[Slurpeez]

I’m certainly hoping to see more of Emma in her red leather jacket taking more of a central role again in S5b.

[Slurpeez]

Right, but the DO outfit with the weird hair and glitter wasn’t her either. I think she was trying to let him know Emma (without the DO influence) was still there. That she could be the DO, but still be the Emma he knew.

Right the version of Emma he knew and liked, but not the version of Emma that is her most authentic self. Why didn’t Emma simply choose to change into her own more traditional clothes (e.g. a leather jacket, jeans and boots)? Because she was trying to appeal more to the version that Hook liked. That is what I mean about this version of Emma not being in keeping with the earlier versions of Emma that the show tried to sell us on (and did successfully for me) in S1-S3.

"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

[Slurpeez]

But it was one dress, one time.

It wasn’t a one-off. There was the first time on her date with Hook in 4×4 and again in 5×3 aboard his ship. The first time I might have written it off as the influence of Emma’s mom and Elsa helping her get ready for her date by selecting a dress Emma wouldn’t normally have chosen herself. However, the second time Emma deliberately chose to don the frou-frou dress. She did so because Hook was rejecting her as the dark one dressed all in black. And Emma desperately tried to soften herself to get him to see she was still the same Emma on the inside. But he still ended up rejecting her. That is why I go back to what Emma told Henry, “changing so someone likes you never works.” She was changing herself to get Hook to like her even as she was as the dark one, but it didn’t really work. Emma was saying she wasn’t weak as the dark one. In fact, she said she was stronger than ever because her walls were down and she no longer was afraid. Yet, Hook fundamentally rejected that version of Emma and said he liked her better with her walls up so he could be the one to tear them down. This goes back to something @nevermore wrote: “It’s that, going back to Emma’s character analysis, this sort of gender configuration depends, structurally, on Emma being weaker than the show was originally trying to sell to us.” I find this new branding not to be in keeping with the version of Emma Swan that the show was originally trying to sell us.

"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

[Slurpeez]

I feel like we are overthinking this a bit. If I was in a relationship, and my gf liked me better with a beard, I would likely do it for her. In fact, my friend has done this recently. I think she just wants to make Hook happy and she knows what he likes. It was her reaching out to him and letting him know she cares what he thinks. I don’t think she’s going to change everything all of a sudden. Just this one time, she dressed up a bit.

I don’t think I’m over analyzing things. I’m not saying it’s always wrong to do nice things for the person you’re in a relationship with, but I don’t think think a person should change so much that she starts to lose her original identity either. It’s not the dress that is the problem (though it is ugly). The pink dress is merely an external representation of Emma’s core character changing since she’s been in a relationship with Hook. Yet, changing excessively for a person never works. Emma’s dress shows how being in a relationship with Hook has caused her to become much more traditional, softer, demure (i.e. “feminine”)–which wouldn’t be as big an issue if she’d actually been depicted that way all along. The problem is, however, that is just not how Emma was depicted for the first 3 seasons. It’s not progressive; it’s regressive. See the images below:

Emma Swan season 2 promotional photos

Emma Swan was never depicted as a girly girl in the first first two seasons. In fact, she was a modern-day princess who was always depicted as being more of a tomboy who was more comfortable wearing leather jackets and jeans than high-heeled shoes and a dress. In fact, her red leather jacket is her savior power symbol. The writers used to understand this about her, and she was marketed this way: she always took more after her father than her mother, as depicted in the S2 photos of Emma in which she’s wearing her father’s armor, wielding her father’s sword while ignoring her mother’s frilly dresses. The few times we’ve really seen her dress up (excluding her trips to the Enchanted Forest/Camelot), she was wearing short, edgy, modern dresses, which seems more in keeping with her more masculine sensibiliities. But Emma in a pale pink satin prom dress from the 1950s just makes her look like Greece’s Sandra Dee — whom Emma Swan certainly is not.

I find Emma changing for Hook to be very ironic. Emma told Henry in 5×5 that “changing so someone likes you never works.” She then said she liked Henry’s dad because he was always himself. But then Emma proceeded to not be herself with Hook on the boat when she changed her clothes to get him to like her again. I don’t think that Emma is being true to herself when she’s with Hook, which is what I think that pink dress really symbolizes and why Emma and Hook just don’t work together, on so so many levels.

"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

[Slurpeez]

If you believe that Emma is NOT a strong character anymore and that she has either not progressed or regressed, what can the show do–if anything–to make Emma more palatable.

Emma being the one to make a willing sacrifice would have kept her as an active character with a central role that wasn’t focused only on a guy, and her sacrifice would have further solidified her role as “the savior” of the tale. Instead of spending her effort trying to resurrect Hook in a way that might not work, it’d be better if she really would battle the darkness and win, perhaps even freeing people who’d been victimized or killed by dark ones past (rather than saving the villains). If Emma ends up doing this in the second part of S5b, it will go a way to restoring her status in my view.

"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

[Slurpeez]

Simply put, we have this long-standing convention in our (lets call it Euro-American) culture that goes something like this: “man = strong, manly, and dangerous / woman = weak, pliable, and gentle / man active (RARRGH!), woman passive (*swooon*)”

A case in point is a scene from 5×3 in which Emma, still the Dark Swan, intentionally puts on the very pink, very feminine dress to appeal to Hook, as he finds her new masculine-looking dark one appearance off putting.  Emma must “soften” her appearance so as not to offend her masculine, hunky boyfriend. (“Like me better now?”). There she is trying to get through to him, to let him know she’s still the same Emma on the inside, but that she’s better even, because she’s no longer afraid, that she’s an open book. Yet, Hook says he liked her better when her walls were up, because he liked being the one to tear them down. Hook’s an 18th-century man, so it’s not really surprising that this is his view of romance. He likes being made to feel like he’s the powerful hero of the tale, the strong man who scales the broken girl’s proverbial walls. He’s not so pleased to find her walls already lowered.

"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

[Slurpeez]

The darkness may tempt a person to give in to the dark path but it is the person’s choice to give in. We saw Emma fight it until she chose to give into her selfishness of not wanting to let Hook go. Even though Rumple gave in to the darkness early on, we still saw his good side eg saving the children from the ogre war, giving Belle the chance to leave. Hook chose to give into the darkness because it gave him “permission” to be dark. Just like his “cursed” hand gave him permission even though there was nothing wrong with it.

All of this. Hook not behaving that dark at first due to Emma taking his memories, despite the darkness still being in him the entire time they were back in SB, shows he really didn’t have to act like a dark one. Yet, the moment he discovered what Emma did to him in Camelot, he starts acting very dark. Hmmm I wonder why that is? It’s almost like that new discovery gave Hook permission to indulge the darkness. I think @PoM is right on point to compare the situation to when Rumple said the “cursed hand” merely gave Hook an excuse to act out his darker impulses that have always been there, lurking beneath the surface. But, back to Emma, since this is supposed to be a thread about her (again exemplifying the problem of making it about her boyfriend instead of her).

thedarkonedearie wrote:
Why is it bad to take control and be the “agent.” Maybe he thought she wouldn’t be able to direct her own story and still not succumb to the darkness

I think I’m going to let @nevermore and @slurpeez handle this one because honestly this statement baffles me to the point of silence. No one ever has the right to take over your story (read: life) because they don’t think that you can handle it. That is not a decision they get to make.

Because this is meant to be a modern fairy tale about Emma, not Hook, who is a secondary character.  He was never meant to be the central figure of the tale. Emma has always always been the main heroine of the story. That is why Emma is called the Savior, not Hook. (That is why Emma should’ve been the one to sacrifice herself in S5 finale in my estimation–so that she could finally fulfill her role as Savoir to the fullest extent).

Moreover, when a person gives up agency, she ceases to have a say in her own life or story. Yes, she may have a moment of crisis or be in need of help every now and then, but she ceases to be an interesting individual when she ceases to exert her will or have a say in her own destiny. She ceases to exist except as an ornament or background character in someone else’s story (in this case Hook’s). Instead of the focus being on Emma, the focus instead became about Hook and his inner battle with darkness instead of Emma’s. And that’s the problem.

This is both bad in fiction and in real life, because fiction is both a reflection of society and an influence of it. So it matters when a show, which started off with interesting, capable heroines doing interesting things, becomes about a woman giving up her agency. It matters when young people start to question why it matters if a formerly active woman gives up agency to a man, who then mistreats her and her family. Little girls and young women start to think that this is a good, romantic thing, when actually, in this case, it’s destructive. And that in and of itself is worrisome.

Same works in reverse by the way, since no one has the right to take away another person’s agency. So I don’t promote or believe in reverse discrimination. That is why Belle controlling Rumple with the dagger was a big no no in my book, too. It’s also a no no for Emma to give up control to Regina.

"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

[Slurpeez]

So first thing is Adam said that they have been building to that episode since season 1 and that Baelfire was always supposed to be Henry’s father so I don’t understand why they can’t admit what was their intial plan? Why they avoid telling the truth about who was planned to be Emma’s main love interest when it’s so obvious?

Because A&E sold out their original vision when (1) ABC executives said to include Hook in as many scenes as possible and (2) when they said to make Hook the main love interest. If they admit they changed things, then they risk alienating their overlords and alienating CS fans who like to maintain otherwise. Why do you think A&E stopped doing their podcast after S2? It’s because they were blatantly pro-Swanfire in S2, and ABC put a stop to it. I think the line, “You killed a man for a ship? Who does that?” is A&E’s meta commentary about what really went down in S3b.

"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

[Slurpeez]

But none of that would have happened if Emma hadn’t done what she did. It was her actions that started it all. If she lets him die, Hook doesn’t get controlled by the darkness.

Are you claiming that since Emma betrayed Hook first, she is responsible for Hook betraying her? Are you saying Emma is to blame for Hook trying to kill her family? I find that troublesome, as it seems to be like battered person syndrome. The only thing I said Emma is guilty of is tethering Hook to the sword (which Hook himself considered the worst betrayal), but the rest is on Hook. He still is responsible for what he did as the dark one, in my opinion. To claim that she is at fault for what Hook did is like trying to blame the paramedic who saves a known killer (against his wishes), only for him to then awake, kill a person and then attempt to murder the paramedic’s family in revenge. Moreover, no matter who you place the most blame on, there is no denying there was a lot of betrayal going on. Betrayal isn’t healthy or loving. It’s the opposite of those things.

If you blame Emma for tethering Hook, then I don’t think you can blame Hook.

Yes, I can. I am entirely being consistent with my reasoning. If Emma and Rumple are responsible for what they did as dark ones then so is Hook. He doesn’t get a free pass in my book.

He warned her. He said he would be terrible. And she didn’t listen. I guess it’s hard for me to blame Hook, if Emma is the reason Hook was in that predicament in the first place. They both did very unheroic things, but Hook doesn’t do those things if Emma doesn’t do her thing first.

No offense, but I think your perspective is the one that is inconsistent. You seem to hold Emma and Rumple accountable for their dark deeds but not Hook. Why is that? Just because Hook warned her it doesn’t mean he actually was unable to fight the darkness, as he proved in the end when he fell on on his proverbial and literal sword.

"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

[Slurpeez]

So then shouldn’t she feel responsible for what Hook did as a result of making him become the DO? Shouldn’t she want to go save him?

She did feel responsible for turning him into a dark one, but she doesn’t need to feel responsible for what he did as the dark one. He is still the one who chose to unleash the former dark ones. Thus, Emma doesn’t “need to” feel compelled to resurrect him after he nearly murdered her family; the onus is on Hook for that. I question Emma’s judgment as a mother. Emma’s first thoughts should be for the safety of her son, whom Hook deliberately tried to harm. I don’t think Emma is in any way morally obligated to get Hook back, nor do I think Henry should be tagging along to Hell. It shows a horrible lack of judgment on Emma’s (and Regina’s) parts.

I feel like you can’t feel like Hook was responsible for his actions, but then say it’s Emma’s fault.

First of all, please, don’t tell me how I can or cannot feel. It’s patronizing. You’re entitled to have your own opinions about fictional characters and a fictional relationship; I’m entitled to mine. But you don’t get to dictate what other people can or cannot feel. If we cannot even agree to have a difference of opinion without trying to dictate how the other person ought to feel, then what’s the point?

Next, both characters can be guilty simultaneously. If Emma is responsible for what she did as the dark one, then so is Hook responsible for what he did. One person’s guilt doesn’t somehow omit another character’s guilt. I think both of them are at fault. I think that Emma was at fault for betraying him, and Hook was at fault for then betraying her in return by summoning Nimue and the dark ones. In fact, I think it was very unheroic of both of them.

You either think that Emma, who has been afraid to love because she always loses the ones closest to her, did not want to lose someone she cares about and felt she could get the darkness out of him and figure it out. She chose to keep him alive, selfish reasons or not. If you think you love somebody, I imagine it’s pretty hard to just let them go.

Emma chose to keep him alive out of fear, but that doesn’t mitigate that it was a huge betrayal from Hook’s perspective. Sure, it might be hard to let someone go, but in this case, it would’ve been more heoric of Emma to let Hook go. It was his dying wish; he pleaded with her to let him die than tether him to the sword, because he really didn’t want to to be made into the thing he hated most (i.e. the dark one). In Hook’s opinion, it was a worse fate than death.

Later after he found out what Emma did to him, Hook said, “How could you do this to me?” He was angry and wanted to get revenge on Emma, but he is still responsible for his choices the same as Emma was responsible for her choices. Both are guilty of betraying the trust of the other.

I understand her wanting to save him, and although the show says that was her giving into the darkness, it just didn’t feel that way.

Okay, you may not see it that way, but that is what happened in the story. Emma actually went from wearing all white to all black, signifying she fully became the dark one the instant she tethered Hook to that sword.

If saving someone from death is darkness, then idk anymore. So she saved him, but then Hook, very much in control of his actions, was horrible. So you either think that, or you think Emma was selfish and it’s her fault look did what he did.

The world isn’t that black and white. Both Emma and Hook are at fault, just for different things. Emma is guilty of making another dark one. Hook is guilty of nearly sending Emma’s family to hell, killing Merlin and casting another dark curse. Both were dark ones, but both are still guilty of different crimes.

And if that’s the case, and you are thinking about it in Emma’s eyes, wouldn’t you want to save the guy you think you love who just sacrificed himself after a darkness battle he only had to endure because you made him this way?

Heck no! If someone tried to murder my child and family, I would not be trying to resurrect him, no matter how guilty I felt. Admittedly, Hook did the right thing the end, but he merely put out a fire he himself started. If Emma is responsible for her actions as the dark one than so is Hook. I get that Emma feels guilty about what she did, but that doesn’t excuse Hook for what he said and did to Emma and her family. Even though he then died in an eleventh-hour turn-about, he still was guilty of doing horrible things.

"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

[Author]

Posts