Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
This isn’t that surprising. I mean, a deacon married Snow and Charming in the pilot. The only thing I’m curious about is how magic and a form of Christianity can co-exist in the EF.
I’m more bothered by the fact that there is Christianity in the EF at all. And that’s not any sort of anti-Christian statement, but rather that Christianity did not spring fully formed into our world one day. There is a very rich history that comes before Christianity that allows for its emergence onto the scene. In order for Christianity to exist in the EF you have to have: Judaism for a start, Israel and the traditions of David, Jewish Messianic tradition, the rise of Jewish apocalypticism, The Roman Empire and their conquest of Jerusalem, and perhaps most importantly, you have to have a historical Jesus of Nazareth who was crucified by the Romans and was believed to have risen three days afterwords by his followers. Without that last one, there is no Christianity.
Having an organized religion in the EF is one thing. But calling it a church and placing a Christian label on it is seriously problematic because it brings up a lot of question as to how Christianity made its way to an entirely different world.
And yes, I know A and E don’t want me to think this one through the way I am, but this is one of those cases where I wish they’d think a line through a bit more. One little change in the script and it wouldn’t bother me so much, “Book a temple” because at least that one has a broader meaning of general religious gathering place.
[adrotate group="5"]"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"There might be something to it, but I think the wedding that doesn’t happen is Regina and Leopold. Regina is taking the place of Charming, on her way to marry someone she doesn’t particularly want to marry, when her carriage encounters Robin Hood, a bandit living in the woods, and fate goes from there. In other words OQ are getting the Snow Falls treatment.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"I would like to pose a follow-up question. Is there a way for any character, whether male or female, to be redeemed other than parenthood? I suppose redemption can come from romantic love, too, according to the writers. But more broadly, is there a way to be good again other than parenthood, or even romance? Are there any characters who will seek redemption for a reason besides other people? Are there any characters who seek redemption just for the sake of wanting to be better people themselves?
Is there a way? Yes. By choosing to be better. That’s real redemption, in which you simply choose to be the best version of yourself, by making amends, and trying to not make the same mistakes you once made. It’s actually really dangerous to say that you’re only being good for the sake of one person–be it a child or a romantic partner. Living for other people is a slippery slope because people leave, people disappoint, and it’s really unfair to put your redemption and your path back from your villainy (in the case of our show) on the shoulders of another person.
This is not to say that the person in question should be alone or that children and romance cannot play a role, but it should not be THE role. Redemption starts from within.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Again, I don’t disagree insofar as there simply are way more female villains than there are male villains on this show. So, numerically speaking, there are simply going to be more mothers than fathers.
That’s true too of course. But it’s that every female villain (the major arc ones) gets the same story: some sort of rejection or ill treatment from a man (and as I pointed out, a man who gets to more or less walk away unscathed, the exception is Rumple and that’s largely because he’s core cast) and then redemption through motherhood. If it weren’t every major female villain**, then it might be nothing but it is pattern–either lazy writing or honestly thinking that motherhood is the key to a woman’s salvation.
** = I’m leaving Ursula and Cruella out of this mostly because they turned out to be side villains more than major ones. Mal is the real Queen of Darkness in this years arc.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Milah is an interesting exception
Milah is a very interesting exception, and I wonder if she’s an exception because her story is really peripheral to the more (male dominated) story of Rumple, Hook, and Baelfire. She only gets slightly (very slightly) redeemed in that Hook mentions to Bae that Milah did want to go back for her son and that they often talked about it. So even when her Good Mother card does come up, it isn’t from her perspective, it’s from her male lover’s.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Not necessarily. We know the EF has gods. It’s possible that the church line is related to them (Eric’s people seemed to worship Ursula the goddess) rather than to Christianity.
Except the places of worship associated with pantheistic religions were not called churches. They are called temples. Church is a Christian term, not general religion.
Temple, is from the Latin templum which is a general structure for religious services.
Chruch (big C or little c) comes from some Greek verbage. You have kyriakos okios (house of the Lord) and ekklesia which has a broader meaning of assembly but is used to specifically mean Christian Church when used in a religious context. We got a lot of Christian/church words from that last one…like ecclesiastical matters, matters relating specifically to the church.
(thank you 5 years of Greek and Latin. You sometimes come in handy…)
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"But by and large, none of the father-child relationships have this salvational component. It seems like A&E keep reiterating a kind of “fallen woman” turned Madonna narrative. I wonder if they’re aware of this.
Highly doubtful that they’re aware.
But you mention “fallen woman” and the thought occurs, how many of those saved-by-motherhood women had their downfall because of a man? And more to the point, a man who managed to get off scot-free, no punishment for his crimes?
The answer scared me.
Cora: The beginning of her “fall” begins with Jonathan, a man to whom she gave her virtue (gosh, her words not mine…this is a bad start…) only to have him reject her and their child. Cora was looking at life as a single mother and, in that day and age, a loose woman with questionable morals who slept with a man before marriage. Jonathan gets off without any punishment. He shoves (eek) Cora away and gets to walk away. Leopold is up next though he doesn’t necessarily contribute to Cora’s descent but he demonstrates how far Cora has fallen in choosing pure, virginal and pristine Eva over her, despite obviously having some serious feelings for Cora. Leo, of course, gets to live a somewhat happily ever after for a time being with a perfect wife and perfect daughter until–yup–Cora’s inserts herself once more for the sake of her daughter who was denied the life Cora wanted for herself and her child.
Zelena: Jonathan is, of course, the first man who starts Zelena’s descent and I’ve already touched on how he gets away without any sort of punishment. Zelena’s adopted father is a drunk but we never see him suffering for his mistreatment of Zelena; she bears the brunt of all that. Rumple is the big one here though, and of course he suffers greatly for his supposed part in Zelena’s downfall. But that, by and large, has more to do with the fact that Rumple/Bobby Carlyle is a series regular and can’t be sent off to Forgotten Character Island.
Ingrid: There are two men in Ingrid’s case. The man in the forest when she was a child who’s deeds did awaken her powers in a moment of great emotional turmoil. Now, yes, he did die so that’s a punishment. But instead of being proud of protecting her sisters, Ingrid grew fearful to the point where she locked herself away and considered herself a monster. The Duke of Wessleton is next…he molests and tries to force himself upon Ingrid which catapults her into accidentally killing her sister. Ingrid loses a sisters, gets sucked into an urn, but the Duke gets to walk away.
It’s hard for me to overly critical (I know, shocking) of the Madonna narrative because on the one hand, the first half of this series does show how beautifully it can be done with the likes of Emma and Regina when it comes to Henry. Emma kissing Henry’s forehead and breaking THE curse is still one of the best moments on this show.
But it’s rather alarming that the seasonal arc villains take the same path by and large. And that path is: women become villains through the actions of a man (who gets to walk away) and then are redeemed through child bearing or having their own child-inserts.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Parenthood as a means of sanctification (with the exception of Peter Pan) is a recurring theme.
I agree but you know what’s interesting, looking at your list? Apart from Rumple, none of those fathers were villains. Whereas–with the exception of Snow and Emma–all the mothers on my list were considered villains. The one truly villainous father that was also villain of the arc (Pan) was never redeemed.
They really like setting up a female villain and then giving that female villain some sort of mother-role that eventually gets her to redemption.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Yep. Looks like Christianity. a religion from our world, has made its way to FTL.
Yes that’s my problem with that line. It suggests that somehow the historical surroundings that led to the rise of Christianity and the Church here in our world, also happened in the EF.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"
