- This topic has 55 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This isn’t necessarily a theory so much as a literary look at what Adam and Eddy might be getting at with Emma Swan and Rumplestiltskin. For the purposes of this, I am taking @Slurpeez108 theory (found HERE) as my touchstone for Rumple’s actual plan. Instead of putting forth my own theory (until the very end), I am looking what is happening between Rumple and Emma from a critical literary standpoint, using the most influential work of the Western (at the very least) world: The Bible.
In an interview before S4A began, Eddy Kitsis said that Rumple was “the devil himself.” Obviously this riled up fans because our connotation of the devil is pure evil and no one wants to think of Rumple (love him, hate him, be indifferent to him) as just straight up pure evil without any nuances because it seems antithetical to how the show presents their villains. But looking back from where we stand now, I think Eddy might have been slyly giving a clue. There is another aspect to the Devil: temptation. The Satanic figure is the physical manifestation of temptation: the snake in the Garden, the devil on your shoulder whispering in your ear that you should do a thing–even though you know you should not do a thing. It can be temptation for love, for money, for power, for sex, for…chocolate. We readily associate the devil with the concept of temptation.
Well, so did the Bible. If Rumple’s archetype is “devil” (and by this we can read temptation instead of a Satan like figure) then what does that make Emma Swan? Obviously her archetype has long been “Savior.” Without pushing a religious agenda, here in the Western world our minds instantly jump to one savior in particular because of the religious influences the Church has had over our little corner of the globe: Jesus Christ.
Interestingly enough, the idea of Temptation vs Savior has a reference point in the Gospels (Mark, Matthew and Luke—John is the red headed step child of the 4.)
Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”
Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”
Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:
“‘He will command his angels concerning you,
and they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’”</p>Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”</p>
Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.”Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.
Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.
Matthew 4:1-11
The Temptation of Jesus Christ is a three fold temptation by the devil, a disembodied voice who is tempting Christ into giving in to his powers.
Does this sound familiar (hint: yes). I also think the writers and promo department set this up in their promo for the beginning of S4B
“Three ways to corrupt a hero. Three way to tarnish a savior.”
Now the Devil in the Bible tempts Jesus with food, power, ect. I don’t think Rumple will tempt Emma necessarily with those specific things or even necessarily with three things, but rather he’s trying to tempt her to give in to some sort of darkness, or at least open her heart to it so that Rumple can empty his darkness into her heart (as per Slurpeez’s excellent theory), by messing with those she loves. Putting SB in danger? Emma reacts by trying to save them because “Savior.” Trying to rewrite the heroes (read: her parents) story? Emma reacts by trying to save them because “Savior.” Potentially messing with Hook or Henry? Emma reacts by trying to save them because “Savior.”
So how does the story play out? Well…(spoiler alert) Jesus died and rises again. But in doing so, he conquers death and the devil (he actually went down to Hell for a few days and then busted out…) and the theological result for believers is that death (and the devil) has no hold over believers due to Christ. The Devil seems to win for a short time (Rumple will seem to win by emptying his darkness into Emma’s own heart) but the true love power of the Savior (Jesus/Emma) will ultimately defeat the darkness and the Devil (Rumple).
Let’s end this whole shebang with a bit of theorizing.
Many of us have long suspected that Emma Swan might actually die–it’s how heroes and saviors roll, just as Buffy Summers. But what if, with this Author plot going on concurrently, instead of dying Emma is corrupted and erased from history. Spoilers indicate an AU for the finale and Emma seems curiously absent from any shots we’ve gotten so far. Is she trapped in the book, or did the Devil temporarily claim victory just like he did when Christ died for three days
Now somehow Emma comes back. Henry writes her back into the story, provided that Henry finds the magical quill or is “chosen” to be the next Author. That’s plausible and (again, as per Slurpeez) it would also mean that Henry really was the undoing of Rumple because Emma’s victory means Rumple’s downfall, just like Christ’s victory ended the devil’s victory. In doing so, Emma conquers “death” and the Devil (Rumple) and is reborn anew as an even more powerful Savior. In doing so, Rumple’s darkness goes back into his heart, effectively killing him by season’s end.
What we are left with, then, is a super powerful Savior who has really come into her own powers—say powerful enough to move realms a year from now when the show (potentially) ends with them all going back to the EF?
Thoughts?
[adrotate group="5"]"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Wow. A lot of great connections there.
For some reason though, I’ve been on board Emma dying and then being re-born train.
Although if she did, I love the idea of Henry writing her back into the story with a magic quill.
@RG – Yes, I think Emma being called “the Savior” is a huge tip-off about her fate, which was actually foreshadowed in S1. Emma’s destiny is to “bring back the happy endings,” which in S1 seemed to happen but then didn’t really because everyone remained in SB rather than being transported home. Compare this role to Jesus, according to Christians, whose role was to provide salvation for those who believe. Jesus had to pay the price (i.e. through his death), which Emma has yet to pay. You don’t really get called a savior without the suffering part being added on.
"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
I really like this theory. Great connections and really solid thought process. As much as I hate seeing the Villains get the upper hand in most situations I would love to see Emma go dark for an episode or two. I’d actually love to see it not resolved immediately and to kinda be a “to be continued” episode.
That being said, the idea of Emma being reborn as a more powerful savior really is what got me on board with this theory. I think Emma has so much more potential than she knows. She us getting her magic down, but when it comes to using it in “battle” she needs Regina help. However, I hope she doesn’t join the list of characters on the “Just Kidding! I’m not dead!” List. I’m getting a little tired of that theme. I’d prefer to see her just break through the darkness and turn Golds dark Magic he pours into her into light magic and defeats him with his own power.
Compare this role to Jesus, according to Christians, whose role was to provide salvation for those who believe. Jesus had to pay the price (i.e. through his death), which Emma has yet to pay. You don’t really get called a savior without the suffering part being added on.
You could argue that Emma’s already through this herself. She started out in season one not believing at all about the curse, her role in breaking in and restoring happy endings. And Emma got that way because she suffered a lot in her childhood, through a lot of disappointments and heart break.
It took her a long time to believe in happy endings, or that they were even possible for herself. But she’s finally gotten to the place in her personal life and as the Savior.
It took her a long time to believe in happy endings, or that they were even possible for herself. But she’s finally gotten to the place in her personal life and as the Savior.
Yes, but if we’re going to take RG’s theory about Emma being like Christ to its full extent, then the natural conclusion is that Emma will die to give everyone else their happy endings. If Emma doesn’t die, then she potentially could be written out of the book (temporarily), until Henry course-corrects things by becoming the next Author to rewrite Emma back into the book. Then Emma takes everyone, including herself and Henry, home again.
It took her a long time to believe in happy endings, or that they were even possible for herself. But she’s finally gotten to the place in her personal life and as the Savior.
Yes, but the story isn’t finished just yet. Emma herself said that as soon as she sits back to enjoy herself something else bad happens. The price of being the savior might mean not getting her own happy ending until everyone else has their happy ending first.
"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
That being said, the idea of Emma being reborn as a more powerful savior really is what got me on board with this theory. I think Emma has so much more potential than she knows.
Yes I agree. Her full power of Savior hasn’t been fully realized yet. I’ve always believed that it will be Emma’s job (her real job) to take everyone home to the EF. It also fits very nicely with the Christian motif running through this thread—Christ’s second coming result in the “going home” to the mythical/heavenly realm. Emma’s being reborn or being rewritten into the story (say, by Henry) grants her the ability to take everyone back to the Fairy Tale World which has always been the more mythical/fantastical/divine realm as compared to the human world of SB.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"In support of the view that Emma is not yet able to settle down to have her happy ending is something she said in S3. As Emma herself said in The New Neverland,
“I’m the Savior. I don’t have the luxury of having moments. It’s just not my life. Every time I think I’m going to kick back and enjoy myself I can’t, because it’s never going to stop…It’s different. My magic has a price. The price of being the Savior is I don’t get a day off.”
And so far, Emma hasn’t defeated the dark one. She has relied heavily on others to save them from lesser evils as well. She relied on Rumple to save everyone from Peter Pan and again relied Regina to save everyone from Zelena. Emma didn’t really defeat Ingrid either, since Ingrid killed herself. If Emma truly is the Savior in the ultimate sense of giving everyone else a happy ending first, then she still has some saving left to do.
"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
I think many of us have always thought Emma would “die” in some form at some point in the series. Like has been reiterated many times, saviors die and are reborn in some capacity. It’s a classic theme of literature.
I do have a question. Often in literature, the “savior” has a teacher, a mentor who is killed off at some point, thus enabling them to rise to the challenge alone. In Harry Potter, it was Dumbledore who was taken. Although I’m not a fan, even I know it was Obi Wan in Star Wars. Does Emma have this counterpart? Some would say it’s Regina, but she really hasn’t been that big of a mentor. Would it be Rumple himself? He does seem to be the one everyone ran to in seasons past when something went wrong. Could Rumple be both the “temptation/devil” and “mentor” to the savior?
Keeper of Rumplestiltskin's and Neal's spears and war paint and crystal ball.
I do have a question. Often in literature, the “savior” has a teacher, a mentor who is killed off at some point, thus enabling them to rise to the challenge alone. In Harry Potter, it was Dumbledore who was taken. Although I’m not a fan, even I know it was Obi Wan in Star Wars. Does Emma have this counterpart? Some would say it’s Regina, but she really hasn’t been that big of a mentor. Would it be Rumple himself? He does seem to be the one everyone ran to in seasons past when something went wrong. Could Rumple be both the “temptation/devil” and “mentor” to the savior?
Yes the Savior/Hero always has an old mentor…
Arthur has Merlin
Frodo had Gandalf
Buffy with Giles
You’re right with Luke and Obi Wan (and Yoda) and Harry with Dumbledore.
I guess, for Emma, it’s both Rumple and Regina. Regina teaches Emma magic more than Rumple, but there were moments when Rumple did push Emma’s magic and her ability (the protection spell in The Miller’s Daughter). I think Rumple is more a philisophical mentor than a hands on one; Regina is the hands on one.
Making Rumple the mentor and the devil/temptation speaks to the complexity of ONCE’s original cast of characters and I wonder if Rumple was intended to play more of a mentor type persona (a la with Zelena and Cora and Regina) than he ended up doing–for whatever reason.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"
The topic ‘The Temptation Of Emma Swan’ is closed to new replies.