Carl and Laura have feelings, too!
Alas, I can't seem to find the episode where Urkel realizes this and resolves to change his behavior accordingly...
shareWhat about Steve's feelings though? Don't you realize that you're talking about a nerdy teenager, who is forever bullied in school and gets no love from his own parents? And say what you want about Steve and his clumsiness and his poor social skills, but the Winslows were really cruel to him some times.
Intelligence and purity.
Yeah but he's also annoying. Granted you don't want to be cruel to him but the only time he seems to understand that he's been overly annoying is when someone snaps on him. The only person who I thought was completely out of line when it came to Steve was Eddie (with the exception of the Frat party episode) who used him constantly
"I'd rather lose for what I am than win for what I ain't"
Kacey Musgraves "Pageant Material"
Plus, he's supposedly so crazy about the Winslows, but apparently he doesn't care enough about them to be more conscientious about how his behavior affects them...
shareDoes it matter that much if he's had a rough personal life?
First of all, it's his parents and the bullies who are the real bad guys, not the Winslows. Second of all, being the victim of one group does not mean you have no responsibility to show respect to another group, especially if that other group are the ones you impose yourself on.
And that's actually the most important thing of all: the Winslows did not go to Steve and make demands to him and then fail to show him the proper respect. That's usually Steve. He's the one who constantly goes to them, and then it's immediately their responsibility to put his feelings before their own.
Imagine what would happen if someone like Steve went to you, annoyed you every day, broke your things and stalked your daughter. If you order him to leave because you simply don't want to be friends with him, if he cries, and then somebody criticizes you for failing to take care of him and being a terrible family to him, what would you do? Where would your own feelings and rights matter? Wouldn't you find it unfair if such a responsibility was thrusted onto you against your will?
The Winslows have actually given Steve a lot more chances to come back than any real life normal neighbor would, and instead of appreciating them for giving him another chance, Steve just typically responds with something like "Oh Winslows, and Laura my pet! You love me! YOUR REALLY LOVE ME!!!"
Simply put, if you can't respect them, then leave them alone. That's the right thing to do.
Wow... I have to say that you're really too hard on Steve. Sure, he might have been clumsy, pushy and tactless. But he (usually) also had a heart of gold, and he would do anything for the Winslows. He stood up for Laura to many jerks, who did not deserve her attention. He took all the blame when Eddy drove a car through the wall into the living room, even after he almost was sent to military school for it. He was the one to save Carl's life, when he got an electric shock from a broken lamp. Steve did good stuff like that for the Winslows all the time. But I guess that you missed all of it, because you were too busy starring at his flaws. I have to say though that his yearning for Laura was really tiresome, and he would come to treat Myra in a terrible way. But I say that he still was good to the Winslows most of the time...
Intelligence and purity.
I know I sound like I'm very unforgiving of Steve, but it's really not like that. I do consider both the positives and the negatives of his character. It's a little difficult for me to explain my problem with him, but I'll try.
Standing up for Laura to all those jerks is a tough one. In the end, it was a good thing, but it was also meddlesome. Realistically, he didn't really have the right to control her social life, even with good intentions. If it was that time when Laura considered buying a gun (which was absolutely boneheaded of her), then, yes, Steve really had to butt in, because it was serious.
Taking the blame for Eddie's car crash was sweet of him, and I'm glad it worked out for him since in the end Eddie fessed up to Carl.
And he did save Carl's life from the electric shock, not to mention that time when he pulled Carl out of that frozen lake when they went ice fishing, and that time in the hospital when he knocked out that robber trying to shoot Carl.
I really don't miss his good deeds like you think I do, and I do believe that his good deeds far outweigh and redeem his flaws. He deserves to be forgiven for them, just like everybody else. And there's nothing wrong with this sentiment at all. So what is it about Steve being forgiven and learning to be considerate of others that upsets the writers so much?
My guess is the fact that Steve is very easy to have his feelings hurt, and that he is always presented as the victim, and that most mistakes he makes are accidents. And for these reasons, it is never his fault, he did nothing wrong, and it's never his responsibility to feel for others. And this I don't buy.
I really don't hate Steve. And I don't really define him for his mistakes while shrugging off his good deeds. But I hate the ways his flaws are poorly resolved, unacknowledged and unforgiven, and how unfair it is for the Winslows sometimes.
I hate favoritism, double standards, free passes, and entitlements, and Steve had more than a little of these working in his favor.
Standing up for Laura to all those jerks is a tough one. In the end, it was a good thing, but it was also meddlesome. Realistically, he didn't really have the right to control her social life, even with good intentions. If it was that time when Laura considered buying a gun (which was absolutely boneheaded of her), then, yes, Steve really had to butt in, because it was serious.
The problem is that when it came to which guys to pursuit, Laura was really stupid. She would start drooling over all these hunks, even a guy who she knew had hurt her best friend. And she would never get that it would end badly, so Steve had the opportunity to step in and help her. If only she'd had a better judgement, you would have been right that Steve should have minded his own business. But since Laura was so stupid, he was only doing the right thing. And about her buying a gun, and I don't see how it was a bad idea at that point. She had been attacked by those thug girls and was afraid. Then again, I never could go along with the anti-gun moral of that episode.
I really don't hate Steve. And I don't really define him for his mistakes while shrugging off his good deeds. But I hate the ways his flaws are poorly resolved, unacknowledged and unforgiven, and how unfair it is for the Winslows sometimes.
I hate favoritism, double standards, free passes, and entitlements, and Steve had more than a little of these working in his favor.
I don't agree with this at all. Nobody denied that Steve was clumsy and pushy and tactless. But he also was mostly a good guy, which is why his flaws and mistakes were forgiven.
Intelligence and purity. share
And about her buying a gun, and I don't see how it was a bad idea at that point. She had been attacked by those thug girls and was afraid. Then again, I never could go along with the anti-gun moral of that episode.She was underaged, unlicensed, scared, completely untrained with firearms, and had poor judgement at the time, and the gun she was considering buying was from the trunk of a car. People like that had a decent chance to not only hurt someone else unintentionally, but also encourage the bad girls to target and gang up on her first to eliminate threats to themselves, just like the girl who had her shoes stolen.
I don't agree with this at all. Nobody denied that Steve was clumsy and pushy and tactless. But he also was mostly a good guy, which is why his flaws and mistakes were forgiven.Was Steve really forgiven for those?
In the hospital episode, Steve was legitimately rude, loud, and obnoxious, and even hurt Carl with his adjustable bed. And after Steve saved Carl's life from the robber, it's Carl who had to apologize for not accepting Steve as a wonderful friend who was not at all rude, loud, obnoxious, and didn't at all hurt Carl with the bed? I don't think so. That's like saying that if Steve hadn't saved Carl's life afterwards, it still would have been Carl's fault for being a jerk, which clearly is not true. Carl should have forgiven Steve, not apologize to him.
What about that episode where Steve climbed onto the roof without permission, broke the satellite, pulled Carl and Eddie off the roof, and then got mad that they fell on Steve? Not a single apology came out of his mouth. Not one. Instead, he completely shrugged off their pain, and fought fiercely to deny the Winslows any of their rights, only to settle the fight by appealing to Carl about his needs. His needs to get what he wants and not have to be more responsible and considerate to others.
Just because Steve redeems himself doesn't mean his past actions should be forgotten without being forgiven first. And in the event that Steve does not earn forgiveness, I refuse to wait until he does something redeeming in a future episode. An episode should never end with an antagonist unforgiven or unpunished. share
She was underaged, unlicensed, scared, completely untrained with firearms, and had poor judgement at the time, and the gun she was considering buying was from the trunk of a car. People like that had a decent chance to not only hurt someone else unintentionally, but also encourage the bad girls to target and gang up on her first to eliminate threats to themselves, just like the girl who had her shoes stolen.
But like you said yourself, Laura was really scared at the time. And in her mind, buying a gun was the best way for her to protect herself from another attack from those girl thugs. Yeah, that might not have been true at all in real life. But it was a natural thing for Laura to think in that particular situation...
Was Steve really forgiven for those?
In the hospital episode, Steve was legitimately rude, loud, and obnoxious, and even hurt Carl with his adjustable bed. And after Steve saved Carl's life from the robber, it's Carl who had to apologize for not accepting Steve as a wonderful friend who was not at all rude, loud, obnoxious, and didn't at all hurt Carl with the bed? I don't think so. That's like saying that if Steve hadn't saved Carl's life afterwards, it still would have been Carl's fault for being a jerk, which clearly is not true. Carl should have forgiven Steve, not apologize to him.
What about that episode where Steve climbed onto the roof without permission, broke the satellite, pulled Carl and Eddie off the roof, and then got mad that they fell on Steve? Not a single apology came out of his mouth. Not one. Instead, he completely shrugged off their pain, and fought fiercely to deny the Winslows any of their rights, only to settle the fight by appealing to Carl about his needs. His needs to get what he wants and not have to be more responsible and considerate to others.
Just because Steve redeems himself doesn't mean his past actions should be forgotten without being forgiven first. And in the event that Steve does not earn forgiveness, I refuse to wait until he does something redeeming in a future episode. An episode should never end with an antagonist unforgiven or unpunished.
I have not seen those episodes in many years, so I can not comment on them at the moment. But I have to repeat that you, yet again, are way too hard on Steve. And there is no way that he was an antagonist.
Intelligence and purity. share
But like you said yourself, Laura was really scared at the time. And in her mind, buying a gun was the best way for her to protect herself from another attack from those girl thugs. Yeah, that might not have been true at all in real life. But it was a natural thing for Laura to think in that particular situation...Well, yeah, I agree. Anyone in Laura's position could have made the same mistake. But that wasn't the point I was trying to make. My point was that safety and survival were on the line and it was the only time I can remember when Steve seriously did have to intervene.
I have not seen those episodes in many years, so I can not comment on them at the moment. But I have to repeat that you, yet again, are way too hard on Steve. And there is no way that he was an antagonist.Well, I used to like this show a lot that I used to record the episodes on VHS to watch them in my room at night. So I remember those episodes well, and a lot of years after I first watched them, my point of view for the morals of this show became more analysed and critical, and now I find several particular things about this show surprisingly distasteful, especially those episodes.
And I wish you wouldn't misinterpret that I think Steve is some evil person. What I hate, above all else, is the writing of his character on specific episodes, and the way they make him very difficult to be around by other characters without being given the position of the antagonist. Just watch the American Gladiators episode, and you might see what I mean and wonder why he is not an antagonist.
Here's the truth. The writers came up with a formula, where Steve is the unpopular, clumsy and eccentric nerd whom nobody wants to be around, and deep down, he is truly a good and kind person and others have to look through his nerdish exterior and see his real self on the inside. That's actually a good formula.
Unfortunately, however, the writers continually repeat this formula, and their executions gradually get worse and worse. They come up with new ways to make Steve's nerdish exterior more and more intolerable, and the resolutions to these problems are usually the same. In other words, look through his mistakes and judge him for who he is on the inside. He won't learn from those mistakes, and he will do them again and again, but don't get mad over them or make him responsible for them, just judge him for who he is on the inside.
And I think that is a terrible resolution that unfairly leaves the Winslows in a no-win situation. share