Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-34924658-20141208070047/@comment-24674051-20141209145659

The only problem with that analogy is that Ingrid was never the protagonist of the plot. Typically, the anti-hero is in the role, or on the side of, the protagonist. It's just that their methods are sometimes suspect. I would put Peter Pan (as he was presented in JM Barries books) as an Anti-hero. (He definitely was the protagonist, but his methods were not much, if any, better than Hooks.). Regina during the 3A arc in Neverland would definitely qualify as an Anti-Hero, as would Hook. And even Gold in the Neverland arc would be more of an Anti-hero.

Ingrid was the antagonst of the plot, Her goal was to find love (Cue Song: Looking for love in all the wrong places). But her goal was to coerce 2 women (one of whom is legitmately family) to love her and be her sister, a bad goal. and her methods were quite obviously bad as well. Hence, Villian for the better part of the story. And if you look at how she went after Emma in Boston, she comes pretty close to Anti-Villian. Her methods were to spend time with Emma, show Emma that she cared about her (which I really think that in a way she did), and even try to adopt her and give her a family. If it wasn't for what we know to be her end goal, these methods would seem to be those of the hero.

In the end, once Ingrid realizes that she was loved by all of her true sisters, she definitly becomes remorseful about the curse she cast, and her goal changes to canceling the curse and saving Storybrooke (good goal), and since the only way to do that was through self-sacrifice, that is what she chose (good way). Therefore, while she lived much of her adult life as the villian, she is redeemed at the end, and therefore rises to hero status and a happy ending. (remember, happy endings are not always what we expect them to be).