April 2002 posts


Previous April 2002  

More April 2002

Elements of Goldilocks & the Three Bears in GONE (spoilers if you havent yet seen it) -- neaux, 08:33:43 04/10/02 Wed

I was trying to make parallels of GONE to Goldilocks and the Three Bears.. directly relating Goldilocks to Buffy but it seems to me that the writers flipflopped some of the elements of the original Tale to create their own twist on the story. Here is my very brief analysis:

Yes Spike makes it perfectly clear at the beginning of the ep. that He loves his Goldilocks (who is Buffy). Buffy shudders at the thought and chops her hair off. Although Buffy is GONE/Invisible for most of the episode, she still acts out in a Goldilocks fashion as well as the Goldilocks character jumps to the form of Willow as she snoops around the Troika's basement lair.

Of course the Troika easily represent the 3 bears. Warren who proves he is Taller than Johnathan in the Episode would be Pappa bear. Johnathan the bear that has a heart, the momma bear and Andrew the bear that likes to play is Andrew.

One of the main elements of the FaeryTale was the pudding/porridge and yes the pudding is even evident in GONE. And just as if Goldilocks stayed at the Bears house she would have been pudding.. so would have Buffy if she would have stayed invisible... and so possibly would have Willow if she didnt escape the Troika's hostage scenario.

and what about the too big too small just right theme?
um.. well lets just say it was played out in Spike's Crypt as his upstairs was ransacked and Goldilocks ended her fun downstairs in Spike's bed, before she was kicked out. Could Spike's Bed have been JUST RIGHT??!!

Now, what is interesting is the Goldilocks Tale itself because everyone has heard it told in many different ways.. and with many different endings..

Many stories I found on the internet include the three bears eating pudding and Goldilocks escaping from a window at the end of the tale and the little bear wanting Goldilocks to come back and play.

When I was first told the story it was about porridge and Goldilocks trashing the bears house before narrowly escaping her death. I've also heard a version where she was eaten by the bears. Does anyone know of any other variations.. and how it could relate to the episode of GONE?
[> Re: I really like that :-) -- Dedalus, 09:03:29 04/10/02 Wed

[> Too funny neaux! -- ponygirl, 09:08:38 04/10/02 Wed

This definitely brought a smile to my face and since I'm trying to avoid actual work at the moment here's my attempt to parallel the story with Gone:

It's been a while but the major element in Goldilocks seems to be the theme of trespassing and the repetition of 3. There are 3 bears, Goldi tries out 3 different things in the house: the chairs, the porridge, and the beds, of which there are of course 3 of each. In Gone Buffy uses her invisibility to trespass against 3 people: the social worker, Spike and Dawn. It's certainly different than the fairy tale but each has similar elements: Buffy sits in the social worker's chair, she ends up in Spike's bed, and she offers Dawn food. For all Buffy's protestations that she's just trying to have fun, like Goldilocks, she is taking what she wants without regard to the consequences.

In a sense she is trying to find the "just right" option - she's too cold/burdened at the beginning of the episode, too wrapped up in her fun for much of Gone, she can't find the balance. Willow too is searching for the "just right", magic's too tempting, the ordinary ways are too slow.

In the end Buffy does seem to find the middle option in regards to her life, she's not doing backflips about it, but she doesn't want death either. The fact that her third option is not "just right" yet for either her or Willow leads to the rather bittersweet conclusion of the episode.
[> [> Exellent!! That definately makes sense to me! -- neaux, 09:16:01 04/10/02 Wed

very astute!! I knew someone would find something in my ramblings to make sense!! Thank you Ponygirl!
[> [> Hot, Cold, Just Right -- ravenhair, 10:32:07 04/10/02 Wed

What a fun analysis, neux! Adding to ponygirl's comments regarding food. Notice Buffy torturing the social worker with the HOT coffee, teasing Dawn with the COLD pizza, and
finding contentment in the company of Spike (Nekkid!Spike=JustRight).
[> [> [> Just right?? Surely a DEAD body is cold?? :) :) (NT) -- Heinaki, 10:55:05 04/10/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> Mmm... room temperature! Just right! -- ponygirl, 10:59:12 04/10/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> [> "Room" temperature... in a cold, cold crypt! Mwa ha ha! -- Heinaki, 11:04:02 04/10/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> [> "Room" temperature... in a cold, cold crypt! Mwa ha ha! -- Heinaki, 11:04:03 04/10/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> Re: Just right?? Surely a DEAD body is cold?? :) :) (NT) -- ravenhair, 12:22:26 04/10/02 Wed

Sex = Food

or remember: "hey, that's cheating"??

OK. Mind. Out. Of. Gutter.
[> [> [> It's always about balancing Ice and Fire isn't it ? damn i love that use of a pattern in S6 -- Ete, 11:05:41 04/10/02 Wed

[> Good analysis - my guess is the writer/s put it in subconsciously -- Slain, 15:52:09 04/10/02 Wed

Darkness and Light -- Rahael, 12:16:54 04/10/02 Wed

This is a re-post of my response to a really interesting discussion lingering at the bottom of the board, and I thought I'd restart it again at the top. This was kind of a response really, to a lot of discussion taking place on numerous threads on the Board.

That part of Samson Agonistes (poem by Milton) which depicts Samson talking about his blindness seemed especially relevant to me when looking at the motif of light and dark in Buffy.

"O dark, dark, dark, dark, dark, amid the blaze of noon,
Irrecoverably dark, total Eclipse
Without all hope of day!
O first created Beam, and thou great Word,
Let there be light, and light was over all;
Why am I thus bereav'd thy prime decree?
The Sun to me is dark
And silent as the Moon,
When she deserts the night
Hid in her vacant interlunar cave.

Since light so necessary is to life,
And almost life itself, if it be true
That light is in the Soul,
She all in every part; why was the sight
To such a tender ball as th' eye confin'd?
So obvious and so easie to be quench't,
And not as feeling through all parts diffus'd,
That she might look at will through every pore?
Then had I not been thus exil'd from light;
As in the land of darkness yet in light
To live a life half dead, a living death,
And buried; but O yet more miserable!
My self, my Sepulcher, a moving Grave"

Leslie points to the link between Darkness and death. When things decay, they blacken. We consider sleep to be a kind of death, and that happens in darkness. There is a link between blindess (both moral, and physical) in darkness. 'In the Dark' signifies both ignorance and loneliness. Night is dark.

In Genesis, the creation of light and dark are simultaneous. It's God ordering his universe, creating dichotomies and boundaries. "Let there be light" but as Light was created, so was darkness.

"Let there be light, and light was over all;
Why am I thus bereav'd thy prime decree?"

In Sunnydale (ironic title, signifying light, but the original Spanish name was closer to hell), there are two worlds, the world of light; and that of darkness. It is dangerous to stray across the boundaries. This season, we have two uneasy, restless creatures, who aren't normal, who transgress all kinds of boundaries, walking in between. Buffy believed herself to be expelled from Heaven, and Spike himself is damned. Samson (rather than Milton himself) links God explicitly with light. He self pityingly considers himself exiled, in the dark, weak, helpless and abandoned. He is a 'moving grave', a 'living sepulchre' and that in essence, is what Buffy and Spike are too.

This morning, I planned yet another long, self revelatory post, titled 'Buffy Summers, c'est moi!". Which I decided to spare everyone. But the essence of this idea, was that my personal perspective leads me back to 'The Body' as the essential turning point for our current darkness in BtVS. The Body as an episode is bathed in light. It's everywhere. I think it signified that death is normal; that it happens in 'daytime', that to be human and normal in Sunnydale means living in the light, and that means that death is inevitable. Dawn's attempt to rescue her takes place in darkness, and is tellingly titled 'Forever' (i.e, escaping diurnality, escaping days, months years, which are the rags of time).

From then on, an inevitable darkness falls upon Buffy. Everything is and must be unnatural for her. She is exiled from day (normality, non-Slayerness) because she is exiled from her Mother.

But her mental darkness must be differentiated from the darkness of death, which has cast its long shadow over her. For the darkness of death, of night is not unnatural at all, but part of the cycle of life, of time.

Darkness has also got some very positive connotations. Darkness/Night has sexual connotations. No wonder that Dark Buffy is also more sexual than she has ever been! Darkness is mysterious, exciting. Darkness is beautiful, just as night is beautiful.

("She walks in beauty, like the night
Of cloudless climes and starry skies;
And all that's best of dark and bright
Meet in her aspect and her eyes")

At the end of the poem, Milton triumphantly shows that Samson's mental blindess is the real problem, not his physical one. He has access to 'inward illumination' as does Buffy, whose prophetic dreams come to her at night ("When most I winke, then do mine eyes best see/for all the day they view things unrespected/ but when I sleep in dreams I rest on thee/ and darkly bright, are bright in dark directed" - ok, that was from memory so it is probably mangled)

Samson can 'live' in the 'dark' but still be with his God. And this leads me to Angel. Exiled always to the dark (and by crushing the ring of Amara, that's where he chooses to stay), he can be the warrior for the Powers that Be. In fact, they saved him by creating darkness, by covering up the sun, creating unnatural night. The wording of Angel's Shansu takes me back to Joyce. For his salvation is couched in the language of the dead. And Buffy's gift is death. Her gift, really is her life. And these two concepts heavily underline this idea in BtVS and AtS - Light/Dark and Life/Death are linked in a profound and mysterious way. And this mystery is the mystery of Dawn, the personification of light, who is created to be sacrificed, to be killed. Whose function is to the tear down dichotomies/the walls of the universes, and who ushers in chaos.

'At the heart of darkness' we will find illumination. At the bottom of Pandora's box/at the end of the tunnel, we find Hope. At the close of night, Dawn will break.
[> ' and darkness was upon the face of the deep' -- Anne, 13:10:41 04/10/02 Wed

I'm fascinated by the whole issue of the imagery of darkness, though I don't feel that I have a really great handle on it.

The only thing I have time to note about it right now is a slight correction on one thing you mention, which I think however is in line with your general thesis. You write:

"In Genesis, the creation of light and dark are simultaneous. It's God ordering his universe, creating dichotomies and boundaries. "Let there be light" but as Light was created, so was darkness."

In fact, darkness was prior to light in that account:

"And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light . . ."

So darkness is considered to be more primitive than light; in this context it is conceived of as being prior to the creation of boundaries, in some sense a synonym for chaos. Nevertheless, as such, it is an essential element of creation; the raw substance that needs to be combined with order to make a world. Even chaos, therefore, cannot necessarily be stigmatized as wholly evil.
[> [> Self Flagellation is in order........ -- Rahael, 14:12:52 04/10/02 Wed

I knew it! I knew I should have looked it up!!!!
[> [> [> scarcely........ -- Anne, 14:44:00 04/10/02 Wed

But it's not as though the difference undermines points you were making. I'm just wondering whether it extends them in some way: what are the implications of the difference between saying that light and darkness are coeval and saying that darkness is prior? Somehow I feel as though there ought to be some kind of juicy conclusion to draw from it, but so far I'm coming up dry.
[> [> [> [> Darkness and light -- Vickie, 17:06:07 04/10/02 Wed

Western cultures tend to identify darkness with evil. This identification can be limiting, and tends to fragmentation of selves and cultures.

I've sounded off enough here about the shadow self and the necessity for its acceptance if the goal is wholeness. Surely there's a connection here to your theme?

Frequently, darkness is also identified with the feminine. Dark, earthy, fecund, cavernous (as in cave or womb, associating our beginnings and our endings) as opposed to light, bright, mountainous (Freudian much?) and masculine. This description is clearly an oversimplification, but brings out some salient points. Rahe's point of Joyce becoming a symbol of The Mother and therefore her death an image of Buffy's separation from the feminine bears examination.

I'm riffing here, and folks here don't usually seem to care for this train of thought. Email me if you like.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Darkness and light -- Rahael, 03:21:28 04/11/02 Thu

Well, at least this has elicted more responses than my previous attempts to start a Buffy related thread! What one needs at a time like this is Age, ready to turn straw into gold.

Anyway, I too find the imagery of darkness fascinating. Leslie pointed out the imagery of growth/vegatation/gestation below, so I didn’t want to belabour it. But it certainly links to the Persephone thing. Plants go underground during winter, dwelling in darkness. It seems from the outside that they are dead – but the growth of spring would not be possible without it.

There’s a rather beautiful poem by George Herbert called ‘The Flower’ where he compares the harshness of winter with depression (Who would have thought my shrivell’d heart/ Could have recover’d greenness? It was gone/ Quite under ground; as flowers depart/To see their mother-root, when they have blown,/ Where they together/ All the hard weather, /Dead to the world, keep house unknown.).

Herbert concludes that the action of the dying and then regrowing plant (going down to hell, and rising toward heaven again) is like the tolling of a ‘passing bell’ – the bell which signifies someone has died. Similarly, Buffy’s leap down into death, and rising again out of the ground has a vegetative connotation. Except of course, Buffy hibernates during the Summer.

It’s quite significant that even Herbert, not given to feminine imagery brings ‘the mother’ in to the image of darkness.

The most obvious symbol of ‘motherhood’ is of course, nourishment and feeding. We often see Joyce in the context of food, of eating, and most Joyce/Buffy scenes take place in the kitchen. Joyce feeds Spike as well – it’s a key feature of the relationship. And in Pangs, we see Buffy earnestly try to be ‘mother’, to provide food for the Scoobies. She doesn’t quite succeed, but it makes her very anxious. In the Body, her immediate reaction to Joyce’s death is to vomit, to reject food. And in this season, we see her provide ‘unsatisfactory’ food for Dawn. And its always *fast food * whether it's that fried chicken or DMP burgers. Furthermore, its interesting to note that in this season, where she is attempting to ‘mother’ people – Dawn, Willow, she is involved in food preparation, but of a kind which is unnourishing and probably bad for your health.

I never look at darkness and think ‘evil’. Perhaps this is one aspect of Western thinking that has not permeated my consciousness. I look on it as a positive, and I always have. I am ‘dark’, my skin is dark. Hindu gods like Kali, Shiva and Krishna are dark of skin, as signified by their portrayal of having ‘blue’ skin in pictures. I think your comments about integrating darkness and becoming whole are very valid. It’s not something I think very much about, perhaps because I take it for granted. I think darkness can be associated with creativity, with the primordial soup from which life began, and as Anne has pointed out with the Genesis correction, light comes out of darkness.

I'm not someone who splits up my psyche into the dark, slumbering unconscious and the exposed-to- daylight conscious. My conscious mind is dark enough already! For years everything was grey and colourless; then blackness descended, fracturing occurred and healing took place. The point is that darkness can heal. And that's the point that Age was making, I think, with the idea of monstrosity in the Buffyverse.

In Sunnydale, we associate darkness with the ‘monsters’. But I think we’ve seen an interesting development of the idea of ‘monstrosity’ in both BtVS and AtS. This is an idea which Age first brought up in his review of ‘Birthday’. Cordelia embraces her new demon aspect. It is a source of strength. All the ‘heroes’ – Buffy, Angel, Doyle, and perhaps Cordelia in the future, draw strength from their semi-demonicness. What is most interesting about them is that they are neither wholly human, nor wholly demon, but something in between. It’s the standing in between I think which ties into the idea of ‘integration’. In Season 6, Buffy finds being in daytime difficult. She would rather not be seen at all, and in Gone she embraces invisibility. The most beautifully subtle scenes in Afterlife, imo, was Buffy’s silent discomfort at stepping out into the sun. She still sort of belongs in the world of the dead, of darkness, the underworld. She sees skulls where she should see living beings. And I thought Tara’s metaphor of ‘cosmic sunburn’ was really interesting. Buffy has been burnt by the sun, by light.

Thanks for the Ursula Le Guin quote Anom. I think Guin’s series was the first sci-fi type books I ever read, and it seems that they are hard to surpass in quality. No doubt I’ve internalised that quote….

That earlier quote about 'When most I winke, then do mine eyes best see' is a Sonnet by Shakespeare one of my favourites. Reminded me guilitily that I still haven't started work on that Shakespeare essay. I don't mind, but I'm conscious that I'm letting down my fellow essayist- and the same with the joint essay on metanarration. I guess I'm indulging in the newfound luxury of being able to put off essays infinitely.
[> [> [> [> [> [> I'm enjoying this discussion very much... -- Jon, 10:22:48 04/11/02 Thu

...I just don't have time to contribute to it, nor do I think I could add significantly to what's already blooming. I just wanted you all to know so you wouldn't be discouraged (especially Vickie who sounds like she is). This thread is going in my files. Thanks.

Jon
[> [> [> [> [> shadows & dreams -- ravenhair, 20:05:23 04/11/02 Thu

Approaching the subject of the shadow self with an untrained eye as it relates to the dream sequence in Dead Things:

By ignoring her darker side Buffy has developed a complex centering around Spike, her shadow self. Her relationship with Spike is disturbing to her and is reflected in her dream. Spike tells Buffy “it’ll be our secret” and later we see him in handcuffs alluding to her suppression of her darker side.

During the dream sequence, we see flashes of Katrina. Buffy is haunted by her impression that she killed an innocent, that she was capable of harming a human being. And her fear is presented to her victim, “Do you trust me?” The question is posed simultaneously to Spike. Can she trust the dark side within her?

Buffy’s instinct is to stake Spike, permanently shutting out her shadow self, but this is not the solution because Katrina lays before her dead, staring accusingly with blue eyes. Maybe as a warning that she must come to terms with the dark roots of the Slayer?
[> [> button -- anom, 22:21:42 04/10/02 Wed

"In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be light!' And there was still nothing, but you could see it."

Oh, & I quoted Ursula LeGuin's "Left Hand of Darkness" farther down the board, before I knew the thread was taken up here. I won't repeat it here--go check it for yourself!
[> [> [> LOL says Rufus whose flashlight batteries seem to have gone dead...;) -- Rufus, 05:17:29 04/12/02 Fri

[> Just some rambling -- Etrangere, 09:49:15 04/11/02 Thu

Lots of great stuff here, Rahael, very interresting subjects.

Light is death-is-life (Shansu logic) in the Body / while Dark is life-is-death in Forever

Then there is Afterlife where Light is life-too-harsh and Dark is death-as-sweet

Harsh Light of Day is about illusioning oneself
In the Dark is about breaking those illusions (Angel gives up the ring because if he lived the day he wouldn't see anymore the evil in the darkness)

This is Sunnydale too, Sunnydale is light and illusions of a nice little town
Only in the Dark of the Hellmouth we can see the truth of vampires and such

In Normal Again, the Asylum is all light (and illusions ?) while Buffy's life is dark

William is looking for light, effulgence. He think that this effulgence can be found into Cecily, but Cecily, as her name means, is blind and cannot see him. Light is blinding ?

The dark reveals, in the Dead Things scene, when Spike is trying to bring Buffy in the Dark, it is in the open (a public place) and he tells her not to close her eyes, to see, not to be blind, not to illusion herself.

Also in season 6, dark is hot (Spike is fire) and light is a cold light, a starlight (think older and faraway), removed from here, a symbol of Heavens.

come back to the Body, in the last part of it, the sequence begins with the doctor shutting the light after the examination of the corpse and let the body. Its clothes has been removed in the preceding part (and Willow's wondering about her clothes underline that theme), it is now naked, removed of all its human artifices. We are left with death, that raises, naked too, to fight Dawn and when it's done, all is left is death (the body has been uncovered during the fight) and Dawn moves to touch it. That when the episode shuts the light. All that is left is death, the ultimate truth ?, in the darkness of the end of the episode.
[> [> Great points, as per usual -- Rahael, 10:08:22 04/11/02 Thu

People disrobe in the dark, and so in a sense they discard some barriers. Willow's worry about clothing, both in Restless and the Body shows an anxiety about being self revelatory. Perhaps because she fears that there is nothing to reveal inside? that she is empty? That she herself is nothing more than a costume.

Great point about effulgence, I'd forgotten that. Other effulgent things - Buffy in the Gift, the Diamond used by the Geek trio, (something else which is cold and hard and shining.)

Buffy looks into the Fire (Light) but all she sees is the dark. I wonder what the significance of that is.

The star/guiding light motif turns up in Bargaining as Tara's little light guides Xander and Willow out of the dark woods.

In the meantime, fires burn up Sunnydale.

Perhaps the harshness of light can be linked into the theme of 'The Hardest thing in life is to live in it'. Death/dark can offer peace, rest solace. But Spike/Buffy/Angel are dead and alive. They get the worst of both worlds.

Finally, going back to the interlinked nature of both these symbols, we know that too much light can lead to Darkness, charring, decay. ('Why does my skin not crack and peel' and Buffy's leap into the light in 'The Gift' lead to her death and decay). It's vice versa too. In Bargaining, Buffy's decaying body regenerates, and she lives again.
Fic: Leashing the Beast, chapter 10 -- Nos, 17:31:17 04/10/02 Wed

For any of you that might be following it here, chapter 10 is up. Hope you enjoy...

Leashing the Beast, by Nos


Summary: In response to my own challenge *heh*, found on Crumbling Walls.
The Nerdy Three find out what Spike's chip does and formulate a plan to kill
the Slayer.
Rating: R for violence


http://www.fanfiction.net/read.php?storyid=602842
Angel/Spike - Restraining the monster (very long with spoilers to NA) -- shadowkat (yes intense and masochistic), 18:55:25 04/10/02 Wed

A/S = Restraining the monster


WARNING SPOILERS UP TO NORMAL AGAIN

Been thinking a lot about our vampires, probably more than I should. And not just about Angel and Spike. Due to a discussion on two boards yesterday: one was a thread on what motivates different vampires on Kellyne’s post on Spike/Warren and another was a thread on what turns different vampires on. These two threads together, plus all the other ones on vamps recently got my brain buzzing, which is never a good thing.

First a few interesting quotes from our favorite vamps :

ANGEL
Angel: When you become a vampire the demon takes your body, but it
doesn't get your soul. That's gone! No conscience, no remorse... It's an easy way to live.

FOOL FOR LOVE
SPIKE: Don't make it sound like something you'd flip past on the Discovery Channel. Becoming a vampire is a profound and powerful experience. I could feel this new strength coursing through me. Getting killed made me feel alive for the very first time. I was through living by society's rules. Decided to make a few of my own.

Now a few questions that have been bugging me.

1. What would you do if you were to become immortal? No more physical pain? No quilt? No fear? You have ultimate power – you aren’t going to heaven, you may end up in hell but only if you get staked or decapitated or stay out in the sun.
2. What would you do if you were suddenly given the power to hurt everyone who ever hurt you?
3. What would you do if the pain was gone? And you were free to slash and burn?
4. What would hold you back? Would you become the monster?
5. What holds you back now?

What do Spike and Angel do? Now this is not a debate on which vamp you prefer or which deserves to be redeemed, those aren’t the questions that interest me. Any more than I am interested in the whole Spike is evil/Angel is good soul debate. No, I’m interested in different questions – some of which are posed above.

In Angel Season 2, Darla tells Angel something he never quite understands, maybe because he’s afraid to: “What we once were informs all that we have become. (Angel looks at his father’s body) The same love will infect our hearts – even if they no longer beat. (Angel looks at his mother’s and his sister’s body) Simple death won’t change that.”

What is she saying and why? She tells him this after he kills his father and his entire family. The reason he kills them is out of vengeance not bloodlust. His father was disapproving of him, rejected him, over and over again. So he brutally kills him. And what does Darla tell him?

Darla: “You’re victory over him took but moments. But his defeat of you will last life times.”
Angel: “What are you talking about? He can’t defeat me now.”
Darla: “Nor can he ever approve of you – in this world or any other..”

She’s right – this simple fact haunts him and motivates him whether he is Angel or Angelus. He wants approval desperately – whether it be from other demons or from humans or from the Powers That Be. He is concerned over how he appears to people, the artistry of his kills, the actions he takes and he does them in a grandiose manner when he is Angelus – take the whole opening the gates of hell idea in Becoming Part I & II (Season 2 Btvs). As Spike puts it – most vampires aren’t interested in that, but along comes one with vision. If they don’t approve of me – they can literally go to hell! What does he tell Darla when he first rises from his grave?

Darla: “You can do anything, have anyone in the village. Who will it be?”
Angel: “Any one? (Darla nods) I thought I’d take the village.” (PRODIGAL, Season 2 Atvs.)

Angelus prides himself in the “artistry of the kill”. Angel prides himself on where he lives, his car, his friends, helping the slayer. Why? Is he still hunting his dead father’s approval? Will he always hunt it? Is that what lies behind some of his actions?

Becoming a vampire does not erase what you once were - all it does is remove certain barriers. The monster now has full reign. As Angel puts it – “I could do whatever I wanted, no pain, no remorse.” Yet when he regains his soul, he can never quite examine the reasons why, perhaps it is too painful for him? So he makes it simple, I was a Vampire. Vampires= Evil. I had no choice, it’s what I was before I got my soul back. I’m not responsible for those crimes. No more than he would have been responsible for them if he lost his sanity, right? He did not remember these crimes. And when he did, it wasn’t him. He wasn’t in his right mind. But Darla challenges him on this time and again.

Darla: "What a poster child for soulfulness you are. This is no life Angel! Before you got neutered you weren't just any vampire, you were a legend! Nobody could keep up with you - not even me. You don't learn that kind of darkness. It's innate. It was in you before we ever met. - You said you can smell me? Well, I can smell you, too. My boy is still in there and he wants out!"

It’s difficult for us to admit that there is darkness inside us. Difficult to see that we are capable of horrible things in a blink of an eye. Angel struggles with this. He struggles with the knowledge that part of him wants to hurt people and is afraid to fully examine why. To look at the darkness that still lives inside him, has always lived there, even when he was just a man. He even tries, albeit unsuccessfully to kill himself, when he realizes that he wasn’t a much better man. In some ways he prefers the monster, the monster was simple. “It’s the man in me that needs killing not the monster.” (AMENDS, Season 3 Btvs)

So what about Spike? Interesting vamp Spike and very different than Angel as both a human and a vampire. Comparing these two can get dicey, sort of like comparing an apple to an orange.

Spike started his existence as a Victorian poet, granted a rather bad Victorian poet – if his peers are to be believed. He was the scholar. The stuttering somewhat haughty bookworm who courted ladies and wrote lovely verse. As “leslie” on All Things Philosophical Board pointed out – Spike “liked words for their sound (the eternal "effulgent") rather than their sense. He likes how things feel physically; he gets suicidal when he, literally, can't touch things (both when confined to the wheelchair--paralyzed--and newly chipped).” Angel on the other hand likes to feel things mentally, and is into image – having a big house, a cool car, nice clothes, reading thought-provoking books. We rarely see Angel enjoying food or drink, while Spike is ordering a “flowering onion” and drinking quite a bit of alcohol, even has a liquor cabinet. Angel doesn’t need anything but blood so he only eats blood. The only time I saw him enjoy food was when he became briefly human in Atvs Season 1. I thought for a while Angel went without for the same reasons that monks go without, but realized it has more to do with what each man/vamp enjoys. Spike’s desires are personal or sensual in nature, taste of fine food, smells, cigarettes, alcohol, a fast ride on a motorcycle while Angel’s veer more towards what others perceive – clothing, car, big hotel. Ironic because knowing their backgrounds, I would have expected the reverse.

What do we know about William (Spike)? Not as much as we know about Liam (Angel)that is for sure. We know that Spike was once called William, that he was a poet, that he respected his mother, and he loved a girl named Cecily. We also know that Drusilla not Angel was his sire. His anger unlike Liam’s appears to be more directed towards his peers than his family. Liam has peers that go out brawling and thieving together. William has no one, he is solitary, a loner. When his peers seek him out, he invariably says the wrong thing.

ARISTOCRAT #2 Ah, William! Favor us with your opinion. What do you make of this rash of disappearances sweeping through our town? Animals or thieves?
SPIKE(haughty)I prefer not to think of such dark, ugly business at all. That's what the police are for. (looks at Cecily) I prefer placing my energies into creating things of beauty.

While Liam usually has no trouble in this department. He is either with his friends or with the ladies, here’s two flashback scenes from Atvs, Prodigal. Season 2.

Anna: “Master Liam, your father...”
Angel: “Will be off to church by now, repenting of his sins, and well he should. Closer, Anna.”
Anna: “Why do you keep to the shadows, sir? Are you not well?”
Angel: “The light. It bothers my eyes just now.”
Angel’s dad: “And I know the reason why. (Pushes Angel out into the sunlight of the courtyard) Up again all night, is it? Drinking and whoring. I smell the stink of it on you.”

William on the other hand tries to court the girl with poetry, he is Victorian and all courtly.

CECILY: Your poetry, it's... they're... not written about me, are they?
SPIKE: They're about how I feel.
CECILY:Yes, but are they about me?
SPIKE:Every syllable. Oh, I know... it's sudden and... please, if they're no good, they're only words but... the feeling behind them... I love you, Cecily.
CECILY:Please stop!
SPIKE: I know I'm a bad poet but I'm a good man and all I ask is that... that you try to see me-
CECILY: I do see you. That's the problem. You're nothing to me, William. You're beneath me.

One wonders if William would have been better off with Liam’s approach, of course the two twenty- six year olds are separated by a century, which I believe is important. They are both men of time and place and environment. Angel/Liam was abused by his father. William as far as we know had no problems with his family, it was his peers that he struggled with along with the ladies.

When they become vampires, who they were colors who they become. As Darla so clearly put it: What we once were informs all that we have become. The same love will infect our hearts – even if they no longer beat. Simple death won’t change that.

So if you hated your family in life, hated the disapproval and were filled with rage against humanity, inflicting that rage through whoring and thieving – what type of immortal do you become? In Liam’s case – he wanted to take out the whole village. The whole world. Inflict as much pain as possible. But what is interesting – is he was no longer interested in his human pursuits of thieving and whoring and drunkenness, he became more artistic and more interested in image and reputation.

ANGELUS: You've got me and my women hiding in the luxury of a mine shaft, all because William the Bloody likes the attention. This is not a reputation we need. SPIKE:Oh, I'm sorry. Did I sully our good name? We're vampires.
ANGELUS: All the more reason to use a certain amount of finesse.
SPIKE: Bollocks! That stuff's for the frilly cuffs-and-collars crowd. I'll take a good brawl any day.
ANGELUS:And every time you do, we become the hunted.

But William? William preferred the arty pursuits in life. He seemed almost courtly. I can’t imagine William ever breaking a rule or letting loose or being drunk and disorderly like Liam. Yet, Spike loves breaking rules, loves going against the crowd, loves physical pursuits. In some ways he seems to be the opposite of his human self just as Angel seems to be the opposite of his. Yet – it makes sense, when you think about it. Liam hated the disapproval of his family, no matter what he did he couldn’t win. So when he becomes a vampire – he destroys them all. William refused to cow tow to the Artistocrats and their vulgarity. He suffered their contempt and possibly blamed them for the loss of Cecily. I’ve always found it interesting that he changes his name from William the Bloody to Spike paralleling the aristocrats criticism of his poetry: “I would rather have a railroad spike driven through my head than read another line of his poetry.” Perhaps that man got his wish? When the man becomes a vampire – his insecurities are unleashed in violence and debauchery. He can inflict the pain others inflicted on him without remorse.

The vampires in Bvts fascinate me, each is such a different creation.
Let’s look at a few of the fascinating characters Whedon and company have created over the years and their interesting behavior patterns:
1. Darla – we know Darla was a prostitute dying of syphilis when the Master created her. She has never loved anyone fully except possibly the child she created with Angel. She was a seductress in life and operates in the same manner in death. She seduces her kill, wearing numerous guises to do it. From the school girl uniform in Season 1 Bvts to the suite for the lawyers in Atvs.
2. Drusilla – a chaste girl with visions – she is driven insane by Angelus and made a vampire, eternally tormented by visions. She makes a vampire out of a poet hoping for a companion on her eternal ride. Yet is obsessed with the man who tormented and created her. She was tortured in life and enjoys torturing in death.
3. Harmony – a follower, wanting to be part of the crowd, she takes her identity from whomever she is with. If Cordelia is the head of the gang – she agrees with everything Cordy says, if Cordy falls out of favor, she is rude and obnoxious to her. She will do practically anything for approval – and will turn to whomever she believes is the one in power for it. She was this way in life as well as death. Angel believes Harmony will turn on Cordelia because she is a “vampire”, perhaps he wants to believe this because it is easier, it is nice and compact and lets him off the hook. Vampires always turn on you, it is their nature, no soul = evil. Soul=potential for good. But- Angel is forgetting what Harmony was in life. So has Cordelia. Harmony never showed any real loyalty in life – she went wherever the group went. If the group disliked you – she did. Cordelia should have remembered that. In the episode Disharmony, Cordy and Angel send Harmony into a vampire group meeting, a meeting filled with tons of vamps and a motivational speaker. They send her in as a spy. Harmony of course changes sides, joining the majority just as she always did in high school. Before she does this Angel states : “Harmony will turn on you."
Cordy: "Why? Because *you* did?"
Angel: "Because it's her nature. She's a vampire."
Cordy: "So are you."
Angel: "She doesn't have a soul."
Cordy: "Oh. That's it, is it? You're better than her because you have a soul?"
Angel: "Well, yeah."
Cordy: "I noticed yours didn't get in the way of betraying the people who worked with you, who cared about you."

Exactly, Cordy gets it. A soul doesn’t keep us from betraying each other. All Harmony’s soul might have done is make her think twice – or would it? It didn’t make her think twice in life or has Cordy forgotten? Way back in Season 3 Btvs, when Cordelia was dating Xander, Harmony turned on her, treated her like crap because of Xander. Because he wasn’t accepted by the in crowd. (See Bewitched Bothered & Bewildered Season 2 Btvs) The vampire is only echoing the worst in the human’s nature. But it is easier to believe that Harmony does it “just” because she’s a vampire. It’s easier to blame a monster, because then we can believe that we wouldn’t do it. It makes us feel safe. Just as it makes Angel feel safe.

Why don’t Angel and Spike kill anymore? Is it the soul or chip holding them back? What is restraining them? They have nothing to fear. As Spike put it in Fool For Love: “becoming a vampire means you have nothing to fear but one girl.” And hey she’s easy to avoid if they want to.

Angel claims it’s quilt, the pain and the remorse that stops him. When he becomes Angelus in Innocence – the first word out of his mouth is “the pain is gone”. Remember the gypsies wanted to torture him, they didn’t want to give him a gift. According to Angel the gypsy curse has somehow made it possible for him to feel the pain of everyone he’s ever hurt. That would be 243 years of pain and suffering he’s inflicted. Ah, that sounds like more than a soul they’ve put in our boy. Perhaps they’ve added a little something to go with it? Because clearly the Mayor and Warren didn’t have this weight on their shoulders, nor did Ben when he decided to turn Dawn over to Glory. Nor did Anya, considering the scores of people she’s hurt within the last 1000 years. So is it just a soul? I think there’s something else that holds Angel back, something else that motivates him.

Prior to meeting Buffy, Angel was a bum, wandering about the tunnels in disgrace. Then, wham, he met Buffy and slowly over time figured out how to help her. It wasn’t instantaneous. At first, he just issued nebulous warnings. (Welcome to the Hellmouth and Harvest). Later he actually started chipping in, though he had to be prodded by Xander and Giles (Out of Sight/Out of Mind and Prophecy Girl Season 1). Finally he openly aided the gang (Season 2). Then, when he left, he formed his own little unit and his own cause to help people. (Atvs Season 1). Somewhere along the line Angel evolved and became the hero Spike derides in IN THE DARK, Atvs Season 1: “No, helping those in need’s my job, - and working up a load of sexual tension, and prancing away like a magnificent poof is truly thanks enough! (high voice) I understand. I have a nephew who is gay, so… (low voice) Say no more. Evil’s still afoot! And I’m almost out of that Nancy-boy hair-gel that I like so much. Quickly, to the Angel-mobile, away!”

Which brings me back to Spike, what is holding him back? If the Spike from IN THE DARK were to meet the Spike from The Gift, what would he say to him? Probably the same thing he wanted to say to Angel. “We’re vampires! Get with the program! Stop being the slayer’s lap dog!” So why has he decided to help instead of hinder the gang? What is motivating him? Not the same things as Angel, he doesn’t have a soul – so the guilt, if it is present, is not the same. The chip only prevents him from physically biting, hitting, or harming people. As he would have put it – there are other ways. Some far more effective. He certainly tried a few of them in Season 4 – The Yoko Factor, where he successfully splits the gang apart? Or in the beginning of Season 5 – Out of My Mind where he successfully delays Riley’s operation? Why did he help them at all in the beginning? Money? Even he doesn’t seem to be sure. He appears to be grasping for reasons – “pay me” or “I need your cash”. Yet in Where the Wild Things Are – he had to talk himself out of helping Xander save Buffy? Why did he even offer in the first place?

XANDER: We're fresh out of superpeople,and somebody's gotta go back in there. (Deep breath) Now who's with me?(Willow and Tara hesitate.)
SPIKE: I am.(Everyone looks at Spike in surprise.) I know I'm not the first choice for heroics ...and Buffy's tried to kill me more than once. And, I don't fancy a single one of you at all. But... Actually, all that sounds pretty convincing.

I always thought that was an odd scene. What was motivating him then, even to think about it? Why go against his own nature? Why didn’t he try to kill Giles when he became a Faryal demon in A New Man? Money? He didn’t get paid up front. Later, when he actually falls for Buffy, we answer this question with the obvious answer – he loves Buffy. He can’t stand to see Buffy hurt. But he’s a demon – why not find another way of getting her affection? He could kidnap her and have someone turn her into a vampire? What motivates Spike to hold the monster in check? It must be painful for him, going against his nature. He’s not really being rewarded for it. The gang has not totally accepted him. Yeah he got to have sex with Buffy, but he couldn’t have predicted that last season when he was doing all those noble acts for her benefit. Nor could he have imagined this when she was dead and buried and he stayed behind to help her friends and protect Dawn. When we see him in Afterlife, he’s a nervous wreck – worried half to death about Dawn. Why? It’s not because of Buffy, Buffy to his knowledge is dead. In Bargaining Part I – he saves Giles’ life – why? Why is he even still there? And much later in the season, after Buffy has broken things off and Xander has treated him like scum, why does he help Xander get the monster that poisoned Buffy? (Normal Again – Season 6: shooting script taken from Psyche.)

“Xander gets another clear shot from the ground and nails the demon with a couple more tranquilizers. This time, the demon notices. It turns around to go after him, but Spike jumps from behind and chokes it. The demon stumbles. Beginning to feel the tranqs. And after a struggle, it finally falls…. (edited for length – fight was much longer.)”

Why does he protect Xander from the monster? I’d think he’d let the monster kill Xander – it would be easier. Is it because he still thinks he has a chance of working things out with Buffy? Even Spike seems to be wondering what he’s doing after he learns that Buffy thinks they are all figments of her imagination : “On the other hand, could explain some things. This all being in that twisted brain of hers. Fix up some chip'n my head, make me soft so I'd fall in love with her, and then turn me into her sodden sex slave.” (NA Season 6 Btvs) Now here’s something Spike and Angel have in common – both are blaming external forces for their behavior. For Spike – it’s the chip that’s done this to him, for Angel it’s his soul. And to Angel’s credit – he has proof of that, without the soul he turned into a complete and utter monster. But then a soul is different than a chip, right? A soul makes you feel pain – at least a soul given to you by a gypsy curse. I have a hunch poor Angel doesn’t have just an ordinary soul…I think this one was manufactured to torture him. But back to Spike.

If it’s all about Buffy for Spike - what motivated him to stay in Sunnydale, after Buffy’s death, and help people who had shown nothing but dislike and hatred towards him? People who barely tolerated him? What motivated him to continue doing so? Why is he restraining the monster? Is it just love?

Why do we hold back the monster in ourselves? Is it our fear of being caught? What motivates us?

I think it’s more than just love for Spike. Just as I think it’s more than just guilt for Angel. I think these two vamps have come to an odd realization; one we all come to sooner or later. Sooner or later the violence, debauchery and evil acts ring hollow, become dull, easy, futile, there’s no end to them and no challenge. They are the acts of ignorance and blindness. They provide no true rewards. Sometimes energy is better spent on creation than destruction. Notice Spike’s delighted surprise when he realizes that it is far more satisfying to have sex with Buffy than to kill her. “I always knew the only thing better than killing a slayer would be f…..” (Actually I think he is probably making love to her in his head, regardless of her attentions but that’s another debate.) He’s beginning to realize what Anya figured out way back in The Body – creating life is more rewarding than destroying it.

This is what I think is happening to Angel and to Spike, I think they are being forced to grow up, but through two totally different paths as is fitting for their characters, since they are two entirely different vampires, an apple and an orange if you will. They are being forced to acknowledge that they are more than a windup toy for the good or evil to do the gods bidding. And that destruction while rewarding at the time leaves nothing lasting. Perhaps this realization and not just a chip or a soul is the path out of their mutual states of arrested development. Perhaps similar realizations are the paths out of our own?

Thanks for reading. Looking forward to your thoughts as always!

;- ) shadowkat
[> KABOOM!!! Wow, amazing stuff, I'm too spun to reply just yet... -- Scroll, 20:11:30 04/10/02 Wed

[> and many thanks to 'kat from the redemptionista camp! -- Kitt, 21:06:07 04/10/02 Wed

[> Lo-ve-ly :), really great. -- Ete, 03:22:59 04/11/02 Thu

[> [> Re: Lots to Mull - Neat! -- Brian, 09:23:39 04/11/02 Thu

[> Amazing (as always!) -- ponygirl, 13:53:00 04/11/02 Thu

I'm left completely impressed - you've managed to tie in the Forces of Good thread as it pertains to Angel's motivations and the recent Clockwork Orange discussion!

I love the whole graying of the soul issue - the idea that one's nature, be it monster or human, is something we must all choose and take responsibility for is ultimately one of the most hopeful statements that ME has made.
[> Great as usual ShadowKat. You need to have a website for all your essays... -- LeeAnn, 14:46:37 04/11/02 Thu

What would you do if you were suddenly given the power to hurt everyone who ever hurt you?

This question has been answered by tyrants, big and small, all over the world. From the murderous dictator who wipes out whole classes of people (only a few of whom deserve it) to the petty supervisor trying to get the people who don't like him fired. From the French Revolution to Pol Pot to every tinpot dictator propped up by the CIA you see the murders for revenge and fun. Those with the power to commit mischief do. From the deaths of Steve Kangas and James Hatfield to the manipulation of a journalist's life just because she wrote something a rich man didn't like. (The Greatest Vendetta on Earth) The rich and the powerful have the power to indulge their hatred without penalty. And like the vampires of the Buffyverse some of them do.

I think Spike's love of brawling, his attraction to the challenge of fighting Slayers and now loving a Slayer is based in his life as a human. Because he was a human wimp he inherited the never-ending task of proving he was a bigger bad than anyone else alive or dead, of establishing himself as an alpha male tells everyone else what to do, from Dalton to Dru to Harmony to various minions. We've seen how he controlled his minions through violence and the force of his personality. He controlled Harmony the same way. But once chipped he was emasculated in the eyes of the vampire community. Or believed he was. But the Slayer is alpha over every vampire. By helping her, by being her consort, he is dominant over them too. I don't think he's thought it out in that way. But I think he feels it in his gut. If he has Buffy, he's the Big Bad, at least in his own mind. Very much like a man with a trophy wife to lend him status. That doesn't mean that he doesn't love her, worship her. But after Smashed and Wrecked, he has been not just loving to her, but submissive. He has acknowledged her dominance and very much returned to the situation that led William to accept being turned. We saw William being rejected by his social group. Being rejected by the woman he loved. And then accepting Dru. Now that the Scoobies and Buffy have rejected him, what changes will he accept now.

Damn, he does need his rocks back.
[> Your fame is spreading Shadowkat... -- Loki, 17:47:06 04/11/02 Thu

Your post has just appeared on the Big Bad Board ;)

http://pub107.ezboard.com/fjmdotcomrefugeeboardfrm5.showMessage?topicID=409.topic
[> [> Re: Your fame is spreading Shadowkat... -- shadowkat, 20:12:36 04/11/02 Thu

Thanks!! Really appreciate it!! Read some of the posts
over there and made me feel great!
[> [> [> Re: Your fame is spreading Shadowkat... -- Loki, 20:36:47 04/11/02 Thu

You`re welcome! :)

Your other one (the`Heart of Darkness` S/W parallel,) is in the spoiler section. Probably not too many will read that until the end of the season, as many of them have sworn off spoilers for the moment. Being a B/S inclined board they`ve been getting a bit fretful lately. ;)

In fact Vandalia, from this very board, has been encouraging them to appreciate the benefits of the non-spoiler world. LOL she`s got a lot of recruits to the cause. ;)
[> [> [> [> LOL!! -- shadowkat, 20:52:41 04/11/02 Thu

I'm trying to stay off spoilers but failing miserably - I like to protect myself against disappointment, particularly when I invest so much in something - yes, insane to invest in a tv show...but oh well.

At least I don't really know everything they are doing
at the end of the season. This is why I write character
analyses to keep myself occupied. Agree with deknight -
spoilers make spoiled milk. Reading dang wildfeed almost
ruined AYW for me. Been off it ever since.

I have about four other Spike ones they can have...although
been thinking of sending some to BAPS and some scholarly
publication called Slayage. Yes - should get a website, one of my fans has offered to build one for me to post my essays, have 14 character essays now.

The Spike - Demolished Man essay isn't too spoilerish
and fairly redemptive - I think.

Yep B/Ser (although I'll live if they don't get back
together...since I was late to that ship to begin with)
and redemptionist...just more interesting to see them try
to redeem him. As long as they keep him interesting and not predictable they got my interest. That said I understand the fretting, fret a little myself - certainly regarding the next two episodes. But we shouldn't - I can't see JW throwing this character out quite yet.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: LOL!! -- Loki, 21:07:03 04/11/02 Thu

Oh yes, I have issues with the wildfeed! I`m sooo not gonna be reading those again.

I`ll remain spoiled for this season as it`s gonna take a huge effort to wean myself off `em, but strangely I feel more contented with the direction of the show. I`ve done my ranting and hair pulling, and now I`m more serene. I refuse to believe they are going to trash all the growth of the last few seasons. I`ll not believe it till I see it!

Yes, I hope B/S work things out in the end, but I`m in the `redemption is the priority` camp. You might want to check out the `Spike and Pinnochio` thread in the BBB spoiler section. Lot of it`s speculation, but some of it`s spoilery. Very intriguing. I think they might be on to something. Not sure how I`d feel about it if they are right though.

Guess we`ll all have a clearer idea of the lay of the land at season`s end. :)
[> [> [> [> Did someone say my name? -- vandalia, 22:29:04 04/11/02 Thu

Thanks for the words of support, Loki. I also like the 'Spoiler Free Is The Way To Be' thread over at www.televisionwithoutpity.com (snarky yes but they have their die-hard Spuffy contingent as well). Its so much more FUN to see it when it happens, let me tell you!
[> Should we jump off the soul train? -- Sophist, 21:00:33 04/11/02 Thu

Your post contains an implicit point that I want to make explicit in order to pose some questions.

We know 2 things about the Buffyverse with reasonable certainty. One: Possession of a soul does not, in itself, prevent evil. Warren is a perfect example, but there are numerous others. Two: Liam's soul didn't trouble him much before he met Darla.

When Angel got his soul back, presumably the soul he got was Liam's. Why did it have any effect at all on him? Consider the Gorches. They wiped out an entire town before they were vamped. If they were re-souled, what would change and why?
[> [> Re: Should we jump off the soul train? -- shadowkat, 21:45:42 04/11/02 Thu

Thank you for picking up on this - wondered if anyone would.

In my post - I ask if there might be more to our boy's soul then meets the eye. Remember it was a gypsey curse designed
to inflict torture, to make him pay. In the episode Becoming PArt I - the gypsey explicitly states that he will remember everything and feel pain.

Question: Is it Liam's soul? Is it someone else's? Does
a soul retain the personality and mind of the human when it leaves? Or is it like the demon essence untouched until it makes contact with the human? Or is it much simpler than this - is it Liam's soul but intensified, the guilt he
feels intensified by an empathy that Liam wasn't capable of feeling in life? Not sure about this.

I think they are doing an entirely different path with
Angel than Spike. I think Angel's story is about forgiving
and understanding himself and those around him, getting past
vengeance. It is about guilt. While Spike's may be more about self-esteem, about growing up past adolence, learning that he is capable of good acts and good acts add more to the world than destructive ones. It's a different story and
metaphor they are doing here. And since the two characters
are on two completely different shows now - I think ME might be able to pull it off. I'm still trying to pinpoint
the differences...but my hunch is Spike's is not unsimilar to the little boy in AI or Pinocchio or Alex in A Clockwork
Orange...while Angel makes me think more of the mythic heros like Hercules, Odysseys, or the Arthurian Knights.
Tormented anti-heros...doomed to travel alone in pain hunting for peace and never finding it because they can't see that it lies within themselves.

Okay must go to bed now...starting to make no sense..lol!
[> [> [> Jump while it's in motion -- eeep? -- LittleBit, 10:52:52 04/12/02 Fri

I have to agree that the simple restoration of Angel's soul would not seem to produce the sort of results we have seen. In his time as Liam he doesn't seem to be terribly concerned about the consequences of his actions. Even if his behavior can be attributed to his father's disapproval of him, his wastrel ways don't seem to be calculated to change that opinion.

I think that the restoration was essential to the final outcome of the gypsy curse --- that the eternal torment (which IMHO is the actual curse) would not be possible without the soul.
[> [> [> [> Re: Jump while it's in motion -- eeep? -- Malandanza, 20:30:21 04/12/02 Fri

"I have to agree that the simple restoration of Angel's soul would not seem to produce the sort of results we have seen. In his time as Liam he doesn't seem to be terribly concerned about the consequences of his actions. Even if his behavior can be attributed to his father's disapproval of him, his wastrel ways don't seem to be calculated to change that opinion.

"I think that the restoration was essential to the final outcome of the gypsy curse --- that the eternal torment (which IMHO is the actual curse) would not be possible without the soul."

I also agree that there was more to the gypsy curse than a simple soul restoration. Angelus + soul should have been worse than Liam -- after all, Liam had a soul but didn't have a demon living in his subconscious. Additionally, a century of living and rather evil life ought to have pushed him towards evil rather than good. I can easily imagine a human Liam treading a similar (but less bloody) path as Angelus had Darla been a mortal temptress, leading him down a path of crime.

So I think that the curse was in two parts. The first restored his soul; the second added a powerful conscience to make sure he regretted the evil that Angelus had done. I think the soul was necessary to enable Angel to understand the difference between right and wrong -- without it, what good is a conscience? If it punishes you for doing evil, but your actions don't seem evil to you, where's the pain?

Which is not to say that vampires don't understand that murder is frowned upon by humans. They do understand what humans consider right and wrong, but trying to convince them that killing humans is wrong because of human morality is a bit like an animal rights activist trying to convince and avid hunter that shooting deer is wrong. The hunter can be made to stop killing deer, if he has no license or the season ends, but you can't convince him that there is anything wrong with killing them.

But I don't mean to downplay the importance of the soul -- we saw in Season Four how important it is to Buffy. When Buffy's demon roommate was stealing her soul, Buffy quickly lost the ability to discern between right and wrong. Her conscience was ineffective since she no longer saw her actions as wrong.

Both the soul and the conscience are necessary to be good. Without a conscience, a soul is not much use (as Warren shows), but without a soul, the conscience is irrelevant (Spike is an exception, since his conscience was programmed by humans).
[> [> [> [> [> Souls and Guilt (Angel & Spike) -- Scroll, 12:13:45 04/13/02 Sat

I think the gypsy's curse (restoring Angel's soul) was quite sufficient without adding "a powerful conscience to make sure he regretted the evil that Angelus had done". As far as Joss has defined the Buffyverse soul, it does seem to be merely a conscience (as opposed to the Christian concept of soul). A human soul allows Angel to see from a human perspective all the evils he perpetuated as a vampire. Angel feels the guilt of 145 years of killing.

Even if the soul Angel receives belonged to Liam, a drunk and a lecher and a generally not-nice-guy, I think having to face up to 145 years of massacring would be enough to put Angel/Liam on his path to redemption. I think Angel's initial reaction to his soul is completely plausible. In fact, his reaction clearly shows that Spike could never handle having his soul restored. Imagine how the sensitive William would feel knowing that he'd been a mass-murderer for the past 120 years? He'd probably go catatonic or try to immolate himself somehow.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Souls and Guilt (Angel & Spike...and Darla) -- Malandanza, 17:55:13 04/13/02 Sat

"Even if the soul Angel receives belonged to Liam, a drunk and a lecher and a generally not-nice- guy, I think having to face up to 145 years of massacring would be enough to put Angel/Liam on his path to redemption. I think Angel's initial reaction to his soul is completely plausible. In fact, his reaction clearly shows that Spike could never handle having his soul restored. Imagine how the sensitive William would feel knowing that he'd been a mass-murderer for the past 120 years? He'd probably go catatonic or try to immolate himself somehow."

You bring up an interesting point. I had thought that Angelus' decades of wallowing in murder, mayhem and sensual pleasures would only confirm Liam's prodigal ways. But the soul was gone -- as we saw in B2, when Angel's soul was returned, he had no awareness of what he had done as Angelus. The first time around, Angel had to suddenly confront a century of evil that he remembered committing -- evil almost beyond the comprehension of Liam. Of course it would be a shock.

We saw nearly the same thing happen with Darla -- she did regret the things she had done in spite of her initial protestations to the contrary -- granted, it took her longer to feel remorse, and she didn't have a demon to fight with the way Angel did, but she was in the care of W&H and had, in life, seen a bit more evil than had Liam.

Much has been made of humans like Faith and Warren having souls, yet doing evil. But consider that for Faith and Warren the decline into evil was slow and gradual. Neither of them went directly from relative innocence to mass murderer with a penchant for torture. They had time to adjust -- Angel and Darla did not. And yet, Faith still repented in the end (it remains to be seen whether or not Warren's torpid conscience will have an effect on him as his crimes escalate -- where are the Warren Redemptionistas pulling for his salvation?)

And I think you're right about Spike -- sensitive William having to face all the evil that Spike has done would likely send him into insanity or suicide.
[> [> Back to what a soul is..... -- Rufus, 05:13:41 04/12/02 Fri

According to Joss the soul is amorphous. We know that the personality and memories of the vampire are that of the host, the demon displaces the soul but needs the human mind. The question is, if a soul is not a personality, is it something floating around with a name tag on when the person is vamped?

You are right about the Gorches, they were accomplished thugs before they became vampires, nothing much changed in the way they operated except instead of just killing, they have themselves a snack as well. A soul returned to them would be meaningless as their conscience is well past repair.
[> [> [> What if it's all a lie? -- Darby, 10:09:38 04/12/02 Fri

What if the soul of the human doesn't leave, but gets buried under the wants and needs of the vampire soul? What if the whole soul thing is not just a part of the Buffyverse mythology, but an actual myth itself, used to justify killing humans in a way that would not be allowed otherwise (think Halloween)? The Angel spell may have been to empower or fully integrate Liam's soul rather than to return it, and we may be seeing the assertion of William's soul over the "defanged" vamp. It also fits the facts that vampires "remember" their human lives and that Angel "remembers" his Angelus life (except during transitions).

It's funny how everyone sees ancient "scientific" explanations for how things work as unsophisticated and quaint, but mystical explanations are accepted as absolute gospel (and gospel is not something that Joss particularly puts much stock in).

In a way, it would make what a vampire does to their turned victims even worse than it is.
[> [> [> [> Re: What if it's all a lie? -- Sophist, 10:38:46 04/12/02 Fri

I like this idea. The more I think about Liam, the less convinced I am that restoration of Liam's soul would have had the impact we saw on Angel.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: What if it's all a lie? -- shadowkat, 11:06:36 04/12/02 Fri

This idea sounds very possible to me as well...the writers
have given us conflicting data:

When Angel made Drusilla - Darla asked him why not just
kill her? And he said that would be too easy for her.
If he made her a vampire it would be Eternal Torment.

Yet in the Btvs - Doc says two conflicting things to
Spike.

Forever - I know you, you're that guy down at the corner
mart, playing dominoes except for the hair and you're a vampire (more i think about this line - it sounds like
a metaphor for Spike's duality = William (soul)/Spike (demon
fighting for dominence? And maybe it was never meant to
be taken literally - ME doesn't tend to work literally.)

The Gift - Doc says why do this, I don't smell a soul on
you. (Does he? Is it buried?)

Again not sure. The whole soul thing has been bugging me
for awhile now - partly because it seems too easy and
too pre-determined. Get a soul - you get saved? Not sure.
Lots of ambiguity there. Even in Joss's quote regarding it.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Ya noticed that didn't ya? -- Rufus, 18:53:49 04/12/02 Fri

I think that the ambiguity works to the writers advantage...less likely to write oneself into a corner. But remember that the vampires we have gotten to know all were vamped at a pivotal times in their young lives...all had bones to pick with the world, save Dru who was insane. So, what does the soul do? Is it an ingredient that helps one use a conscience, prefer right?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Ya noticed that didn't ya? -- shadowkat, 07:15:59 04/13/02 Sat

"So, what does the soul do? Is it an ingredient that helps one use a conscience, prefer right?"

It feels like a conscience that you can either ignore or
believe. But how does that explain some of Spike's acts
in past two years? At times he seems to be experiencing
more guilt than the characters with souls. I think you're
explanation is as good as any...ME certainly doesn't appear to use the term soul in the same way we do.

Here's what I think happened with the soul bit - I think
Whedon was still trying to figure out where he was going
Season 1 and Season 2 with the series. When he created Angel - who was meant partly as a metaphor - the older guy who falls in love with the teenager but shouldn't because that would be wrong. (He's a lot like a father figure to buffy and that whole season they did stories on the theme of how you shouldn't go there with an older man or woman, 'I only have eyes for you' being just one example. This is a theme that extended into Season 3) Or the old - I love him but my love turned him into a monster theme (another theme that extended into Season 3, and possibly 4, when Angel still made appearences in Btvs.) They were metaphorically dealing with these two themes in Season 2, using the soul thing and using vamp villians as metaphors. But ended up writing themselves into a corner. This happens a lot in fantasy writing - you set up certain fundamental rules - then realize ugh I hate that rule it constricts my story, how do I bend it? Particularly when you have an audience who won't let you without a bunch of hollering, we fantasy lovers are an obnoxious bunch (LOL!). And the soul thing really did constrict their story as far as vamps went, because it gets pretty boring to watch a girl just hunt and stake vamps or kill monsters every week - boring to write and boring to watch. And vamps are such an excellent metaphor for adolescence, alcoholism, etc to pass up. So how do we write interesting complex vamps and get around the soul bit with our audience? Enter Harmony and
Spike with a chip. Maybe there's a loop-hole here the writer's think - after all the only evidence that the only good vamp is souled one comes from Angel (which doesn't have to be reputable as a source, he doesn't know everything) and the Watcher's Council (which we can make untrustworthy - which hey works with our anti-authority theme) - cool. So from a writer's perspective - I think
we're probably making wayyy too much out of the whole soul thing. (Actually the soul bit on both shows was beginning to get on my nerves last year. I could feel the writers chomping away at it. )

;-)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> The soul in control! -- Slain, 14:16:21 04/13/02 Sat

Here's the way I think of vampires:

The human has two parts: soul and body. When a human dies, they lose the soul, and the demon replaces it. They become demon and body. 'Soul' therefore means conscience, but also consciousness, the spark of whatever it is that makes us alive. Demons have no morals or sense of good and evil, but souls do. The difference between a vampire (half demon) and a full demon is that vampires remember about having a soul, whereas full demons do not. Vampires may, then, have the possibility for redemption, but full demons have no concept or desire for it.

So with Spike's chip, he's closer to redemption only because he's more-or-less prevented from doing unredeemable things. But the actual spark of good in him has always been there, in the human part of him. So I'd agree it's not a case of 'souled vamp good, soulless vamp bad' - rather that any vampire has the capacity for good, because of their human half. In fact, I'd completely disregard Angel, when talking about Spike or other vampires - because Angel's soul is in control (ack! rhyming!), he is effectively human.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The soul in control! -- Rufus, 16:10:39 04/13/02 Sat

I see the soul as a direction that one prefers to travel. Vampires prefer chaos, evil...it makes them feel good..just like Joss said. There was also the fact that on the spectrum of behavior, souled and unsouled, start at about the same mid point. That leaves room for a broad spectrum of potential behaviors on the side of both human and vampire. So far it's well proved that lust, greed, or vengeance can make a person every bit as evil as the worst demon. Vampires we only know a few of them, but their first impulse is to head in the direction of evil. I only wonder if as a human can ignore their conscience, can a vampire ignore their preference for evil? Harmony still tried to kill Cordy at the end of Disharmony, but Cordy couldn't kill Harmony because they used to be friends. Spike is behaving against vampire norm by hanging out and demon hunting with the humans but, his propensity for acting out violently may be his downfall, as he reverts to what he knows best...making me glad that there is a chip in his head. The analogy of alcoholism and vampirism is a good one. It's played out over and over again, including the alley scene in Smashed. The chip will only take Spike so far, as long as he is sans soul he will be a danger to those around him, and even his best intentions won't stop him from potentially falling off the wagon. I do see an option that the writers have and I would be in spoiler land telling you.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Agree -- shadowkat, 16:40:59 04/13/02 Sat

Agree with your points and Slain's directly above.
Still struggling with the whole vampirism/alcoholism metaphor. Maybe because I read the Smashed sequence more as a reaction to his argument with Buffy than as a desire to feel good. Although - I guess you could say it's not dissimilar to someone saying :"You're just a horrible drunk and will always be a horrible drunk". But I don't think
it was written that way. He appeared to be trying to reaffirm his identity in the scene. Vampire=evil. Must
be evil. That's what I am. I'm evil. I kill things.
And now I can again. Just have to do it. The fact he had to work himself up to it - was very interesting and I think comparing it to alcoholism takes something away from it.

Knowing some of the spoilers myself - I think we both see the same way for the writers out of this one. Be interesting to see if they take it.;-)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Agree -- Rufus, 18:03:18 04/13/02 Sat

But if you know anything about addicts, they tend to start using again under stress. Spike thought the chip was not functioning, he was p/o'd at Buffy, and like some addicts I've known, he went out to teach her a lesson, finding that it was harder to kill again that he thought...but he still tried to attack. But as random events can have unexpected consequences, what may the consequences of this chipped vampire eventually be? All I can say is that the lack of a soul may counteract all of Spikes good intentions, just as an addict may not intend to use or drink now, what can happen an hour, day, week, ect....away?
[> [> [> Re: Back to what a soul is..... -- Ahira, 12:28:13 04/13/02 Sat

Have been doing some thinking on this and being new, not sure if it was brought up in this way before. The whole Angel with and without soul thing has really gotten to me in a lot of ways. Mostly, it just doesn't sit right.

Consider this, the "soul" was restored to Angel as a curse by the gypsys. Wanting to punish him for their loss. Now take a step back and ponder. Here we have a vampire doing his thing and killing, gypsys wanting retribution/vengeance and a soul on the table. Who says that the person was a nice guy before he became a vamp? Would returning the soul to a Jack the Ripper type really be much of a punishment? My supposition is, maybe that soul they cursed him with was modified. Amplify morality, awareness of good vs. evil, etc. Guarantee that when you "gift" the vampire with your curse that it does the job you want. Makes the need for the happiness clause even greater. Give a vamp a huge awareness and drive for good to really make them suffer for their past. Over the long time they can live, maybe he could come to terms with his past and move forward. Something they wouldn't want.
[> [> [> [> Re: Back to what a soul is..... -- Rufus, 00:43:31 04/14/02 Sun

I don't think so. I feel that at the point of transformation either the seperation of the soul from the person or the return of one, the person is confused, in the most cases they have just risen from being dead. Angel was Angelus, a vampire that seems to act out his constant daddy problems on any harmless population he strayed by. His unlife had been about the frustrated contest he had with his dad, that was terminated by Angelus when he first became a vampire....from the Prodigal

The last angry words of Liam's dad

Dad: “It’s a son I wished for - a man - instead God gave me you! A terrible disappointment.”

Angel: “Disappointment? A more dutiful son you couldn’t have asked for. My whole life you’ve told me in word, in glance, what it is you required of me, and I’ve lived down to your every expectations, now haven’t I?”

Dad: “That’s madness!”

Angel: “No. The madness is that I couldn’t fail enough for you. But we’ll fix that now, won’t we?”

Dad: “I fear for you, lad.”

Angel: “And is that the only thing you can find in your heart for me now, father?”

Dad: “Who’ll take you in, huh? No one!”

Angel: “I’ll not lack for a place to sleep, I can tell you that. Out of my way.”

Dad: “I was never in your way, boy.”

Who took Liam in? Darla, she saw an opportunity in a nice package. She promised Liam new things new experiences and when he rose from his early grave the first thing he did was to practice on the village and his father, his need to control, win the contest...

Cut to Angel’s father nailing up his window from the inside.

Angel: “You’re no different from the rest of them, - are you, father? (His father spins around and stares at him) Cowering in their houses - boarding up the windows - smearing that foul herb in the doorways. You’d think something evil - and vile - and monstrous - had taken to terrorizing this village -and everyone in it.”

Dad: “Be gone, unclean thing! A demon can not enter a home where it’s not welcome. He must be invited!”

Angel: “That’s true. - But I was invited.”

Angel looks to the doorway. His father turns and sees little Kathy slumped against the wall.

Dad: “Och!”

Angel: “She thought I returned to her - an angel.”

Dad spins around and charges Angel with the hammer in his hand.

Dad: “Murderer!”

Angel easily pushes the attack aside, making his dad fall to the ground.

Angel: “Strange. - Somehow you seemed taller when I was alive.”

Dad flattens himself up against the wall: “Lord, bind this demon now.”

Angel: “To think I ever let such a tiny, trembling thing make me feel the way you did.”

Dad crosses himself: “I pray ye, give me your protection, Father.”

Angel: “You told me I wasn’t a man. (Slowly stalks closer to his dad) You told me I was nothing. - and I believed you. You said I’d never amount to anything. (His dad stares at him with wide-open eyes) Well, you were wrong. (Angel morphs into vamp face) You see, father? - I have made something out of myself after all.”

Angel puts a hand over his father’s face and bites him. They slowly slide down the wall and out of the picture.

Darla: “This contest is ended, is it?”

Angel has his feet up on the table playing with his father’s pipe. His family lies dead around him.

Angel: “Now I’ve won.”

Darla: “You’re sure?”

Angel puts his feet down and picks up a mug of ale: “Of course. I proved who had the power here.”

Darla: “You think?”

Angel: “What?”
Darla: “You’re victory over him took but moments.”

Angel looks over at the body of his father and gets up: “Yes?”

Darla: “But his defeat of you will last life times.”

Angel: “What are you talking about? He can’t defeat me now.”

Darla: “Nor can he ever approve of you - in this world or any other. - What we once were informs all that we have become. (Angel looks at his father’s body) The same love will infect our hearts - even if they no longer beat. (Angel looks at his mother’s and his sister’s body) Simple death won’t change that.”

Angel: “Love? - Is this the work of love?”

Darla steps closer and smiles up at him: “Darling boy. - So young. Still so very young.”

Angelus (Liam), felt he had power for the first time in his life/unlife he went about proving that to the villagers that may have witnessed his humiliation at his fathers whim. His name came from the sister he murdered, the sister that felt the love that seemed to escape the young Liam who was more interested in whoring and drinking than growing up. He then went to fight the most fearsome opponent...his father....note I said murderer...Liam's father said "murderer"....a demon would have been consider a killer or a beast that massacres, but Liam's father said "murderer"...what he first called unclean demon he called murderer...the last moment of his life he knew that his angry son had come back to seek revenge upon him. I feel that though abusive, Liam's father thought he was the prince of child rearing, making sure his son was a man not a dissapointment. What he got back was death to the village, his family, all because he could never show love (maybe he thought it would be unmanly) to his son. Angelus killed his father....Angelus is what he once was, Liam, with new power, but not much insight into people. He mistook bad childrearing for a contest to the death. Alive, Angelus was stifled and caved under the verbal and physical assaults of his father, yet was unable to leave the home. When Darla met up with him he never got the chance.

The contest Angelus won, was against his ageing father, a man who was a product of maybe another cruel parent, someone repeating a cycle that couldn't be broken. Darla knew a nice looking guy when she saw him, but underestimated the hidden rage of the insecure boy/man. She created a monster, a man forever stuck acting out pointless pissing contests geared to win approval, his father can never see what he made of himself, only Darla was left. She understood that she has a live..well unlive one...but Angelus surpassed her in cruelty....a cruelty that hides the insecure, unloved boy who would never be approved of by the one person he needed it most from....now that is a tragedy. Some people say that the vampire is only a demon in a shell, but I disagree all you have to do is look at the words spoken by Angelus.....he said his father made ME feel a worthless...Angelus may be a demon, but first and forever he is Liam.

Then the soul again found the body....Angel was created in the dirt by a gypsy curse. Angel didn't seem to know where he was at first, then the memories came flooding back....his conscience had a chance to take an overview of what happened when no morals were abided by. I don't think that Liam was the nicest guy, but he never had that chance to grow up. I don't think he would have killed his family or become a killer of thousands.....imagine remembering all you have done, only now being able to care about it? For Angel the return of the soul ended the contest and started the feelings of loss and regret. Angel can never bring back what he took away from the world and himself. His journey back from monster to man is facinating to watch...his being able to finally connect in a way he should have had the chance to hundreds of years ago. I can't wait to see more new shows starting Monday.
[> [> [> [> [> Amazing - thank you. I agree. -- shadowkat, 08:16:03 04/14/02 Sun

You gave me a new appreciation of Angel. I agree with you. It's another way of showing the theme of growing up. The ability to get past what our parents or enviroment teaches us and become in essence our own man/woman, regardless of their teachings. To stand on our own. In a way it's not unlike the Pinocchio storyline. Clever clever ME - to echo themes across two shows on two different networks - so that if you miss one, you miss out on the whole tapestry.

I too look forward to seeing new episodes of Angel, even if I haven't been nearly as obsessed with it this year as Btvs, I do find Angel's storyline to be intriguing for all the reasons you outlined above. It's posts like this one that continue to inspire me to write and post threads. Thanks for the wonderful discussion.

PS: you also managed to change my mind regarding the addiction metaphor. I can see that now with both Spike and Angel and not just Angel.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Gee, thanks.......Angel is an underrated show -- Rufus, 16:11:10 04/14/02 Sun

For me to fully appreciate anything Spike has gone through I had to look at all the vampire characters that we have gotten to know, they are still acting out their human wants and desires. There is the motif of families through the show and also of addictions. Angel is Spikes unwilling parent, notice his reactions to Spike in FFL almost resemble what Angel's father would have been like. Spike was wanting to do more than the status quo and Angelus became the establishment.....his dad. All the characters you have to look at all their past and present interactions to see just how great the writing in both shows has been.
Angel is on Monday night.....can't wait.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Back to what a soul is..... -- yabyumpan, 10:47:38 04/14/02 Sun

Thanks Rufas, great post, just to add some thoughts:

With reference to Angel not being able to be the man his father wanted him to be, it seems, that in some ways, he achieved that by becoming Angelus. My impression of Liam’s father was of someone who felt he hadn’t done as well as he should and tries to make more of himself than he is:
Dad: “Oh, I do. I do say so. Have you not had enough debauchery for one night? Must you corrupt the servants as well?”
Angel: “Servant, father. We have *one* servant.
This is pure speculation, but I imagine him (Liam’s father), to be someone who takes out and projects his own feeling of failure onto his son. As Angelus, he becomes the opposite of the Liam we know, liking the finer things in life, going to the ballet, mixing with artists etc (She), reading classical literature; even his torture and killing he views with a kind of artistry. His father was a merchant dealing in silk and linen ((blind date), who would have expected his son to follow him into the family business. Pure speculation again, but we know that Angel has artistic leanings, I wonder if his father taunted him about that not being a “manly” pursuit. Maybe forbade him to draw etc. If his creativity was denied it would help to explain his drinking/whoring etc. If his father would not allow him to be who he was then he would become the complete antithesis of who his father wanted him to be. As Angelus, he was able to be, in someways, the person he wanted to be as a human.

On a slightly different track, but still with fathers. Thinking about the connection between Wesley and Angel. Both had fathers who thought/think them a failure. With Wesley, this led him to keep trying, with the WC, poss with Giles and I think in some ways, with Angel. This has led in the end, to him starting to become his own man. With Liam, he gave up trying, and in fact, revelled in his failure; this led him to Darla and to becoming Angelus.
Interesting with Wesley at the moment, he’s gone against the possible father figure (Angel) and that has led him to probably the worst mistake of his life.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Very good point about the Father and Fathers -- Rufus, 16:05:13 04/14/02 Sun

I always saw Angels dad as a type A who for whatever reason wanted to make sure that Angel didn't make the same mistakes he did. Angel could only see his dad as a man who had never had fun in the quest of the secure, good life. Both had chips on their shoulders and couldn't talk to each other. Angel's dad drove Angel right into the arms of Darls with his inability to dispense with the rod and maybe spoil the child a bit. I always wondered if the father had a better more loving relationship with Cathy, and some of Angels anger about love was about their ability to connect. Angel was the oldest son and dad had expectations for him that didn't include artistic persuits. As for the servant dig, I think that was almost a way of saying "where has all this business 24 hours a day" gotten you? A modest return and a permanent bug up your ass. Angel was a early slacker, who didn't find the family business stimulating. But even most slackers grow up and go on to making a living.

Also, I think that is where Wesley and Angel connect, even if they don't know it.....fathers. I have to wonder which father was worse Angel or Wesley's? Proving that people haven't changed that much over the century. I wonder if we get a return of Connor, what type of dynamic will play out with father and son?
[> [> [> [> [> [> Wesley's Fathers & Growing Up (Spoilers for Angel S2) -- Scroll, 19:25:36 04/14/02 Sun

Wesley is one of my two favourite characters (Tara's the other), and despite his bumbling in the past, I feel he's really grown into his own ever since Angel fired him in S2. And I think a great deal of Wesley's growth comes from this sudden break from his constant need to 'prove' himself to his father figure. In Buffy S3, we see that Wesley's pretty much a pompous ass with no social skills, always walking around with "a stake rammed up his English channel", as Faith says. But we see glimpses of the brave general in Choices when Wes tries to make Buffy & Co understand the stakes regarding trading the Box of Gavrok for Willow with the Mayor, and in Graduation 2 when he warns Buffy that Faith poisoning Angel is meant to distract her from the Ascension.

But Giles, Buffy & gang only see Wesley's bumbling and not his reasoned arguements. They refuse to see him as anything but an intruder and a nuisance. Not only does Wesley fail to secure Giles' approval, the fellow Watcher who should have stood at his side, but he's immediately fired by the Council. Losing his job as Watcher is proof (at least it seems this way to Wes), that he is a failure, as a man and as a son.

In Angel S1, Wesley bends over backwards to get Angel & Cordy to accept him. He especially wants acceptance from Angel who is an authority figure and, despite being a vampire, very much a father figure. But once Angel fires his crew, Wesley has to step up as leader and he does a wonderful job, backed by his Watcher training. But once Angel rejoins the team, we see Wes faltering in "Belonging" when he calls his father. It's a touching and inspiring contrast between the brow-beaten son being verbally abused by his father and the strong general in "There's No Place Like Plrtz Glrb".

S3 Wesley probably doesn't see Angel as a 'father' anymore. Maybe as an older brother, definitely as a 'hero' like the Slayer. Wesley is still very much the Watcher: he is Giles who sacrifices his own well-being in the service of his charge. I really hope he and Angel reconcile; their relationship, like Buffy/Giles, is one of the most fascinating in the Buffyverse. One thread a while back compared Angel & Wes to David & Jonathan; that's how I see their dynamic. ('Course the slash subtext is there, but that's a whole 'nother story!)
[> [> [> [> [> [> Wow. Now compare Liam to William. -- Traveler, 23:34:35 04/14/02 Sun

If Angelus was indulging in Liam's repressed desire for "artistry," then doesn't that mean he wanted to be more like William? The irony is that Spike wanted to be more like Liam, living each day sensually, focused completely on the present. Thus, suggesting that Angelus was a father figure to Spike shows even closer connections to the relationship between Liam and his father. Angelus became an artist as he had always wanted, but Spike had turned his back on that life. Since Angelus was pushing him to be more like himself as his father had once pushed him, perhaps Spike was rebelling against Angelus as much as against the rest of the world? If that is the case, how can he possibly resolve those issues now that Angel is in LA and on another network?
[> Re: Angel/Spike - Restraining the monster (very long with spoilers to NA) -- Etrangere, 13:58:04 04/13/02 Sat

WARNING SPOILERS UP TO NORMAL AGAIN

4. What would hold you back? Would you become the monster?
5. What holds you back now?


Two very good questions. Vampires stand for a removal from the two sources of morality :
The outer, laws and society's assessment of what you're doing. The Vampires do not belong to our society anymore, they don't have to behave by its rules, as Spike points out in Fool For Love. On contrary, theirs push them to behave the more violently.
And the inner morality, that conscience thing called the soul in the Jossverse that makes people decide what's wrong and right even when they have no one around them to tell them.
Obviously the two are linked. We forge an inner moral compass by integration of the society's rules, and the society has rules in the first place because men with their inner morality made them. So it's a dynamic system.

So how does Angel and Spike relate to that ?

Angel, even with the coming of soul, inner morality, doesn't belong yet to the human society. Indeed he even tries to keep on belong with the monsters society in the first place (Five by Five, Darla), and even when he's prooved to be unable to do that, it is not easy for him to belong with the humans. This need to act into the society's rules is what he first learns of in City of... yet has to struggle to keep during the seasons. (don't know for sure in S3, i'm still in mid s2 :)

Spike's situation is the inverse. He doesn't feel the inner morality, he's forced by the governement not to act against the society's rules. He can bends those rules (like he does in Yoko Factor) but that's all. And it's more the fact that he finds himself inside the Scooby Gang and care for them, and Buffy in particulary, that he acts for the "good". Even then, his unability to understand the inner morality makes him stand apart from them : this is very well shown in Dead Things, when he is truelly unable to understand Buffy's distress and guilt for having killed Katrina. ("why don't you explain it to me"). His struggle is to manage to interiorize those rules like children do in socialisation.

We can also note that the redemption question, so central in Angel, is seldom asked for Spike. Whatever evil Spike has done in the past, it's mostly not put into the scale in the show (compared to Angel). The problem comes more from his ability or unability now and in the future to understand inner morality once the outer, forced morality is removed (what would he do if the chip is out ? What would he do if Buffy would never know ? What would he do if it was remote strangers without links to the Scoobies ?)
However the fans (those anti Spike especially :) often wonder about it, saying Spike is bad because he never expresses guilt over his past misdeeds, or that being evil by nature he should be killed anyway. (I might be caricaturing :)

But in the same way Angel question the idea of inner morality vs the society's rules. All the time we might not agree with those, our own conscience telling us the law is not fair, and sometimes it's a very legitimate critism yet how far can one goes before it's an individual judging only with his own mind who is right or wrong in the whole world... and taking mesures against them. This is very well shown by the end of Reunion and Cordelia assessment of it : will you just let Dru and Darla kill everyone you don't like ? I always find incredibly ironic that Angel is fighting a cabinet of Lawyers, who are thus both the one defending the accused, asking for a chance of redemption for all, and the one standing for Laws and the human society's rules. In Wolfram & Hart's case, both those ideals are ofcourse corrupted, but one can't say that Angel has got very smooth relation with another symbole of the outer morality in his serie in Kate.

She’s right – this simple fact haunts him and motivates him whether he is Angel or Angelus. He wants approval desperately – whether it be from other demons or from humans or from the Powers That Be. He is concerned over how he appears to people, the artistry of his kills, the actions he takes and he does them in a grandiose manner when he is Angelus – take the whole opening the gates of hell idea in Becoming Part I & II (Season 2 Btvs).
Angelus prides himself in the “artistry of the kill”. Angel prides himself on where he lives, his car, his friends, helping the slayer. Why? Is he still hunting his dead father’s approval? Will he always hunt it? Is that what lies behind some of his actions?

As I said before, both those moralities are linked, they work together. Thus Angel even with his inner morality, yearns for the recognition that is the reward from the outer morality. And his redemption is to become anew a part of the humane society by becoming human again.
As you brillantly show, it's also because of who Liam used to be and is as Angel / Angelus.

OKay, i gonna finnish this later, don't have the time right now. See you later :)
[> [> Re: Angel/Spike - Restraining the monster (very long with spoilers to NA) -- Etrangere, 16:19:35 04/13/02 Sat

And I just cleared up all that i wrote then... and whatever is doing that button there may I ask you ? I swear it was one of the longest post I ever tried to make... i gonna kill myself now :'((((
[> [> [> Second part of my post at last -- Etrangere, 17:17:17 04/13/02 Sat

"If at first you don't succeed, I'll kill him and you'll try again."
*sights* I'm registering what I write all along this time.

where was I ?


It’s difficult for us to admit that there is darkness inside us. Difficult to see that we are capable of horrible things in a blink of an eye. Angel struggles with this. He struggles with the knowledge that part of him wants to hurt people and is afraid to fully examine why. To look at the darkness that still lives inside him, has always lived there, even when he was just a man. He even tries, albeit unsuccessfully to kill himself, when he realizes that he wasn’t a much better man. In some ways he prefers the monster, the monster was simple. “It’s the man in me that needs killing not the monster.” (AMENDS, Season 3 Btvs)


This point is I believe very important to what vampire are.
Amends showed us what proclaimed to be the purest form of Evil ever. And it was a very lame show :) If it demonstrated anything it was how much what evil was came indeed from humanity.
It is as if every human has his own monster in him that is unleashed by being a vampire is unstoppable. Or is it the monster that is tamed into being a human ?
S4 and S5 in Buffy are the two seasons that explore the most that idea. In S4 with the themes of the creation of Man, of the exile from the Garden of Eden and the learning of Good and Evil. In S5 by the exploration of the idea of humanity and of the humane condition. If someday I think I can add something to Dedalus' great essay on S5 (one can dream) I might do a compagnon piece for my S4 themes, in the waiting we can look at how Tara (who though she was a monster before knowing she was human), Anya (who learnt her humanity by finding her place in the system, by loving Xander and realising what death and love was about), Dawn (who had to come in term with not being real) and ofcourse Spike explores the theme of humanity. The apotheosis of this was in the Gift when Ben, by renuncing to his mortality, was considered as a monster, and when Spike's acceptance of dying for those he loves allows him to be treated as a man, though he is a monster.
And love is there an important word. As much for Tara, who realised she wasn't demon because of Willow's and her friends' love, as for Anya, who learns her humanity because of her love for Xander, as for Dawn, who believes in the reality of her own humanity because of the love of her family, or for Spike, whose love for Buffy causes his will to be human, unless it is his will to be human that causes his love for Buffy.
Love, indeed, is the Key in Season 5, and what other force could be seen as breaking all walls between dimensions ?
One can become a monster because of love - as Angelus did, or one can try to become human because of love - as Spike does.


As “leslie” on All Things Philosophical Board pointed out – Spike “liked words for their sound (the eternal "effulgent") rather than their sense. He likes how things feel physically; he gets suicidal when he, literally, can't touch things (both when confined to the wheelchair--paralyzed--and newly chipped).” Angel on the other hand likes to feel things mentally, and is into image – having a big house, a cool car, nice clothes, reading thought-provoking books. We rarely see Angel enjoying food or drink, while Spike is ordering a “flowering onion” and drinking quite a bit of alcohol, even has a liquor cabinet. Angel doesn’t need anything but blood so he only eats blood. The only time I saw him enjoy food was when he became briefly human in Atvs Season 1.


This is a very good point.
Spike was called "King of Cups" by Druscilla in Fool For Love, and it suits him. He is always led my his emotions and feelings without much though, while Angel on the other hand could be called the "King of Swords" for the intellectual way with which he reacts to things. And as a sword he has a double edge, he neatly separates Angel the Champion from Angelus the Scourge of Europe, while Spike is more ready to synthesises the different part of him and makes it hard to see what's humane and what's demonic. Their attitude toward their own monsters and morality is thus very different.


ARISTOCRAT #2 Ah, William! Favor us with your opinion. What do you make of this rash of disappearances sweeping through our town? Animals or thieves?
SPIKE(haughty)I prefer not to think of such dark, ugly business at all. That's what the police are for. (looks at Cecily) I prefer placing my energies into creating things of beauty.


This quote ties with what you say after :


Yet, Spike loves breaking rules, loves going against the crowd, loves physical pursuits. In some ways he seems to be the opposite of his human self just as Angel seems to be the opposite of his. Yet – it makes sense, when you think about it.


William didn't like to think of things of darkness, he repressed it. That's why it's such a great part of him as a vampire. Just as it is because Liam had so much rage and anger at his father that he became such a wicked vampire.
Vampires are the Shadow Selves of who there were in human life.
We also can see that very well in one Vampire you didn't talk of in this essay : VampWillow. There is very few who dislike to think themselves as evil as much as Willow, yet she became obviously one of the most evil vampire in the Wishverse. All Willow's repressed anger and violence expressed itself the more strongly in VampWillow. Willow was very compassionate, VampWillow is a sadist.
We can see the reverse in Harmony. She is one of the character in which there is the less personnality change between the human and the vampire self. That's because Harmony seldom did repress her agressivity : when she felt like being a bitch, she was. And thus as a vampire she strikes as very less evil than others.
How ironic : the less you express you inner evil as a human, the more likely you are to be evil as a vampire.
Just as it is the people who are believing the more strongly to act for the greater good who often do the worse things.
That's also what characterizes the "outer circle" Anya, Tara, Dawn and Spike that finds their humanity in S5 , after the Restless dream where the four core scoobies saw their strength - humanity ? - turned into weakness as their own inner Big Bads. The outer circle on the other hand knows already they have a inner monster, because they began that way, Tara only with an imaginary one and Dawn only as mystical energy that can cause the apocalypse, yet it is an important difference. Because of this knowledge, they're less likely to separate themselves totally from their evil side, and thus might be more able to protect themselves from it.


Why don’t Angel and Spike kill anymore? Is it the soul or chip holding them back? What is restraining them? They have nothing to fear. As Spike put it in Fool For Love: “becoming a vampire means you have nothing to fear but one girl.” And hey she’s easy to avoid if they want to.

We arrives there to the 5th question you asked in the beginning of your post. What's refraining us, humans, from doing evil. For sure many of us do, but most people wouldn't go around killing or whatever just because thet could, or so do I believe, but I kinda like anarchist ideas.


Why do we hold back the monster in ourselves? Is it our fear of being caught? What motivates us?
I think it’s more than just love for Spike. Just as I think it’s more than just guilt for Angel.

I just wanted to add that I agree. That I think one of the reasons Spike loves Buffy is actually because it gives him a good pretexte for acting "good".

He’s beginning to realize what Anya figured out way back in The Body – creating life is more rewarding than destroying it.

That was in Forever :)

They are being forced to acknowledge that they are more than a windup toy for the good or evil to do the gods bidding. And that destruction while rewarding at the time leaves nothing lasting. Perhaps this realization and not just a chip or a soul is the path out of their mutual states of arrested development. Perhaps similar realizations are the paths out of our own?


Lovely conclusions. I mostly agree.
To conclude my own though, i want to go back to ideas of inner and outer morality of my first post.
Maybe can we tie the inner morality to the mind as Angel does, conscience as a rationnal thing (someone here once said that Angel had a Kant-like way of seeing morality), and the outer morality to the heart as Spike does, defining it by those he loves and cares for, and seeks the respect of.
As I said before, it's a dynamic relation ship between those two. What is being purely led by reason than a corruption of morality as shown by the Initiative, or by those ready to kill Dawn for the sake of saving more lives. (I don't blame Giles for killing Ben, nor do I think it wasn't necessary, yet I think it is an evil action in itself) ? As for being led by the heart only, it's the threat shown by the wilder species of demons, Faith or Willow every time she manipulates other for preventing herself - and them ! - to suffer.
As often, it is Tara who stands the better in the middle ground. She is probably the most moral character in the shown because she knows perfectly how to balance these two kinds of morality, as shown by her dealing with Willow's abuse.

Well, I can't say if I said everything I tried to say the first time, but I'm tired now, so there is is. Again, great post shadowcat on a very interesting topics.
[> [> [> [> Re: Second part of my post at last - Great! -- lachesis, 14:43:13 04/15/02 Mon

Loved this. Thinking now . . . Thanks ever so!
[> [> [> [> Wonderful as always, Etrangere. -- Ixchel, 22:44:48 04/15/02 Mon

[> [> Great post Ete! Can't wait to see the rest. -- Sophist, 16:20:52 04/13/02 Sat

ABAWARD WINNERS!! -dont be surprised -- neaux, 19:32:56 04/10/02 Wed

http://neaux0.tripod.com/abaward.html

here are the awards! rejoice or curse!! I'll have full numbers tomorrow if you are interested.
[> This is great! Thanks for all the hard work -- Valhalla, 20:27:08 04/10/02 Wed

[> Thanks neaux -- Rufus, 20:28:43 04/10/02 Wed

What staking motion.....;)
[> [> Oh my gosh, Spike in almost every category? But who would vote for him? -- Ian, 22:31:29 04/10/02 Wed

[> [> [> Which is exactly why I didn't vote. This board's bias prevents any considerations of actual quality -- A regular, 22:35:46 04/10/02 Wed

[> [> [> [> No offense to you, neaux. It's not your fault. Thanks for the idea -- A regular, 22:45:02 04/10/02 Wed

[> I expected better of you guys -- anonamous, 22:44:38 04/10/02 Wed

I was expecting the groups of geniuses on this board to think critically about each category and cvome up with the best choice for each. And what happens. You guys look, say "ooh, Spike's so cute" and vote for him in each category! this looks more like the type of thing the teenages at teh Bronze would put together, not something that came from a bunch of philosophers

Grow Up people!
[> [> Happens with popularity contests -- A regular, 22:46:53 04/10/02 Wed

[> [> [> Could we stop with the pseudonymity? -- d'Herblay, 23:00:41 04/10/02 Wed

Ok, I've done it myself in the past, but after a couple more trolls-by and the whole Boke thing, I'm starting to think that if people want to say something, they should be willing to stand behind their words. We've pretty much avoided the whole flame wars scene so far, so such maneuvers are, I think, not necessary, even in such controversial terrain. And frankly, some people who are willing to put their own well-known aliases behind their words might just agree with you.

But not about Spike . . . he's sooooooo KEWL!!!!!!!!
[> [> [> [> lol, Jesus and sliced bread have nothing on him! How bout the Spike-free abawards - -- yuri, 23:38:08 04/10/02 Wed

to give all the less-worthy a chance to compete, now that we're all clear that he's the best at just about everything?
[> [> [> [> Or at least spell check the pseudonyms? -- Sophist, 10:00:06 04/11/02 Thu

[> [> [> [> As opposed to the pseudos we use already? -- coughcoughmunduscoughcough, 15:24:24 04/11/02 Thu

I think "A regular" probably just felt s/he had made a throwaway generic comment and her/his moniker was meant to reflect this.

As for trolls...lord, who cares? Most are such tediously predictable button-pushers I'm amazed they still draw considered responses. And as for my posts, I always stand behind them -- as far behind them as possible. ;)

-mm
[> [> [> now wait a minute -- celticross, 07:07:04 04/11/02 Thu

Neaux goes to all this trouble...makes a website and all...and now we just complain about the winners? Was there a memo that said it's not cool to like Spike anymore?
[> [> But, but, but... -- Darby, 08:17:22 04/11/02 Thu

True, I thought that Spike kind of dominated the nominations and the awards, but there were very few nominations, especially in the more "serious" areas (c'mon, "nekkid Spike" didn't garner the same attention as various literary allusions, right-?), that I felt were out of line and shouldn't have been on the list. The writers like Spike and Buffy (duh) and give them the juiciest stuff to do a lot!

I voted for a couple of Spikecentric awards (Hell, I nominated a couple), and I voted otherwise in categories and have a bit of the "Hey!" response there, too, but be fair, James and Sarah should not be prostrate chanting "We're not worthy!" over this.
[> [> Wow..so much infighting. We can't even use our real fake names? :) -- Tillow, 10:30:28 04/11/02 Thu

[> [> All's fair ... in love and ABA awards -- Valhalla, 17:54:44 04/11/02 Thu

hee hee.
[> [> Reeeeor! Phhht! Phhht! Hsssss! Say it with me now: "It's only for fun." -- Dichotomy, 18:30:59 04/11/02 Thu

[> Thanks for all the work neaux. It turned out great. -- Ian, 23:07:29 04/10/02 Wed

Oh, and now that the "mysterious" posters have responded to my origianl post, I suppose I should clarify that I was joking.
[> [> I knew that......says Rufus who is not a sore loser when Giles gets hardly a vote......sigh..;) - - Rufus, 00:56:26 04/11/02 Thu

[> If this is ever done again... -- neaux, 04:31:58 04/11/02 Thu

Not that I plan on doing this any time soon... but I believe Spike and Buffy might need to receive lifetime achievement awards and be out of the running.. eh??

Counting the votes was very tedious. Later tonight I'll post actual numbers if you guys want to know. But it tired me out. I'm glad everyone enjoyed the fun though.
[> Thanks a lot Neaux for all the hard work &...... -- JCC, 08:23:46 04/11/02 Thu

bringing excitement to our dull little lives....for a few weeks anyway. To qoute Once more with Feeling:

Where do we go from here?
[> Thanks for all the hard work! -- Wynn, 08:39:13 04/11/02 Thu

[> Re: ABAWARD WINNERS!! -dont be surprised -- Slain - oh, no, I mean 'anonymous', 11:29:03 04/11/02 Thu

I don't have any particular complaints, but I haven't been here long enough to start complaining yet! I would have prefered to have a greater breadth of seasons represented, rather than mostly just the past two, though.
[> [> Re: ABAWARD WINNERS!! -dont be surprised -- annonymous, 13:11:34 04/11/02 Thu

Spike deserves to win....countless times, anyone who's annoyed by this fact can go F*CK themselves!
[> I was surprised... -- LeeAnn, 13:06:17 04/11/02 Thu

There has been so much anti-Spike sentiment on the forum and in chat that I thought it was pointless to vote. So I was surprised Spike/James Marsters won so many of the categories.
Does this mean there are more shallow people than the anti-Spike people thought? Or more deeply thoughtful ones than I thought?
[> [> Re: I was surprised... -- Deeva, 13:22:23 04/11/02 Thu

There are probably more closeted Spike lovers out there than we realize. Maybe the more vehement ones are covering. You know that saying "Me thinks the lady doth protests too much."
[> [> Re: I was surprised... -- JBone, 19:31:59 04/11/02 Thu

There has been so much anti-Spike sentiment on the forum and in chat that I thought it was pointless to vote.

Okay, I haven't been in the chat room since September, but I'm at a loss at your belief that anti- Spike sentiment has overcome the board. If there was ever, in the history of the internet, a Spike flag waving board, this just may be it. Sure you have your Angel fans, and maybe a couple Xander fans here, but it's not like there is a huge pro-Riley or pro-Oz or pro-Giles or pro-Wesley fans dominating the board. Althought the Wesley fans would be justified, judging by the brilliance of the portrayal of Wesley this season.

Anyway, I by no means, see this as a anti-Spike board in any stretch of the imagination.
[> Neaux you deserve an award! Thanks! -- ponygirl, 13:27:39 04/11/02 Thu

[> Rejoice! -- Deeva, 13:28:02 04/11/02 Thu

Thanks for doing such a good job! And don't mind the poo-poohers. Sulk, much? *g*
[> Re: ABAWARD WINNERS!! -dont be surprised -- Slain, 14:49:47 04/11/02 Thu

It's really great the way people can just anonymously abuse people on this board, isn't it, without having to face any consequences for it? That's great.

That was my sarcastic voice, by the way.

I don't really understand the Spike lovers or the Spike haters, myself. He's a great character, and JM is a great actor, with many of the best lines and the best scenes in the past two Seasons, but as a character he doesn't seem exactly loveable or hateable to me, more likeable to dislikeable.
[> [> Every board has trolls. Please don't assume a regular poster responded above. Just ignore them. -- Sophist, 15:47:44 04/11/02 Thu

[> Thanks for your hard work, neux! :-) -- ravenhair, 16:25:53 04/11/02 Thu

[> Neaux, you did a great job. Thank you -- Isabel, 18:05:20 04/11/02 Thu

I was surprised to see only 26 people voted. For all the comment this is generating, (ok- they're trolls- ignore them... )

I feel that anyone who didn't like the results should have voted in the first place. This ain't Florida, they got counted. I spent 2 hours selecting my choices. It wasn't easy! BTW-Spike did not win in every category! Only about 5 of my selections were most popular, and I'm sure it's the same with everyone else.

Sorry to get vehement on folks. I hate seeing Neaux's efforts abused by a bunch of wankers.
[> Thanks neaux! I had fun, which was what it was meant to be, right? -- Dichotomy, 18:12:19 04/11/02 Thu

[> Queries for Neaux -- JBone, 19:51:26 04/11/02 Thu

Thanks Neaux, you tackled a project that I considered too big to complete in a very few weeks, and somehow pushed it through.

I was looking through your posted point tabulations and have questions about categories 3 and 17. For 3 (the best performance by a recurring guest star), it looks like both M and H have 5 votes. And in number 17 (best nude or lightly clad body male), it looks like both F and D have 6 votes. I know that you have been really busy tallying it all up, so I hope this doesn't sound critical.

And who is no vote?
[> [> WOW!! THanks!! That Means 2 More Winners!! -- neaux, 04:34:49 04/12/02 Fri

Good Catch J-Bone I'll try to put them up tonite!!

yeah.. my eyes get weary.. I was more concerned about making sure all the tallies equaled 26 because I wanted my counting to be correct that I should have been concentrating more on the winners!!

as for the No Votes- There were 2 people who did not vote in 1 of the categories. (but those were two different categories)
[> Really wonderful job neaux... the site looks great, and your efforts are much appreciated. -- OnM, 20:39:32 04/11/02 Thu

So don't pay too much attention to the say-nay-ers, 'K?

I pretty much agreed with the majority of selections, and the ones that I didn't agree with were still very reasonable choices.

Is it our fault that the dead blond guy is so quotable? If I had writers that good workin' for me, I'd be really quotable too!

;-)
[> [> ditto Neaux!! Incredible job, and alot of fun !! -- SK, 22:01:42 04/11/02 Thu

[> Thanks for taking this on, neaux, I had fun! -- verdantheart, 07:00:18 04/12/02 Fri

I had a good time thinking about the nominations and I even sent in noms for a few categories. I only wish I had had more time to mull things over (and even maybe suggest a category).

Thanks again! - vh
[> Drat'n drabbbit! I just didn't have time to read everything and vote! -- Marie, 08:20:40 04/12/02 Fri

I really wanted to, neaux - sorry! It was a great idea, and you've worked so hard - ignore the flak!

Marie
"Welcome to the Hellmouth/The Harvest" Annotations II: The Sequel! -- Rob, 19:51:02 04/10/02 Wed

OK, I don't want to get annoying, but since it's been a while since I posted about my collecting annotations for my new Buffy site (all with Masq approval, of course), I just wanted to make absolutely sure that everybody who wanted to contribute an annotation for either "Welcome to the Hellmouth" or "The Harvest" has had a chance...

The annotation can be anything--literary or other reference (for example, "Helpless" as compared to "Little Red Riding Hood), continuity (good or bad), note about character development, etc etc--as long as it is objective. I would rather shy away from subjective statements, like, "I don't like this scene," since I want this to be an unbiased reference guide. You can put forth an analysis or theory, just not an opinion about the quality of the story.

So, please send me any comments, even the smallest, little insignificant thing...I'm moving on to posting for "Witch" annotations in a few days.

Rob

P.S. Of course, you'll get full credit, if I quote you at my site.
[> Is this the final call? -- d'Herblay, 22:18:55 04/10/02 Wed

I'd really like to contribute, but I'm afraid that I probably won't be viewing "Welcome to the Hellmouth"/"The Harvest" again until my post-season finale Buffybinge. I do though plan to have reallllly gooood annotations sometime in early June! So will you be adding annotations as people come up with them, or must I go watch it now?
[> [> No...I'd be glad to add your annotations later. -- Rob, 06:36:20 04/11/02 Thu

[> Re: "Welcome to the Hellmouth/The Harvest" Annotations II: The Sequel! -- shadowkat, 06:01:58 04/11/02 Thu

Annotations?

What do you already have? Sorry only been posting on
this board for three weeks now.

Do you have anything showing that Xander's hatred of
vampires arises partly from the fact that they not only
killed but turned his best friend Jesse into one?

Also Jesse is similar to Xander and Spike. Jesse had a yen
for Cordelia and to a smaller degree Buffy (just met her)
When he gets vamped he goes right for Cordy, dancing with
her first. Xander is forced to kill him - Jesse is the first
vamp that Xander ever has to kill.

People have wondered why Xander hates vampires - you can
probably trace it to Jesse. "I am going to say, vampires
are a bad thing." Xander says after they escape from
Jesse and the vamps and get back to Giles library. He had
gone to save his friend and failed.

Another annotation - comparison of the Bronze scene
in Welcome to the Hellmouth and in Dead Things - the angle
of the shot and some of the dialogue is very similar.

My two cents for what it's worth.
Surprise/Innocence vs. Loyalty/Sleep Tight (LONG, spoilers for Angel season 3 through Sleep Tight) -- oceloty, 23:01:42 04/10/02 Wed

Surprise/Innocence vs. Loyalty/Sleep Tight

(spoilers for Buffy season 3, Angel season 3 through Sleep Tight)

I'm delurking to express my thanks and awe at the discussions I've seen on this board ... and, at last, some thoughts of my own that just wouldn't go away 'til I got them on the page.

My goal is not to compare the merits of the episodes so much as the ways in which they share key plot/structural elements and themes, much as Buffy the series and Angel the series do.

Spoilers for BTVS through season 3, and ATS through season 3 Sleep Tight, plus speculation on the rest of ATS season 3. I haven't (alas) seen season 2 (any Americans/Canadians interested in helping rectify this? please?), so I'm basing my discussion on the transcripts. And, warning fair and square, I'm not laconic. This is long.







Spoilers ho. Here we go.

As the credits rolled for Sleep Tight, two thoughts dribbled through my find. First, that I was _really_ impressed by the episode. Second, that emotionally, watching the Loyalty/Sleep Tight combination felt like watching Surprise/Innocence. Part of this is probably because I think all four are very well written and executed, but the more I thought about it, the more I think both two- parters use some similar elements to explore some of the same themes. This isn't to say the L/ST is a knockoff of S/I; rather, it seems to be revisiting some ideas from S/I, in the Angel setting.

"I'll show you what I mean."


Part 1: Common Plot and Structural Elements

1. Two-part episode structure.
The events of S/I and L/ST are quite compact in "TV" time (a few days at most) but fill the space of two actual episodes. Despite little chronological time elapsing, many and important events are transpiring with major consequences for the characters involved. Both two-parters are the fulcrums, if you will, by which major changes are introduced into seasonal (or longer) plot arcs.

2. The plot is focused on the way in which the main protagonist loses the one s/he loves most.
In S/I, Buffy loses Buffy season 2 Angel. (I'll just call him SI-Angel from here on.) In L/ST, Angel season 3 Angel (just called Angel from here on) loses Connor.
Admittedly, in S/I there are others in Buffy's life she may love just as well or even more (her mother, her friends), and both Buffy and Angel lose others they care about, at other times (Joyce Summers, Doyle). But I do think that SI-Angel has a special relationship with Buffy; as she tells Willow in Passion, her first instinct is to tell him of her troubles. Similarly, Connor, as seen in Couplet, is the child Angel never thought he could have, someone he can love deeply and truly even if his curse denies him romantic love.
I also think SI-Angel and Connor share other similarities as the objects of affection. They came into Buffy and Angel's lives recently and unexpectedly. They are the people who offer Buffy and Angel unconditional love and acceptance, often in contrast to their other, more tumultuous relationships. Finally, SI-Angel and Connor are uniquely dependent upon Buffy and Angel, respectively, and the protagonists feel responsible for protecting the objects of their affection from past and current threats. (SI-Angel is quite capable of taking care of himself, but Buffy did rescue him in What's My Line, and I would argue that emotionally he's very dependent on Buffy.)

3. Dreams/prophecies are accurate, but don't play out literally, or as expected.
Buffy dreams of SI-Angel's death; when in actuality he loses his soul and becomes a very different kind of person. Wesley wrestles with the "father will kill the son/devour the child" prophecy and dreams that Angel kills Connor, when in actuality Angel drinks spiked blood and Connor is kidnapped into a demon dimension.
In both cases, the use of predictive dreams adds tension to the episode and a means to drive the plot forward. Thematically, it also lends a sense of inevitablity as Buffy and Wesley inadvertantly bring about the events they tried so deparately to avert.
There's also a sense that the events played out are part of a larger design. Enyos says of SI- Angel's soul loss, "I see now it was meant to happen," not to mention SI-Angel's later attempts to awaken Acathla, and Connor's fate is tied into the Tro-clon and possible ruination of mankind. So, while the goings-on have profound effects on the characters, they are also tied into the fate of humanity. They are important on both personal and epic scales.

4. The circumstances regarding the losses are the tragic result of fatal ignorance.
Buffy and SI-Angel didn't know about the perfect happiness clause, of course, and Angel didn't know about the kill the son prophecy.
In both cases, the "fatal ignorance" was also attributable in some part to betrayal by a trusted ally (Jenny Calendar and Wesley) and in some part to actions by malevolent forces of which the protagonists were mostly unaware (the Kaldersash, and Sahjhan, also arguably Holtz and crew and Wolfram and Hart). Jenny and Wesley both had Buffy and Angel's interests at heart, respectively, yet made decisions of questionable judgment with terrible implications. At the same time, the guilty parties couldn't necessarily have altered the outcome by revealing the truth. Jenny didn't know about the happiness clause until it was too late, and Wesley telling Angel about the prophecy wouldn't necessarily have kept Connor safe from Holtz and Sahjhan's manipulations. But, we'll never know.


So -- I think both S/I and L/ST are presented as tragedies in the classic style, down to the fatal ignorance. As viewers we see mostly the personal consequences of the tragic events and their effects on the protagonists and those around them. However, the stories are also structured to give an epic feel to the proceedings -- upon these sad events will ultimately rest the fate of the world. We feel Buffy and Angel's pain on a personal level, but also because what happens is tied into larger events.

continued in Part 2
[> Part 2: Surprise/Innocence vs. Loyalty/Sleep Tight (spoilers for ATS S3 through Sleep Tight) -- oceloty, 23:07:07 04/10/02 Wed

Part 2: Surprise/Innocence vs. Loyalty/Sleep Tight

(spoilers for Buffy season 3, Angel season 3 through Sleep Tight)









Part 2: Common themes, and what now?

Discussing plot has probably revealed some of the common themes (as I see them), but what can I say? I need closure.

1. Loss.
Not just loss, but LOSS, like a truck smashing into a bug at 65 miles per hour. Buffy and Angel are totally devastated by these losses. Buffy is a wreck throughout Innocence (and most of the rest of BTVS season 2). Angel -- look at the end of Sleep Tight, which I suspect will set the tone for the rest of ATS season 3.
It's not just loss for the sake of loss (e.g. The Body), but its effects on the characters. The loss is setup for character development and redefinition. In a lot of ways, Buffy created an identify for herself in her love for SI-Angel, and Angel is his love for his son. The losses strip them of their identity and their emotional strength and it becomes an important question, characterwise, how they will go on afterwards.

2. The end of the innocence.
This plays out more directly in S/I (just look at the episode title, "Innocence"). The birthday tag to "Innocence" sums it up: In the space of about one day, Buffy got older. Fast. I've read a lot of commentary about this stuff that I can't hope of duplicating half as well, so I'll let this point rest here.
With regards to the same theme in L/ST, I think Angel's situation in Sleep Tight is a little more complex but no less intriguing. Over the years we've seen that Angel oscillate like a yo-yo (black, of course) between idealism and cynicism. On one hand, he wants desperately to believe that humans are good, that souls (including his own) can be saved. (I'd pick Sanctuary as a prime example of this belief, and the lengths to which he will go, when he's in the grip of that belief.) On the other hand, Angel has seen and even perpetrated some truly terrible atrocities. He has witnessed some of the worst humans are capable of (just look at AYNOHYEB, which I would really love to see, or even Lilah in Sleep Tight) and the beige Angel arc, especially Epiphany, came because Angel's idealism crashed very messily into pessimism about human nature.
Epiphany brought some perspective to Angel's worldview and perceptions of good and evil. I think the betrayal and loss of L/ST has the potential to do the same. We'll see, it seems, how this way play out; my speculation is that Angel's epiphany will be sorely tested.

3. Secerets and lies, and Betrayal
I think L/ST gives more weight to these, because of the heavy focus on Wesley. But Buffy and Giles were terribly hurt by Jenny Calendar's actions and the implications were important, especially for Passion but also throughout the rest of BTVS season 2. (Arguably BTVS season 3 as well.) There was also the tension between Willow and Xander over Xander/Cordelia, and Buffy's feelings she had betrayed and "killed" Angel, as played out in IOHEFY.
Betrayal is a huge part of L/ST. (Come on, the L stands for "Loyalty.") Wesley in Sleep Tight was being torn up by guilt; I think it's safe to say that's only going to get worse. Angel has terrible (if understandable) trust issues (as illustrated in Dad) but trusted Wesley completely. The Angel- Wesley relationship was heavily emphasized from Couplet through L/ST. Exactly how Angel will react I can only speculate but it's clear things are going to change.
The counterpart to betrayal is forgiveness, which just happens to be the title of the next Angel episode. Apparently we won't have to wait too long to see how this plays out.

4. Internal divisions and shattering the group dynamics
Ultimately the trust issues did not prevent the scooby gang from saving the world, but they would resurface with much significance in Becoming 1 and 2 and in especially in season 3 when Buffy returned and Angel was released from Hell.
Again, this seems like it may be much more signficant in ATS. Sleep Tight brought to a head the off/on tension between Angel and Gunn; Wesley was isolated by the Fred/Gunn pairing, and Wesley's betrayal of Angel is like a two-by-four to the head. In ATS season 2, Angel's leaving the AI team brought Wesley, Cordelia, and Gunn closer together and left them even more devoted to their mission. It's possible that the opposite will happen here (as was hinted at in the Hyperion confrontation in ST), as each member of AI will have to choose between loyalty to Angel, to Wesley, and/or the mission.


5. Bringing characters to a crossroads.
It's like Whistler said in Becoming 1: "The big moments are gonna come. It's what you do afterwards that counts. That's when you find out who you are."
The events of S/I put Buffy through the emotional wringer and ultimately forced her to come to terms with her duty. The second half of BTVS season 2 found Buffy struggling to overcome her issues and kill Angel to save the world. Ultimately, Buffy succeeded, at great cost to herself and others, and this success defined her identity as the Slayer.
I think Angel at the end of Sleep Tight is in a similar but not identical position. His quandry is not so much facing up to a difficult task but balancing his responsbility for getting Connor back (it seems totallt obvious to me that he's going to try) with his AI mission and his own (considerable) personal baggage. It's not clear whether he will:

(1.) lapse into depressed brooding, a la pre-soul, pre-Buffy Angel?
(2.) Throw himself into the quest with the reckless lone-wolf obsessiveness and disregard for the welfare of others, a la beige Angel?
(3.) Accept the help of his friends, forgive Wesley, and otherwise act in a sensible mature fashion, in keeping with his S2 epiphany?

What I like about the writing of ATS season 3 is that all of these seem feasible, because we've seen some of each kind of Angel throughout the course of the season. My personal prediction (you heard it here) is a combination of all three, as the #2 is milked for maximum dramatic impact until Angel gets to #3.
I've always found Angel the most fascinating character in the Whedonverse because there's so much of a gap between the person he wants to be and the person he is. Angel has incredibly high standards for his own conduct but is often spectacularly incapable to living up to his standards. He tries terribly hard but so often gets it wrong, especially in times of personal crisis. Throughout season 3 I've seen Angel (despite his goofiness) changing his patterns and acting in impressively mature fashion. (I have in mind Heartthrob, where Angel deals with Buffy's death as well as anyone could expect; That Vision Thing, where we see Angel practically picking up his derailed train of rush- to-save-Cordy as he listens to and trusts Wesley; and Dad, where we trusts his friends to take care of Connor as he leads the pack o' bad guys to the exploding mineshaft.) The question of how Angel will react to Connor's loss is a chance for some character exploration and development and I for one am absolutely riveted by wanting to know how it will play out.


At last, the wrap-up

With regards to all the things I've brought up here -- hopefully, they won't be confined to S/I and L/ST. S/I gained a lot of power from the quality of its followups and the ways in which they continued to explore the issues of S/I. Passion and Becoming 1 and 2 built on the events of S/I in ways that made season 2 BTVS a classic (by my reckoning, anyway). It remains to be seen if the next 6 episodes of ATS will likewise bolster L/ST. Hey, I can hope.
I already said I wouldn't play "which two-parter is better", so ... I won't. I will say that I think S/I and L/ST are some of the best episodes of their respective series. Both benefit from considerable groundwork in the context of the season arc and are the payoff episodes in that the pieces assembled episode by episode are finally put together and blown into teensy bits. But I think they also work very well because of strong writing and execution (directing, performance, etc) of each individual episode. To steal from Richard Schickel, they made me care not just what happens next, but the fates of the characters as well.


Well, hope I've done this right. Quotes and transcripts are from Pysche. Got comments? Want to help me see Angel season 2? I'd love to hear what you think: oceloty42 @ good old yahoo.com (without, of course, the good and the old). Thanks.
[> [> Great post -- Rahael, 03:31:15 04/11/02 Thu

Plenty of food for thought. I'll come back with comments
[> [> Re: Part 2: Surprise/Innocence vs. Loyalty/Sleep Tight (spoilers for ATS S3 through Sleep Tight) -- Cactus Watcher, 06:14:27 04/11/02 Thu

A fine post.

The thing that comes to my mind about the S/I - L/ST comparison is that S/I pretty much ended my own 'innocence' about the saga. I was really shocked by what happened to Angel in 'Innocence.' I finally realized ME wasn't going to pull punches. If something logically was a dangerous course of action, it was going to have very bad consequences. I certainly didn't see the events of S/I coming. But, having seen for years how things go in the Buffyverse, the tragedy of L/ST was easier to understand and predict.
[> [> Re: Part 2: Surprise/Innocence vs. Loyalty/Sleep Tight (spoilers for ATS S3 through Sleep Tight) -- Slain, 11:43:10 04/11/02 Thu

Very good filmic and, er, theme-ic analysis, oceloty. The only thing I'd disagree with is a bit from Season 2. Buffy wasn't a wreck after 'Innocence', as that makes her sound a bit weak - for a little while (a few scenes), she was devastated; but she quickly recouperated, and kicked Angel is the balls - something Joss viewed as an explicit feminist statement. That's in the DVD commentary, by the way. ;)
[> Is there such a thing as half a miracle? -- Rufus, 04:39:08 04/11/02 Thu

I find the relationship between Wesley and Angel facinating. Both have had childhoods that are similar in that they had demanding, authoritarian, fathers. Both didn't or couldn't do anything to keep their respective parents happy. You have a vampire with soul, just starting to grow up until he gets back tracked by having a son. There's Wesley who was brought up to do his duty as a Watcher and was browbeaten into becoming a bit of a wimp, insecure about his innate talents. Both men end up coming to a crisis over a child that shouldn't exist at all. I can't wait to see the next installment called Forgiving, can Angel forgive the man whose well intended actions caused the abduction of Angel's son. Connor, the miracle child is in another dimension being brought up by a man who made it clear when it comes to Angel, he will show no mercy. What will he show Angel's son, if they are even alive? So much is going on that one facet of the ongoing saga at AI could keep me happy, but add three men who are wounded types, who all think they have tried to do the right thing. What will their actions turn them into? Can any of the men forgive the other for the actions of the recent and long past? Monday won't come too soon for me. Nice post welcome to the board.
Question for the board regarding Angel's future..... -- AurraSing, 09:12:00 04/11/02 Thu

Hey,I'm bringing this question here to the experts because the more I think about this dilemma,the more it starts to bother me.
Why is Angel striving towards Shanshu if he discovered in "I Will Remember You" that being a mortal would be of no help to him if he wants to fight evil,presumably at Buffy's side?

Of course this is all assuming that Buffy and Angel still love each other in a romantic sort of way.However it seems contradictory to me that Angel still wishes to become mortal even if the PTB give him that option,unless Buffy has somehow managed to finally lay down her burden of being a Slayer,otherwise,what's the point?

And if the romance is no longer there,is Angel simply looking for some inner peace and assuming that he will not be given this gift until all the evil has been purged from L.A.? This seems a bit extreme,since the evil is coming from a wide variety of sources and it's unlikely that all evil would be gone in even Cordy or Gunn's lifetime...after all,some of the humans on "Angel" have proven themselves to be overwhelmingly evil and yet they are not supernatural in origin.Is the "Agency" going to eradicate them as well?

The reason I find this annoying is that I believe BTVS will (and should) end at Season 7. So either Joss is planning on ending ATS at the same time OR he plans on some other ending all together for Angel,one that does not include Shanshu and Angel's mortality, that can take place after the BTVS cast has disbanded.This brings up the possibility that all the B/A shippers out there are going to be sorely disappointed,but since I'm not one of those it's just a shrug to me.
On the other hand,I'm still wondering why Angel wants to be a "real boy" if Buffy is still fighting demons,vamps and the horrors from hell....maybe this is a subtle way of Joss telling us that the B/A romance is indeed dead?
[> Re: Question for the board regarding Angel's future..... -- purplegrrl, 10:45:03 04/11/02 Thu

When Angel first found out about "shanshu-ing," I don't believe he thought it would happen in Buffy's lifetime. Angel still believes he must attone for his past mistakes (approx. 140 years of Angelus plus approx. 100 years of being "dirty street guy"). He's only been actively fighting evil for about 6 years. To him that's not long enough. Not only that, but Angel doesn't know how to *be* human any more -- no matter how much he longs for it. He didn't know how to fight as regular Joe Human, only as super-strength Joe Vampire. The decision to become the vampire once more in "I Will Remember You" was probably the hardest decision Angel ever had to make -- even worse than leaving Buffy at the end of season 3. In IWRY the Powers That Be were willing to let Angel have his reward, but he turned it down because he knew that no matter how much he loved Buffy and wanted to be with her, he wanted to help her fight evil even more.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm a B/A shipper from the word go (although I am willing to concede to a little B/S shipping!). Unfortunately, the way the Buffyverse is currently structured, the only way Buffy and Angel could be together romantically (with all the physical intimacy that entails) is for both of them to become completely human -- Angel is no longer a vampire and Buffy no longer has the Slayer's gifts or duties -- at the same time. Although each of these events has happened, they have never been in parallel. Both Angel and Buffy understand that no matter how much they love each other or are in love with each other (I believe they have a forever kind of love), they simply cannot be together. They will always love the other. But they recognize the limitations of the relationship. It's not that they shouldn't or can't have other romantic relationships -- that's a part of getting on with the business of life. No matter where they go or who else they love, Buffy and Angel will still have a special place in each other's heart that no one else can fill.

As for the end of BtVS: I think AtS can (and should!) go on. (Assuming the network bosses see it that way.) BtVS and AtS have diverged enough that although they inhabit the same universe, they are parallel and no longer intertwined. Will we ever see Angel shanshu? Maybe. Do I personally want to see it? Maybe. I'm being wishy-washy here for two reasons: 1) If Angel shanshus during Buffy's lifetime, he faces the same dilemma he did in IWRY -- he could end up being a libility to the woman he loves and getting her killed. I doubt Angel would tell Buffy he had become human for that very reason. He would just stay away. Depressing. 2) If Angel shanshus at some point in the future, then here he is human without the woman he loves, and possibly with no real purpose in life. Depressing. I guess I would just rather imagine Angel continuing to fight the good fight out there somewhere.
[> Re: Question for the board regarding Angel's future..... -- clg0107, 11:25:32 04/11/02 Thu

>>I'm still wondering why Angel wants to be a "real boy" if Buffy is still fighting demons,vamps and the horrors >>from hell....maybe this is a subtle way of Joss telling us that the B/A romance is indeed dead?

Considering that Joss has said in utterly un-subtle terms that they are not soul mates and they are not getting back together, I figure we can assume that where the shows eventually go are not dependent upon one another. Whenever Angel shanshus, it will stand on its own....and if it happens when/where we see it, it will have it's own natural, plausible and (probably) satisfying conclusion.

~clg0107
[> [> But Buffy and Angel HAVE to get back together! *sob* -- Slain, 12:18:50 04/11/02 Thu

Just kidding.

Joss has never said that Buffy and Angel aren't soul mates, though he did once compare their love to his love for Ho-hos (some kind of American snackfood, I think). He's decided that Buffy and Angel aren't going to get back together more because it just wouldn't work too well - Angel Season 1 showed that Buffy and Angel work better apart, and bringing them together doesn't advance the plot - and S2 and 3 have just compounded this, what with Angel's reaction to Buffy's death followed by his return to Darla, and now his infatuation with Cordy.

I'm not keen on this myself, as I prefer to have Angel pining away for Buffy, and have always assumed that they would get back together (I guess I am a B/A 'shipper after all!) But if BtVS does end after Season 7 and Angel carries on, Angel and Buffy remaining apart would make the most sense.
[> Re: Question for the board regarding Angel's future..... -- Rufus, 14:19:23 04/11/02 Thu

I would like to see Angel go on. He and Buffy may have loved each other, but they seem to have moved on. That is more realistic than the soul-mates forever. People can love many times in their lives, if they are open to it. The break up and subsequent getting on with their lives bit with Buffy and Angel is a good way to show people that you can lose a love, but still go on to love again.
[> [> Re: Question for the board regarding Angel's future..... -- Angelina, 16:35:28 04/11/02 Thu

BUFFY AND ANGEL...OH MY YES...Buffy and Angel must get back together at the end of the series. Neither one of their characters have "moved on and loved other people". They have only set themselves up for disaster time after time. Buffy and Spike are going to kill each other. What they have is an obsessive desire for one another. That is not love AND it has not been even remotely pretty. Angel? We simply cannot even go into what Angel has gotten himself into! But moving on with their lives? NO WAY. Joss and the writers would be doing the course of true love an injustice to not have them find each other at the end of their individual journeys. Sometimes two people are simply meant to be together. Whether Joss had a vision of this bond between B/A is not clear, but his characters took on a life of their own! There was that unique "something" between them. You saw it in every single scene they had together. Even if I see them one hundred times, I feel it. The Magic and Power. "Lightning hits once, MAYBE twice". (Thanks Stevie)...and it ain't striking anywhere else but upon B and A! It has to be! Buffy has had enough. She wants out! She has saved the world a million times. Somebody owes this girl a BIG TIME FAVOR! She has sacrificed her childhood, herlove, happiness, normalicy and her LIFE for "TPTB" Enough already...let her retire...better yet...un-slay her! Let her live out the rest of her life the "Normal Girl" she has always wanted to be. Pass on Mr. Pointy and split-ta-away! And Angel, same goes for him...prehaps his son, born human, can convince him to take the gift of mortality and be a real father to him. What have we now, a ready made family of human beings, ready for happiness ready for love. Call me an old romantic, but I will always beleive that "with true love anything is possible" . Buffy the Vampire Slayer always seemed like a fairy tale to me. Odd, but I always saw Buffy as some sort of sckewed "Sleeping Beauty", waiting for her Prince Charming to come a take her away from all the DARK. Prehaps Angel, the Prince of Darkness himself, changes into that Mr. Charming guy, and suppose he kisses our Sleeping Buffy and she wakes up, not a Princess but a Normal Girl. Oh my, please let there be a happily ever after. I simply couldn't stand it otherwise!
[> [> [> You couldn't stand it....... -- Rufus, 17:17:43 04/11/02 Thu

The point is, whoever Buffy ends up with will be a choice made by her (the writers actually). If they found each other again I'd have no problems with it, but I'm fine no matter who she end up with. I just don't like the idea of people waiting by a candle in a window for something that may never happen....I want them to live their lives, and maybe go out and find that they can love again. If Buffy and Angel get together again then it was meant to be, but if they don't I can only hope that Buffy can stand it..:):):)
[> [> [> Sleeping Beauty -- Rahael, 07:31:33 04/12/02 Fri

Actually, they have already used the Sleeping Beauty myth on Buffy, in my opinion. Angelus (the name was given on account of his beauty) slumbered until Buffy came along and awoke the sleeping prince. In one of the older versions of the Sleeping Beauty story, the princess is actually awoken by sex, not by a kiss.
These happy fairy tales are actually are sanitised versions of something much darker, and most of them weren’t really meant for children.

I must confess that for me, it’s not so much of a happy or a sad ending. The emotional satisfaction I get from stories and narratives doesn’t actually depend so much on what happens at the end, but how it is constructed – therefore, Anna Karenina left me feeling happy; many trashy novels leave me irritated and discontented despite/because of their unfeasibly sugary sentiments.

The only way that Buffy will ever get a ‘happy ending’ is if we see a change in her mindset, in the way she looks at the world. If it doesn’t she could have whatever happy fairy tale ending, and she would be left feeling discontented. In OMWF, she rescues the disneyesque prince, and turns away, saying “whatever”.
[> Buffy and Angel: The Future (frey spoilers) -- Dochawk, 20:41:13 04/11/02 Thu

Given that both Joss and SMG seem willing to talk about an eighth season, don't give up on it yet. Joss says that he has stories through year 11. (I just don't see that happening)

And Angel will definitely go 5 (you don't get to syndicate for big money without 100 episodes).

But what if BTVS ends after 7 and Angel after 5. What of the Buffy movie? It will be a big movie, with both Buffy and Angel? Maybe it will be the final battle between the demons and the "light" that Frey refers to, that finally cleanses the earth of demons (or maybe "light" loses so there can be 2 Buffy movies).
[> [> Re: Buffy and Angel: The Future as per SMG AND DB -- Angelina, 11:20:39 04/12/02 Fri

I was watching "Becoming Part 2" this morning on FX (cried yet AGAIN, How gorgeous is Angel in this episode??????? MUCH.), and during one commerical break they had mini interviews with Joss, SM and DB and some of the writers. These were new interviews by the way, and they were dicussing, among other things, the Buffy/Angel dynamic and SMG said plain as day "I don't think the fans would accept a NON Buffy/Angel relationship, I don't think I would". Her words! Even DB said there was always a chance for their characters to reunite! I can only hope! I think more of the fans want them together at the end then not.
[> [> [> Re: Buffy and Angel: The Future as per SMG AND DB -- Slain, 15:58:42 04/12/02 Fri

I think the reason I want Buffy to end after S7 is because I'm worried it's going to turn into the X- files. As for a movie, well, did anyone see the X-files movie?
[> [> [> [> Good point -- Apophis, 17:26:02 04/12/02 Fri

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Good point -- yabyumpan, 10:04:29 04/13/02 Sat

I'm really hoping that Buffy and Angel DON'T get back together, ever. While I liked it at the time, looking back it just seems creepy. If/when Angel and Cordy get together, I really hope that that Angel makes it clear that he's moved on. No matter what SMG has said, JW, DG & DB have all said recently that he's moved on. I would like to see that chapter closed. I hope ME will be brave enough to do it.
[> [> [> [> [> [> It would almost seem like moving backwards to me. -- VampRiley, 15:05:44 04/13/02 Sat

If, and I say if, for some strange reason, they did get back together, I would hate to see the two of them being all lovey-dovey like when they were first together. If they stay apart, then their relationship can stay in that mythic, romanticized, first stage kind of love. But if they got back together, I don't think it could be that way.



VR
We are *defined* by the things we fear -- Yoda, 09:31:06 04/11/02 Thu

We are *defined* by the things we fear.

This is one of my favorite quotes. The Master says it in the Season 1 episode “Nightmares” .

In season 6 we are seeing all of the SG’s fears becoming real. They have never really faced their fears just buried them. So now all their fears are becoming reality.

I remember as a child being on a ferris wheel. It had stopped to let some passengers off and I was sitting on the top car with my siblings. The car was swinging wildly and I was sure we were going to flip over backwards. I was terrified and I scrunched my eyes shut real tight. This only increased my fear.

My heart was in my throat. I mentally tried to find a way to handle the fear and I thought to myself, what if I look at what is terrifying me so much maybe it won’t be so bad. So I opened my eyes and tried to step away from myself and look at what I was feeling. I felt the butterflies in my stomach and I thought to myself, huh, that’s an interesting feeling.

It wasn’t like I had never felt that way before but I had never stopped to really look at it. Then I looked down and saw how far from the ground we were. I thought, huh, this isn’t so scary after all. Then I actually started to enjoy looking around and seeing the entire park from that vantage point. It was beautiful. I have never been scared of heights since then.

I faced my fear and found out that it wasn’t so scary after all. It was sort of an epiphany. I often think back to that day when I have to face things that aren’t pleasant. It gives me courage. Closing our eyes and hoping that the things that scare us will go away just doesn’t work out does it?

In Nightmares the Master is shown to be quite wise. He knows a thing or two about fear:

The Master's lair, Collin is sitting, listening to the Master

Master: Fear is a wonderful thing. It is *the* most powerful force in the human world. (crouches to face Collin) Not love, not hate. Fear! When you were a mortal boy, what did you fear?

Collin: Monsters.

Master: Ooo. (gets up) We are *defined* by the things we fear. (goes to the large cross) This symbol, these two planks of wood, it confounds me. Suffuses me with mortal dread. But fear is in the mind. (puts his hand on the cross and holds on while it burns) Like pain. It can be controlled. (lets go) If I can face my fear, it cannot master me.

From "Nightmares" we see that Buffy is afraid that she caused her parents divorce and that her father will stop coming to see her because of all of her perceived failings. He tells her in her nightmare that she is sullen and rude and not nearly as bright as he thought she would be plus she gets into trouble and embarrass them with all the crazy stunts she pulls. Who could stand to live in the same house with a daughter like that.

And here we are 6 years later and we see that Buffy’s fear does come true. Her father has abandoned her. We have tended to put all the blame on the neglectful father. But I wonder if Buffy’s fear has somehow made it, in part at least, come true. Remember that summer she spent with him. He told Joyce that Buffy had been withdrawn all summer. Did she in her fear push him away?

Next they show her fear of the Master, being buried alive, and being turned into a vampire. The Masters words are interesting.

Master: You still don't understand, do you? I am free because you fear it. Because you fear it, the world is crumbling. Your nightmares are made flesh. You have little Billy to thank for that. She looks behind her, but Billy is gone. She turns back to the Master.

Buffy: This is a dream.

Master: A dream is a wish your heart makes. (grabs Buffy by the neck.) This is real life. (pulls her around so her back is to the open grave) Come on, Slayer! What are you afraid of? He growls and bares his teeth, but doesn't bite. He throws her into the coffin at the bottom of the grave, and the lid slams shut.

Buffy: No! Help me!

Master: How 'bout being buried alive? The Master laughs maniacally as he starts to shovel dirt into the grave.

Buffy: Somebody help me Please! No No! Please! No! No! No! Somebody help me! Please! No! The first shovelful of dirt hits the coffin, and some falls in through the cracks of the poorly constructed coffin.

Buffy: Please! No! Help me No! The next shovelful of dirt covers the crack between the boards.

Buffy: Help!

So the question is will the SG face their fears or will their fears master them?
[> Like the "negative space" Dawn's art teacher wanted them to draw in The Body? -- Sophist, 10:47:27 04/11/02 Thu

[> It seems to be a running theme... -- Solitude1056, 10:54:22 04/11/02 Thu

Joss revisited this idea in Season 4, although he never seemed to develop it as well as I was hoping. Adam goes through this same sort of questioning with the vampires: what are they afraid of?
ADAM: I've been thinking. About vampires.

BOONE: This is my place.

ADAM: Your place. Yes. The sewers. You hide from them, crawl about in their filth, scavenging like rats. What do you fear? ... You fear the cross. The sun. Fire. And, oh yes. I believe decapitation is a problem as well. ... You fear death. Being immortal, you fear it more than those to whom it comes naturally. Vampires are a paradox. ... Demon in a human body. You're a hybrid. Natural and unnatural. You walk in both worlds, and belong to neither. I can relate. ... I have been blessed. I have a gift that no man has, no demon has ever had. I know why I'm here. I was created to kill. To extinguish life wherever I find it and I have accepted that responsibility. You have lived in fear and desperation because you didn't have that gift. But it's time to face your fear.

[...]

BOONE: ... We're ready.

ADAM: Then ask yourself: What is it? More than man, more than anything else… what is the thing that you fear?
Which prompted the funniest vampire scene IMO, in that season:
BOONE: It's hard to believe. I've been avoiding this place for so many years, and it's nothing. It's nice, got the pretty windows, the pillars, lots of folks to eat... where's the thing I was so afraid of? You know, the lord? He's supposed to be here -- he gave us this address. Well, we'll just have to start killing off his people, and see if he shows up.
Unfortunately, it seems after that episode that Adam dropped the whole "what do you fear" question and kept moving in his rather aimless who-knows-what-he'll-do-next-and-who-cares rest of the season...

Maybe it's just a cyclical thing for Joss, and he decided it was time to deal with it again, one step farther along the continuum.
[> [> Re: It seems to be a running theme... -- Simone, 17:02:31 04/11/02 Thu

That's really interesting, because I've been thinking about S4 a lot lately. I haven't fully worked out my theory yet, but I'm starting to see that there was a lot more to that season than I initially thought. I'm not sure if it's something that has already been discussed to death around here and I apologize if that's the case.

The first 3 seasons are all about fighting the id, the irrational, chaotic impulses that pervade our adolescence. Then, in S4, it all shifts. The Initiative, which represents rationality/order/authority/the superego, is the enemy every bit as much as Adam. In fact, they're the ones who made him into a monster. In trying to destroy or subjugate the demons - who represent the irrational/chaos/anarchy/the id - at all cost, they only succeeded in creating a monster of a different sort. A monster who was going to use the things he was meant to destroy against them. Adam is rationalism gone mad, thinking not only that the Truth is accessible to it, but that it already *knows* what it is ("I have a gift that no man has, no demon has ever had. I know why I'm here"), knows what's right, what should be done, with absolute certainty, and, paradoxically, letting loose the very demons it's trying to negate.

Significantly, it took Buffy and the SG digging deep into their own subconscious minds to vanquish Adam. But what they found there was dangerous and scared them, so "Restless" ended with Buffy utterly rejecting the very thing that helped her win the battle. To this day, they still long for clarity, simplicity and moral certainty (as their reaction to Riley's visit seems to indicate) and reject their (inner) demons, the irrational part of themselves. But, like with the Initiative/Adam combo, the SG are in danger of becoming what they fear precisely by trying to deny and escape it at all cost.

My background is mainly in philosophy, but the show itself used a lot of Freudian terminology in S4, so I think psychology would probably afford a more accurate interpretation than all this babble about the dangers of rationalism (what can I say, Plato's Republic scares me) and how the only solution is to recognize the absence of true noêsis. Sadly, I know next to nothing about that (psychology, that is).
[> [> [> Re: It seems to be a running theme... -- Rufus, 05:15:37 04/12/02 Fri

Does the Freudian terminology reflect the patriarchal influence of the Initiative?
[> Re: We are *defined* by the things we fear -- Deeva, 12:02:21 04/11/02 Thu

Good post. It gave me some things to think about.

If Buffy’s fear was knowing that she was the root of her parents divorce, buried alive and becoming a vampire how does this apply now in S6? I think that her real fear is being the agent of pain for her friends, family and to her lovers. She can’t stand the thought of being the cause of suffering, accidental or otherwise. Everything has to be fluffy puppy perfect or as close to that as possible.

Angel: She killed him to save the world. Well, yeah. That’s a pretty heavy one there. Painful & tragic no matter how you look at it. And the fact that he comes back, (forgive me but the little ditty of “The Cat Who Came Back” just popped up. Hee.) major angst coming out of every where. She hates this period because she sees the physical proof of her “blunder”. Nearly all of the SG have been physically hurt from Becoming.

Riley: He implied that the only reason he turned to vamp ho’s was because of Buffy. He didn’t say it exactly that way but Buffy certainly translated it as such. She is angry that he appears to be blaming her for his behavior. I’m not on either side of this argument. I just feel that this was, to her, another painful event that is happening because of her. And I’m sure that in Buffy’s mind she felt that she didn’t do enough for Riley. Less superhero and more girlfriend, be there more often for him, love him more or run faster or yell louder, something, anything.

Spike: “I’m using you…and it’s killing me.” Very telling. To me it says that she recognizes the fact that though she may only see their sexcapades as just a freakish solution to her current “ailment”, he might be interpreting it as something else entirely. She knows that Spike would take what little she could throw his way and puff it up into something much bigger and better than what it really was. He’s a poet and we know it. Because that’s what poets do. You take something small and seemingly immaterial and make it more than that. Buffy is pained by the fact that she knows it isn’t what he thinks it might be, therefore seeing the pain that she would put him in if this went for much longer.

Giles: She will never get over Jenny Calendar’s death. She blames herself for it and for indirectly causing Giles such grief. Even though he has moved on, I don’t know if I get that he is over Jenny’s death.

Joyce: Buffy thinks that she is a failure at being a daughter and feels guilty for putting her mother through so much worry.

Dawn: feels that she didn’t do enough to keep Dawn out of Glory’s harm. And to some degree she even feels awful about not being a better guardian to her sister, for being so involved with herself that she doesn’t know what is going on with Dawn’s life. She seems to have lost the ability to connect with Dawn. Awkwardly interacting with her as if she didn’t know how to.

Faith: She thought she could save her. To finally have someone who was almost just like her, be by her side, a sister of sorts and in the beginning they were. Her faith in Faith was amazing, even with all her friends starting to side against her she still held her belief to the very last moment. That is until Faith did the one thing that did her in. She began to go after Buffy’s friends. In Buffy’s mind, she blames herself for all of the events. Angel’s poisoning, Willow’s kidnapping and so on. She never wanted to kill Faith until Angel was poisoned. Her decision to kill Faith can be seen as a decision to kill Dark Buffy. All the things she might have entertained but her moral center would not allow.

Kendra: It’s a shame that Kendra could not have lived a little longer, even if she was a Jamaican leprechaun. I think that would have been a good foil to Buffy for at least a few more eps but I digress. Again, here is another only if situation. Only if I didn’t let myself be tricked by Angel, only if I ran faster, only if…

I could really go on and on. But I’m gonna stop, I think my boss thinks I’m writing up a proposal of some sort. Pshaw, what’s that? But to end all this endless and maybe even pointless blathering, looking back at all this has made me agree with even more of Spike’s observation of Buffy in Normal Again. Well, the martyr part and living again bit, not the ultimatum. It’s from Psyche’s site, of course.

Fine, then. But I hope you don't think this antidote's gonna rid you of that nasty martyrdom. See, I figured it out, luv. You can't help yourself. You're not drawn to the dark like I thought. You're addicted to the misery.

It's why you won't tell your pals about us. Might actually have to be happy if you did. They'd either understand and help, God forbid, or drive you out where you finally be at peace in the dark. With me. Either way you'd be better off. But you're too twisted for that.

Let yourself live already. Stop with the bloody hero trip for a sec. We'll all be the better for it.

Oh and btw, I think that's great how you faced and overcame your fear of heights. I used to have that same fear and while I am not exactly gung ho about going really, really high up. I'm just more cautious but my knees do go a bit weak.
[> those pesky inner Big Bads -- Slain, 12:05:48 04/11/02 Thu

Good analysis - the sudden autobiographical references threw me a bit, though ;)

As has been said, S6 is about the inner Big Bad (I kind of feel Joss would love that phrase), and facing and coming to terms with it. Every one of the main characters has one key fear, and every one of them has tried in some way to escape from this.

Buffy - her own capacity for evil: that the source of her power is rooted in darkness
Willow - of it being found out that she's insecure and not the responsible one
Xander - commitment, becoming his father

In Spike, Buffy can both indulge her capacity and desire for evil, but can also clearly set herself apart from him - can say 'he is evil, but I'm good'.

Xander's escapism is less extreme, but is simply him trying to put off the wedding and the process of settling down. Xander seems to deal with his problems better than the rest of the Scoobies, probably because his are more commonplace.

Willow used more and more powerful magic to escape from her insecurities ("geekish roots") as well as appearing powerful and in control, but in simply blaming and abandoning magic and making herself an emotional invalid she isn't facing up to these problems.
[> It's ironic that -- Rufus, 14:16:06 04/11/02 Thu

With all the scary things the SG and Buffy have faced, that their inner fears frighten them more. Big Bads come and go, but it seems some boys still can't get out of the parents basement, and some are still afraid they will be left alone. The Big Bads only serve as a distraction from the fears that have finally surfaced this season. Inner demons are either delt with,or they get their own season long arc......;)
[> ...but not only by those -- anom, 21:17:27 04/11/02 Thu

"We are *defined* by the things we fear.

This is one of my favorite quotes. The Master says it in the Season 1 episode 'Nightmares.'
[...]
In Nightmares the Master is shown to be quite wise. He knows a thing or two about fear."

Well, he would. He'd been dealing in it a lot longer than he dealt w/all the other emotions in his human life. But I think we're defined by a lot more than what we fear. All of what we feel and what we think combines to define us. Pardon the repetition, but if we limit what defines us to what we fear, we limit the definition of "define" to its most limited meaning, which is...limitation, as shown by its sharing a root with "finite." Adding what we believe, what we love, what we want, and more can expand our self-definition beyond what we fear & keep fear from tipping the balance of what we are.

"In season 6 we are seeing all of the SG’s fears becoming real. They have never really faced their fears just buried them. So now all their fears are becoming reality.
[...]
So the question is will the SG face their fears or will their fears master them?"

I think the answer depends on whether they find a more well-rounded definition of themselves, based on more than fear.

"I remember as a child being on a ferris wheel.
[...]
I faced my fear and found out that it wasn’t so scary after all. It was sort of an epiphany. I often think back to that day when I have to face things that aren’t pleasant. It gives me courage. Closing our eyes and hoping that the things that scare us will go away just doesn’t work out does it?"

That's a great story, Yoda! I had a similar (sort of) thing happen as an adult. Airplane, serious turbulence...don't have time to go into detail right now, since I'm going away for the weekend (my sister-in-law's 50th birthday surprise birthday--don't tell her!) & have to pack tonight. So I may have to go into the archives for the answers to these questions:

Did your epiphany apply to feelings other than fear? Did you become more aware of your feelings in general, or become more able to look at them the way you did at fear, so you could take them into consideration but not be controlled by them?
[> [> Agreeing with Anom -- Rahael, 09:00:03 04/12/02 Fri

Isn't it significant that the Master, who makes that comment is actually trapped in that old Church until Buffy (facing down her own fears and accepting her fate, death) comes along and frees him?

Doesn't it show that freedom from fear (which imprisons us) will give us the agency we crave in life?

My greatest fear is death. And I see this illustrated in Sunnydale. In BtVS, death simply will not leave people alone. People go through the pain of death, and then are not allowed to have the peace of the grave. They stalk Sunnydale, confronting us with the idea of mortality and our own eventual fate.

I have had many terrifying experiences. The earliest, I think is when I was six years old and I was interrogated by an army soldier, who cornered me in my own home and pointed his gun at my head. Then later on, I was confronted daily with the possibility that I may not be alive the next day. I forced myself to live moment by moment.

Most scary of all were the fact that bombers would descend, carry out a raid, and then depart, to recircle. So for about half an hour or so, we wouldn't know whether it was over for that night, or we still had a fresh ordeal to come. The most hateful sound to me in the whole world was the distant buzz of the plane engine, coming closer. The relief I felt when I heard the bomb explode, because it hadn't hit us.

I wasn't allowed to show fear. I was supposed to copy (at the age of 9 and 10) the adults of the family. Play cards as the shells whistled around our house. Lie there unconcernedly while soldiers marched through our garden. Stroll casually to the bomb shelter. Watch the cups tremble and shiver as our house felt the force of distant bomb blasts. I don't think I ever once said to anyone that I was terrified.

In one of these painful intervals, I had my epiphany: that if it continued for one more second, my mind would slip into madness.

And so it proved, of a kind. I didn't really slip into full on madness, but I did develop all sorts of ... I don't really know what to call them. Even in the safety of England, I had the overwhelming impulse to jump under tables everytime I heard an airplane. Firecrackers used to scare me. I became withdrawn and unsociable. I just didn't trust the world not to kill me. But I would have told you then, that I was perfectly normal. That my experiences hadn't affected me at all. That I could 'handle' things. In fact, I barely ever thought about it or talked of it to anyone.

Then, as I approached adolescence, the dreams started. Dreams where I died again and again, either murdered, or committing suicide. (Who was it who said that the coward dies a hundred times, the brave man only once?) Each dream was vividly real. And I relived the terror that I had hidden from. Confronting the fear wasn't pleasant. And I can't make any claim to bravery. I am a coward, at least about physical pain. Acknowledging finally that there was something wrong with me, I went about trying to change my life. People around me were unhelpful to say the least. I was confronting them with a fearful idea. But in being pro-active, and truthful and practical I gained a respect for myself that I had never dreamed I would have.

In retrospect, I came to see that the darkest, blackest period of my life were the ones that saved me. Gave me my strength. And this may sound pretty syruppy, but nearly every morning, I look up at the sky when I walk to my office, and feel glad that I am alive; and feel glad that I can feel happiness again.

Because if you try to stop feeling 'fear' you stop feeling.

I still feel fear, still feel anxiety. I get quite emotional, quite quickly. I seem to feel great waves of emotion all the time, from love, to happiness, to anger, to simple contentment. And I can't tell you how greatful I am to be able to feel all these things.

Ahem. Can anyone tell that I just love Season 6?
[> [> [> Re: Agreeing with Rahael -- Arethusa, 14:32:20 04/12/02 Fri

Your post was very moving to me. I spent most of my childhood in fear, too, and I totally relate to what you said about becoming very emotional very quickly. My dreams are still with me twenty years later: I wake up with a jaw ache from clenching my teeth in my sleep almost every week. Even now I listen to every footstep in my house, every shift of air or variation in heat, afraid the monster my mother married is near. I shut down my feelings when I was about ten, and didn't start feeling again until my first child was born, 22 years later. Even writing this is incredibly difficult; I'm almost unable to reveal my feelings to my family, let alone strangers.
When Buffy said dying was easy, it's living that's hard, I knew why this show is so important to me. I don't believe in a merciful God. I don't believe people are basically good at heart. But I do believe that I can be happy anyway, and so I will raise my kids and enjoy my life as much as I can. I will cultivate my own garden, and maybe it'll be a beautiful one.
[> [> [> [> Griefe brought to numbers -- Rahael, 15:22:08 04/12/02 Fri

"Griefe brought to numbers cannot be so fierce,
For, he tames it, that fetters it in verse."

I feel privileged to have got the response I did; your post was very moving too.

In a way, I find it easier to write such things to the board than have to see people's discomfort at first hand; easier to say it to strangers than to friends who don't know how to respond. Writing it out as a structured thing enables a little detachment as well.

It's funny you should mention that image of the Garden. I for many years saw in my minds eye a grey bleak world, where nothing grew. But somewhere in that place there was a beautiful garden, the only place where the sun shone. I couldn't get in because the walls were too high. I believe the walls have disappeared now.
[> Interesting, Yoda. I believe fear is necessary... -- Ixchel, 17:17:42 04/12/02 Fri

It has its place. Fear warns us and tells us when to be cautious. Just like pain is necessary, informing us when we are damaging ourselves. But, like most things, fear can be harmful as well as beneficial. Unchecked it can paralyze and debilitate, causing harm when its function is to prevent harm.

IMHO, one of Buffy's fears is her Slayer aspect. The out-of-control killer as embodied in pre- Sanctuary Faith or the lone killer as embodied in the First Slayer. Not only that this aspect of herself if not controlled will drive loved ones away, but also that she may _hurt_ them if she doesn't control herself, her emotions. This is a valid fear, in a moment of losing her temper Buffy _could_ seriously injure someone without intent. This may be part of why she keeps such a harsh control of her emotions. Unfortunately, this fear which helps her function, can also hurt her. By distancing herself from her emotions to maintain her control she loses some of herself (Intervention?). Hopefully, she can face her fear (as you say) of her Slayer aspect and also achieve some sort of balance with the aspect itself.

Ixchel

Current board | More April 2002