wanderingbeauty:

i think a sure sign of being a grown up is shifting your focus away from the titular character who wants to flirt you out the window with stories of adventures, friendships, and mermaids 

and instead asking questions like, “what about the origin of james hook? how did he come to be on the island? why do so many people ignore the many facets of his personality and instead only focus on one aspect of his character?”

he’s a very complex man. he studied at eton, practicing good form, grace, and politeness. he uses it to his advantage when he’s trying to get wendy and the boys to join his crew. but that’s not how he always is. he’s also – through the filter of disney – scared out of his wits whenever he hears the ticking noise; this can lend to general silliness and comedy. but that’s not how he always is. he’s also known to kill members of his own crew in cold blood. but that’s not how he always is. 

so many different, distinct personality traits in one man. and people are content to reduce him to a one-dimensional, flat character. 

perhaps the most interesting bit of all, i think. is his relationship with the darling children – wendy in particular. it’s quite clear that she’s infatuated with him. some may even argue that there’s an attraction there. but in the vast majority of the adaptations – going all the way back to the debut performance in the early 1900s – the actor who plays hook also plays mister darling. what does that mean? what was barrie’s intent? there’s definitely nothing to suggest pedophilia; hook doesn’t seem to be interested in wendy at all. he may not even like her. instead, he’s really just using her to get to peter and nothing more. and there’s no subtext leading us to believe wendy has an “unnatural” relationship with her father; despite sharing an actor, the two characters couldn’t be any more different. so what exactly is the nature of their relationship?

on a whole, why isn’t hook explored more? why hasn’t he gotten his own movie? his own story? there’s a great opportunity to explore psychology and philosophy, and it’s all getting squashed by mediocre retellings and adaptations that don’t make any sense.

for shame.