- This topic has 22 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
@RG, I think you kinda said it all. But here are a few thoughts:
I think as far as morality goes, almost all cultures have prohibitions/taboos on who one may/can/should kill, eat, or have intercourse with — but what those prohibitions are varies. In this sense, it depends on what you mean by “moral relativity”. If you mean, is there one absolute/universal system of moral coordinates, then no. But should there be a system, whether individual or collective? I think this is where it gets complicated. I think, collectively, there is always a morality. But within that, individual morality may vary — including outliers, who often end up being social outcasts.
Rumple’s claim seems to be that one protects one’s loved ones by “all means necessary.” This is the Machiavellian position, I guess. We’ve seen something similar with Snowing and Lily, but unlike Snowing, Rumple’s statement that he is dark — incorporating this into his identity — allows him to forego the sort of mental gymnastics we saw from Snow White where she had to literally dehumanize Maleficient’s child to justify her actions. But that’s not surprising — the Machiavellian position if actually a quite “honest” one.
For what it’s worth, I think Rumple is digging in his heels to counteract what he perceives as Belle’s intransigence, but they will need to find a middle-ground if this is to work. Belle’s a bit black/white on things. So when Rumple counters Belle’s (over-)statement that “darkness always wins” with “I’m sorry this happened to you” — this I think speaks more to something like “I’m sorry you had to stumble into the gray area in this particular way.”
There’s another theme that emerges out of much of this: does negative … lets call it “karma” balance out with positive “karma” (can they cancel each other out, for example), or are they entirely separate “bank accounts”, as it were? If someone does a good deed, does this good deed cancel out their bad deed?
[adrotate group="5"]does negative … lets call it “karma” balance out with positive “karma” (can they cancel each other out, for example), or are they entirely separate “bank accounts”, as it were? If someone does a good deed, does this good deed cancel out their bad deed?
I don’t think the show knows. All of Hook’s crimes seem to be wiped clean by the fact that he returned to SB with the stolen bean (that he stole) at the end of S2. From then on out, it’s “hero” status for him, with the exception of Dark One Hook, and despite cursing everyone to Hell, they all go to rescue him because of some perceived sacrifice. Yet Rumple sacrificing himself for the entire town doesn’t seem to make a lick of difference to the heroes in 5A when they said he had his chance for redemption and if he dies, so be it.
But I don’t know that one action cancels out the other. Saving a child from a burning room doesn’t bring back to life the child you pushed in front of a car, to get specific.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"But as far as Belle goes, she was very strong in this last episode, until the very end. I loved that she tossed Gaston into the river. But then what do we make of her crying on Rumple’s shoulder? Is she going to give in a little to Rumple’s dark side? Does this scene actually prove she really doesn’t LIKE the beast in Rumple but maybe is fully acknowledging that in a world with magic and evil magical beings, having dark powerful magic to protect you and your baby may be worth keeping around?
I don’t think the show knows. All of Hook’s crimes seem to be wiped clean by the fact that he returned to SB with the stolen bean (that he stole) at the end of S2. From then on out, it’s “hero” status for him, with the exception of Dark One Hook, and despite cursing everyone to Hell, they all go to rescue him because of some perceived sacrifice. Yet Rumple sacrificing himself for the entire town doesn’t seem to make a lick of difference to the heroes in 5A when they said he had his chance for redemption and if he dies, so be it.
Precisely. This, and the lack of clarity on the nature of dark magic causes inconsistencies in the storytelling. On a side note — I think that the “hero/villain” distinction in OUAT can be interpreted as an emic (in-world) discourse/ideology, one that maps poorly on the experiential reality of the world being depicted. Whether that’s intentional or sort of “emerged” at some point, I really don’t know. But from that perspective the statement that Hook is a hero (or, really, anyone is a hero) should be taken with a large grain of salt. This past season, the term “hero” is increasingly used in quotations marks — last time, by Hades, if I recall.
But then what do we make of her crying on Rumple’s shoulder? Is she going to give in a little to Rumple’s dark side?
Well, the way I interpreted this was more along the lines of “Dude, this whole thing really sucks.” It felt like a very natural reaction to me — whatever we might feel about Rumbelle, these two really only have each other to lean on. They’re extremely tangential to the “heroes” — as @RG pointed out, said heroes were more than willing to toss Rumple under the bus the second it suited them, and they tend to use Belle as either Google or leverage. Even if it’s a dysfunctional marriage, I think there is a real commitment. They’re expecting a child. And they’re faced with what seems like an overwhelming external threat. Whatever their internal marital issues and philosophical disagreements might be, they’ve been put in a position where they’re de-facto allies.
This discussion reminds me of a play I learned in French class. It’s called Rhinoceros. It’s basically about how human society has to have a system of morals. Humans can think and know right from wrong, unlike animals that act on instincts and everything they do is for their own survival. So when a person rejects the morals and only thinks about their own survival than they stop being human and become… Well… A beast.
The extended use of the word beast in this episode really made me think about this play. Of course it’s the Beauty and the Beast story so they have to bring the word a couple of times, but the way it was used caused me to wonder if the writers watched this play.
You know what I can't continue with the dead people brought back to life list I'm out of space in the signature and now we have an underworld arc this is to much I quit why do you bring so many people back to life OUAT WHHHYYYY
But as far as Belle goes, she was very strong in this last episode, until the very end. I loved that she tossed Gaston into the river. But then what do we make of her crying on Rumple’s shoulder? Is she going to give in a little to Rumple’s dark side? Does this scene actually prove she really doesn’t LIKE the beast in Rumple but maybe is fully acknowledging that in a world with magic and evil magical beings, having dark powerful magic to protect you and your baby may be worth keeping around?
Belle sees the world in black and white and her idea of heroism is almost archetypical. Any break in that static view tends to throw her into confusion. This is why I think she’s so conflicted over loving the mad AND the beast not the man under the beast.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"I think Belle has always subconsciously been fascinated by the dark side of Rumple but is dominated by her compassion for others. Lacey was essentially Belle minus her compassion hence why when Rumple was playing nice she wasn’t interested but as soon as he started showing a darker side, she was all over him.
I’m really liking this new direction RumBelle has gone in. Rumple has stopped pandering to Belle’s sense of righteousness and is honest in the fact that sometimes there is no “right” way whilst Belle is not being so rigid in her definition of right and wrong. I loved the scenes where Rumple and Belle were squabbling like an old married couple because it was fun. RumBelle are FINALLY solving a problem TOGETHER.
All magic comes with a price!
Keeper of FelixRumBelle are FINALLY solving a problem TOGETHER.
Yes they are but at the same, is solving this problem–a problem that is about protecting their child which even the most bitter, angry, resentful, and split couples would rally over–really an indication of Rumbelle being able to solve all their problems. Acknowledging Belle’s love of the darkness and Rumple agreeing not to murder people and do things for nefarious reasons doesn’t erase the past deception, demands, resentful feelings, lying, ect.
Don’t get me wrong: it was fantastic to see them working together but as @nevermore put it, they are defacto allies because the issue is about their child.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"While I agree that a plurality of moral viewpoints can exist, Belle also has a strong point. Just because many people have different perspectives, that doesn’t mean there is no such thing as right or wrong. The torture of innocent children is not a good or honorable act, no matter how a person like Gaston tries to spin it.
"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
The topic ‘Morals and Points of View’ is closed to new replies.