Reply To: Love and Romance on OUAT: What's the Message?

[Slurpeez]

POV is critical for how readers or watchers feel about characters. But for a show like ONCE where we have so many characters interacting and centric episodes, does morality changed based on from whose eyes we are looking?

I think the subjective lens through which the audience views a character can change over time as more of his or her back story is revealed. However, that does not change the objectivity of the moral choices one makes. Take Rumplestiltskin as an example. When we were first introduced to him, he was presented as an unhinged imp with a maniacal laugh who was the mastermind behind the “curse to end all curses.” He was perceived to be the Dark One whose dastardly plan, in conjunction with the Evil Queen’s obsession with revenge, devastated an entire land and its people. Objectively speaking, that is pretty dark and heavy. (Of course, I might add that Snow and Charming did almost the same exact thing as Rumple and Regina in recasting that dark curse, but that is for another post). While Rumple/Mr. Gold was an intriguing character in the first 7 episodes, it wasn’t until episode 8 when we learned about how he became the Dark One that he became sympathetic; what drove him to seek the power of the dagger was done in an effort to protect his son. Suddenly, we realized that it was the love of a child that led a humble, lame, poor man to choose dark magic in the first place, and it was an effort to find that same lost boy that led Rumple to create the dark curse. It seemed almost understandable why a man who first seemed so dark would choose such a dark means of locating his child.

Does that make Rumple’s actions in creating the dark curse suddenly morally defensible though? Did one man’s desire for reconciliation with his son justify him sacrificing one world for the next? I’d argue no, since the ends don’t always justify the means. Nothing could make the destruction of an entire realm morally right, nor could one man’s desires suddenly wipe his slate entirely clean for all the other wrong things he’s done such as killing people. Baelfire, who was that little light which kept his father human, saw that the dark magic made his father hurt people all of the time, and that he was only getting worse. While his son did eventually forgive his father, who came back for him, it didn’t suddenly absolve Rumple of the very real fact that his child had to grow up alone, nor did it change the fact that Rumple was the cause of so many other countless characters’ heartache.

As much as I understand and sympathize with Rumple as a character and like Rumbelle as a couple, I’m not blind to the fact that after he did the right thing of sacrificing himself to save everyone, he eventually fell back into his old pattern of darkness. Though perhaps Zelena deserved to die for the crimes she’d committed and attempted to carry out, her cold-blooded murder was not the way to deal with her. (A trail of Zelena’s peers, followed by a ruling of the law, was the way to handle her fate). Rumple lied to the woman he loves, saying he wouldn’t murder Zelena, and then did it anyway. He proposed to and married Belle while lying to her. Even when we come to better understand why the villains do the things they do, we hopefully are not blind to the wrong deeds they commit. Forgiveness does not equal total acceptance of wrongdoing, nor does love totally “fix” a character in question.

Rumple was wrong to lie to Belle by giving her a fake dagger and for killing another woman. Belle was perhaps too trusting and too naive to believe Rumple would be true to his word, so in that sense she allowed love to blind her. Maybe she just didn’t want to believe he’d fall back into his old ways. She said she loves even the dark parts of him, though I don’t think that means she has to accept them as morally okay, nor does that mean she has to stand for it when she discovers the truth. Hopefully, she won’t stand idly by if Rumple tries to justify his dark actions. No matter how wrong Zelena may have been for setting up the death of Rumple’s son, I doubt Bae would’ve wanted his father to relapse into darkness just to avenge his death or to marry Belle under false pretenses. Baelfire hated what dark magic did to his dad, as surely as I’d hope that Belle hates how dark magic continues to corrupt the man she loves.

While I think Belle and Rumple have true love, I think the way their story is currently being portrayed is not meant to be considered a healthy scenario. Belle can’t fix Rumple, as demonstrated by the failure of TLK to fully break his curse when he pulled away from her. The addict in question has to want to change, and the person who loves the addict cannot be an enabler if the addiction can ever be overcome. While Rumple is addicted to a fantastical element of magic, the scenario is similar to alcoholic addiction. The best movie I’ve seen that shows a realistic portrayal of love and addiction is perhaps When a Man Loves a Woman starring Andy Garcia and Meg Ryan. In that film, the husband had a difficult history of enabling his alcoholic wife. Her addiction was so strong it was putting herself and their children at risk. Eventually, the husband realized his behavior was enabling his wife to drink. To get clean, she first had to seek help outside of their marriage and he had to learn how to deal with an alcoholic wife. It was only in wanting to free herself that she was able to become sober once again, and it was in wanting to understand her illness that they were able to reconcile as a couple. Belle cannot excuse Rumple in his use of dark magic, and he has to want to free himself, if he is ever to overcome his dark one curse through TLK.