The Instigator
cloebowie
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Mharman
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

The Prince Should Not Have Rescued Rapunzel

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/10/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 404 times Debate No: 97901
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

cloebowie

Con

This debate is whether the prince should have rescued Rapunzel or not. I can tell you why he shouldn't have, and you can tell me why he should have.

The story portrays the prince as a hero, inciting its observers to think that Rapunzel would have never been freed, had the prince never come to her rescue, which not only discourages independence but also encourages dependency.

Rapunzel did not need the prince to escape: Rapunzel could have chewed her hair off and used it as a rope to climb down, Rapunzel could have maneuvered her rolls of hair and used it as a cushion to break her fall, or Rapunzel could have jumped while holding the ends of her hair, allowing the rest to inflate and create something of a parachute.

Rapunzel would've come out of the situation a lot stronger, had she gotten out of the situation herself, had she solved her own problem, instead of relying upon someone else to solve it for her.

My argument is that Rapunzel should have been given the ability to rescue herself, rather than the ability to attract a man.

Make the best debater win.
Mharman

Pro

Present you arguments.

I will be arguing that the Prince was justified in rescuing Rapunzel.

My opponent will argue that he is not justified in saving her Rapunzel.
Debate Round No. 1
cloebowie

Con

First of all, I'd like to thank my opponent for accepting my challenge debate, and secondly, I'd like to clarify that this debate is more about the writers of the story than the characters of the story, meaning I'm not disapproving of the characters but the writers of the characters.

Neither the prince nor princess of the story had done anything wrong.

I thought having the prince rescue Rapunzel was a small-minded solution to the problem, as oppose to having Rapunzel rescue herself, which would've been more open-minded.

Rescuing Rapunzel was heroic, on the prince's part, but generic and stereotypical, on the writer's part.
Mharman

Pro

So you're telling me that it was sexist on the writer's part? Feminism + overreacting = |TRIGGERED|.
Debate Round No. 2
cloebowie

Con

I'm saying it was stereotypical, which made it generic, instead of creative and original, like it could've been. The potential was there; the writers just decided not to fulfill it. Poor decision, in my opinion.
Mharman

Pro

First off, look at when the writer wrote the book. The year was 1812. Back then, saving a fair maiden was all the rage.

Next, take a look at the physicality of it. She is locked in one room, for almost two decades, just there, reading and painting. Do you really think she would have the strength with no muscle development whatsoever, to climb down a tower, that tall, using her arms? It would have been impossible.

And lastly, she had no desire to escape until she met the Prince. She was convinced that "mother knew best" and was content being up there! Little did she know, that this woman was NOT her mother. If the Prince hadn't told her about the real world, she'd have no desire to leave. She would've never even discovered that she was a princess without him.

So, without the Prince, escape would not have been possible. This justifies the ending, or at least makes it plausible.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by lighth0us3 1 year ago
lighth0us3
I think the idea that the prince should not have rescued Rapunzel purely on the basis that it is generic and unoriginal is insufficient to criticise the writers!
Its original to have a girl with incredibly long hair locked up in a tower alone, give the writers some credit!
Also in the original Rapunzel her plan for escape was through the pieces of silk the prince brought her to weave a ladder, not her hair as where would she attach her cut hair to to save herself?
The prince also didn't rescue Rapunzel as their plan failed the witch tricked them and the prince was blinded. They were only reunited in the wastelands.
In addition if the prince HAD rescued Rapunzel, we wouldn't have had such a cool alternative scene in Shrek where Fiona actually saves herself! It was one of my favourite scenes in the movie.
Posted by Mharman 1 year ago
Mharman
Oops, I said "her Rapunzel." I'll probably end up losing S&G for that one.
No votes have been placed for this debate.