why didn't he kill him in his sleep?

[Marty McFly]

@sweetgrass
I disagree. just because Hook said that about Rumpel doesn’t mean it’s true. Hook is a villain, and just like Regina, he thinks himself better than he really is. he doesn’t admit that he is a villain. but Rumpel is different. he never tried to convince himself that he isn’t a monster. so I really don’t think that the reason for staying in the hovel was to scare people… it’s actually an interesting thought, but I doubt it’s true. I think he stayed there because he thought it would be best for his son to stay around friends (like Maureen sp?) I think his greatest fear, the fear that made him a coward was fear of abandonment or to be alone. and if he lived in a palace his son would be lonely

[kfchimera]

I disagree with Rumple being at fault for making Pan evil!  Malcolm was a grown man who would rather drink and gamble then watch after his son and provide a life for them.  When given a chance to start over, he uses it for his selfish impulse of returning to a time where he could be carefree and happy.   Somehow he’s not content with that, and starts to recruit boys to be his minions on his quest for immortality, along the way playing such sadistic games that some of them are maimed.  He cruelly goes to see his son, kidnapping his own grandson, in some kind of mind game designed to reinforce that his son is worthless and everyone he loves will leave him.   That isn’t something Rumple just caused by thinking it was evil so it became so–that’s blaming the victim really.  “Well if you didn’t mind if I treat you horribly, then it’s not a problem right? So its your fault for minding, otherwise my behavior would be just fine!”.    I don’t know Pan wanted to apologize–he just didn’t want to feel bad about what he’d done.

Pan implies in their final confrontation that  he never loved his son and always resented him.  Is that true? Or is it just what Pan convinced himself over the years to help him justify the temptations that drew him away from a boy he once seemed to have some affection for ?Even as Pan he  remembered Rumple’s favorite breakfast,  but as Malcom he took him to the spinners, he seemed as if he just wanted to be left alone in some ways, rather than actively wanting to destroy his son’s happiness.  So it’s hard to say what it was Pan felt because it didn’t seem like he burned with the need for revenge against Rumple for being born, but at the same time he showed very little compassion or concern for him.  On the other hand, it could seem  like everything he said or did was just a game to inflict pain on Rumple, a cruel game like Lucy putting the football in front of Charlie Brown, knowing she’ll see his hope, then yanking it away.   That might not be “evil” but it certainly is sadistic when you think about it.

I don’t think it was just Rumple’s fears that corrupted Pan.  Pan seemed to be busy manipulating and scheming all on his own, quite apart from Rumple’s thoughts.  It was a shock and surprise to Rumple when the shadow hauls him off, and then we see Pan talking to the shadow in the cave. So I don’t think Rumple  influenced Pan by his dark fears and turned Pan into this awful thing–I think Pan slowly turned himself into that with the years of isolation and his raw ambition running unfettered by any societal limits or reasons to care what others think.  The shadow may have played some role too.

We don’t know who or what the shadow was, if it was Malcolm’s doubts or fears made corporeal or just the exiled black fairy, or what it could possibly be, some kind of pure evil thing?  For some reason though once it entered Malcolm, he began to be much more calculating than I think he’d been before.  I feel like it was the start of his turning evil as opposed to just irresponsible and selfish.  I do think as I said, it was a process for Pan, going from strategic thinking to maintain his youth and fun, to just enjoying harming others for kicks, to telling himself he’d never even loved his son, and wanting to kill those his son loves, just to hurt him.
At that point, where you reach a state with a person who doesn’t even see what they’re doing is wrong and doesn’t care on any level about the harm they do others, that to me sort of seems nearing a state of irredeemable evil.  Regina really seemed as if she’d gone that far but somehow that last little shred of decency in her roared to life because of Henry.   Pan couldn’t understand her love for her son as he’d eliminated any memory of feeling that way himself  (if he ever had, as I said, its sort of unclear) so he underestimated her. Without the capacity to care for anyone but yourself (and I don’t think “loyalty” as a technical love loophole counts…!) , combined with the active feeling of pleasure at the suffering of others, that’s where I think a character deserves to be called evil even if none of the other characters use the term.  Pan got to that state all on his own, without Rumple thinking that into being from what we can tell.

“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass

[Marty McFly]

hey KFC I missed reading your posts, they are always good and thought provoking.
it’s true what you say about the process of getting from just a selfish git who would rather get high than care for his son to a sadistic evil who would kidnap and kill and play mind games just to torture his son – the only person in the world who still has some feelings of love for him. even though he already convinced himself that he hates him (in think lovely thoughts Malcolm hugs little Rumpel and doesn’t look like he hates him at all)
btw, remembering his favorite breakfast was just another callous insult I think (just like that voodoo doll in the beginning, “hey you thought I loved you? haha!)

[RumplesGirl]

I disagree with Rumple being at fault for making Pan evil!

Agreed times 1000. Trying to say that a little 8 yr old boy is responsible for the actions of a grown man is specious and it takes the blame Malcolm deserves for his own actions and puts it on someone else. Malcolm chose to let go of Rumple’s hand. He chose to drink and gamble and leave his son with spinsters.

Pan implies in their final confrontation that he never loved his son and always resented him. Is that true? Or is it just what Pan convinced himself over the years to help him justify the temptations that drew him away from a boy he once seemed to have some affection for ?

I think it’s the latter. I think he may have loved Rumple a little bit when Rumple was a child but over the years his obsession to be young forever changed everything and he convinced himself that he had never loved anyone.

 

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

[kfchimera]

Marty–thanks for the kind words!

RG: I definitely prefer to think Malcolm sort of “fell out of love” rather than never loved and Milah did the same.  In the fairy tale world of thinking, love doesn’t end so its a bit of cognitive dissonance.  They didn’t want to care for Rumple and avoided trying to be reminded that they once did actually to the point of denying it ever happened. Cognitive Dissonance .

 

“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass

[Cinders]

Picture young Rumple, on Neverland, asleep or crying under the tree. Rumple believed his father was going to leave him. In the next scene, his father casts him away and becomes Peter.
Did papa abandon little Rumple because that’s what Rumple believed would happen?
When older Rumplestiltzkin returned to Neverland, he feared Peter. I always thought that Rumple never believed in himself enough to believe he could defeat Peter Pan, so he never defeated him. Nederland was all about believing. Rumple didn’t believe his partners could defeat Peter either, so they never defeated him.
In Storybrooke, when Rumple was restricted from using his magic, when he had to truly trust and believe in his own strength, that’s when he was able to defeat Peter.

[sweetgrass]

@sweetgrass
I disagree. just because Hook said that about Rumpel doesn’t mean it’s true. Hook is a villain, and just like Regina, he thinks himself better than he really is. he doesn’t admit that he is a villain. but Rumpel is different. he never tried to convince himself that he isn’t a monster. so I really don’t think that the reason for staying in the hovel was to scare people… it’s actually an interesting thought, but I doubt it’s true. I think he stayed there because he thought it would be best for his son to stay around friends (like Maureen sp?) I think his greatest fear, the fear that made him a coward was fear of abandonment or to be alone. and if he lived in a palace his son would be lonely

i don’t necessarily take what a character says as the truth, but in this case I actually agree with  Hoook.  To me Hook is the most self aware of the “villains”.  He has admitted he is a villain and is trying to change of his own accord, not at the nagging of other characters.  I agree with you that Rumple sees himself as a monster but he has never shown true remorse or even an understanding of the damage his caused others.  To me, he seems to justify/minimizes it as they should have known better than to deal with the dark one, even in those instances where he manipulated all the circumstances so the person has no choice but to deal with him.

I don’t think that they stayed in the village for Bae’s friends,  Rumple kept Bae isolated from others.  it was the point of their fight in Nasty Habits.  The other villagers including their kids were terrified by Runple and kept their distance from Bae.  Remember that one scene where the kids ran away when Bae approached.  Think about it.  if you knew the guy down the street was a mob boss would you want your kids to play with his.  I wouldn’t.  I would keep a respectful and polite relationship with that neighbour but would not want myself or my kids to get sucked onto that world.  With Rumple it’s even worse, if you disagreed with Bae or upset him slightly Rumple would not Hesitate to kill, maim, hurt you or your family.  Basically, all the kids would list Bae win all the games out of fear for his father, they would also won’t feel comfortable being themselves or disagreeing with Bae for fears his father.

Keeper of Hook and Emma's smoldering first kiss, a certain Pirate's sauciness, the Evil Queen's snarkiness, Grumpy's gruffness and a drop of true love to make it all go down smooth.

[Marty McFly]

Picture young Rumple, on Neverland, asleep or crying under the tree. Rumple believed his father was going to leave him. In the next scene, his father casts him away and becomes Peter.
Did papa abandon little Rumple because that’s what Rumple believed would happen?
When older Rumplestiltzkin returned to Neverland, he feared Peter. I always thought that Rumple never believed in himself enough to believe he could defeat Peter Pan, so he never defeated him. Nederland was all about believing. Rumple didn’t believe his partners could defeat Peter either, so they never defeated him.
In Storybrooke, when Rumple was restricted from using his magic, when he had to truly trust and believe in his own strength, that’s when he was able to defeat Peter.

this is very VERY interesting!! remember what Gold said on the ship? never land is where imagination runs wild? Oh wow! in SB imagination doesn’t run wild, so real life finally kicked in and Pan lost.

[Author]

Posts