+- Grimm Forum (https://grimmforum.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Grimm Universe (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Grimm-Universe)
+--- Forum: Characters (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Characters)
+--- Thread: Nick (/Thread-Nick--2315)
RE: Nick - Robyn - 02-27-2016
(02-26-2016, 10:23 PM)irukandji Wrote: Adalind had the luxury of expending tremendous amounts of money, time, and energy to look for Diana. That seems to have faded fast. Now she's just mooning around, 'hoping' Diana is okay. So much for searching for her.
Respectfully and completely disagree.
Adalind had an expense account provided by the Royals. It covered expensive hotel suites, clothes, pretty things that keep a woman happy. She has no means financially or through means of a support group to find & retrieve Diana.
Adalind being on her own with no one to count on has been a constant in her storyline with two exceptions: Meisner and Sebastian in S3 and Nick in S5. But that support has it’s limits. Meisner delivered Adalind & the baby to what he believed was a safe route out of Europe then returned to his personal cause - revenge on the king. Nick is supportive of Adalind to the extent that she is the mother of ‘his’ son. He’s never expressed any genuine concern or remorse for Adalind’s daughter or her heartbreak over the child being kidnapped twice.
Quote:Nick never got the luxury of being outraged over himself, his home and lover being violated. He didn't get the luxury of being able to think the entire situation through, even to the point of tracing it back to the kidnapping or Adalind's attempted murder of Marie. He didn't even get the luxury of talking to Juliette about the embarrassment and humiliation he must have felt, thinking it was Juliette he was with and instead it turned out to be Adalind. Instead, he was whispering to Hank about how he wished he had his powers back even though he told Juliette he wanted to be normal.
What could have been a great story arc got buried in mediocrity.
I agree with Nightschade that most of this lies with the writers. Character evolvement & analysis always takes a backseat to what they consider the real story. But. I think it’s worth looking at Nick’s reactions & behavior from a different angle.
Your opinion is that Nick was denied the opportunity to be outraged, embarrassed, comfort Juliette, and work his way back to the beginning - it all started with Adalind - so he could come full circle.
My opinion is, that’s not the man the writers created over the course of 4 ½ seasons. Nick wasn’t outraged at being sexually assaulted because that part didn’t matter to him as much as the loss of his Grimm. If Nick felt raped it was because his Grimm had been taken from him, not his dignity or the intimacy he shared with Juliette.
If we consider it strange that Nick didn’t regard Adalind’s act as rape, then shouldn’t we also consider it strange that Nick was willing to risk Juliette to get his Grimm back? Juliette agreed to the spell because she loved Nick enough to risk it. Why didn’t Nick love Juliette enough to refuse taking the risk?
Nick doesn’t come across as man of high moral character. As the seasons progressed, Nick became more like Sean - he likes the power and he doesn’t want to give it up. My comparison to Sean is mostly about the love & need of power. I don’t think Nick is ruthless & heartless like Sean. But when he decided to allow Juliette to risk the spell, he decided being a Grimm was his priority.
And as Nightschade suggested, we have to consider the writers’ motivation & priorities. The show is based on Nick, the Grimm, so Nick can only not be a Grimm for a certain amount of time. The writers either didn’t care how the hero was made to look during the process, or, the hero of questionable moral character is what they were going for.
RE: Nick - irukandji - 02-27-2016
Robyn, we cannot consider the writers' motivations, for the simple reason that they're not sharing. If they were, we'd have known before the season started that Nick was not going into the depths of hell for revenge but instead he morphed into Adalind's domestic and docile person. And there are the forum threads, which don't come down to the writers' motivations but only our own interpretations. In my interpretation, this was a rape, no way around it.
That said, all I wanted to do in this thread is talk about Nick's rape, not Diana, not the royals, not Viktor, not about Nick's past actions, Nick's current feelings for Adalind, baby Kelly, Adalind as the good mother, etc. No disrespect is intended, and I appreciate people stepping into the debate. But those issues are not what I felt was pertinent to the topic I brought up.
I don't like Nick. I never have. However, what I like even less is a storyline that portrays rape as some kind of convoluted adventure in magical ecstasy with the main character highlighted as a big square doofus.
I was curious to read others' opinions on it.
For example, Izzy would simply say Nick was not tricked, he was not raped, he was just being a man. Or as Izzy would call him, a "pig".
Is that what it boils down to? Nick is a "pig"? Is that how we should see him?
And tscchope, a person who goes along with a rape does not constitute consent.
RE: Nick - tscchope - 02-27-2016
@Robyn I don't see any evidence that Nick was really upset over losing his Grimm powers. Juliette was the one who told Nick he had to be a Grimm again. Why did she do that?
As for Nick's character, the writers do make a bit of a sponge. I'd have liked to see if his kiss would have awoken Juliette from her coma. That would have proven that he had a pure heart.
@irukkandji, Nick had point where he knew the women wasn't Juliette and chose to carry on having sex. The choice and the option to stop make it consent. As Henrietta demonstrated a hexenbiest can use her touch to get just about anything. not-Juliette could do that to Nick in a blink of an eye. Would that constitute rape in your eyes?
The stalker Rosalee is going to have re-enter her life could try to force himself on her. Shows use rape as storylines. They also use murder. Is murder okay, but rape is wrong to use?
What Adalind did to Nick she did it to get Diana back. She didn't know Viktor didn't have her. What she did to Hank, on Renard's orders, to get Nick's key was much worse. Hank would have died; Nick's life wasn't threatened. Yet Hank has never given voice to what he felt about what happened and both he and Wu looked ready to eat some more of Adalind's cookies. The thought makes me shudder. Hank's never confronted his Captain about ordering him put to death unless Nick handed over his key.
As far as we know Nick hasn't talked to Hank about what really happened that night. Consider: Nick tells Hank who waits til Nick is out of the City and then empties a magazine into Renard's head at point blank range. That's not going to happen.
RE: Nick - irukandji - 02-27-2016
(02-27-2016, 09:40 AM)tscchope Wrote: @Robyn I don't see any evidence that Nick was really upset over losing his Grimm powers. Juliette was the one who told Nick he had to be a Grimm again. Why did she do that?
As for Nick's character, the writers do make a bit of a sponge. I'd have liked to see if his kiss would have awoken Juliette from her coma. That would have proven that he had a pure heart.
@irukkandji, Nick had point where he knew the women wasn't Juliette and chose to carry on having sex. The choice and the option to stop make it consent. As Henrietta demonstrated a hexenbiest can use her touch to get just about anything. not-Juliette could do that to Nick in a blink of an eye. Would that constitute rape in your eyes?
The stalker Rosalee is going to have re-enter her life could try to force himself on her. Shows use rape as storylines. They also use murder. Is murder okay, but rape is wrong to use?
What Adalind did to Nick she did it to get Diana back. She didn't know Viktor didn't have her. What she did to Hank, on Renard's orders, to get Nick's key was much worse. Hank would have died; Nick's life wasn't threatened. Yet Hank has never given voice to what he felt about what happened and both he and Wu looked ready to eat some more of Adalind's cookies. The thought makes me shudder. Hank's never confronted his Captain about ordering him put to death unless Nick handed over his key.
As far as we know Nick hasn't talked to Hank about what really happened that night. Consider: Nick tells Hank who waits til Nick is out of the City and then empties a magazine into Renard's head at point blank range. That's not going to happen.
And this exactly illustrates my point.
Tscchope, you went all over the map with everything else but Nick's rape.
RE: Nick - tscchope - 02-27-2016
(02-27-2016, 09:43 AM)irukandji Wrote: Tscchope, you went all over the map with everything else but Nick's rape.
No. I've hit the nail on the head as to why Nick wasn't raped. You just don't want to see it.
RE: Nick - Robyn - 02-27-2016
tscchope, I don’t think anyone knows Renard was the mastermind behind using Hank’s life as a threat to get the key. Renard only admitted to Nick enough to gain his trust/allegiance - that he conspired to kill Marie - and Adalind has never betrayed Renard’s secrets, and instead, taken the blame for everything.
My assumption is that being a Grimm had to be very important to Nick if he was willing to expose Juliette to unknown but probable risks that Elizabeth warned them about.
Also, I don’t remember anything that makes me think Nick realized it wasn’t Juliette he was having sex with. I’d rewatch but find the whole Nick sleeps with two women while disguised as each other too revolting, so I’ll just take your word for it.
irukandji, tscchope is right. Opinions based on facts provided in the show have been presented. However, you only want to focus on a single event without consideration of circumstances or characterizations.
And we do have to consider the writers’ motivations & intentions - it’s their story & their characters. They decide how characters act & react in various situations. We as viewers can only glean from those actions & reactions.
RE: Nick - Hell Rell - 02-27-2016
What does everyone think Nick was thinking when Elizabeth told Rosalee to use one less drop? She said that the transformation would be permanent if they used that extra drop. Nick was just informed that Juliette could look like Adalind forever if something went wrong.
Was he confident that nothing would go wrong? Did he trust that Elizabeth knew what she was doing? Or was he thinking "Juliette could look like Adalind forever? I'm not mad at that". That was a scary thing Elizabeth just said so someone help me out here.
RE: Nick - jsgrimm45 - 02-27-2016
(02-27-2016, 10:50 AM)Hell Rell Wrote: What does everyone think Nick was thinking when Elizabeth told Rosalee to use one less drop? She said that the transformation would be permanent if they used that extra drop. Nick was just informed that Juliette could look like Adalind forever if something went wrong.I think the one less drop was only because the potion needed to be returned to it correct properties having already been made. She told Juliette on the breathing of the potion to do only so many or the chance would be permermant.
Was he confident that nothing would go wrong? Did he trust that Elizabeth knew what she was doing? Or was he thinking "Juliette could look like Adalind forever? I'm not mad at that". That was a scary thing Elizabeth just said so someone help me out here.
RE: Nick - New Guy - 02-27-2016
(02-27-2016, 01:47 PM)jsgrimm45 Wrote:Hi JS and HR,(02-27-2016, 10:50 AM)Hell Rell Wrote: What does everyone think Nick was thinking when Elizabeth told Rosalee to use one less drop? She said that the transformation would be permanent if they used that extra drop. Nick was just informed that Juliette could look like Adalind forever if something went wrong.I think the one less drop was only because the potion needed to be returned to it correct properties having already been made. She told Juliette on the breathing of the potion to do only so many or the chance would be permermant.
Was he confident that nothing would go wrong? Did he trust that Elizabeth knew what she was doing? Or was he thinking "Juliette could look like Adalind forever? I'm not mad at that". That was a scary thing Elizabeth just said so someone help me out here.
Anything is possible. Elizabeth could have intentionally designed the potion to create a permanent super hexenbiest. Hexenette's rage left an incredible path of death and destruction. Now she is FrankenEve and can kill 20 individuals in a few seconds just by lifting her hand. IMO, her victim count will grow exponentially until it becomes necessary for her to be terminated.
New Guy
RE: Nick - syscrash - 02-27-2016
Quote:Nick thought that it was Juliette he was sleeping with. Once sex started, he'd have known it wasn't her, yet kept on going. That's consent.
That sums it up. Especially since the writers left no doubt that Nick knew there was a difference. You add he is a detective, noticing what is out of place is his job. He is aware that Wesen, and Magic can account for the unexplained. So either her was in denial, did not care, or was suffering from wishful thinking. Nick's only hurt other them losing his powers. Is how it made Juliette feel. Even now he has never regretted sleeping with Adalind.
The show is written with a lot of ambiguity so the viewers can adjust it to fit their taste.
To distort the story to paint a narrative not even close to what the writers intended, provides a false impression of the show to readers that come to this forums to help understand things they missed or to get an understand of what the show is about. The same goes for bashing a actor for the actions of the character. or bashing the actors presentation because the character doesn't react the way you think they should. Anyone that knows anything about the craft. Knows that hardest part to play is that of someone that is being portrayed as not normal. Especially when it is totally contrary to the actors personality. We have seen these people out of character enough, that we can appreciate the parts they play. Silas is nothing like monroe. Bitsie is nothing like Juliette, Hexenette, or Eve. Yet she makes each one convincing. People act like she is evolving into these personas. There have even been questions about is Bitsie Jealous of Adalind and Nick. Really. Anyone that follows them know this is one tight group that are the best of friends.
The show brings up ethical questions and situations. But it never takes a position. Such as the Stacy question, they addressed the question. But never gave an answer as to it being right or wrong. The Nick and Adalind, situations. They give a reason for the actions but never address the morality of it. The fact we are discussing the ramifications and definitions of rape is what was wanted. To accuse the show of being morally incentive is not what the show is doing. This is one of the things the show left no ambiguity for. They have made it more then clear. It was sex through deception no more no less. By definition is that rape yes, but that is not the intent. The show uses bombastic situations, to off set the questionable out comes. Adalind and Hank off sets the way Nick took Adalind's powers. Nick and Adalind off set the Juliette and Nick breakup. Nick mothers death off set the assassination of Kenneth. With out the off set Nick would be perceived the villain in each of these cases.