- This topic has 153 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Love is something which is freely given, even when the beloved may not deserve it.
To bring this back to ONCE, I find this problematic in show. I’m going to use Rumbelle as an example (I could use other ships, so this isn’t a slap toward Belle and Rumple by any means).
In 201, ‘Broken,” Belle promises love to Rumple, she wants to be with Rumple, but it’s conditional. She elicits a promise from Rumple, “promise me you won’t give into hate” in regards to Regina. It’s not being freely given here, but based around a mutually agreed upon promise. (which then Rumple breaks and Belle storms off)
Or to use another ship, Snow and Charming. In S3 in NL we had Charming sick and keeping that secret from Snow. When they have their first real fight (like ever) in 307, “Dark Hollow,” Snow states that love means being together. In other words, their love is predicated on the promise that they’ll always be together. It’s a condition of their love. So was is love freely given is the people in universe are putting conditions on it in the first place?
Though, reading back over what @Slurpeez108 linked to, all those examples could be unconditional LOVE but conditional RELATIONSHIPS. Which…I find thought-provoking if problematic. If LOVE is freely given then it should also be freely taken back at any moment based on the actions, deeds, thoughts, ect of the person to whom the love was given.
[adrotate group="5"]"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Hmm, I never thought of those two examples as conditional love. Gotta revise that section again…Interesting though. 🙂
If LOVE is freely given then it should also be freely taken back at any moment based on the actions, deeds, thoughts, ect. of the person to whom the love was given.Â
Yes.
Though, reading back over what @Slurpeez108 linked to, all those examples could be unconditional LOVE but conditional RELATIONSHIPS. Which…I find thought-provoking if problematic. If LOVE is freely given then it should also be freely taken back at any moment based on the actions, deeds, thoughts, ect of the person to whom the love was given.
Well, in those examples, I don’t think that love could be taken back “at any moment” since the couples in question truly love each other, despite everything, and probably would continue doing so, even if the relationship conditions weren’t met. Now, whether those couples would continue to have a successful, healthy partnership is another matter entirely.
In my opinion, having a successful, healthy relationship comes down to mutual reciprocity, as well as commitment. Do both partners not only feel love and respected, but also secure? If an error is made, do both couples show true repentance and forgiveness? Are the partners able to admit when they’re wrong? If a condition of the relationship is not met, then one may ask how serious an offense is it? Is one mistake worth dissolving the relationship? Do the “mistakes” keep happening? How high is the level of commitment one has made and what is the threshold level one has for what is considered tolerable or intolerable?
Also, when I say love is freely given, I don’t mean that love wins out over everything else or that it is even the biggest determining factor in deciding to go forward in a relationship. That is the mistake I feel lots stories make, which is to assume that the initial feeling of euphoria is love, that it will last without any relationship issues, and that it’s the only important thing, which is why Romeo and Juliet ended so tragically. What I mean is love is a choice one makes, and when coupled with wise-decision making, mutual cooperation, and good communication, can lead to a very fulfilling, healthy and mutually beneficial long-term relationship. Of course, one can choose to end an unhealthy relationship. It just depends, again, on what one can put up, what is considered to be mutually beneficial or destructive to one or both parties involved.
Bringing it back to OUAT, does Belle have her breaking point with Rumple lying and killing people, and if not, is that healthy for her own sake? She didn’t bat an eyelash when she discovered he’d murdered his first wife. How will she react when she finds out he lied to her this time? With Snow and Charming, she had one expectation to be together with Charming all of the time, probably because for most of S1 they were separated due to fake fiancees, the Evil Queen, and the dark curse, so her expectation was that in marriage they’d always together. Charming, however, also had an equally valid notion that sometimes love means sacrifice. As a man who may be expected to fight battles, he carried this in mind whenever he slew a dragon or fought someone. He thought he was putting his wife first. Yet, both Charming and Snow seem happy enough to continue their marriage. Is that healthy or co-dependent? I’m not sure, but I think that Snow and Charming always find a way to work things out for both of them. They literally share one heart. That may be sweet, but also oddly discomforting if one of them drops dead.
"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
In my opinion, having a successful, healthy relationship comes down to mutual reciprocity, as well as commitment. Do both partners not only feel love and respected, but also secure? If an error is made, do both couples show true repentance and forgiveness?
I agree with this, though I’m going to qualify the last bit about respect. It’s possible to FEEL love and respect but not be respected in actuality. Someone can say that they respect you, but then their actions prove otherwise. To use one ship on ONCE as an example: Rumple loves Belle, I will never question that. But respect…he might say he does. But his actions–going after Regina in 201, lying to her throughout most of 204, not telling her the whole truth in 211, killing Zelena after making some more promises–seems to suggest that his words and actions do not match up. Rumple’s own selfish desires to keep secrets, have magic, and have power keep appearing to outweigh any respect he would claim to have for Belle. And for Nealfire, if we want to extend this to parental/child love.
Belle has this great line in 317 about “self-respect” when she initially refuses to help Regina because Regina did horrible things to Belle in the past. But when/if Belle learns what Rumple has done at the end of S3 and her stance is “that’s okay, it’s just part of who you are,” then I have to question not only Belle’s self-respect but question even more the respect Rumple has for Belle.
To use another example: Regina might claim that she respects Robin, but does she really if she ends up going after Marian with every intention of killing or at least removing Marian as an obstacle? Is that respectful to Robin and Roland?
Again, actions and words not matching up. They should align but there seems to be a disconnect, which calls into question the healthy bit of these relationships.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"I agree with this, though I’m going to qualify the last bit about respect. It’s possible to FEEL love and respect but not be respected in actuality. Someone can say that they respect you, but then their actions prove otherwise.
Yes, I agree very much. Replace what I wrote with does each partner “feel” love/respect with does each partner have love/respect for the other.
"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
If LOVE is freely given then it should also be freely taken back at any moment based on the actions, deeds, thoughts, ect of the person to whom the love was given.
I disagree. Humans can’t just turn their emotions off as if they were flipping a switch. If it were that easy then you wouldn’t have people staying with abusive partners for so long or you wouldn’t have people crying over a relationship that has recently failed.
For example, if your partner cheats on you, you are going to be upset and probably end the relationship. You recognise that the relationship needed to end because of the betrayal, you’re upset about it because you still love them. Nobody in a serious relationship that has failed just moves on no big deal, it takes time to rid yourself of those feeling of love for the other person.
All magic comes with a price!
Keeper of FelixIf LOVE is freely given then it should also be freely taken back at any moment based on the actions, deeds, thoughts, ect of the person to whom the love was given.
I disagree. Humans can’t just turn their emotions off as if they were flipping a switch. If it were that easy then you wouldn’t have people staying with abusive partners for so long or you wouldn’t have people crying over a relationship that has recently failed. For example, if your partner cheats on you, you are going to be upset and probably end the relationship. You recognise that the relationship needed to end because of the betrayal, you’re upset about it because you still love them. Nobody in a serious relationship that has failed just moves on no big deal, it takes time to rid yourself of those feeling of love for the other person.
I didn’t say that the love doesn’t exist anymore. But it’s mine to give and it’s mine to take back. It might still exist in that I have feelings for the offending party, but just because it exists doesn’t mean that you get to have it.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Ok, so I just read the last 10 pages…I think I’m fairly decently caught up…?!
To me, A&E have used the last three seasons to define concepts integral to the overall story. We have defined ‘family,’ ‘hope,’ and ‘home’ – which, to me are the 3 biggest concepts so far. Next, I think we’re going to take those concepts to further look at the concept of ‘true love’. I suspect, with what we know about S4, we’re going to see more emphasis on true love that is not romantic. We’ve seen in S1 and S3, when Emma and Regina each broke a curse with TL kiss with Henry, so in OUAT-verse, we have learned TL is not limited to romantic love. I would assume, since A&E have confirmed Elsa does not have a romantic partner, they’re going to use Frozen to introduce a healthy sibling relationship. I’m hoping we see the show re-focus on Henry as a central character, since everyone and their mother is related to the kid, and watch various characters’ relationships with Henry develop – primarily his relationship with Rumple.
In regard to the romantic love – Snowing: co-dependent to the point of ridiculousness, and frankly, I’m hoping their parenting skills develop with the lil Royal. I do find their actions regarding Emma to be unrealistic.   As a parent, I don’t care who I’m saving or why I’m doing it, there is NO WAY I’m sticking my kid in some tree thing to send them to goodness knows where. While I don’t think Snow’s desire to have another child because they missed out on raising Emma is as heinous as some do, I DO have a huge problem with Snow’s declaration that she would stay in NL with Charming as opposed to return to SB with Emma. I don’t know why they tend to portray Snow as totally turning a blind eye to their decisions regarding Emma, or what Emma went through as a result. I hope we do learn more about it, because IF I had given up my child, only to learn their childhood was – at best – miserable and lonely, and see that as an adult they’re barely capable of functioning emotionally…my duty is to my child. Snowing need to realize they made some huge errors in judgment – and that’s putting it mildly. The more I think about it, those decisions are almost as bad as some of the decisions the villains have made….(probably unpopular thought, I know)
Which is probably why I don’t tend to have the same issues with the villains that some do. Yes, if we ran into Rumple, Regina or Hook in our world, we wouldn’t be forgiving of them AT ALL. However, when you look at their actions in the context of the EF, for me, they’re a little more acceptable. I think Regina and Hook have worked far more diligently to redeem themselves than Rumple. Yes, they’ve backslid and no, neither one is by any means a saint. But I think their desire to turn their lives around for those they love is far stronger than Rumple’s. So –
CaptainSwan — at this point, I’m ok with what Emma & Hook have divulged to each other and what they haven’t. I think they know each other well…they know they have more to learn, and I think they know there’s also a lot of negative to be learned about each other – whether it be their own actions, or experiences that inhibit them from fully functioning in a romantic relationship. There’s only so much you can learn about someone – I’ve been with my husband for 7 years; I know the kind of person he is, and I know most of his stories and what makes him the person he is, but I certainly don’t know everything. In every kind of relationship, you are constantly learning about the other person.
Outlaw Queen — the ‘because the pixie dust told me so’ justification is, indeed, weak. I think I can buy Outlaw Queen, not because pixie dust says they’re TL, but because they ARE in the beginning of a relationship. It’s new and until Marian came back, they hadn’t moved past the ‘honeymoon stage’ where everything is roses and wonderful and love is love and blah blah let’s-make-everyone-around-us-vomit. I do buy the instant attraction – and even the snippets of the lost year in the EF that we’ve seen show 2 people who are attracted to each other, though begrudgingly. I don’t buy they’re actually in love yet, because I don’t buy the whole pixie dust is omniscient spiel. And they’re obviously about to hit a huge….hurdle….in their relationship.
RumBelle — Belle, Belle, Belle. I do actually find this relationship toxic. Firstly, because the thing that sets villain Rumple aside from villains Regina and Hook – again, for me – is that Rumple really has no desire to change, and certainly hasn’t done anything to change. I think he feels perfectly justified in killing Zelena and lying to Belle. Because Belle has allowed this from the very beginning. As mentioned, Belle DOES know a lot of what Rumple has done – and she is well aware of what are possibly the worst things he’s done – kill the mother of his own child, and abandon that child in favor of his power. Say what you will about Hook and Regina – to me, I do believe at this point in time, that Regina would give anything and everything for Henry, and Hook for Emma. Belle has that same ‘blind eye’ that Snow has — and to me, if she continues to turn a blind eye to Rumple’s present-day actions, then said blindness is just as bad as the evil actions themselves. Rumple’s actions regarding Zelena are not justifyable in my opinion – because I don’t think it’s what Neal would have wanted! If someone would have huge issue with you avenging their death by killing the person you blame for said death, then you’re avenging nothing; that killing is the same as killing some random stranger on the street with no motive (not that killing is justifyable at all…but for purposes of the argument).
And with that I end my ridiculously long post.
To me, A&E have used the last three seasons to define concepts integral to the overall story. We have defined ‘family,’ ‘hope,’ and ‘home’ – which, to me are the 3 biggest concepts so far
I am about to agree and disagree. I think HOME and FAMILY have been more or less clearly defined. Home and family go hand in hand on ONCE and as long as you one, you have the other. It’s a basic, bare bones definition that hasn’t been nuanced the way those terms and concepts are in real life, but I’m more willing to let this one slide since the show isn’t concerned with modern complexities in this regard.
Hope…is whatever Adam and Eddy decide it is in that episode because hope in what exactly? In love? In family? In happy endings? In heroes? In good? In not getting caught when you do something bad? In pre-S1, Emma’s label for her character poster was both “The Savior” and “The Hope.” Is Emma the definition of hope?
Next, I think we’re going to take those concepts to further look at the concept of ‘true love
It’s not even the concept of true love I’m concerned with.It’s just LOVE. Friendship love which has become almost invisible. Parental love which is probably the most well defined on the show because it’s a very BASIC love–except they complicate it with Cora/Regina, Pan/Rumple, ect.
I’m hoping we see the show re-focus on Henry as a central character, since everyone and their mother is related to the kid, and watch various characters’ relationships with Henry develop – primarily his relationship with Rumple.
*snarky RG comment here that is only acceptable because @Jenna_B and I like each other* 😉
Which is probably why I don’t tend to have the same issues with the villains that some do. Yes, if we ran into Rumple, Regina or Hook in our world, we wouldn’t be forgiving of them AT ALL. However, when you look at their actions in the context of the EF, for me, they’re a little more acceptable. I think Regina and Hook have worked far more diligently to redeem themselves than Rumple. Yes, they’ve backslid and no, neither one is by any means a saint. But I think their desire to turn their lives around for those they love is far stronger than Rumple’s. So –
Yes, this is something to take into consideration. The characters are mostly archetypes and exist in a mythic way, meaning that their actions match what we expect “villains” and anti heroes do in a mythic realm. HOWEVER, this is a show about those mythic figures existing in our reality, so I can’t dissociate entirely from their actions because it gives those characters–Regina, Hook, Rumple–license to do whatever they want simply because “they are fairy tale characters”
The more I think about it, those decisions are almost as bad as some of the decisions the villains have made….(probably unpopular thought, I know)
People might not agree with this in particular, but the more we talk, the more people are opening up that they do find Snowing to be VERY problematic, especially in regards to Emma and their idea of parenting.
I’ve been with my husband for 7 years; I know the kind of person he is, and I know most of his stories and what makes him the person he is, but I certainly don’t know everything. In every kind of relationship, you are constantly learning about the other person.
I…hesitate here because this is not a defend your ship thread and if it turns into this I’m going cry. And we all know I don’t ship CS. So this is going to brief and with the understanding that I’m respond to the overall idea not bashing the ship. But, there is a difference between learning that your partner doesn’t actually like your lasagna or prefers a certain kind of laundry detergent and learning that your partner has committed the kind of crimes Hook/Rumple/Regina have.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"
The topic ‘Love and Romance on OUAT: What's the Message?’ is closed to new replies.