance I guess!
I’m not trying to argue that Emily in Paris won’t attract a more informed viewer. I like to think that I am knowledgeable about Paris. It’s impossible to study art, literature or the trajectory of the type of western-centric history that is taught at university, without learning a lot about Paris. I studied art history and in some ways, that helps inform my understanding of French culture, history, and the luxury industry, which this show appears to be based on. Does my small knowledge of Paris in any way help my viewing here? No, not really. But I digress.
My point is that Emily in Paris is likely to attract a less informed viewer and give a false impression of Paris. It’s not all affairs, Chanel bags, and trips to the Opera. If you keep this image of Paris in mind, you will be sorely disappointed when you go to the actual city and realise, just like New York, London and Tokyo, famed cities always have their problems. It’s a timely reminder that we should always be critical of what we watch.
Like it’s predecessors, SATC and to a greater extent, Younger, Emily in Paris is aspirational. Let us briefly return to the Chanel bags, like Carrie’s shoes in SATC, it would just be absolutely impossible for Emily to own that many designer bags. This show is escapism, plain and simple. Maybe we can now go to the supermarket, but we can hardly travel to Paris. With Emily, we can not only travel to Paris through our screen but instead, a Disneyland-like version of Paris to boot. But even Disneyland has more tourists than in this show.
But maybe, there is something real at the core of Emily in Paris, just as there is in Younger. In Younger, Liza is struggling to find work in her dream industry later in life. It instantly endears her to the viewer that she must lie about her age to support herself and achieve her dreams. In Emily in Paris, Emily is suffering from a very real ennui that comes along with the life of an immigrant. It’s a feeling I find very relatable. Emily is experiencing transition shock, which is very true to the experience of moving away from your comfort zone.
I did find it somewhat awkward that Emily, a white woman, is struggling with culture shock surrounded by a predominantly white cast. She is not a sudden minority in this show and it is, after all, a privilege to move overseas.
I know that many have it much worse, they are forced out of their home countries by conflict or they are searching for a better quality of life. This isn’t Emily’s experience by a longshot. Emily suffers from the very white, middle-class sense of entitlement that I too feel. Yet, I think it is character building to leave your comfort zone and realise that you won’t be instantly embraced by other cultures. That you too can always struggle. I think the show captures this feeling very well, if not the actual reality of moving to another country without speaking the language.
Would I recommend this show? Sure, it’s pretty, Lily Collins is lovely, and it’s an easy watch. Of course, know that it’s hardly an accurate representation of Paris, or even of an expat’s relationship to Paris. You may feel good, or you may feel annoyed, and that’s all part of the fun I think. This show irks me, but it is easy to watch and fun to complain about later, just like a real Parisian. This show is as easy to consume as a croissant drenched in butter. Let me just say, this show is hardly a work of art, I don’t judge you if you like it or dislike it. In my opinion, this show deserves all of its critiques. Like the croissant, this show is excessive, but every now and again we all deserve a treat.
You can watch Emily in Paris right now on Netflix. Bonne chance I guess!
Comments
Post a Comment