Talk:Essays/@comment-4423292-20170629031156

Love Redeems vs Love Interest Redeems
Girls Next Door and Reylo have got me thinking about Love Redeems, and how it’s different from Love Interest Redeems.

Belle and Rumple for Once Upon a Time are an example of Love Interest Redeems. In part, being around Belle brings out the good in Rumple. In part, the threat of losing her retrains him. And if she was killed, you can be sure he’d fall off the wagon in a heartbeat.

Snape and Lily from Harry Potter are an example of Love Redeems. Snape didn't become a better person to win Lily back. He didn't do it so she would think well of him. He didn't do it because she asked it of him. No, she was already dead, and he did it always — because love drove him to be a better person.

I think a lot of this hinges on the question, “Who’s the driving force behind the redemption.” In Love Interest Redeems, it’s the love interest, who has to pull their partner back from the brink. In Love Redeems, it’s the villain-ish character, who decides to be a better person themselves, being inspired by love (or even by a love interest).

It’s the difference between “You make me a better person,” and “You make me want to be a better person.”

Lily really didn’t have any active role in Snape’s redemption. It had nothing to do with what she did. It didn’t even have that much to do with who she was. But it had an awful lot to do with Snape, and who he was. Lily did not redeem Snape; he redeemed himself.

I’m always a fan of Love Redeems. I absolutely support the idea that love makes people better and stronger than they were before.

I’m quite a bit more iffy about Love Interest Redeems. I’m not saying it’s bad or that I’d never support it, but it’s definitely a little… weird. Project boyfriends are never a good idea, and people deserve to be loved for who they are, not who their partners think they can turn them into.