One is the Loneliest Number: Unpopular GG Opinions

[readster]

 I will put a major UO, I really wanted to know more about Christopher's Family. There was so much focus on Christopher and Lorelai not getting married because Lore realized early on it wasn't the life she had. But sadly, it was constantly shown to have Straube as the asshole who never accepted either of his granddaughters, more with Rory. Chris's mom was kind of just a furniture piece, I hate when shows do that. They put one parent up as the villain no matter what but instead of having a contributing spouse that agrees with them, she just sat there. It was like Lindsey, she wanted all this crap and Dean to earn it but she sat on her ass all the time and just was: "I want this." "I hate you!" "WahhAAA!" Then we see that Christopher's  grandparents still loved him and so forth. I did like that when Straube did die how much Chris hated that things were left so bad with each other. I have a similar relationship with my father and sad to say, as much as I have tried to reach out. When someone doesn't want to take the olive branch, they won't. 

[takalotti]

Then comes WBB, when the only true surprises are tequila night with Christopher, Emily's conspiracy and Rory's in flagrante delicto. Fair enough that he's pissed when Lorelai suddenly feels the need to tell him about tequila night (can anyone say couples counseling needed?) Suddenly Luke goes nuclear and storms off.

Very OOC and over the top for S5 Luke.

I am NOT defending Luke's blowup, but there are a couple subtle details I always notice here.

It's not just that Luke learns about tequila night. It's not just that Lorelai hadn't told him yet. There's also the implication that she had no intention of telling him.

LORELAI: To comfort him. I know I should have told you about it, I just didn’t because I didn’t want you to read anything into it, or think anything weird, and I’m only telling you now because he’s here and it might come up, and I don’t want you to feel shanghaied.

Then there's this. It's pretty apparent that despite having brunch with Chris at the Dragonfly and getting drunk on tequila together, Lorelai never once mentioned that she was dating Luke. That can kinda make you feel like shit when you're said boyfriend. It can also make you wonder if it was left out to make room for flirting with a guy she has a history with.

LORELAI: Luke and I are dating.

CHRIS: That’s great.

LORELAI: Have been for, what, four months now? Man, time, it flies when you’re having fun, huh? Big fun. Nothing sexual intended, although ¯

Again, still not okay that he stranded Lorelai and then wouldn't even talk about being upset. But I do understand him having doubts about the relationship from Lorelai's end.

[txhorns79]

But sadly, it was constantly shown to have Straube as the asshole who never accepted either of his granddaughters, more with Rory. Chris's mom was kind of just a furniture piece, I hate when shows do that. They put one parent up as the villain no matter what but instead of having a contributing spouse that agrees with them, she just sat there.

 

I chalk some of this up to contrivance.  Straube and Francine have to want nothing to do with Rory because otherwise Lorelai would have a second source to hit up for the Chilton money, and it overly complicates the storyline.  Otherwise, I would agree that Chris' mom was treated as furniture.    

[junienmomo]

I am NOT defending Luke's blowup, but there are a couple subtle details I always notice here.

It's not just that Luke learns about tequila night. It's not just that Lorelai hadn't told him yet. There's also the implication that she had no intention of telling him.

Then there's this. It's pretty apparent that despite having brunch with Chris at the Dragonfly and getting drunk on tequila together, Lorelai never once mentioned that she was dating Luke. That can kinda make you feel like shit when you're said boyfriend. It can also make you wonder if it was left out to make room for flirting with a guy she has a history with.

Again, still not okay that he stranded Lorelai and then wouldn't even talk about being upset. But I do understand him having doubts about the relationship from Lorelai's end.

Very insightful, talkalotti. I'd completely missed that she had no intention of telling him.

Another cringe-worthy moment between the three of them in WBB is Lorelai's getting nervous about the three of them standing there and asking both men to look at her dress. Can't remember the exact quote at the moment.

 

And all that after she had just told him she didn't think it was a good thing for them to spend a night apart, like when he has early deliveries. His response was to get her a TV the next day for his bedroom.

I think I'll choose to believe that she regretted the Christopher incidents and hoped they would fade into nothingness. She might even have said that to Sookie. Also, to her credit, in the aftermath of the "need time"/breakup, she did admit that she did the wrong thing by hiding it.

 

I'm guessing that the writers just decided to pile a whole bunch of offenses together in order to make WBB (the hundredth episode, IIRC) wildly dramatic. Sadly it came at the cost of Lorelai's perceived maturity.

Or maybe not perceived, when I consider her refusal to tell Luke about the possible pregnancy in Booze and Melville.

[timimouse]

So I'm kind of noticing / understanding now why seasons 6 & 7 played out as they did. I for one hated the Christopher and Lorelai getting married arc, but I'm seeing now that it had to be played out. Throughout the entire series, it's been somewhat emphasised how they have history and I think that they wanted to show that their story needed to completely end before her and Luke could really move forward. It's just a shame that it had to be crammed in to one season so it felt somewhat unnatural.

My biggest grouse with those last two seasons is the April storyline which I think destroyed Luke's character somewhat in a lot of people's eyes. I shall continue to watch and over-analyse to figure out why they took him down that road.

[dustylil]

Far be it from me to call Lorelai a rational, mature woman, but I had no problem with her not telling Luke about the "pregnancy scare" in Blame Booze and Melville. It was what - 2 or so days? - before the matter was resolved. From what we were given to understand, birth control did not appear to be a joint issue for them - it was her responsibility. I have no doubt that had she come to the point of taking a pregnancy test, that she would have told him - whatever the result. (Alternately she could have moved to a nearby town,  waited thirteen or so years and allow  the child to do the informing).  

I don't doubt Luke cared for Lorelai very much, but their rekindled romance was still fairly new. They were still building a foundation. And communication between them was never their strong suit. Indeed, Luke was planning to buy a house for them without even so much as a mention of it to Lorelai. Also,  to the best of my recollection, Luke's views on children and babies as presented in two memorable scenes in the third season were not particularly positive or encouraging. Undoubtedly, he would do his duty but she might well think he would feel trapped. From her perspective (and given her own history), what she knew at that point of his opinions on kids,  and the relative newness of their renewed relationship, I thought it made sense that she would  wait a bit to see if the situation resolved itself on its own.

[solotrek]

So I'm kind of noticing / understanding now why seasons 6 & 7 played out as they did. I for one hated the Christopher and Lorelai getting married arc, but I'm seeing now that it had to be played out. Throughout the entire series, it's been somewhat emphasised how they have history and I think that they wanted to show that their story needed to completely end before her and Luke could really move forward. It's just a shame that it had to be crammed in to one season so it felt somewhat unnatural.

My biggest grouse with those last two seasons is the April storyline which I think destroyed Luke's character somewhat in a lot of people's eyes. I shall continue to watch and over-analyse to figure out why they took him down that road.

I do agree that the Christopher/Lorelai thing had to happen at some point. The way it happened was stupid and how the whole relationship went down was rushed, but it had to happen. Because no matter what, there was going to be a fan base for that relationship due to the history and build up of the characters' relationship. They had to see why it would ultimately fail but also that their friendship could survive that. I think Lorelai needed to see that as well. Otherwise Christopher would always be the "what if" guy in the back of her mind, and that can become toxic for any relationship.

 

I'm going to go with the opposite of that opinion and say that I think the April storyline helped Luke's character. I definitely changed over to this side in recent years, because during my initial rewatch I thought it was a detriment to his character. Just like Lorelai needed to have that fling with Christopher, something had to push Luke to the next level. He was a man that loved his comfort zone. Even his relationship with Lorelai kept him hovering in that zone to a certain degree and she also encouraged some of his bad habits (ie she loved the idea of him throwing a frying pan at Taylor). While he was undeniably insanely selfless, there was something that made him not conducive to a long term relationship. He was very closed off emotionally and horrible at communicating. You saw it with Rachel and Nicole without even factoring in the secret love of Lorelai. You saw it in his relationship with Lorelai. It's easy for him to keep being like that with girlfriends/wives/fiances because in the end, they can leave him and he can retreat.  However, he couldn't do that with April. He so wanted to be a factor in her life and to be a good dad  that he ended up adjusting himself. Willing to talk about anything, pretty conversational, willing to do things, and an overall friendlier guy. His relationship with April basically helped give him the emotional maturity he needed to get to in order to have a successful long term relationship.

[readster]

 

However, he couldn't do that with April. He so wanted to be a factor in her life and to be a good dad  that he ended up adjusting himself. Willing to talk about anything, pretty conversational, willing to do things, and an overall friendlier guy. His relationship with April basically helped give him the emotional maturity he needed to get to in order to have a successful long term relationship.

 

 

 I completely agree with that. April did push Luke out of his comfort zone and he couldn't retreat to life like usual as he did many times once the crisis was over. Much like how they did with Christopher, the way it was done was badly done. It made it seem like Luke was this horrible person when he was younger who never would have stepped up or been a good parent. Even though since the show began, he helped people, went out of his way and sadly, people took advantage of it. They were expecting us to believe that he would have not been around. Not to mention how all of a sudden Amanda wanted to sell everything to move in with her mother who was probably not going to live much longer than a year. At that point, even if it would have been my mother. There was no way that would have been clean and simple and then after she was gone. Expect to get her life and April's back together not to mention she would have to sell off or take care of the estate. It was so rushed for conflict.

[Taryn74]

I have no doubt that had she come to the point of taking a pregnancy test, that she would have told him - whatever the result. (Alternately she could have moved to a nearby town,  waited thirteen or so years and allow the child to do the informing).

 

 

HA!

[timimouse]

I'm going to go with the opposite of that opinion and say that I think the April storyline helped Luke's character. I definitely changed over to this side in recent years, because during my initial rewatch I thought it was a detriment to his character. Just like Lorelai needed to have that fling with Christopher, something had to push Luke to the next level. He was a man that loved his comfort zone. Even his relationship with Lorelai kept him hovering in that zone to a certain degree and she also encouraged some of his bad habits (ie she loved the idea of him throwing a frying pan at Taylor). While he was undeniably insanely selfless, there was something that made him not conducive to a long term relationship. He was very closed off emotionally and horrible at communicating. You saw it with Rachel and Nicole without even factoring in the secret love of Lorelai. You saw it in his relationship with Lorelai. It's easy for him to keep being like that with girlfriends/wives/fiances because in the end, they can leave him and he can retreat.  However, he couldn't do that with April. He so wanted to be a factor in her life and to be a good dad  that he ended up adjusting himself. Willing to talk about anything, pretty conversational, willing to do things, and an overall friendlier guy. His relationship with April basically helped give him the emotional maturity he needed to get to in order to have a successful long term relationship.

 

I can agree there. I always thought I was kind of alone with this opinion but I didn't hate the April story. I agree that it was necessary for his character to grow. I didn't agree with HOW he dealt with it at times (especially keeping it from Lorelai for so long) but it was a necessary evil nonetheless. These things make Lorelai and Luke's reconciliation more believable in my eyes.

[timimouse]

I'm gonna throw something out here (which I'm sure was probably previously discussed so I apologise in advance). Now I'm a huge fan of the Season 6 rift between Lorelai and Rory. It made their relationship much more realistic in my eyes and again necessary for character development in my eyes. But a few things are troubling me. I understand that Richard and Emily saw it as their do-over in that for once somebody was running to them for help instead of running away from them. However, 1) Why was Lorelai SO adamant that Rory taking time off was such a bad idea? It's really not natural for a 3 year old to decide they want to become a journalist and never change their mind in 18 years. Most people question their career choices at some point in life; isn't it better they do that whilst in college when they have the chance to potentially alter that path, than 10 years later when they're miserable? and 2) Why didn't Richard and Emily believe Lorelai about Huntzbergers?I don't see why after everything she told them, they still coddled Logan and kissed all that Huntzberger a$$. Were they so blinded by the name and status?

[KatWay]

I think Lorelai wouldn't have minded if Rory had talked about switching majors or thinking about doing a semester abroad to figure things out, but she full on dropped college, after everything she'd worked for so long, and she clearly wasn't in a good mindset about it. It was a very spur of the moment decision, I think Lorelai would have been more supportive if they'd had a mature talk about it. Which is why she wanted her parents to turn Rory away, so she would have to calm down a little and they could mull things over.

 

As for why the Gilmores didn't believe Lorelai...well, that never made much sense to me either. Why didn't they ask Rory? Surely they would have believed her? But still it reeked of this elitist thinking - Lorelai couldn't possibly be right about the Huntzbergers, she had to be biased, because the Huntzbergers were basically royalty after all, and Lorelai just didn't understand that world. I still cringe at how they treat her when Logan comes to visit.

[moonb]

Seconded. I think if Rory had had a definitive plan for her time off and a timeline for a return to school, Lorelai might have handled it more thoughtfully. But I think in Lorelai's eyes, Rory was simply reacting to Mitchum's review without thinking - which she was. And also, Rory may have reached the point in her development where she really believes that connections are much more important than drive or talent - a sign to Lorelai of her movement into the upper class world of the Gilmores and Huntzbergers. It's the overall pattern of season 5 Rory that makes Lorelai worry: the initial casual relationship with Logan, sleeping with Dean, taking the Huntzberger internship. If Rory hadn't already been behaving in questionable ways for the past year(to Lorelai), maybe Lorelai wouldn't have taken her decision so badly. But would season 2 Rory have reacted to Mitchum that way? Who knows?

I also fanwanked that Rory told Richard some portion of the Mitchum story with important omissions. I can buy that Richard and Emily would dismiss Lorelai's version so easily - she exaggerates everything, she hates the Huntzbergers for being rich, she has an axe to grind. Perhaps the senior Gilmores were so pleased to have Rory run to them for help that neither really thought through this whole "keeping her on track to go back to Yale" plan. Obviously we didn't see Richard doing much of anything to help Rory in early season 6.

Btw, I'm another fan of the Lorelai-Rory rift. I really enjoy that part of season 6.

Edited March 5, 2015 by moonb

[txhorns79]

Btw, I'm another fan of the Lorelai-Rory rift. I really enjoy that part of season 6.

 

I think the rift, if handled correctly, would have been good for both of them.  Maybe it is a UO, but I didn't think they had a healthy relationship as mother and daughter.  I thought Lorelai was way too much of the: "I'd rather have a friend than a daughter" school of parenting, and it really caused her trouble during times when Rory needed a mother who wasn't concerned about being her daughter's friend.   

[moonb]

Yeah, watching your child grow up and make mistakes is going to be rough on any parent. It was probably much, much harder on Lorelai because so much of her identity is wrapped up in Rory - her own self, her skill as a mother, and her chosen way of life.

[dustylil]

I agree with moonb concerning the senior Gilmores not accepting that Mitchum  had said something that had upset Rory. Why would Emily and Richard believe what Lorelai said about anything? To their mind, she was still a petulant, headstrong teenager. She couldn't be trusted to make appropriate judgements concerning her own lifestyle, her work, her love life, or what was best for her daughter. Not understanding or  being part of the Huntzberger world, Lorelai had at best  misinterpreted some light or idle comment on MItchum's part.

As well, that a close friend of theirs - a fellow Eli of Richard's - would do or say anything about their perfect granddaughter simply wouldn't compute for the senior Gilmores. Surely everyone saw and appreciated the wonderfulness that was Rory.

[timimouse]

I think Lorelai wouldn't have minded if Rory had talked about switching majors or thinking about doing a semester abroad to figure things out, but she full on dropped college, after everything she'd worked for so long, and she clearly wasn't in a good mindset about it. It was a very spur of the moment decision, I think Lorelai would have been more supportive if they'd had a mature talk about it. Which is why she wanted her parents to turn Rory away, so she would have to calm down a little and they could mull things over.

 

 

Seconded. I think if Rory had had a definitive plan for her time off and a timeline for a return to school, Lorelai might have handled it more thoughtfully.

 

Yes, it was a bit rash, however she did talk about the possibility of going back and so did Richard and Emily. I think Lorelai's reaction actually made it worse. She didn't really listen... she just flipped out and said "NO". You cannot tell a 20 year old no. She's an adult. If Lorelai had recognised Rory's confusion and sat and talked it through with her, I think it would've gone very differently. I think it's more evidence of how dysfunctional their relationship was deep down. How much Lorelai live vicariously through Rory. Which is so ironic as all she wanted was to be able to make her own choices without HER parents' influences.

 

I think the rift, if handled correctly, would have been good for both of them.  Maybe it is a UO, but I didn't think they had a healthy relationship as mother and daughter.  I thought Lorelai was way too much of the: "I'd rather have a friend than a daughter" school of parenting, and it really caused her trouble during times when Rory needed a mother who wasn't concerned about being her daughter's friend.   

 

This solidifies my point from above. Also, as previously mentioned, there was alot of what Rory was doing throughout season 5 that Lore didn't agree with... but she never really said anything about it. It's almost as if she wanted so badly to maintain that "best friend" role that she was too scared to speak her mind. The few times she did, Rory didn't take it very well (Dean / Logan / Huntzbergers) so she back off. DYSFUNCTIONAL on both ends. Because your best friend would want to tell you the truth and you'd want to hear it.

[dustylil]

Of course Rory's other best friend Lane thought the affair with Dean was just peachy.

 

I thought Lorelai was entitled to express her frustration with Rory's decision to suddenly drop out of Yale (there wasn't even a pro/con list!)  especially, given all that had transpired over the last several months. To say nothing of Rory's snippy attitude at their lunch.  But she probably figured they would continue the discussion at their house when both had a chance to calm down. How was she to know that Rory would without a word up sticks and move in with the grandparents?

[Aloeonatable]

 

I don't see why after everything she told them, they still coddled Logan and kissed all that Huntzberger a$$. Were they so blinded by the name and status?

I couldn't understand why they were so wanting Rory to marry Logan (at least Emily was) after the hell the Huntzbergers put Rory through. 

[junienmomo]

Yes, it was a bit rash, however she did talk about the possibility of going back and so did Richard and Emily. I think Lorelai's reaction actually made it worse. She didn't really listen... she just flipped out and said "NO". You cannot tell a 20 year old no. She's an adult. If Lorelai had recognised Rory's confusion and sat and talked it through with her, I think it would've gone very differently. I think it's more evidence of how dysfunctional their relationship was deep down. How much Lorelai live vicariously through Rory. Which is so ironic as all she wanted was to be able to make her own choices without HER parents' influences.

 

 

After Rory's first year at Yale, Lorelai had zero power over her daughter. Money came from the grandparents, she had friends, could live any number of places if she wanted to, she technically didn't need Lorelai at all. Add to that the sleeping with a married man and the trip to Europe. Lorelai was already hurting over the lower priority their "special relationship" had. In the past it had been easy to push Christopher away so Lorelai could be the best parent ever, but she couldn't do that with the grandparents or the Yale friends.

 

After the second year, Rory wasn't coming home as often. She had a boyfriend (was Logan already in the picture?) who was part of the grandparents' world, and Lorelai was cut out. She was chasing her daughter instead of helping her through the transition that adulthood brings, something Lorelai didn't experience except in a slight way with Mia.

 

Cut to the yacht theft. Rory has, for a moment, become Jess. What was Lorelai's reaction when Jess did something stupid? Explode, make demands, in Jess' case of Luke. The demand that Rory couldn't quit school stems from Lorelai seeing that Rory had really broken the special connection, that Rory didn't intend to become what Lorelai had insisted she become.

 

Lorelai never seemed to appreciate what she had until she didn't have it anymore.

[txhorns79]

You cannot tell a 20 year old no. She's an adult.

 

I would qualify that statement.  If you are supporting that 20 year old, you have all the right in the world to condition your support of that person on their making choices with which you agree, or otherwise can live with.  The 20 year old then has the choice to disagree and refuse your support, or realize that they can make their own decisions, without parental involvement, when they are supporting themselves.

[readster]

 

This solidifies my point from above. Also, as previously mentioned, there was alot of what Rory was doing throughout season 5 that Lore didn't agree with... but she never really said anything about it. It's almost as if she wanted so badly to maintain that "best friend" role that she was too scared to speak her mind. The few times she did, Rory didn't take it very well (Dean / Logan / Huntzbergers) so she back off. DYSFUNCTIONAL on both ends. Because your best friend would want to tell you the truth and you'd want to hear it.

 

  I also agree with this. Lorelai didn't like where Rory was going towards and it was more into the life she ran away from and never really wanted to be a part of. She wanted to still be the BFF that was told everything and as Rory's mother, have everything she wanted for her and forget the rest or even to the point where she was afraid to tell Rory she didn't like where she was going or the choices she had made the last 2 years. The big problem I did have with the Huntzberger problem was, that it wasn't the first time someone in a higher circle thought ill of Emily and Richard. They will still saying how they let Lorelai ruin her life with getting pregnant and not marrying Christopher and even to the point where Straube and Francine admitted in season 1 that people thought less of them for letting it happen too. Even though they blamed Lorelai and Rory for everything that went wrong in Christopher's life. I really hated it with Richard who knew what it was like to all of a sudden be thought of so greatly and then being forced out as he was with Jason's father who basically forced Richard into early retirement because he thought he was too old and out of touch with today's standards. Then when Jason *gasp* decided to do his own company with Richard, Jason was basically excommunicated from his family and the company and Richard was blackmailed into coming back. So, really to think that they couldn't believe that Logan's family would dare to say anything 1) critical and 2) completely downright mean and belittling. Especially, when everyone knew about stuff the Huntzburgers did in the past came off as not only Emily and Richard wearing rose colored glasses but being so oblivious that they could have killed someone in front of them and they go: "Well, I'm sure he had that coming." 

  However, with Gilmore Girls the rich and upper class were constantly portrayed as snooty and unaware of the world around them. Emily had no idea what Google was. When Luke asked the DAR what it really did they laughed at him like he was some 3 year old saying: "I farted!" 

[timimouse]

I would qualify that statement.  If you are supporting that 20 year old, you have all the right in the world to condition your support of that person on their making choices with which you agree, or otherwise can live with.  The 20 year old then has the choice to disagree and refuse your support, or realize that they can make their own decisions, without parental involvement, when they are supporting themselves.

 

Agreed. I should've been more explicit. Lorelai wasn't supporting Rory at this point - Rory wasn't living under her roof and Lorelai wasn't paying for Yale. However, that being said, I still think her approach was too dramatic. 

[solotrek]

Agreed. I should've been more explicit. Lorelai wasn't supporting Rory at this point - Rory wasn't living under her roof and Lorelai wasn't paying for Yale. However, that being said, I still think her approach was too dramatic. 

I thought her reaction at the lunch was pretty on point. Rory was just out of jail, they're both emotionally amped and then Rory just dropped that bomb on her. Even I would be like WTF are you talking about/hell no. I thought all subsequent actions/reactions by Lorelai was just insanely over the top and just not motherly. Her cool down period was never. And instead of being the mother in the situation, (like I've said before) the vibe I kept getting was jilted lover. Their conversations during that time always ended up being confrontations and that was mostly due to Lorelai. Heck, she even did the weird ex thing of constantly having lunch with Paris just to hear bits of news about Rory.

 

Maybe it is a UO, but I didn't think they had a healthy relationship as mother and daughter.  I thought Lorelai was way too much of the: "I'd rather have a friend than a daughter" school of parenting, and it really caused her trouble during times when Rory needed a mother who wasn't concerned about being her daughter's friend.

 

Yup. Even the whole Jess-hate early on ended because Emily had agreed with her and she didn't want to be Emily. No Lorelai, those were your motherly instincts and maybe you should stick to your guns.

[ShellSeeker]

I just finished watching the series for the first time, and my UO (or maybe it isn't, I'm not sure) is that I think Rory should have accepted Logan's proposal. I get why the writers had her say no, but I really liked Logan -- I liked him more than the creepily possessive Dean, and much more than the tormented, overwrought Jess.

 

It seemed like Rory thought that if she married Logan, then her career would be over before it ever got started, and that she'd become the corporate wife who planned dinner parties and started having babies. I don't think it would have had to be that way though. Logan was also starting his career and also, he was always very supportive of Rory's ambitions. I don't think he would have expected her to immediately click into housewife mode -- it probably would have freaked him out. 

 

I would have liked to see them talk about it more, and agree that they wanted to be together, but they also both wanted to focus on their careers. Logan could have thrown himself into working for that start-up company in California (at least I think it was a startup), and Rory still could have followed the Obama campaign. Then, when they had both established themselves, together they could have made a decision about what they wanted to do next.

 

I don't know, maybe that's not realistic. I guess I wish that the show had had a more favorable view of marriage. Other than Richard and Emily, there really were no strong, healthy marriages on that show. Dean got married, but then cheated on Lindsay with Rory. Lane got married, and ended up as the girl who gets knocked-up and is then stuck in her hometown forever. Lorelai bailed on Max, harpooned things with Luke, and then had a short-lived disastrous marriage to Christopher.

[Aloeonatable]

 

t seemed like Rory thought that if she married Logan, then her career would be over before it ever got started, and that she'd become the corporate wife who planned dinner parties and started having babies.

 

What made you think this? I saw Rory as wanting to make her own decision about where she wanted to live and work. Logan even mentioned a couple of newspapers that she could work for when they moved to the Bay Area, so I don't think either of them saw her as a corporate wife, planning dinner parties and having babies. 

 

 

I would have liked to see them talk about it more, and agree that they wanted to be together, but they also both wanted to focus on their careers.

 

The issue seemed to be more about sustaining a long distance relationship. Rory was willing to do that, Logan wasn't. 

 

 

I don't know, maybe that's not realistic. I guess I wish that the show had had a more favorable view of marriage. Other than Richard and Emily, there really were no strong, healthy marriages on that show. Dean got married, but then cheated on Lindsay with Rory. Lane got married, and ended up as the girl who gets knocked-up and is then stuck in her hometown forever. Lorelai bailed on Max, harpooned things with Luke, and then had a short-lived disastrous marriage to Christopher.

 

Marriage on this show was often shown as a mixed bag. Not surprising that the Dean/Lindsay marriage didn't work out. They were far to young and immature. As for Lane, she wasn't shown to be too unhappy with her choice of partner nor the early pregnancy. Lorelei's history with men and possible mates was a mess, but I don't think that the show was necessarily unfavorable to marriage. 

 

Anyway, I'm glad that Rory didn't marry Logan. I can see her eventually settling down with someone else.

[solotrek]

I just finished watching the series for the first time, and my UO (or maybe it isn't, I'm not sure) is that I think Rory should have accepted Logan's proposal. I get why the writers had her say no, but I really liked Logan -- I liked him more than the creepily possessive Dean, and much more than the tormented, overwrought Jess.

 

It seemed like Rory thought that if she married Logan, then her career would be over before it ever got started, and that she'd become the corporate wife who planned dinner parties and started having babies. I don't think it would have had to be that way though. Logan was also starting his career and also, he was always very supportive of Rory's ambitions. I don't think he would have expected her to immediately click into housewife mode -- it probably would have freaked him out. 

 

I would have liked to see them talk about it more, and agree that they wanted to be together, but they also both wanted to focus on their careers. Logan could have thrown himself into working for that start-up company in California (at least I think it was a startup), and Rory still could have followed the Obama campaign. Then, when they had both established themselves, together they could have made a decision about what they wanted to do next.

 

I don't know, maybe that's not realistic. I guess I wish that the show had had a more favorable view of marriage. Other than Richard and Emily, there really were no strong, healthy marriages on that show. Dean got married, but then cheated on Lindsay with Rory. Lane got married, and ended up as the girl who gets knocked-up and is then stuck in her hometown forever. Lorelai bailed on Max, harpooned things with Luke, and then had a short-lived disastrous marriage to Christopher.

Honestly, I loved Logan as a boyfriend. I love how they both grew up in and around the relationship and it was fully functional. They supported each other when needed and fought and argued when needed. Their Ross/Rachel "it was a break" issue aside, they were one of the healthiest relationships on the show. I could see them getting married and would have had no problem if Rory accepted. Heck, my own engagement lasted a couple of years while my now husband and I were finishing college and working on post college stuff and having a long distance relationship for many of those years.  So I would have had no issues with Rory off covering the Obama campaign and Logan working with the San Francisco company at the time. When you're an adult with a strong relationship, you can handle it. And honestly, those two had a pretty great relationship by then.

 

That being said, based on everything Rory has seen of marriage, it does mean the end of a career. Sookie aside, what married woman in the show had a career?

 

I do think the whole thing was rushed. I'm always confused when the actors from the show (Lauren, Keiko come to mind from recent interviews) say that they were surprised the show was ending. The way they ended that relationship (and everything else ended) was pretty series finale. For a season finale, I could see them waiting it out, Logan letting Rory find her own post-college career, talking about it more, etc... Heck, Paris and Doyle ended up having a more natural progression than how they ended Logan and Rory.

[txhorns79]

I do think the whole thing was rushed. I'm always confused when the actors from the show (Lauren, Keiko come to mind from recent interviews) say that they were surprised the show was ending. The way they ended that relationship (and everything else ended) was pretty series finale. For a season finale, I could see them waiting it out, Logan letting Rory find her own post-college career, talking about it more, etc... Heck, Paris and Doyle ended up having a more natural progression than how they ended Logan and Rory.

 

If I remember right, there was an open question during the seventh season as to whether Gilmore Girls was ending, or if it was going to return for a short final season.  I think for a period, it very much looked like the show was going to come back (and I mean the actors were signed on for another season, etc.), so maybe that is why the actors were surprised when it turned out to be the end.  I think the final episodes were written in a way to where they could serve as a series finale, but remained open enough that the series could return.   

[readster]

If I remember right, there was an open question during the seventh season as to whether Gilmore Girls was ending, or if it was going to return for a short final season.  I think for a period, it very much looked like the show was going to come back (and I mean the actors were signed on for another season, etc.), so maybe that is why the actors were surprised when it turned out to be the end.  I think the final episodes were written in a way to where they could serve as a series finale, but remained open enough that the series could return.   

 

 Plus, this was at the time with the CW you had shows that were suppose to be cancelled returning out of nowhere (7th Heaven) and shows being written to end even if it look like they were going to come back (Gilmore Girls, Everwood, Veronica Mars).  I do remember Kieko saying it was almost a "Married with Children Reveal" which was that the entire cast and crew didn't know that Married with Children was ending during the 11th season and someone in the higher ups told a radio show due to confusion on the date of announcement. The PR person thought it was already made when the cast and crew were not being told until the following Monday before shooting began on the last 5 episodes. It ended up with the entire cast and crew not only shocked but that such an announcement was made public before they were told. 

[junienmomo]

 I guess I wish that the show had had a more favorable view of marriage. Other than Richard and Emily, there really were no strong, healthy marriages on that show. Dean got married, but then cheated on Lindsay with Rory. Lane got married, and ended up as the girl who gets knocked-up and is then stuck in her hometown forever. Lorelai bailed on Max, harpooned things with Luke, and then had a short-lived disastrous marriage to Christopher.

Morey and Babette is the strongest marriage in the secondary characters, I think. 

Other relatively strong marriages include:

• The Kims theoretically LOL
• Dean's parents, his mother even worked, although not at a career
• Mitchum and Shira, no guarantee that what Emily said about them was true, but they also weren't on a breakup path
• Tom and 'the wife'
• yes, even TJ and Liz
• Mia and Howard through the wedding at least

[readster]

You can add in despite things, Straube and Francine and even though they never officially got to the alter. Kirk and Lulu had a pretty solid relationship.

[Aloeonatable]

This is just my opinion, but I think ASP always wanted Rory to end up single. 

[txhorns79]

This is just my opinion, but I think ASP always wanted Rory to end up single.

 

I did appreciate that Rory's "ending" in terms of the show was more about her own professional accomplishment than some life cycle based development (i.e. a wedding, babies, baby weddings,  etc.). 

[solotrek]

I did appreciate that Rory's "ending" in terms of the show was more about her own professional accomplishment than some life cycle based development (i.e. a wedding, babies, baby weddings,  etc.). 

It's fitting because that's the premise the show started with. Rory gets into Chilton to go to Harvard to become a journalist. The show ends with Rory fulfilling that dream (Yale instead of Harvard) and doing the Obama campaign trail as a journalist.

[timimouse]

Personally, I did not care for Logan much. Even more so, I don't think him and Rory were good together. I think she changed too much for him /  compromised who she was to maintain that relationship. And once a relationship starts like that it's downhill from there. Towards the end I felt like they tried to make Logan this oh so loveable guy, but I didn't buy it. And I'm glad she didn't accept the proposal because for once she was standing up for what SHE wanted. It wasn't that she didn't love him, but her career path meant more to her at that time than being Mrs. Logan Huntzberger. She redeemed herself a bit there in my book.

Edited March 6, 2015 by timimouse

[amensisterfriend]

This is just my opinion, but I think ASP always wanted Rory to end up single.

 

I agree, but my own, deeply UO on this is that I would have far preferred Lorelai to be the one who ended the series contentedly, optimistically single, and I think that ending would have made a lot of sense. 

[dustylil]

I was a bit puzzled that in all talk of marriage between Logan and Rory, there was no discussion of how becoming a Huntzberger by marriage might potentially affect her own about-to-be launched career in journalism. Would she avoid taking jobs  at any Huntzberger-owned media outlets for fear of accusations of favouritism? Ride the Huntzberger name for as far as it would take her? Would she keep away from reporting on fields that might be sensitive to the family (e.g. media concentration) or ones in which Logan had a particular interest?

[txhorns79]

I was a bit puzzled that in all talk of marriage between Logan and Rory, there was no discussion of how becoming a Huntzberger by marriage might potentially affect her own about-to-be launched career in journalism.  Would she avoid taking jobs  at any Huntzberger-owned media outlets for fear of accusations of favouritism? Ride the Huntzberger name for as far as it would take her? Would she keep away from reporting on fields that might be sensitive to the family (e.g. media concentration) or ones in which Logan had a particular interest?

 

That sounds like a discussion Rory may have with Logan, or her friends/family after the couple actually became engaged, not before.  It only really is pertinent if she intends to get married to him.  Otherwise, the issue is moot. 

 

Though honestly, if the marriage had happened, she'd probably do what every other reporter does when they have a potential conflict: either mention the conflict up front in the article for full disclosure, or simply give the story to another reporter.   

[timimouse]

I was a bit puzzled that in all talk of marriage between Logan and Rory, there was no discussion of how becoming a Huntzberger by marriage might potentially affect her own about-to-be launched career in journalism. Would she avoid taking jobs  at any Huntzberger-owned media outlets for fear of accusations of favouritism? Ride the Huntzberger name for as far as it would take her? Would she keep away from reporting on fields that might be sensitive to the family (e.g. media concentration) or ones in which Logan had a particular interest?

 

Wasn't Logan on the oust with his family at this point? That being the case, I'd assume they would just continue on that route of gaining their success sans the Huntzberger name. He'd probably become a Gilmore! haha

 

Like said before, she would probably just disclose the conflict upfront or decline to do the story.

[dustylil]

Yes, she might decline individual stories, but would she refuse to work for Huntzberger newspapers or television stations in order to maintain her independence? I would have thought that given how "tormented" Logan was by his family name and all their power, that it would occur to her that there were issues that she herself would think through and address once she was getting serious about him.

 

Also, it would make a change from writing Mrs. Rory Huntzberger over and over again in the margins  her geometry text :)

[txhorns79]

Yes, she might decline individual stories, but would she refuse to work for Huntzberger newspapers or television stations in order to maintain her independence?

 

Honestly, it wouldn't make much sense for Rory to work for any entity connected to Mitchum.  After all, her experience working for him was a bad one.  Why would she put herself in that situation again?   

[Nanrad]

 I agree, the writing staff constantly threw out the "Moonlighting Effect" with Luke and Lorelai saying that it would get boring or sighting certain soup operas or fellow writers. With their excuse: "The best characters never change." Both those analogies are very stupid in my opinion. The basis of the Moonlighting Effect was a result of a writers strike, poor timing and the actors having a problem with each other. The talk about "the best characters never change" needs to be that what makes up their core doesn't change. 

Who were her English teachers growing up? Writing 101 teaches students static and dynamic characters, which more times than not, characters are supposed to be dynamic characters and they often are the best characters. This can be a positive or negative change, but there is supposed to be change of some sort. If a character is static, it better be for a good reason other than "the best characters never change." The Moolighting Effect is a curse, very misunderstood, and often a cop out for writers.

 

I can't blame Rory for not feeling that much of a connection to Georgia.  Rory has a limited relationship with her father, and, at best, sees he and Georgia irregularly.  And that doesn't even get into the fact that Georgia is what, 18 years younger than Rory?  Those are difficult circumstances under which to form a relationship, much less one where Rory feels a sisterly bond to Georgia.  From my own experience, I have a friend who was 17 when his last sibling was born.  They are full siblings, but don't have much of a relationship, not because of anything either has done, but simply because he was already established with his own family by the time his youngest sibling was eleven or twelve.  As such, he had his own life by that point and the bonding events never happened.     

idk, personally, I get her reason, but I'm not cutting her slack. I have two older brothers who are both 18 years older than my twin and I (they aren't twins, my parents both had kids around the same age prior to meeting one another) and I have other half siblings. I don't often speak to my older brother (through my mother), but he tries and I know he tries. He's busy and has a family, I understand that, but we have a relationship or sorts. I don't speak to the other one (through my father) for reasons. My other two brothers I don't speak to because of some fucked up shit they did. And I have an older sister who we met through my father's death, but we speak once or twice a year. I have a total of 9 siblings and only speak to two of them (my full siblings) on a consistent basis not including my mother's son. Despite all of this, I refer to all of them as my siblings. I don't say, I only have 3 siblings and neglect the others because I wasn't raised with them/don't see them.

 

As for Lorelai, she was never one of my favorite characters. She was often times annoying and because I love Jess, the fact that she hated him made me like her less.

I loathe Jess, but I hated the way she treated him. But, I also think he made things harder than they had to be. His life could've been simpler if he wasn't unnecessarily difficult. Lorelai grated when it came to Jess because she was just determined to hate him and I haven't even gotten to the car crash yet. :'(

 

Count me as firmly on Emily's side in most cases. Ya know wanna know why your relationship with your parents always sucks and never gets any better, Lorelai? It's because you're self-centered, sanctimonious ass hat who doesn't think how your actions affect others. Currently watching Season 3, and I want to throw dinner rolls at the TV - Lorelai REALLY DIDN'T KNOW  that you're supposed to apply to more than one school? 

 

Also, I like Chris instead of Luke. Granted, I haven't really gotten to the later seasons when they get married, but I remember watching them the first time around thinking that Luke should just go off with April and find someone else who digs the lumbersexual look, and Chris should be the end game. But, actually, now that I'm thinking about it...maybe Luke deserves Lorelai because she's so awful. And he's awful. And they can be awful together. 

Emily has valid points, but regarding her execution and shoddy history with Lorelai, that is what messes her up more times than not. As a person who has always identified with adults/parents even when I was a teen and had no tolerance for kids/teens myself, Emily really shoots herself in the foot concerning her own daughter.

 

Chris and Lorelai have better chemistry, but I find it hard for someone who cares so much about her daughter to get with the father who abandoned her, which he did. It's baffling. 

 

Readster's comments about Anna being a suitable candidate for institutionalization reminded of something that occurred to me back when we first met the ghastly Ms. Nardini.

This had absolutely nothing to do with Luke, but  I never thought Anna's views were all that unusual for the time. As a successful businesswoman, she felt she was quite capable of having and raising a child on her own and had no need of a partner.  Just a sperm donor.That a boy or girl might need or be better off with at least two parents and/or an extended family in his or her  lives was immaterial. After all, other women (widows, divorcees) had the job thrust upon and did alright. As far as Anna was concerned, she figured she knew what had to be done and had the resources to do it.

It is a cockamamie approach to parenting in my view,  but I do understand the mindset behind it.

True, but she robbed Luke of the option and it was unfair to her daughter. And just overall overbearing about the whole situation.

 

Same with Christopher. And on this re-watch, I have more questions about Rory's early years, because it seems like Chris wanted to be involved in Rory's life but it was Lorelai who kept everyone away. Not that Chris should have fought more if he wanted to be involved in his daughters life, but with what's been discussed, it seems like Lorerlai's the reason he was kept at a distance. Which is just an asshat thing to do. Maybe I missed some crucial dialogue that counters this? 

Actually, there is. In Chris' first or second episode, Lorelai basically lays out how Chris has been a shitty father (which was posted), and then allows him to be apart of Rory's life when he promised to do better. It has also been repeated several times than Chris was the one who never called and broke promises after making them and Lorelai would chastise him about being a disappointment to Rory. All of this stems from Chris' behavior. I can't excuse Chris because if he really wanted to be a father, he could have been. I doubt Lorelai wouldn't made his life unpleasant, especially because she waited for years for him to get his shit together. It's important to note that Rory KNEW who her father was and Lorelai never badmouthed him to her. Rory loved her dad and was excited to see him, but had to temper her expectations in case her broke them because he was known to. 

 

That's the thing, though.  I'm not arguing the what, I'm arguing the why.  Christopher wasn't around much....why?  Because Lorelai didn't make a place for him there.  She paid lip service to wanting him around for Rory, but that wasn't what her behavior showed him she wanted.  Her behavior showed him she wanted him around as a romantic partner for her, and her encouraging a relationship with his daughter always took back burner to that.  Rory knew it.  That's why she went off on Christopher when she found out he'd had lunch with Lorelai in ESH.

This was explained already as to why Rory was upset with her dad, so I'm discussing another point: whether or not Lorelai didn't make a place for him in their life for father figure, Chris didn't try to make one himself. He popped in and out of their lives when it was convenient for him. She shouldn't have to encourage Chris to want to be a (better) dad, either he wants to be one or he doesn't. Rory understood this. She liked him, but he wasn't much of a father and rather date her mom than actively be involved in her life on his own. 

 

They worked well for the roles they played and with that you can see why they were supposed to be a great couple. Just didn't necessarily work when it came to the actors to "bring it".

I thought they had great chemistry in the season 2 premiere in the dream sequence where Lorelai was pregnant with Luke's baby. But, that was too tame and boring for the show runners. 

 

Honestly, what were Lorelai's big complaints with her parents?  That they didn't understand her, and made her feel bad?  That they made her feel stifled?  Boo hoo.  Spoiled teenager hates her parents.  News at 11.          

As a person who grew up and a very support and open how where I could express myself, Emily and Richard came off as somewhat emotionally abusive. Perhaps, that's not the right term, but I don't think they made her feel stifled, I think they were actually stifling her. Even as an adult, her life and her choices aren't good enough. Manager at an Inn and owns her own business--not good enough. Their assessment of Luke before and during the relationship--not good enough because he wasn't the right breeding. Interfered and meddled when given the chance. I can't image what they did before she ran away. 

 

I would say it was more of a two way street on that.  From Emily and Richard's view, Lorelai not only walked out on them, but threw everything they gave her back in their faces.  Lorelai passed the ultimate judgment on them when she walked out, essentially publicly declaring that they weren't fit to be her parents, or otherwise have any kind of place in she and Rory's life.  That's pretty devastating.     

 

Yeah, when something like that happens, you examine your actions and try to change. They stayed the same. I'm not saying Lorelai is perfect, because she isn't, but they were controlling and judgmental to the max. They haven't moved on from what Lorelai did as a young girl and make her feel like shit when shit hits the fan. 

[JayInChicago]

It's interesting--in my opinion it seems commentary here has swung away from supporting Lorelai very much. Do you all think that's a fair assessment?

 

I'm part of an online group for children of parents with a certain disorder that makes them difficult, often impossible people. I often see Emily as a character in a similar light, and Richard to some degree as well. Often the best advice to children in the group I'm referring to is to just walk away from the parents with this disorder. When I first started reading there I thought "god, that's harsh" but after reading more it seems it's for the best when a relationship is totally dysfunctional and actively harmful.  I guess what I wonder is if we'd class Richard and Emily as dysfunctional towards Lorelai (I'd say yes) and actively harmful (hmm...sometimes?)  The problem I sometimes have when I rewatch is whether Emily's sometimes cartoonish villainy has this powerless quality that lets her get away with certain things. Like, a refrain often is that she and her other upper crusty late Silent Generation era women were and are wives. This is what they were raised to do, and while she's completely capable of running a household and being a corporate wife, she has not even very veiled envy towards Lorelai for having a career and not wedding the first well bred man who showed interest. She eventually shows a tiny bit of pride in her daughter's accomplishments, but it's pretty faint.

 

Really though, Kelly Bishop's extremely strong acting gave nuance to this character that just the writing wouldn't do. She could have been played any number of ways that would have ruined the show. So while I don't like Emily very much, I can watch the acting and enjoy the craft.

[txhorns79]

Yeah, when something like that happens, you examine your actions and try to change. They stayed the same. I'm not saying Lorelai is perfect, because she isn't, but they were controlling and judgmental to the max. They haven't moved on from what Lorelai did as a young girl and make her feel like shit when shit hits the fan.

 

I think my main point was that it wasn't clear what Emily and Richard had done to deserve Lorelai's running away and cutting them off.  I thought that was an underlying weakness to the premise that the show kind of glossed over.  If it isn't clear as to what you may have done wrong as a parent, or if you honestly believe you didn't do anything wrong, it is isn't necessarily clear what you would be re-examining and trying to change.  As to "moving on" from what Lorelai had done, I doubt they would be able to do that.  It would have been pretty traumatic an event.   

[readster]

 

Who were her English teachers growing up? Writing 101 teaches students static and dynamic characters, which more times than not, characters are supposed to be dynamic characters and they often are the best characters. This can be a positive or negative change, but there is supposed to be change of some sort. If a character is static, it better be for a good reason other than "the best characters never change." The Moolighting Effect is a curse, very misunderstood, and often a cop out for writers.

 

  Which you think half of writers in any profession from movies to TV never went through basic writing courses, yet handle projects that become very iconic but then you look back and go: "What were you guys thinking?" I think the worst is when writers throw out the "Moonlighting Curse" when even Bruce Willis has said years later: "It was a problem for our show due to several reasons, don't keep using it as an excuse for your own shows." "Grow up people!" As you said about Emily and Richard, they didn't want to change or even look at how they did things. I mean, come on, Logan almost got himself killed and no one in his family worried about the death of their youngest child. It was more: "Hey you did it yourself, call me when you get discharged." Emily had reality hit her upside the head several times from the distance between her and Lorelai. Her relationship with Trix, her maid suing her, ect. Yet, she never changed, she never took a hard look at herself in the mirror. She just kept being Emily Gilmore, because when you are Emily Gilmore, the world revolves around you. I will never forget the timeshare jet situation. She hated she couldn't control something she went to the point where she wanted to spend way too much money to have control over one thing in her life. Since she felt she failed both Lorelai and Rory but yet, she never changed her attitude that maybe that was the cause. Her view that if she didn't steer the world, it was going to fall apart. Kelly Bishop nailed it all the time, even with horrible writing but she even said a few years later: "Emily Gilmore was too caught up in her own little world to the point she could be dying and wanting the drapes changed in her room." 

[Aloeonatable]

 

I think my main point was that it wasn't clear what Emily and Richard had done to deserve Lorelai's running away and cutting them off.

 

It may not have been an action or series of actions on the part of the elder Gilmores that drove Lorelai away, but a lifetime of demands and expectations. I think Lorelai just didn't want Rory to grow up in the same household that she grew up in. I also think that no matter your relationship with your parents, whether good or bad, many people want to live their own lives. Lorelai knew her parents wouldn't easily accept her choice to raise Rory her way and on her own so she had to limit their time together. 

[BBDi]

It's interesting--in my opinion it seems commentary here has swung away from supporting Lorelai very much. Do you all think that's a fair assessment?

 

I'm part of an online group for children of parents with a certain disorder that makes them difficult, often impossible people. I often see Emily as a character in a similar light, and Richard to some degree as well. Often the best advice to children in the group I'm referring to is to just walk away from the parents with this disorder. When I first started reading there I thought "god, that's harsh" but after reading more it seems it's for the best when a relationship is totally dysfunctional and actively harmful.  I guess what I wonder is if we'd class Richard and Emily as dysfunctional towards Lorelai (I'd say yes) and actively harmful (hmm...sometimes?)  The problem I sometimes have when I rewatch is whether Emily's sometimes cartoonish villainy has this powerless quality that lets her get away with certain things. Like, a refrain often is that she and her other upper crusty late Silent Generation era women were and are wives. This is what they were raised to do, and while she's completely capable of running a household and being a corporate wife, she has not even very veiled envy towards Lorelai for having a career and not wedding the first well bred man who showed interest. She eventually shows a tiny bit of pride in her daughter's accomplishments, but it's pretty faint.

 

Really though, Kelly Bishop's extremely strong acting gave nuance to this character that just the writing wouldn't do. She could have been played any number of ways that would have ruined the show. So while I don't like Emily very much, I can watch the acting and enjoy the craft.

 

Like so many things in the show, I think the relationship between Lorelai and her parents is 90% well written and nuanced, and maybe 10% cartoonish. It's been a long time since I watched the early episodes of the show, but I think between what the show gave us and what I filled in, a lot of their relationship makes sense, except when it veers into that over the top cartoonish zone (ie, Lorelai has to raise Rory in a potting shed). Although sometimes I'm not sure if I have interpreted their family dynamics as ASP wanted me to--I just did so in a way that makes sense to me.

 

• The elder Gilmores are old-fashioned, stodgy, conservative, and overly-conscious of appearances. With Emily, that's often taken to the extreme.
• Given what we see over the course of the show wrt Emily's devotion to Richard and her general nature, their dynamic family is not child-centered...And as an only child, Lorelai is expected to fit into her parent's life, not the other way around.
• Lorelai has an innate rebellious streak, which might not have been so pronounced if there wasn't so much to rebel against. I feel like that tension with her parents is one of her main drivers. But one of her least appealing traits (for me) is when she acts like a bratty, rebellious kid with her parents even as an adult, often without trying to find more adult ways to deal with them.
• Without siblings to commiserate with and her parents' lack of warm-fuzziness, it's kind of natural that Lorelai finds Christopher, who is also rebelling against his controlling, standoffish parents.
•  Later it's Rory who gives her that unconditional love she was lacking and together they form a tight unit, and it's Lorelai and Rory against the world. I always felt like one of the main arcs of the show was Lorelai figuring out how to let go of Rory and finally have her own adult life that doesn't revolve around Rory, and Rory learning to live in a real, non-Stars Hollow world where she is not the golden child and things can and do go wrong. In a certain way Lorelai needs to grow up, too. Sometimes I feel like we see her doing that in the show, but when I look at those later seasons I don't see that arc that I expected to see so clearly.
• One of my favorite things in the show is when Richard is sick and Lorelai finally gets a sense of how much her mother loves him and how much her life centers around him and that Emily has softer edges than she thought--she finally understands her mom a bit more.
• Lorelai has some not so good personality traits, IMO, like being self-absorbed, insular (in terms of her relationship with Rory), and maybe a bit inflexible herself, at least where her parents are concerned. I assume we're meant to find her imperfect.
• There's also the dynamic that Rory starts out as that perfect, never-gives-any-trouble child that Lorelai wasn't, and it has got to be conflicting for Lorelai to see Rory interacting with Richard and Emily and being the chld that they wished Lorelai could have been.
• I too expected and hoped to see Lorelai's parents express more appreciation for her accomplishments and work toward a closer relationship by the end of the show, and that did happen a bit, but perhaps was a little too late, especially in those 2 muddled and problematic last seasons.

 

I feel like the show did (at least initially) a great job of packing so much into Lorelai's relationship with Emily (who is after all one of the Gilmore girls) but I'm not sure it all bore fruit as it might have. I do feel like Kelly Bishop is an unsung hero on this show!

[txhorns79]

I think Lorelai just didn't want Rory to grow up in the same household that she grew up in. I also think that no matter your relationship with your parents, whether good or bad, many people want to live their own lives. Lorelai knew her parents wouldn't easily accept her choice to raise Rory her way and on her own so she had to limit their time together.

 

I would have no issue with Lorelai making that choice to live her own life.  My issue is the way she went about it.  To me, she didn't just leave, she burned her bridges and seriously hurt her parents in ways I don't think she totally understood.  It felt somewhat like she was being punitive.       

[JayInChicago]

Yeah, Lorelai definitely was being punitive a lot of the time it seems. It's interesting that Richard and Emily can be like that to people outside the family, but Lorelai breaks their family code by being like that to her closest blood relatives. Hmm. It's a reason I always come back to this show despite it's flaws--there's always more meat on the bone.

[timimouse]

I actually would disagree with the statements made about Emily and Richard not being proud of Lorelai. I think we actually saw the opposite very early on. When Lorelai graduated from Business school, both her parents were there, Emily wanted it all on video and we even saw Emily crying there. They were present at the opening of the Inn, Emily tries to have events at the Inn, Richard helps her with her insurance there.... To me, those things may seem small, but Emily and Richard aren't the best with expressing emotions so it's the little things they do that really count and how they show that they really were proud of her.

 

On another note, I'm not sure if this is an unpopular opinion or not, but does anyone else think they tried too hard to make Anna and April too similar to Lorelai and Rory (respectively). More so Anna and Lorelai (and not just that they looked very similar - dark hair, light eyes...). It first crossed my mind when Rory went to Anna's store and we saw her quirky personality when she was talking to Rory as well as the other customer there. And then again when she overreacted to Lorelai being at April's birthday party. And finally when she flipped out with Luke requesting custody. I could see a bit of a comparison with April and Rory also with them being fast-talking, quirky like their mothers and super-smart.

Not totally sure if this was done deliberately as some foresight to a story line they wished to pursue later on, and never got to, or just a coincidence. But it made me not care much for either Anna or April.