- This topic has 55 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 11 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Thank you RumplesGirl.
You are right, there are lines you do not cross when it comes to family and I’m sorry, but I will continue to stand that I strongly feel like Neal crossed that line with Rumple.
I sincerely hope this doesn’t send Rumple over the edge, though I suspect it might because he just lost his will to live again.
If Rumple does go dark, Neal abandoning him will be a direct consequence of that. That will be Neal’s fault.
[adrotate group="5"]I think this discussion has diverged into two different interpretations of the original statement: a dramatic parallel vs a moral parallel. The original post said:
1) When Neal abandoned his father and immobilized him with the squid ink did anyone else think of how Emma abandoned Hook on the beanstalk and how that came back to bite her.
Neal must sooner rather than later come to realization that he is his father’s son. The more he denies it the bigger the rift he has got to drop the anger or I fear Henry will fall into the family trap.
It seemed to me that storyteller was was pointing out a dramatic parallel in which Neal’s actions make us recall Rumple’s actions, not necessarily a moral parallel which says Neal’s actions are morally equivalent to his father’s actions (correct me if I’m wrong, storyteller). But it seems to me that much of the discussion has become about moral parallels between the actions of Neal and Rumple, i.e. was Neal justified in abandoning Rumple?
Personally, I agree with kfchimera that Neal was justified, but that didn’t make me feel any less pain for poor Rumple. This show does an amazing job of creating complex, sympathetic villains and we must remember that we know more of their inner struggles than do most of the other characters. As a viewer, I was fully convinced that Rumple intended to sacrifice himself for Henry when Neal decided to paralyze him but I also understood Neal’s actions which were based upon what he has seen of his father. I was fully convinced that Neal originally intended to trust his father. That’s what made the scene so powerful. And in the best tradition of tragedy, it now appears Neal’s actions may cause his father to relapse into the very behavior that Neal feared. That’s why I said in a previous post that “…it wouldn’t be a very good story” if Neal had stayed with Rumple. And let’s not forget the theme which has been stressed that Neverland makes people revert to their past.I do think they are drawing more and more dramatic parallels between Neal and Rumple and showing us how, now that he has a son to protect, Neal might start to take more and more desperate action to protect him. I think using Roland as bait was another example of Neal’s desperation. I know he had experience with the shadow, so he had ample reasons to believe that he could protect Roland, but putting a child at risk, even minimal risk, has clearly upset enough fans that we can say the writers got their point across – Neal is slipping toward using more Rumple-like ways to reunite himself with Henry. Again, that’s not to say he is doing things as bad as Rumple has done, just to show us there is a tendency leading that way. Now if Pan’s manipulations turn Henry against Neal, as I think they will, we’ll have three generations who have to reconcile.
Finally, I love the reference to Joseph Campbell, storyteller! I think Eddy and Adam must have a copy of The Hero with a Thousand Faces on their desks. After all, George Lucas said he did and they are big Star Wars fans.
Neal had two bad choices in front of him. Neither were ideal, however I think staying with Rumple would have been the least worst of the two. Perhaps Neal was weighing up his choices of what could’ve happened and leaving seemed like the better choice.
If he stayed, Rumple COULD have killed Henry and if he went he COULD have found Emma. The possibility of the latter choice seemed more beneficial and more enticing than the possibility of the former.
However, what COULD have happened and what DID happen were two totally different things.
All magic comes with a price!
Keeper of FelixNeal had two bad choices in front of him.
I think this is a really valid point. Rock and hard place.
Option One: Stay with Papa and worry constantly that he might kill your child BUT have his super handy dandy magic to ward off psychotic 17 yr old demon and work on 250yr old relationship that is..er…complicated
Option Two: Leave Papa and run smack into the heart of darkness jungle where you might find the other SBers but you might also find Pan who just so happens to want to rip your childs heart.
Neal said before he left, “we’re safer without you.” and it did turn out that this wasn’t the case.
But I think he made a *parent’s* decision. One that a parent can make.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"It seemed to me that storyteller was was pointing out a dramatic parallel in which Neal’s actions make us recall Rumple’s actions, not necessarily a moral parallel which says Neal’s actions are morally equivalent to his father’s actions (correct me if I’m wrong, storyteller).
You hit the nail on the head. Symbolically he is his father’s son and I believe the realization of that will be his release from the samsara he finds himself in. Thanks and follow your bliss.
Custodian of Graham's darts, Rumple's spindle and Robin's quiver
timespacer wrote: It seemed to me that storyteller was was pointing out a dramatic parallel in which Neal’s actions make us recall Rumple’s actions, not necessarily a moral parallel which says Neal’s actions are morally equivalent to his father’s actions (correct me if I’m wrong, storyteller).
You hit the nail on the head. Symbolically he is his father’s son and I believe the realization of that will be his release from the samsara he finds himself in. Thanks and follow your bliss.
*intense lover of Joseph Campbell!!* He was a big reason why I went into what I did, academically. I meant to say that when I was typing before.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"timespacer wrote:
It seemed to me that storyteller was was pointing out a dramatic parallel in which Neal’s actions make us recall Rumple’s actions, not necessarily a moral parallel which says Neal’s actions are morally equivalent to his father’s actions (correct me if I’m wrong, storyteller).
You hit the nail on the head. Symbolically he is his father’s son and I believe the realization of that will be his release from the samsara he finds himself in.
I think Neal already realizes he is his father’s son, at least partially. Going back to “Manhattan,” Neal and Emma had a little conversation regarding Henry and cycles of abandonment. Emma confronted him about abandoing her the way he was abandoned, and Neal acknowledged they’re all messed up and said he wanted to avoid the same mistake with Henry.
Emma: He wants to meet you.
Neal: You weren’t going to tell me about him.
Emma: No, I wasn’t.
Neal: Yeah, well, he’s my kid, too, so you don’t get to make that decision by yourself anymore.
Emma: Great. Go talk to him, then. But… Don’t break his heart.
Neal: Trust me – I’m not going do to him what he did to me.
Emma: Or what you did to me.
Neal: Okay. I get it. We’re all messed up. What do you say we try to avoid that with him? Alright?
Emma: Alright.That is why he’s trying so hard now to reunite with Henry and Emma. Ironically, by choosing to put Henry first before his father, Neal is making a thematically similar choice to one his dad once made. Rumple chose to sacrifice an entire world for another to find his son while Neal chose to sever his relationship with his dad to protect his son. In “Desperate Souls” Rumple said, “All I’ve got is my boy, and they’re going to take him away from me.” In “Quite a Common Fairy,” Neal said, “All I’ve got is my boy and Emma.” So, I fully acknowledge that Neal is making some tough decisions in a way to reunite with his family in a way that thematically parallels the though decision that Rumple made to try and reunite with Neal. If anything, being a father himself may help Neal eventually realize why his father created the dark curse. Yet, I don’t see Neal becoming the next Dark One just because he potentially could understand his father more. He’s not just like his father, in the sense that we’ve seen Neal be brave and sacrifice himself for others before (e.g. the Darlings and then when he let go of Emma so as not to leave Henry parentless). Now, it’s time for Rumple to step up and prove Neal wrong.
"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
“We have not even to risk the adventure alone; for the heroes of all time have gone before us, the labyrinth is fully known; we have only to follow the thread of the hero-path. And where we had thought to find an abomination, we shall find a god; where we had thought to slay another, we shall slay ourselves; where we had thought to travel outward, we shall come to the center of our own existence; where we had thought to be alone, we shall be with all the world.” -Joseph Campbell:
Mask, metaphor and adulthood:
Custodian of Graham's darts, Rumple's spindle and Robin's quiver
I just thought I’d post an epic video about Rumple and Neal’s relationship here, since it’s on topic and very poignant, from both vantage points of father and son:
"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
A bit of wisdom from Joe that we can apply to all the characters of OUAT: http://youtu.be/ExiRGrIKlwM
Custodian of Graham's darts, Rumple's spindle and Robin's quiver
The topic ‘Parallels’ is closed to new replies.