Emma Swan Character Analysis

[Rainbow]

But I think she makes it pretty clear that although she still loves him, she needs to move on and does not want to be with him.

Like u said u interpreted that way, but if she was pretty clear in move on, why when Charming talked to her about she meeting Neal and try to see where that went, she went with him, but of course pan drama happened, she was scared of meeting Neal, bc she wanted to go see where that was going but she was afraid of suffering, in fact was Emma that called the coffee a date, neal only said they had to talk about many things, which was true, they had a son together. About Tamara, she beat Tamara after she shot Neal,  and lets not forget that after she says she Loves Neal and needs him, u cant move on from a 10 year love like that, bc you cant love a person during 10 years and pretend that person never existed 2 days after she died and start a new relation the same time, in the end the problem goes back to the writing, writers  wrote some characters  and i would say Emma was the one that suffered the most,  even more than Rumple,  since she lost her sense of justice and became selfish, she and other characters as long as they are fine, dont care others are suffering, the Emma of S1, again not mentioning walls, if she had the chance to go to UW, she would say, lets bring all our love ones, bc they deserve a chance to live, did she thought that she could bring Neal bc he was her friend, her father son, wouldnt that have been a better argument to make Rumple come along, instead the writers made Emma black mail Rumple using belle, in order to get what she wanted, the sad is none of the things that happened in 5A will be mentioned ever again.

[thedarkonedearie]

So while her moment with Nimue is a powerful one, it matters very little in the end because her entire story and arc once again is reduced to Hook.

I think it clearly matters a lot.  As a result of her actions, yes Hook became a DO.  But I really do not blame her for thinking she will find a way to rid the darkness at a later point.  In that moment, she was losing the person she claimed to love, and all she wanted to do was save him.  Some look at that as selfish, but I do not.  I can understand why she did what she did.  Once again, if saving someone’s life is giving into the darkness, then idk anymore.

But yes, her arc was reduced to Hook. But really, I think the writers went that route simply because Emma was too strong to give in to be a horrible person.  Ok, yes, she “gave in” when she turned Hook, but she also saved his life.  It’s unfortunate bc a really dark swan would have made more a nice segway into the back half.  But clearly the writers felt it was more realistic for Hook to receive the darkness and turn into this horrible person than it would be for Emma to do it.  But at the end of the day, a bf helping her gf go though what is arguably her biggest struggle of her life seems completely reasonable, and the only thing I’ll agree with you on, is Hook stealing her arc in the last two episodes.  Like Emma needed help.  Why is it so bad that Hook was helping her?  I get others should have helped more, but that’s more of a knock on their behaviors than Emma’s.  Just because Hook was there to try and help her doesn’t mean she isn’t heroic and doesn’t mean Hook was the main focus.  At least when I watched it, I didn’t see it that way.  However the vendettas on here against Hook could affect how people perceive certain actions and phrases.

But it’s not him helping her. He isn’t there as an emotional support system while Emma fights herself. It’s Hook literally being the cure. Hook becomes the actor in her life. He has to take her and tell her to get on the horse. He has to get her out of the castle. He has to help her limp out, mute, from a room. He isn’t just there while Emma’s internal struggle plays out on screen, which would be understandable and more acceptable. He’s literally being the agent in the story.

Why is it so bad that Hook is her cure?  Love is supposed to be strength right?  If he’s there as an emotional support system then ok fine.  But I think it says something more that Hook took a more involved role with helping her.  And it worked.  I can’t help but think that if Neal was doing this instead of Hook, you wouldn’t think this way.  The writers are trying to tell us that Hook is important for Emma.  Whether you buy that or not, that is what they are saying.  Hook was able to help her when she needed it.  It doesn’t make her weak.  It shows that apparently, her love for Hook is important and that he is not useless.  IT shows that you truly does care for him, bc he was able to pull her out of the darkness.  Sure, Emma fought it herself in Nimue, but you are right, Hook helped a lot.  But I just don’t automatically associate that with weakness.

[Slurpeez]

So then shouldn’t she feel responsible for what Hook did as a result of making him become the DO? Shouldn’t she want to go save him?

She did feel responsible for turning him into a dark one, but she doesn’t need to feel responsible for what he did as the dark one. He is still the one who chose to unleash the former dark ones. Thus, Emma doesn’t “need to” feel compelled to resurrect him after he nearly murdered her family; the onus is on Hook for that. I question Emma’s judgment as a mother. Emma’s first thoughts should be for the safety of her son, whom Hook deliberately tried to harm. I don’t think Emma is in any way morally obligated to get Hook back, nor do I think Henry should be tagging along to Hell. It shows a horrible lack of judgment on Emma’s (and Regina’s) parts.

I feel like you can’t feel like Hook was responsible for his actions, but then say it’s Emma’s fault.

First of all, please, don’t tell me how I can or cannot feel. It’s patronizing. You’re entitled to have your own opinions about fictional characters and a fictional relationship; I’m entitled to mine. But you don’t get to dictate what other people can or cannot feel. If we cannot even agree to have a difference of opinion without trying to dictate how the other person ought to feel, then what’s the point?

Next, both characters can be guilty simultaneously. If Emma is responsible for what she did as the dark one, then so is Hook responsible for what he did. One person’s guilt doesn’t somehow omit another character’s guilt. I think both of them are at fault. I think that Emma was at fault for betraying him, and Hook was at fault for then betraying her in return by summoning Nimue and the dark ones. In fact, I think it was very unheroic of both of them.

You either think that Emma, who has been afraid to love because she always loses the ones closest to her, did not want to lose someone she cares about and felt she could get the darkness out of him and figure it out. She chose to keep him alive, selfish reasons or not. If you think you love somebody, I imagine it’s pretty hard to just let them go.

Emma chose to keep him alive out of fear, but that doesn’t mitigate that it was a huge betrayal from Hook’s perspective. Sure, it might be hard to let someone go, but in this case, it would’ve been more heoric of Emma to let Hook go. It was his dying wish; he pleaded with her to let him die than tether him to the sword, because he really didn’t want to to be made into the thing he hated most (i.e. the dark one). In Hook’s opinion, it was a worse fate than death.

Later after he found out what Emma did to him, Hook said, “How could you do this to me?” He was angry and wanted to get revenge on Emma, but he is still responsible for his choices the same as Emma was responsible for her choices. Both are guilty of betraying the trust of the other.

I understand her wanting to save him, and although the show says that was her giving into the darkness, it just didn’t feel that way.

Okay, you may not see it that way, but that is what happened in the story. Emma actually went from wearing all white to all black, signifying she fully became the dark one the instant she tethered Hook to that sword.

If saving someone from death is darkness, then idk anymore. So she saved him, but then Hook, very much in control of his actions, was horrible. So you either think that, or you think Emma was selfish and it’s her fault look did what he did.

The world isn’t that black and white. Both Emma and Hook are at fault, just for different things. Emma is guilty of making another dark one. Hook is guilty of nearly sending Emma’s family to hell, killing Merlin and casting another dark curse. Both were dark ones, but both are still guilty of different crimes.

And if that’s the case, and you are thinking about it in Emma’s eyes, wouldn’t you want to save the guy you think you love who just sacrificed himself after a darkness battle he only had to endure because you made him this way?

Heck no! If someone tried to murder my child and family, I would not be trying to resurrect him, no matter how guilty I felt. Admittedly, Hook did the right thing the end, but he merely put out a fire he himself started. If Emma is responsible for her actions as the dark one than so is Hook. I get that Emma feels guilty about what she did, but that doesn’t excuse Hook for what he said and did to Emma and her family. Even though he then died in an eleventh-hour turn-about, he still was guilty of doing horrible things.

"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

[RumplesGirl]

So then shouldn’t she feel responsible for what Hook did as a result of making him become the DO? Shouldn’t she want to go save him?

No one is denying that anyone would want to save someone they love–well, except when it came to Neal (an actual hero who never tried to send a few dozen people to hell only to have a slight modification in conscious) whom Emma insists we have to let stay dead because he died a hero and we can’t take that away from him, never mind that Neal’s existence was important to more than just Emma, say like to her son and maybe to Neal’s father and father’s wife…

What was my point again? Oh right. That was it.

My point is this: it’s natural that someone would want to save someone they loved, we even see it with Neal and Belle when they trek out to save Rumple. The biggest issue I have is that Emma declares Hook a hero who made the ultimate sacrifice and therefore he should be saved because heroes get a second chance. Up-thread you compared Rumple and Hook’s sacrifice and said that while different, they were the same.

Well. No.

Because here’s where intent comes in. You can’t look at two sacrifices as if they exist in a bubble and call them the same simply because in both cases someone died. Intent matters.

Here’s Rumple’s intent:

*Peter Pan is planning on killing everyone*

*Rumple, knowing he’s a villain who doesn’t get a happy ending, decides to kill the plague that was Pan, save his family, and die in the process*

*Town is saved*

Here’s Hook’s intent:

*Hook is planning on killing Emma’s entire family and close circle of friends by sending them to the Underworld and letting the Dark Ones take their place*

*Emma prepares to kill Hook for this thus reclaiming some of her agency in this story*

*Hook, because of Regina–of all people??–is persuaded to not do this thing because he gets to decide what sort of man to be*

*Hook decides to die for his crimes and calls it heroic thus taking away some of Emma’s agency because now Emma needs permission to kill the guy who was going to send her family to Hell*

*Emma takes entire family to Underworld to rescue Hook*

I don’t call that sacrifice and I certainly don’t call it heroic sacrifice. You can call it comeuppance, you can call it justice, whatever. But I don’t call it sacrifice. We’re supposed to be talking about Emma so here’s me returning to her–Emma has lost perspective on justice, cosmic reality, the true horror of what Hook has done as the DO (both to her personally and to her family). All that matters, we are told, is that Emma get her boyfriend back, a boyfriend with whom Emma (and here it’s important to note that Regina gives the all important “it could work” line thereby telling the audience that yes, what Emma believes about her and Hook has weight) apparently shares a love that is the equivalent to Snow and Charming.

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[thedarkonedearie]

Heck no! If someone tried to murder my child and family, I would not be trying to resurrect him, no matter how guilty I felt. Admittedly, Hook did the right thing the end, but merely put out a fire he himself started. If Emma is responsible for her actions as the dark one than so is Hook. I get that Emma feels guilty about what she did, but that doesn’t excuse Hook for what he said and did to Emma and her family.Even though he then died in an eleventh-hour turn-about, he still was guilty of doing horrible things.

But none of that would have happened if Emma hadn’t done what she did.  It was her actions that started it all.  If she lets him die, Hook doesn’t get controlled by the darkness.  So I think they aren’t so different as you say they are.  If you blame Emma for tethering Hook, then I don’t think you can blame Hook.  He warned her.  He said he would be terrible.  And she didn’t listen.  I guess it’s hard for me to blame Hook, if Emma is the reason Hook was in that predicament in the first place.  They both did very unheroic things, but Hook doesn’t do those things if Emma doesn’t do her thing first.

And I’m not patronizing you.  When I say things like, “I feel like you can’t feel like Hook was responsible for his actions, but then say it’s Emma’s fault,” I don’t mean you personally.  I’m just saying in general I don’t understand that line of thinking.  You are certainly entitled to have your own opinions.  I’m not dictating anything at all.  I was debating your reasoning because I didn’t quite agree with it.  Just as you are entitled to having your opinion, I am entitled to disagree without without someone saying I’m the thought police.  RG and I go back and forth saying the word “you” all the time and I certainly don’t take it be offensive at all.  We just disagree about literally everything haha.  But I’m sorry I made you feel that way.  It was certainly not my intention.

[RumplesGirl]

Once again, if saving someone’s life is giving into the darkness, then idk anymore

But that is literally what the show told you! Literally, Emma saves a life and goes Dark Swan and the darkness is doubled over. You don’t know anymore, and neither do I, but it’s exactly what the show showed and told. And then proceeded to tell us that this is the mark of love.

I get others should have helped more, but that’s more of a knock on their behaviors than Emma’s.

Except Emma shuts the others out, refuses to talk to them (Snow and Regina even call her on this in episode 510), BLAMES the others (claiming that they let HER down), and stole their memories. Snow and Charming lament, the entire season, that Emma won’t talk to them, that she won’t open up, that she distanced herself, that whenever they do try to talk–she vanishes, run, makes a bad comment, ect. Even in the end, she won’t go to Granny’s to be with them.

I can’t help but think that if Neal was doing this instead of Hook, you wouldn’t think this way.

Well thanks for putting words in my mouth instead of asking me. Really, that’s the best way to go. Because I really love when people speak for me.

So instead, I’ll just repeat what I said once.

There is something so insulting about making Emma’s hero journey, her path from darkness back to the light, all about her love interest. Now, would I say the same thing if it had been Nealfire? Maybe, but with a caveat that if it had been Neal, the narrative would have been weightier and more poetic. Nealfire turning into a Dark One at the hands of his true love, another father having to deal with being a Dark One to his son? Emma and Neal trying to work together to save each other? Henry and Rumple working to save both of them, their father/son and mother/Savior? That’s poetry. That’s storytelling that touches on so many of the themes this show began with, like family and sacrifice. But like so much this season, it felt as though the story was given to Hook only because the real character it was meant for is six feet underground. Now, I would have had issues with Emma’s journey centering around a love interest and a man, even if it was Neal, because Emma is her own woman and her decision to go villain should rest on her own impetus, not born out of her role as a lover (as opposed to a independent woman, daughter, mother, savior or really any combination of those elements).

Sure, Emma fought it herself in Nimue, but you are right, Hook helped a lot. But I just don’t automatically associate that with weakness.

I’m only going to say this once more: He’s not helping her–he’s the agent. There’s a big difference. One is being a support system but letting Emma direct her own story. The other is actually being the director while Emma takes a proverbial backseat. One is acceptable. One is not.

 

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[thedarkonedearie]

No one is denying that anyone would want to save someone they love–well, except when it came to Neal (an actual hero who never tried to send a few dozen people to hell only to have a slight modification in conscious) whom Emma insists we have to let stay dead because he died a hero and we can’t take that away from him, never mind that Neal’s existence was important to more than just Emma, say like to her son and maybe to Neal’s father and father’s wife…

You are definitely right here.  Why she is so intent on saving Hook, but was willing to let Neal die makes no sense.  And the only thing I can think of is the fact that maybe Emma assumed it wasn’t possible back then when Neal died.  Did she know about Snow splitting her heart then?  I don’t beleive so.  Did she know about the UW and that they could easily access it through Rumple?  I’d like to think that is he had all the information she has now back then, she would have tried to save Neal too.  But alas, I’m speculating.

The whole sacrifice thing….yes, they are different.  One person caused the problem.  But again, if you look at it like it is Emma’s fault and that none of this would have happened if she just did the “heroic” thing and let Hook die, then you could see Hook’s actions as not entirely his fault.  And if you do that, then the scene where he lets Emma kill him to negate everything he did, looks more like a sacrifice.  You could maybe look at it as if he’s rising above the addiction, finally able to fend off the darkness that Emma forced into him.  And lets Emma kill himself to save everyone.  I’m just saying the whole last two episodes are so messy and really can be interpreted in a few different ways.

[thedarkonedearie]

Well thanks for putting words in my mouth instead of asking me. Really, that’s the best way to go. Because I really love when people speak for me.

Not trying to put words in your mouth.  I said I couldn’t help but feel you would think it differently.  I’m not saying you do feel that way.

[RumplesGirl]

You are definitely right here. Why she is so intent on saving Hook, but was willing to let Neal die makes no sense. And the only thing I can think of is the fact that maybe Emma assumed it wasn’t possible back then when Neal died. Did she know about Snow splitting her heart then? I don’t beleive so. Did she know about the UW and that they could easily access it through Rumple? I’d like to think that is he had all the information she has now back then, she would have tried to save Neal too. But alas, I’m speculating.

The most OOC moment in the history of Rumple’s character is him drinking that potion when Emma (who, to Rumple at that moment, was perfect stranger) told him to. He insists that he could find a way to save his son, to prevent his death and Emma insists that Neal stay dead. I’m not naive. I *get* TV and business. I know that this was the writers telling the audience “it’s not going to happen!” (the same can be said for S4 ending with Henry and the Apprentice and the snapping of the pen–again, it’s the writers telling “its not going to happen!”). But the fact that now we’re watching Emma go save a guy who tried to send her entire family to Hell—forgive me if I can’t swallow that, Neal factor totally aside, it’s an odd narrative that speaks not only, IMO, of Emma’s shift in character from strong woman to “Hook’s girlfriend” but the entire shift of the show from family to romantic love.

But again, if you look at it like it is Emma’s fault and that none of this would have happened if she just did the “heroic” thing and let Hook die, then you could see Hook’s actions as not entirely his fault.

Then Emma never learns–which goes back to my second question about her character progress. She didn’t learn from her mistakes. She continues to be foolhardy, rush into action, and put her own selfishness before the concerns of others. I mean, did she even stop to ask if her parents were okay about the almost going to Hell thingy? Instead her selfish need to have Hook in her life is driving the story. Question one and question two rest on that idea.

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[thedarkonedearie]

And for the record, I think you are right, it would have been way better with Neal, despite the issues some of us have with Emma taking a backseat.

And with Hook, I get it, you believe he was the agent.  I just didn’t see it that way.  I saw it as him helping her.  And if him helping her was the biggest reason she pulled away from the darkness, then I’m not sure why that’s so bad.  Why is it bad to take control and be the “agent.”  Maybe he thought she wouldn’t be able to direct her own story and still not succumb to the darkness.  She still had to get on the horse.  He’s not forcing her to do anything.  I really just didn’t see it as him being an agent.

[Author]

Posts