Spoilers - Gilmore Girls S&S #167 ~ We Love Logan's Buns - Page 14

leonana · 02-23-2007, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheJSW (View Post)

Leonana, becuase Lorelai feels differently than you do about that neglect. Chris did not neglect Rory because RORY HAD LORELAI. Lorelai said it herself. You either accept Laura's/Lorelai's reasoning or you do not. If you do not, then you are in contradiction of this show.

I guess that's the problem then. To be invested in a show, I need to be able to relate to the character. Currently, I'm having a hard time relating to Lorelai. The last time I posted this, someone on TwoP said I was too narrow minded. Whatever. It is what it is.

blaab · 02-23-2007, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Hawkeye (View Post)

It is not Lorelai that has lost her soul: she still lovers her neighbor as herself, forgives not 7 times but 70 times and declines to throw the first stone.

No, the ones that have lost their souls are those who are consumed by unending hate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheJSW (View Post)

Hate is a part of the bull****.
If you are down with the bull****.
You are denying the love.
The love should always beat the bull****.
If you are not down with that...
You are making Peebles and Bam-Bam cry.
I hope you are happy.

Captain and Jason, yep, couldn´t agree more ... love it!

damselfly · 02-23-2007, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheJSW

Chris did not neglect Rory because RORY HAD LORELAI.

Huh? Chris's absenteeism didn't happen because Lorelai was there? That's some strange logic.

Chris did neglect Rory, Lorelai just helped cushion the impact -- Rory wasn't as affected by Chris's neglect as she might have been, because she had Lorelai. He still neglected her, Lorelai being there doesn't change that fact.

leonana · 02-23-2007, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by damselfly (View Post)

Huh? Chris's absenteeism didn't happen because Lorelai was there? That's some strange logic.

Chris did neglect Rory, Lorelai just helped cushion the impact -- Rory wasn't as affected by Chris's neglect as she might have been, because she had Lorelai. He still neglected her, Lorelai being there doesn't change that fact.

So true.

TheJSW · 02-23-2007, 11:00 AM

Damsel, no, that's your logic. As Laura stated, then the show agreed with in Go Bulldogs. Lorelai feels that Rory made out fine with ONLY HER. Rory could have used Chris around, but to the parent who raised her. RORY WAS FINE. Again, if you want to deal with your logic, or real world logic, or anything else that you may feel applies. Go right ahead. However, on this show, Lorelai feels so secure in her parenting, that she feels her kid did not miss having a dad around. Those are her words...not mine.

Leonana, are you almost 40? Do you enjoy wearing stretch pants? Do you enjoy alternative music? Does your hairstyle often change? Do you enjoy eating...alot? Are you best-friends with people that could be seen as certifiable by lesser souls? Do you have problems with your parents? Are you a the sole caregiver of a child? Is she a daughter? Do you enjoy randomally splurging on shopping that you cannot afford? Do you like Jeep Cherokees? Do you know how to operate a computer? Do you know how to quicken? Do you have a ridiculously extravagent cell-phone plan? Do you have a tendency to wear odd dresses? Do you wear heels when heels are not called for? I could go on, but why do you have to relate with Lorelai? Why does it always have to be about you? I ask that honestly. I do relate with Luke and Zach. Yet, I am neither, Luke or Zach. See?

Spikette · 02-23-2007, 11:04 AM

I'm guessing that Lorelai decided a long time ago that it was better for Rory to have a relationship with Christopher even if he couldn't/wouldn't be a full-time parent. I don't see that as a wrong or bad decision. Should she have cut Rory completely off from him? I don't think that would have been the right thing to do. They accepted what Chris could offer and Rory seems to completely understand where Chris is coming from and she does not harbor resentment. I'm sure she is disappointed that he was not a better father, but she loves him just the same. I agree with JSW that ASP never intended for Chris to be perceived as a bad person. Flawed, immature, yes. But not evil. They have demostrated many times that Chris knows what he did while Rory was growing up wrong. I guess I just don't understand this whole line of thinking about Lorelai being morally bankrupt because she tried to have a relationship with Chris. She was simply trying to live out a dream she had. She needed to live out the dream to get past it. The dream was stopping her from living her life. Now she is free. I am a die-hard JJ, but I can totally understand what happened in this SL and I can understand why Lorelai did what she did in marrying Chris. I also believe that Lorelai is not solely responsible for the LL breakup and she should not be made to bear the weight of that alone. I understand that there are a great deal of people out there who love Luke, as do I, but he did not deserve to marry Lorelai last year. They were not ready. She needed to let go of the dream and he now needs to see that he can have more than one relationship at a time. He can be both a good father and a good partner/husband and share his life with someone.

Remember, as always, I come in peace.

ckomodo · 02-23-2007, 11:05 AM

Watching season one again recently I was reminded that the first time we see Christopher everyone is making a big deal about it because he had never been to Star's Hallow before, never bothered to visit his daughter in her home in 16 years. Also, Lorelai mentions, and this is around Oct/Nov, that he had not seen Rory since the previous Christmas. Then he tries to make a big impression on her by lying about how his business is going and trying to buy her an expensive book he can't pay for. What else about Christopher's neglect (up until then, not talking about attempts he made later) has to be said?

blaab · 02-23-2007, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ckomodo (View Post)

Watching season one again recently I was reminded that the first time we see Christopher everyone is making a big deal about it because he had never been to Star's Hallow before, never bothered to visit his daughter in her home in 16 years. Also, Lorelai mentions, and this is around Oct/Nov, that he had not seen Rory since the previous Christmas. Then he tries to make a big impression on her by lying about how his business is going and trying to buy her an expensive book he can't pay for. What else about Christopher's neglect (up until then, not talking about attempts he made later) has to be said?

But somehow Rory was still extremely happy to see him when he drove into SH on his motorcycle. Loved having him around. Lorelai ended up sleeping with him on the balcony. Richard and Emily seemed very happy to have him come to dinner, even though it didn´t end up going so well. And after Lorelai had slept with Chris and he asked her to marry him and she, which I understood, said no, they still left eachother in that garden with a hug and a kiss. And throughout that whole ep even when he was leaving I felt Rory really liked having Chris there. I saw no resentment from her whatsoever ...

Great post Spikette!

Mag13 · 02-23-2007, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ckomodo (View Post)

Watching season one again recently I was reminded that the first time we see Christopher everyone is making a big deal about it because he had never been to Star's Hallow before, never bothered to visit his daughter in her home in 16 years. Also, Lorelai mentions, and this is around Oct/Nov, that he had not seen Rory since the previous Christmas. Then he tries to make a big impression on her by lying about how his business is going and trying to buy her an expensive book he can't pay for. What else about Christopher's neglect (up until then, not talking about attempts he made later) has to be said?

You can't choose your biological father! Lorelai can say: Christopher is over, he's the past, and start a new life. Rory's situation is more difficult: Christopher will always be in her life.

Captain Hawkeye · 02-23-2007, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ckomodo (View Post)

Watching season one again recently I was reminded that the first time we see Christopher everyone is making a big deal about it because he had never been to Star's Hallow before, never bothered to visit his daughter in her home in 16 years. Also, Lorelai mentions, and this is around Oct/Nov, that he had not seen Rory since the previous Christmas. Then he tries to make a big impression on her by lying about how his business is going and trying to buy her an expensive book he can't pay for. What else about Christopher's neglect (up until then, not talking about attempts he made later) has to be said?

Actually, it was Febrary/March--after Richard had recovered from his angina. And Rory also saw him (and his then girlfriend) the previous Easter as well

damselfly · 02-23-2007, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheJSW

Damsel, no, that's your logic. As Laura stated, then the show agreed with in Go Bulldogs. Lorelai feels that Rory made out fine with ONLY HER. Rory could have used Chris around, but to the parent who raised her. RORY WAS FINE. Again, if you want to deal with your logic, or real world logic, or anything else that you may feel applies. Go right ahead. However, on this show, Lorelai feels so secure in her parenting, that she feels her kid did not miss having a dad around. Those are her words...not mine.

Your logic is: Rory had Lorelai, therefore Chris did not neglect her.

Mine is: Rory did just fine even though Chris DID neglect her, because she had Lorelai there to compensate.

Chris neglected Rory, and Lorelai feeling secure in her parenting doesn't change that. Chris has acknowledged it, and both Lorelai and Rory have acknowledged it. Both have chosen to overlook his neglect to a certain degree, but that doesn't erase it. Lorelai's pointed reference in IRBIP showed she's well aware of it, even if she did let him off the hook. That's show canon.

Quote:

Do you like Jeep Cherokees?

Wrangler

currienc · 02-23-2007, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Chris did neglect Rory, Lorelai just helped cushion the impact -- Rory wasn't as affected by Chris's neglect as she might have been, because she had Lorelai. He still neglected her, Lorelai being there doesn't change that fact

.

I completely agree with this statement. I am a single mom who raised a daughter on my own. My ex was not terribly unlike Christopher, actually - a "Peter Pan" who felt really, really bad about not being there for our kid. And his neglect of his daughter made me lose all respect for him. So, would I have done what Lorelai did? No. Did it really piss me off when I watched Lorelai dissolve into a puddle of goo every time Amy brought him back into the girls' lives? Yes it did - so sue me. But do I think her morally bankrupt? No way. Maybe she's not as strong as I once thought she was (or wanted her to be), but then I never saw her as perfect. Her flaws, in my opinion, make her interesting, even when they cause her to react in ways that are incomprehensible to me. So, I, for one, am still hanging in there. A little bruised, a little weary. But hanging in there.

ckomodo · 02-23-2007, 11:31 AM

If I was 16 I'd think it was neat my father blew into town on a motorcycle too, what's that got to do with Christopher's ethics, values, and parenting? And as for R&E, they always blamed Lorelai, not Chris, again what's that got to do with the choices he makes? So what Rory didn't hate him, that was all Lorelai's doing, making sure she never lacked anything and making it so Rory could accept him as he is.
But I despute it was spring, it was early in the season, shortly after Rory started at Chilton, when she had just started dating Dean.
Either way, he had not bothered to drive the short distance between his parent's house or R&E's to Star's Hollow in 16 years, he lied to Rory and Lorelai about his circumstances, he obviously was not paying child support. It boggles my mind that anyone would see this as okay parenting.

Tara Ashley · 02-23-2007, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by caf123 (View Post)

It has nothing, or very little, to do with getting together with Luke.

Her character and her core - what I called her soul - were ruined when she shrugged off Christopher as merely "not right", but still deserving of a "marvelous possibility" that randomly didn't work out.

He's still selfish and unreliable and he cares more about himself than his kids. He risked Gigi to a "second-best" marriage, he couldn't be bothered to phone Rory before her own parents' wed - we've been over and over all that.

For Lorelai to turn to him in the first place was reprehensible. That she slept with him a few hours after breaking up with Luke merely adds a layer but it would be just as wrong to marry Christopher if she'd never met Luke.

And to reduce Christopher's neglect and repeated betrayals to a mere romantic choice makes me not especially care who she ends up with. I care because Luke deserves to get the woman he still loves, but watching the last two weeks, I found myself indifferent to disgusted by Lorelai. Even when Emily was so cold in that last scene - I felt the merest twinge of pity, no more than I'd feel for any character on a show I'd just tuned into and didn't especially know or care about.

For me she's lost her moral core and her soul. And it has nothing really to do with Luke. I don't care all that much if they're reunited in the end. If I had any speculative dreams about after the show ends, I might imagine that years later, after watching the sacrifices and effort Luke makes to be a father to April, that Lorelai might someday bother to remember how negligent Rory's father was and what that says about him. And that she might care what type of man he is, and that character might actually matter to her.

If one set of morals was all anyone ever consisted of, then we would ALL be very low, "soul-less" people. I do not agree that Lorelai has made a moralistic mistake in not addressing Christopher's neglect in the recent episodes. However, even if I did agree, I would recognize that there are many, many, many parts to Lorelai, and that slacking on one set of morals (IE the Christopher issue) does not erase all that is beautiful inside of her. To say that is to undermine who she is, and she is such an incredible person.

Secondly --and I know I have little right to say this as I've never been a mother and my dad is the most amazing guy you'll ever meet

-- I still don't feel that Christopher is the worst kind of dad there is. What about those who beat their wives or children? Emotionally abuse their wives or children? Cheat on their wives? Commit murder! Chirstopher is a man with a good heart and poor decision making skills. He has shown remorse for his behaviors in the past. Lorelai and Rory have both seemed to put this issue behind them, at least for now -- shouldn't we?

And lastly, Rory was not and never will be the ruin of Lorelai. I'm still envious of Lorelai's personality and life (ducks) and I think I always will be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Hawkeye (View Post)

It is not Lorelai that has lost her soul: she still lovers her neighbor as herself, forgives not 7 times but 70 times 7 times and declines to throw the first stone.

No, the ones that have lost their souls are those who are consumed by unending hate.

Well put, because I believe one of the greatest qualities in Lorelai is her ability to forgive and continue to look for the good in people. We should really do the same. Don't we owe it to the show to do so?

ETA: There are many other posts I'd like to agree with, but no time!

Spikette · 02-23-2007, 11:37 AM

Hey Tara, you're not alone. I admire Lorelai too. It takes one hell of a woman to raise a daughter like Rory alone. Even with her own family baggage, she managed to build a life for herself and daughter and have a career she always wanted. You go girl!