08-29-2017, 08:39 PM
(08-29-2017, 07:29 PM)wesen Wrote:Demands that neither could meet. Every compromise they made was tinged with regret instead of embraced for the betterment of the relationship. They were not striving to be on equal ground and benefitting from it. The cracks that showed at the beginning of the show grew bigger despite their temporary and superficial covering. Juliette turning into a hexenbiest was their biggest test in their relationship and they failed, for a couple that supposedly started off well, it sure ended horribly.(08-29-2017, 05:37 PM)dicappatore Wrote: IMO, and after 41 years of being married to the same woman, I have come to understand that a relationship is give and take and lots of compromising. And you also have to compl-e-ment each other. I am not talking about “Compl-i-menting each other” as in, “Honey, you did a good job”. Changing that “I” to an “E” has a whole different meaning. Complementing each other in a way that 'The whole is more than the sum of the two".
Years ago at a dinner party with a few other couples, the subject of equality in a relationship came up. One couple were eager to express that in their relationship, everything was 50 - 50, as in 50% - 50% input by them. I replied, well in our relationship, it’s more like 80% - 80%. The woman right away jumped on me to give me a math lesson on how, 80 plus 80 equals 160% not 100%. I gave her a lesson in relationship. First of all we are a couple because we complement each other, which means, most of the time we agree. Since we agree, there is no need to compromise.
When we do have a disagreement, that’s when the compromising of give and take comes in to play. For instance, I told this educated woman. When you met your beau, all I can recall you claiming that once you would marry him, He would have to change many things. How is that working for you? Better yet, how is it working for him? Why marry a guy that you claimed had issues? Which I followed up with. Never mind, It’s really non of my business, I was just trying to make a point.
Going back to Adalind and Nick. I see their relationship “Complementing” each other. What I saw between Nick and Juliette in season 1 through 4 was more of a 50% - 50% relationship with an inkling of a complementary relationship, even after the “Cat-out-of-the-bag” in season 3 and she is one of the scoobies.
Once Juliette turned, that 50% - 50% just did not work out. They both stood their grounds, talked a good talk. They did not complement each other. With Nick and Adalind, I see more commonalities.
I apologize if I am confusing on this. It’s more of a feeling, in my part, and hard to put to words.
Well said.
(08-29-2017, 04:36 PM)irukandji Wrote: I think they were both willing to settle for less.
As opposed to making too many demands of each other. Juliette couldn't accept Nick for who he really was, Nick couldn't handle Juliette as a hexenbiest and had to do so much effort just to please her. Even if Nadalind never happened, Nick and juliette would have eventually broken up. Nick would have eventually resented Juliette for making him choose to turn away from his life as a Grimm in his efforts to please her.
I don't believe pursuing and sustaining a second relationship is settling just because the one that came before it failed. Nick and Adalind, against all odds found the right person for them and despite having insurmountable baggage leading up to the relationship, they made it work for a good two decades. That doesn't sound like settling to me.