Once Upon a Time 02x07: Child of the Moon

[lorelaisquared]

Making up for being so late posting last week's reaction by posting this week's right away.

Comments

[tamlover]

While George is evil, I don't agree he's more evil than Regina. She can be just as duplicitous. Look how she conned the Genie and Jefferson and Hansel and Gretel. And all the rape, sending children to be murdered and eaten, cursing multiple worlds, and so on. They're both evil

[rodlox]

maybe Belle was referring to someone else in that rehabilitation comment? (at the very least, we know she convinced Grumpy to give love a try)

>This is why I don't buy her redemption, folks.
*shrugs* She never said she wanted absolution for past actions - she wanted to redeem herself with Henry.

the fairy-nuns don't bother me...not as much as the question of how a (Vicar? Bishop? Pope?) was able to marry Snow White and Charming in FTL in 1.01.

[lorelaisquared]

Hmm maybe. I think it mostly referred to Gold/Rumpel though. She clearly thinks she's changed him. How true that is remains to be seen.

*shrugs* She never said she wanted absolution for past actions - she wanted to redeem herself with Henry. Agreed. I don't think she's going to like, suddenly like Snow or something, but I think she'll play nice at least for a while for Henry's sake.

not as much as the question of how a (Vicar? Bishop? Pope?) was able to marry Snow White and Charming in FTL in 1.01. *shrug* I don't think that's really a question at all. They obviously had some kind of clergy/church system in FTL. They need someone to marry people so they can have their happy endings.

[rodlox]

a friend of mine said something that may be analogous to the Belle&Rumplestiltskin bit: that even if Joseph Stalin had some kind of Road To Damascus moment and became a nicer person, it would be those close to him who see the change - to everyone else, he'd still just be Stalin, unchanged.

does that make sense?

>I don't think she's going to like, suddenly like Snow or something,
same here. Regina might be willing to bury the proverbial hatchet, for Henry's sake, but that's about it. (particularly where Snow's concerned)

>They obviously had some kind of clergy/church system in FTL. They need someone to marry people so they can have their happy endings.
makes sense.
(though with how often people onscreen refer to a multitude of gods, its odd that we'd be seeing Christian priestly regalia - except that that's probably easiest for most of hte audience to identify)

and its not like there is a paucity of folklore and folktales regarding priests (the Irish and the Amish, for example, both have a rich treasury of tales about priests)

[lorelaisquared]

ohhh yes. Actually that makes a lot of sense. And I think that would apply here.

Yeah exactly. Right now she is playing nice to get what she wants but if it becomes clear at any point that she won't win Henry then I think she'll very quickly turn on them all. I suspect an alliance of sorts against Cora though. But I doubt it will stick.

Well since this draws pretty heavily on Disney fairytales and there are often priests there I think that is where they are drawing it from. Plus the time in which the original tales were written/passed down was predominantly Christian so it makes sense to me that they would be represented but mostly in a ceremonial, they are the ones who perform weddings sense.

[tamlover]

For me, to be redeemed (as opposed to reformed) one must feel remorse for one's past misdeeds and try to atone. If Regina is still perfectly fine with murdering and raping and cursing people, but refrains from doing so because it will drive Henry away, that is nothing even close to redemption in my book.

[rodlox]

Remember what Henry and Charming said each of the times Regina said she wants to be redeemed? "Prove it."

>one must feel remorse for one's past misdeeds
remember what Regina said? that she lost count of how many hearts she had taken from people. how can she fully atone, if she can't even remember all the people she's wronged/cursed/blighted/other ?

>If Regina is still perfectly fine with murdering and raping and cursing people, but refrains from doing so because it will drive Henry away, that is nothing even close to redemption
Truth.
But if Regina refrains from doing so because she's moved on & has no intention of ever doing those things again, isn't that (at least) close to redemption?

[lorelaisquared]

I think it could be argued that it is an attempt at redemption but until she shows remorse for her past actions and tries to atone for them I agree that she will not be redeemable

[rodlox]

how can one atone for things they can't remember?

it would be like if, pre-Emma's return, David and Spencer became best buddies and went bowling every weekend (or Mary Margaret and Regina became good friends) -- that's an improvement, but they can't deal with the FTL events that they don't remember.

[tamlover]

But Regina remembers all the horrible things she did - the broadstrokes, if not every detail. She just doesn't care. Much like Rumpel doesn't care that he once turned a butcher into a pig. They may not remember every specific incident, but they know they've done many horrific things and have no remorse whatsoever.

For me, the first step in redemption is remorse, and neither of them have it. Atonement doesn't mean you pay back each individual crime (it's impossible to bring back those you killed, anyway). It's good if it's directed at those you hurt, but not necessary to me. What is necessary is you try to "balance the scales" - put as much (or more) good into the world as bad you have put in over the year.

Catch-22

[rodlox]

>the first step in redemption is remorse, and neither of them have it.
problem is, even if Regina showed signs of remorse, Henry would either not believe her, or wield it (the things she's being remorseful about/for) as more proof that she's the Evil Queen.

>What is necessary is you try to "balance the scales" - put as much (or more) good into the world as bad you have put in over the year
I agree that that's important...though we need to remember both that Regina hasn't been on the Road To Redemption for very long, and that since she can't leave town, she's in teh company of people who a) don't want her help, b) don't trust her attempts at good deeds, c) will belittle her gestures.

Granted, Regina could go to some of hte neighborhoods of people she hasn't alienated in FTL (since the town is so big)...but then we wouldn't see her onscreen, would we?

Re: Catch-22

[lorelaisquared]

For Regina to be truly remorseful it would have to be for her own benefit, NOT Henry's. If it's only to show Henry she's changed, then it wouldn't be true remorse.

Re: Catch-22

[rodlox]

the way I see it, Henry provides an (impetus?) a reason for Regina to improve herself and, perhaps in the fullness of the series, to achieve redemption.

Re: Catch-22

[lorelaisquared]

Well yes, he does provide a reason, but I think for Regina to ever be fully redeemed she needs to want it for herself and not just for Henry.

Re: Catch-22

[rodlox]

well, it's a lllllonnnnng climb to redemption, and most of us need impetus to get us started. (and sometimes the impetus later serves as a rationalization to keep us going), e.g. "I'm doing this for Henry" can help keep from backsliding when faced with something the old Regina would have crushed a heart for.

personal experience on the impetus and rationalizing.

Re: Catch-22

[lorelaisquared]

Yes, that's true. In a way, Henry (or the idea of him) would act as her conscience when faced with such situations. I'm just saying that eventually she'd need to start doing it for herself as well.