Bae as Henry’s father is unacceptable – show is dead to me

[spinninggold]

@malchore wrote:

.
Short answer: For me, fiction needs to be internally consistent. It has to have some level of plausibility within the context of the story and world it inhabits. I am an atheist which means I don’t just accept things on faith alone. And that’s what the writers gave us tonight; an episode that said, “just accept this plot turn on faith, we cannot offer any rational explanation.” I can suspend my disbelief for Fantasy and Sci-Fi stories because they can be written with plausibility and consistency within their world.

And so, Bae meeting Emma on blind luck alone is so implausible it broke my belief in the story.

You don’t believe in faith? Then why are you watching this series in the first place? The whole point of the series is faith, fate and destiny. That’s the whole point of Fairy Tales in the first place. Good wins,evil loses, destiny happen, those who meant to be together, will be no matter what. And that’s what happened. Personally, and I think at least half the board is with me here, I saw it coming from a mile away. It’s what fairy tales are about.

[Phee]

@SpinningGold wrote:

@malchore wrote:

.
Short answer: For me, fiction needs to be internally consistent. It has to have some level of plausibility within the context of the story and world it inhabits. I am an atheist which means I don’t just accept things on faith alone. And that’s what the writers gave us tonight; an episode that said, “just accept this plot turn on faith, we cannot offer any rational explanation.” I can suspend my disbelief for Fantasy and Sci-Fi stories because they can be written with plausibility and consistency within their world.

And so, Bae meeting Emma on blind luck alone is so implausible it broke my belief in the story.

You don’t believe in faith? Then why are you watching this series in the first place? The whole point of the series is faith, fate and destiny. That’s the whole point of Fairy Tales in the first place. Good wins,evil loses, destiny happen, those who meant to be together, will be no matter what. And that’s what happened. Personally, and I think at least half the board is with me here, I saw it coming from a mile away. It’s what fairy tales are about.

Yeah, I’ve gotta agree. Not sure why someone who doesn’t believe in all that good stuff would have been attracted to a show like this in the first place. If I had that mindset, I’d have given up on it after ep1, given that the story was established as Emma’s journey to find faith so that she could fulfill her destiny.

[MatthewPaul]

While I disagree with the original poster, I will say it is becoming a pet peeve of mine that the writers have been a bit too predictable. Even for those not actively looking at spoilers, it wasn’t that hard to figure out a lot of the mysteries so far.

[Grimmsister]

@malchore wrote:

Tiara – I don’t understand the need for the spoiler tag on your entire post.

Short answer: For me, fiction needs to be internally consistent. It has to have some level of plausibility within the context of the story and world it inhabits. I am an atheist which means I don’t just accept things on faith alone. And that’s what the writers gave us tonight; an episode that said, “just accept this plot turn on faith, we cannot offer any rational explanation.” I can suspend my disbelief for Fantasy and Sci-Fi stories because they can be written with plausibility and consistency within their world.

And so, Bae meeting Emma on blind luck alone is so implausible it broke my belief in the story.

Who’s to say this isn’t? We havent been given the answers to everything yet.
They both came from fairytaleland and so they could have brought something with them, some of that ‘fate and destiny thing’ wich maybe and supposedly does not exist in the real world, something wich made it possible or even non avoidable for them to meet and be atracted to oneanother.
My theory is that the Blue Fairy put some magic spell on them, before they went through their respective portal. That was some of the final preperations she was talking about.

[Daniel J. Lewis]

(I had a beautiful post all written up. It was going to make you cry, solve world hunger, and answer the deepest secrets of the universe and of OUAT. But I pressed the wrong button and lost it. Thus, you’ll get this fart of a response for now.) 🙄

Fate/destiny with the precise timing of something at just the right place are staples of amazing stories.

Like the ring from The Lord of the Rings, maybe the magic inside Emma wants to be in Storybrooke. Maybe there’s something that led her to meet Neal.

[andreth stark]

I’ve never believe in faith or destiny. And despite that, or maybe because of that, I’ve always loved fantasy and fairy tales. Then, you argue, how is that possible? Isn’t it a sort of contradiction?

The answer is not, certainly not. There are thousands of reasons that make me enjoy the genre. Maybe the most important of all is the wonderlust. Maybe just the triad of “Recovery-Escape-Consolation” Tolkien spoke about in it’s “On faery tale” lecture.
According to him, the last element of the triad, “Consolation”, is the fact that faerytales, and fantasy in general, deal with hope and eucatastrophe, that is to say, “when everything points out to a dramatic, bad ending, something saves the day, and the ending turns into a happy one”.

As I understand it, THAT is what OUaT is about: hope. It is a good theme, since paraphrasing Tolkien again, no man can know the future. One can foretell, deduce, or speculate…. But it is not knowing. And loosing hope implies knowing future, for how can you know that the ending is going to be a bad one? (by the way, a good wink to this idea appears during the conversation Mr. Gold and Henry had in Bae’s doorway, where Rumpelstiltskin is the “grown man” who doesn’t have any hope of a good ending, while Henry is the “innocent view” to whom at the end, everything fits.)

However, in that same lecture, he said, on regards of literary belief:
“Children” (and I add; all of us, no matter our age) “are capable, of course, of literary belief, when the story-maker’s art is good enough to produce it. That state of mind has been called “willing suspension of disbelief.” But this does not seem to me a good description of what happens. What really happens is that the story-maker proves a successful “sub-creator.” He makes a Secondary World which your mind can enter. Inside it, what he relates is “true”: it accords with the laws of that world. You therefore believe it, while you are, as it were, inside. The moment disbelief arises, the spell is broken; the magic, or rather art, has failed. You are then out in the Primary World again, looking at the little abortive Secondary World from outside. If you are obliged, by kindliness or circumstance, to stay, then disbelief must be suspended (or stifled), otherwise listening and looking would become intolerable. But this suspension of disbelief is a substitute for the genuine thing, a subterfuge we use when condescending to games or make-believe, or when trying (more or less willingly) to find what virtue we can in the work of an art that has for us failed.”

In this respect, when the writers make things happen with a “magic” or “destiny” or “have faith” explanation, they fail as storymakers. They drive us out of the Secondary World, and it is a painful travelling, since we leave there characters and stories we love as old friends, “secondary world’s” friend we can not look at in the same way anymore.

And the path back to that world is also painful, since you must skip too many potholes to arrive, and even arriving, it will never be the same than before.

So yes, I understand what Malchore said, I even agree with him. But I also understand that maybe the lacking piece of the puzzle is waiting for us behind the next corner of the path.
After all, I live in the real, primary world, where there is no magic…. So I would never claim to know what is going to happen in the next episode.

[Slurpeez]

@DanielJLewis wrote:

Like the ring from The Lord of the Rings, maybe the magic inside Emma wants to be in Storybrooke. Maybe there’s something that led her to meet Neal.

Oh, great theory. Emma thought it was Mr. Gold who destined her to stop Cora from taking her heart, but that was Emma herself who used her own innate magic. As the product of true love, Emma is inwardly attracted to the very person whom the curse was designed to find, Baelfire, and together they produced the one person who could help Emma break the curse, Henry. I think that is a beautiful story and what fairytales are all about, just as Mary Margaret said in the pilot:

Look, I gave the book to him because I wanted Henry to have the most important thing anyone can have. Hope. Believing in even the possibility of a happy ending is a very powerful thing.

I believe Emma’s happy ending will be with her parents, Henry, and Baelfire. After all, this is a fairytale, despite being set in our world.

"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy

[Phee]

@Andreth Stark wrote:

However, in that same lecture, he said, on regards of literary belief:
“Children” (and I add; all of us, no matter our age) “are capable, of course, of literary belief, when the story-maker’s art is good enough to produce it. That state of mind has been called “willing suspension of disbelief.” But this does not seem to me a good description of what happens. What really happens is that the story-maker proves a successful “sub-creator.” He makes a Secondary World which your mind can enter. Inside it, what he relates is “true”: it accords with the laws of that world. You therefore believe it, while you are, as it were, inside. The moment disbelief arises, the spell is broken; the magic, or rather art, has failed. You are then out in the Primary World again, looking at the little abortive Secondary World from outside. If you are obliged, by kindliness or circumstance, to stay, then disbelief must be suspended (or stifled), otherwise listening and looking would become intolerable. But this suspension of disbelief is a substitute for the genuine thing, a subterfuge we use when condescending to games or make-believe, or when trying (more or less willingly) to find what virtue we can in the work of an art that has for us failed.”

I think I get what you’re saying and understand a bit better now how you can still get into stories like this. My brain is wired completely differently. For me, there isn’t a Primary and Secondary world as such. One of the reasons I love reading Tolkien is because I can believe that that land and that magic was really a part of the actual universe I live in. As someone who does believe in magic, fate, destiny, coincidence, God, a whole other spiritual plane, etc, those factors in a story overlap with my own world, so I don’t need to really completely suspend disbelief in order to believe in a fictional world, and perhaps that means I don’t get bothered by the same things you do, because I don’t need my fictional world to be as precisely, flawlessly constructed in order for it to be real to me. If it already feels like the fictional world is connected to my real world, I can’t have the illusion so easily ruined and get sucked out of it.

[pjsparkles]

@malchore wrote:

Tiara – I don’t understand the need for the spoiler tag on your entire post.

Short answer: For me, fiction needs to be internally consistent. It has to have some level of plausibility within the context of the story and world it inhabits. I am an atheist which means I don’t just accept things on faith alone. And that’s what the writers gave us tonight; an episode that said, “just accept this plot turn on faith, we cannot offer any rational explanation.” I can suspend my disbelief for Fantasy and Sci-Fi stories because they can be written with plausibility and consistency within their world.

And so, Bae meeting Emma on blind luck alone is so implausible it broke my belief in the story.

I’m a skeptic and a research scientist. Trying to rectify this show with your view of the world won’t work. It’s a show about magic. Something we know isn’t real but it it’s fun to pretend. A certain amount of faith has been described throughout the series. This wasn’t the first episode like that. I think it’s poetic that they found each other. I mean some people may believe in the true love thing, but I don’t and I still enjoy the show. I’m sorry you are turned off by this but what did you expect from a show about story book characters, saviors, good&evil, magic and happy endings. I hope that you can have a renewed interest in the show at a later date but this show can’t be everything to all people. Nothing can.

[mich7]

@AntBee wrote:

@EastOfTheSun wrote:

Im sorry you feel that way Malchore…=( sorry to disagree but to me this storyline thought predictable, is genius!! It makes me love the show even more! the poetry and the irony of “the savior of the curse” + “the reason behind the curse”, meeting in our world, is pure magic, for me it talks about fate and destiny, and that when two people are meant to meet, nothing can stop that…maybe im just a hopeless romantic, and like these types of stories… Also that makes Henry 100% from fairytale land, like the seer said he is more than he seems, so I bet he is going to be powerful!! so all of this is part of his history, his fairytale, and that gets me excited!!

This is why I ship SwanFire so hard! (Yes, Neal has a lot to make up for; although, Emma was no saint herself tonight.)

This is my thinking as well…it’s the perfect modern day fairytale thus far…perhaps when Neal was asking Emma if she didn’t think something good came out of it and that it was maybe fate I think that was his way of saying he thought they were meant to be. I really don’t think he has given up on her even though like you say Emma was no saint in the episode…in fact she was very unlikable to me…not even wanting Henry to tell Neal his age and then bad mouthing Neal to Henry ( saying he was a bad guy). I think deep down she might have just been trying to make herself look better than Neal because she thought she had messed up so much that Henry might want to be with Neal rather than her. Regina tried that with Henry as well…telling him Emma was nothing but a con. Hate to say it but I think she totally deserved the comment that she was just like Regina.

[Author]

Posts