August 2003 posts


Previous August 2003  

More August 2003

more nightmares -- MsGiles, 09:30:47 08/14/03 Thu

Didn't have time to reply to Q before, but here are some more thoughts

I had a nightmare last night; I was being chased by a postcode. Then it turned into metal velociraptors, quite small ones like origami, which my sister resourcefully cut up with nail scissors. Must lay off the coffee.

The scoobies nightmares aren't quite so off the wall. They tend to be more the sort of things you would expect: childhood scares, like Xander's clown. Areas of worry we already know about, like Willow's stagefright. Some things we don't, like Buffy's issues with her Dad, and her fear of death, and of being vamped, both lovely foreshadowy scenarios. The close-knit quality of Giles' and Buffy's fears - in the graveyard, it's had to disentangle which of their nightmares it is, they fit so seamlessly together.

The central theme is child abuse, and perhaps the difficulty adults have in taking it seriously. The child has been hit by his coach. OK, that's a big deal, and the coach would have gone down for it once it came out. But what does it mean to the child? Would we be more anxious to solve a child's nightmare situation if not solving it meant our own nightmares were made real? I think there's something of this in this episode - switching the point of view from outside to inside. Nightmares touch the deep things inside us, child or adult, and we play with the fear in gothic fictions.

I found Giles' nightmare scenario one of the most touching: he fears losing his memory, and his ability to read. Getting lost in his own library stacks is the worst thing that he could possibly imagine happening: it breaks down his normal rationality, and briefly he can't even reason.

That's something the episode brings out, how these deep fears can paralyse us, throw us back into a childhood state. All the scoobies go through a stage of helpless panic, and struggle through to a place where they can deal with it. Giles gets his mind working again, Xander realises he's big enough to hit his clown, Buffy is able to look outside her devastation at her father's accusations, and see Billy. And then she is able to face her vamped state in the graveyard, hold it together long enough to complete the job.

Ah, the graveyard. The graveyard is an element of true gothic, in the Sunnydale landscape. Dark and brooding, full of crumbling crypts and ancient statuary, it stands in for subconscious unease, the power of mysticism and superstition lurking behind the sunny malls. Here, in a world where dreams are becoming real, it enters the day - still clothed in perpetual night, just over the road from the school. What a nice piece of symbolism!

[> OT to MsGiles [sorry, mini-thread-hijack in process] -- Rob, 10:09:07 08/14/03 Thu

I'm currently working on the FH&T pages at the Annotated Buffy, and I realized that I neglected to save to my HD the first batch of your notes. You didn't happen to save them, did you? And I hate to ask you this, but if you didn't save them, would you at all mind at least rewriting your note on the British "cluck-cluck" noise? Because the episode notes just won't be complete without a "cluck-cluck" note! ;o)

Many thanks in advance.

Rob

P.S. I have all your notes from right after the "cluck-cluck" noise. So don't worry about them. :o)

[> [> Typo!! Obviously should've been "in proGress". Ugh. -- Rob, 10:14:49 08/14/03 Thu


[> S1 as rough draft for later shows -- mamcu, 12:09:15 08/14/03 Thu

Many of the early episodes seem to try out themes and plots and characters that get a much better treatment in a later season. Nightmares has always struck me as a sort of proto-Restless. It has got some good work with the morphing from reality to dream, the blending of the two, while Restless appears to draw a line between the dream world and the real world. AS MsG says, the dreams in Nightmares are very conventional, but in Restless they're perfectly individualized, unique, but thoroughly related to past and future, psychology, etc. Symbolism is a lot more subtle and inexplicable (e.g., cheese).

(But Restless does so many wonderful things--hard to believe they're part of the same series.)

However, some similar notes from both dream sequence episodes:

Backstage at a play, unprepared for the part
Following mysterious creatures
Sharing parts of dream experience
following different characters, but into related places,
etc.


There have been other things that were try-outs in S1 and done more fully later:

robots
possessions
witches
and of course--Big BAds

[> [> fleshing out characters too -- MsGiles, 05:01:41 08/15/03 Fri

Although the dreams are less creative than in later Buffy series, I did like Nightmares. It's hard sometimes to remember how new all the characters were, back then.

Thinking about that, I suppose that as important as the main story in this ep is the way it helps establish the Scooby gang. As much as being about fears and phobias, it's about the gang's weak points, their Achille's heels.

We get Giles' intellectualism, his reliance on his memory and reading skills. We see his panic when they fail him, how for a moment he is vulnerable and unable to lead. There's more about Willow's stagefright, brought up last ep. which holds her frozen and beyond rational thought (all the more impressive that she can overcome it to teach in the next series). Cordelia's reliance on her looks and fashion sense proves to be her downfall (as she's dragged off screaming with her hair a frizzy mass and her clothes stuck somewhere in the '70s), and Xander's greed, which leads him into his own childhood nightmare.
With Buffy, we find out more about Hank, and how she feels vulnerable about her parents splitting up. We find out that her cheerleadery buoyancy hides deep anxiety about Hank, and about the Master and her ability to face him. We find that she fears being buried alive - particularly poignant when we ff to Bargaining. And she fears being vamped. DreamVampBuffy is clearly still Buffy and not a desouled monster, but she is getting hungry ..

They all fall victim to helpless panic, but they all (except perhaps Cordelia) manage to get on top of it and get on with the job. Xander realises he has the strength to knock out his Killer Klown. Willow tears herself away from the mesmerising spotlight. Giles manages to forget his disability, and realises he *can* still think. Like the others, Buffy is eventually able to see through her fears enough to control them and get on with solving the problem at hand. She is able to look up from Hanks devastating accusations to see Billy, sadly lurking. Able, at the end to control her vamp ferocity and direct it at a suitable target - Billy's Ugly Man- giving coma-bound Billy the break he needs to deal with trauma of his coach beating him senseless.

My Season Seven -- Nino, 10:09:17 08/14/03 Thu

My Season Seven:

-Had the First appear as all the Big Bads (in a "Lessons"-esque fashion) to Buffy in "Chosen".

-Gave the First a concrete plan, trying to become a physical entity, possibly using the power of the scythe, and maybe even involed a kick-ass final fight between Buffy and a newly corporeal, ever changing slew of deceased Buffy characters...possibly ending with real Buffy, killing Evil Buffy, and foiling the First's plans. (Instead of that lame ass attempt at killing a bijilion Ubies).

-Had the First appear to Giles as Jenny Calander to plant the seed of doubt in Buffy's ability as a leader, thus explaining some of his shady behavior.

-Had the First appear to Anya as Halfrek, to make her feel as though she wasn't really part of the group and suggest that Buffy's superiority complex might cause Anya her life (as a nice prelude to her speech in "Empty Places").

-Had the First appear to Willow as Warren and Rack to make her guilt stop her from using magic.

-Showed Dawn truly suspecting Buffy as evil after "CWDP" especially after being ignored by her in "Potential".

-Did not include the episode "First Date".

-Mentioned "From Beneath You it Devours..." in the second half of the season.

-Had all the Scoobs talk about Beljoxa's Eye and show suspicion towards Buffy.

-Had Willow go specifically to Amy (not the lame-ass Wicca group) when she turned into Warren, only to find that Amy was either A.)an agent of the First or B.)The First appearing as a dead Amy.

-Didn't have Kennedy (the only character in the Buffyverse, I truly disliked).

-Had Xander and Anya get back together after they had sex again.

-Didn't have Xander's stupid Starbucks joke by the crater after he just found out the love of his life died.

-Had a non-evil Joyce appear one last time in "Chosen"

-Had the First Slayer appear in more then one scence in "Get it Done" and talk all crypticy.

-Had some quality Dawn/Spike scenes...maybe even just ONE quality Dawn/Spike scene.

-More Dawn, Anya and cool First visits...less boring speeches.

-Had the First truly trying to tear apart the Scoobs from the inside, instead of a couple half-ass attempts.

-Had Principal Wood die at the end of the battle...not that I didn't like him...just didn't want Anya to be the only one to go! (Sorry, Spike doesn't count).

-Had a heated scene in Willow's car on the way back from L.A. in "Dirty Girls" that was appropriate given Willow and Faith's history.

-Had Willow smile more.

These are just a few things I think about...just for the record, I still liked season 7. I am Spike fan. I liked where they went with him. I liked "Chosen." I liked a lot of stuff about season 7...but there was so much more, for lack of a better word...potential.

[> Yeah, that woulda helped. -- Gyrus, 11:40:11 08/14/03 Thu

Your hindsight is definitely 20/20; I agree with pretty much everything you said. (Except for killing off Wood -- SOMEBODY has to teach Faith that not all men are beasts. Plus, its nice to have at least one episode in which the black guy doesn't die.)

[> [> Yup. -- dream, 12:12:04 08/14/03 Thu


[> My Season Seven - Why? -- Claudia, 12:35:07 08/14/03 Thu

My Season Seven:

-Had the First appear as all the Big Bads (in a "Lessons"-esque fashion) to Buffy in "Chosen".

(Why? Why would it have been necessary for the First to appear as all of the Big Bads from the past?)

-Gave the First a concrete plan, trying to become a physical entity, possibly using the power of the scythe, and maybe even involed a kick-ass final fight between Buffy and a newly corporeal, ever changing slew of deceased Buffy characters...possibly ending with real Buffy, killing Evil Buffy, and foiling the First's plans. (Instead of that lame ass attempt at killing a bijilion Ubies).

(Again, why? There was no way in the world Buffy could have defeated the First in corporeal form. She barely survived when the First took hold of Caleb and although she killed Caleb, the First remained intact, although in non-corporeal form. I don't see the reasoning behind this.)

-Had the First appear to Giles as Jenny Calander to plant the seed of doubt in Buffy's ability as a leader, thus explaining some of his shady behavior.

(The First didn't have to bother. Giles' own personality made this possible. It's not the first time he has doubted Buffy's ability as a leader. And remember his dream in "Restless"? It indicated his own desire to control Buffy in a paternalistic fashion. In Season 6, he wanted Buffy to grow, but only because he felt he wasn't an effective Watcher for her. And he was right. But when "she" started showing signs that she had really outgrown him, he didn't take it very well. And the destruction of the Watcher's Council, along with Buffy's growing closeness with Spike did not help matters for Giles. He didn't need the First. He was botching up on his own, just fine.)

-Had the First appear to Anya as Halfrek, to make her feel as though she wasn't really part of the group and suggest that Buffy's superiority complex might cause Anya her life.

(Again, why? Anya's resentment toward Buffy has been around for a long time, although suppressed during most of her years on the show.)

-Had the First appear to Willow as Warren and Rack to make her guilt stop her from using magic.

(Somehow, I don't think Warren or Rack's appearance would have made a difference. Sorry.)

-Showed Dawn truly suspecting Buffy as evil after "CWDP" especially after being ignored by her in "Potential".

(Sorry, but again, why? She was never warned that Buffy would turn evil, but that Buffy would reject her.)

-Mentioned "From Beneath You it Devours..." in the second half of the season.

-Had all the Scoobs talk about Beljoxa's Eye and show suspicion towards Buffy.

(Again, why? They had enough fodder to be suspicious about - Spike, her growing alienation from the Scoobies, the battle against Caleb.)

-Had Willow go specifically to Amy (not the lame-ass Wicca group) when she turned into Warren, only to find that Amy was either A.)an agent of the First or B.)The First appearing as a dead Amy.

(Amy was never dead. Although, I never saw any reason to have Amy in this episode, in the first place.)

-Didn't have Kennedy (the only character in the Buffyverse, I truly disliked).

(Won't comment on this.)

I'm sorry, but I find most of your comments . . . irrevelant. But, you are entitled to your opinions.

[> [> I think most of our comments qualify as that... -- ponygirl, 12:43:42 08/14/03 Thu

Irrelevant. Opinionated. But interesting.

Could be a nifty motto!

[> [> [> Hmmmm. . . -- Claudia, 16:48:41 08/14/03 Thu

Hmmm, it does sound like a nifty motto. I wonder if Whedon feels the same about the opinions of others.

[> [> [> [> Re: Hmmmm. . . -- Yellow Bear, 09:53:09 08/15/03 Fri

I'm sure he does.

[> [> Because... -- Nino, 09:26:53 08/15/03 Fri

Woo! Sorry for taking so long to respond...I was mid-response when the lights went out yesterday! But thanks to Gyrus for defending some of my points as I would have, while I was MIA.

(Why? Why would it have been necessary for the First to appear as all of the Big Bads from the past?)

-You're right, not necessary at all...but weren't you just itchin for the First to do SOMETHING? I mean, we have this potentially awesome Big Bad, who teased us hardcore in "Lessons" and he barely worked his evil ways on the Buffster...

(Again, why? There was no way in the world Buffy could have defeated the First in corporeal form. She barely survived when the First took hold of Caleb and although she killed Caleb, the First remained intact, although in non-corporeal form. I don't see the reasoning behind this.)

-Well, my idea was that she would defeat the First before the transformation could be complete...like I said, this is just MY ideal season...but as Gyrus pointed out, defeating the First in this fashion wouldn't kill the First Evil, only foil its plans much like Buffy did in "Chosen" anyway. And I also think this would have prevented Buffy's dumb ass decision to try to kill a bijillion ubies with her wanna-slay-brigade...Besides, I'm not a writer...all I wanted was SOMETHING that resembled a concrete, focused plan...instead of releasing a couple nasties and trying to get Andrew and Spike to kill people...am I wrong here?

(The First didn't have to bother. Giles' own personality made this possible. It's not the first time he has doubted Buffy's ability as a leader)

-Right again! And yet, isn't the First suppose to symbolize those fears and doubts we have on some level? Wasn't that the point of it whispering evil nothings in Willow's ear in "CWDP?" She was already frightned of her power, but the First scared her anyway, in one of the best eps of the season. Why didn't other major characters get the same attention, when obviously the same result was wanted...to get the group to turn on Buffy and/or fall apart. Plus it would explain Giles' shadiness a little better in my eyes...and wouldn't it just have been COOL? I mean seriously...

(Again, why? Anya's resentment toward Buffy has been around for a long time, although suppressed during most of her years on the show.)

-And again I say...it just woulda been cool...why even bother having the First around at all if it isn't going to DO anything...these are just a few example I thought off the top of my head...my basic concern was that the First did not seem have his hand is the lives of the Scoobies...which made the whole season feel kinda disconnected.

(Somehow, I don't think Warren or Rack's appearance would have made a difference. Sorry.)

-Ok, now thats just silly...why would seeing the people she killed NOT have made Willow's scared-of-everything attitude make a little more sense? I mean, are you suggesting that the First shouldn't have appeared to ANYONE? Which visits did you like? You don't think the First, as an entity which can be any dead person, left much to be desired on a series where the dead characters are so important to the living ones? Call me crazy...but what made me excited about the season after seeing "Lessons" was this very possibility..that when they said "Back to the Beginning" they meant it...Didn't you like the Mayor's visit to Faith? Granted, there was not really much follow through in Faith doubting Buffy, but there wasn't much time left...had the visits to the Scoobs happened all season, season 7 coulda been chock-full of character developmenty goodness...instead of boring speeches that had no affect on anything.

(Sorry, but again, why? She was never warned that Buffy would turn evil, but that Buffy would reject her.)

-I just meant it would have been nice to see Joyce's words to Dawn affect Dawn for more then 1 episode.

(Amy was never dead. Although, I never saw any reason to have Amy in this episode, in the first place.)

-Of course Amy was never dead...on screen...So we can't go for some shock value when Willow tries to touch a character we think to be alive, only to find it is the First? I think that woulda been cooler then the Is he/Isn't he Giles storyline...Besides, I liked Amy showing up...I just didn't like the RANDOM reasons she gave for putting the hex on Willow, w/o explaining how she knew Kennedy was a potential...They brought her back (yay) then wasted her with an anticlimatic jealousy speech (sigh).

-And about Kennedy...sorry folks, I never bitch about not liking characters...Riley, Spike...hell, Maggie Walsh...are all OK in my book..i think im entitled to one character in seven years.

-And "First Date" was a disastrous waste of time...SO much could have been done in the 40 minutes wasted on Ashanti and a couple lame jokes...the only redeeming part of the ep was the final scene when the First was actual cool enough to appear as Nikki to Wood.

-Sorry I'm kinda flustered right now, so this isn't very cohesive, I had a lot of thoughts...but I'm sure you'll all survive w/ohearing me bitch

[> [> [> How do you define "waste of time"? -- Finn Mac Cool, 10:30:27 08/15/03 Fri

It gave us a short breather from the arc plot, provided plenty of entertaining jokes, revealed who Principal Wood really is, showed us that the Seal of Danthalzar could be used more than once, and showed that Andrew was willing to stay with the good guys even when given a choice. I'm not quite clear how that is a "waste of time". It advanced the arc story ("Storyteller" and "Lies My Parents Told Me" could never have happened without this episode), as well as giving us just some good old fashioned entertainment. Yes, the Ashanti demon wasn't the best, but she had very little screentime. I count only three scenes with her in them, and she did get a couple of funny moments (the rope discussion, as well as saying, "Do the ropes hurt?" "Yes." "Good!").

[> [> [> [> Sorry...it just plain sucked -- Nino, 10:48:17 08/15/03 Fri

When Buffy said "That may be the best thing I've ever had in my mouth..." I wanted to vom all over the place...(especially since we all know the best thing she had in her mouth was in "Gone" :) )

I just thought this ep sucked...after reading the Joss interview that basically said it would have been silly to have Dawn go on a date with all this important stuff happening, I thought it was especially crappy that they found time for an Ashanti appearance. The whole ep was just lame...especially when the time could have been used for some stuff that was missing this season...ie) Dawn, Dawn, and more Dawn...Yeah, the stuff that advanced the plot was necessary, but I don't think the ep was well done...that's just me.

[> [> [> [> [> Don't lay it on the Ashanti demon -- Finn Mac Cool, 13:54:50 08/15/03 Fri

She was barely even in the episode. If three fairly short scenes that don't really affect most of the others ruin an episode for you, than you have much higher standards than I do. It's all right if you don't like the episode, but I'm just saying that I don't see why the Ashanti appearance would bother you, considering that she had only three scenes, none of which lasted very long, and the last of which consisted solely of a brief fight between her and Buffy. I can understand if you didn't like the ep (even though I disagree), but I'm just saying the Ashanti demon doesn't seem like an appropriate target.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Luckily, I didn't blame it all on Ashanti... -- Nino, 14:44:05 08/15/03 Fri


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> I didn't say all of the blame went there . . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 16:19:41 08/15/03 Fri

However, you specifically mentioned her in the summary of your post. Since that's such a key portion, I assumed that a lot of your dislike was directed towards her. Of course, I have a tendency to put the thing I read most recently (such as the end of a post) as most important, so I may have misread your intent.

[> Evil Disection of Ideas! -- Majin Gojira, 13:58:47 08/14/03 Thu

(Some ideas are good, other's..would be bad.)

"My Season Seven:

-Gave the First a concrete plan, trying to become a physical entity, possibly using the power of the scythe, and maybe even involed a kick-ass final fight between Buffy and a newly corporeal, ever changing slew of deceased Buffy characters...possibly ending with real Buffy, killing Evil Buffy, and foiling the First's plans. (Instead of that lame ass attempt at killing a bijilion Ubies).

(Oh, sure, get rid of the entire meaning of the First even existing. And have Buffy kill it too! You cannot defeat the idea of evil, is she did...well, the ramifications would be as disasterous as if the First actually WON. Now, having a better idea of the full plan of the first would have indeed helped, but your suggestion of an alternate plan from what was displayed...is really very lacking.)

-Did not include the episode "First Date".

(Just because you didn't like the episode, does not mean it didn't serve a purpose...)

-Had Willow go specifically to Amy (not the lame-ass Wicca group) when she turned into Warren, only to find that Amy was either A.)an agent of the First or B.)The First appearing as a dead Amy.

(What? People can't be evil all on their own?!)

-Didn't have Kennedy (the only character in the Buffyverse, I truly disliked).

(Ignore the roll she played for Willow's development. Sure, you could probably have asked for alittle bit more from her, but removing her completely does more harm than good. finding a better replacement, OTOH...)

-Had Xander and Anya get back together after they had sex again.

(Because then Anya's death would have been more poingnent and really devestated Xander--throughing off the entire mood of the final scene)

-Didn't have Xander's stupid Starbucks joke by the crater after he just found out the love of his life died.

(See Above)

-Had a non-evil Joyce appear one last time in "Chosen"

(Um...Why?)

-Had the First Slayer appear in more then one scence in "Get it Done" and talk all crypticy.

(Does it have to be served on a silver platter?)
-Had the First truly trying to tear apart the Scoobs from the inside, instead of a couple half-ass attempts.

-Had Principal Wood die at the end of the battle...not that I didn't like him...just didn't want Anya to be the only one to go! (Sorry, Spike doesn't count).

(Amanda died to! >:( Wood is necessary for Faith Development as a Character.)

-Had a heated scene in Willow's car on the way back from L.A. in "Dirty Girls" that was appropriate given Willow and Faith's history.

(Not disagreeing with this at all, I just want to say a resounding YES to that statement)

-Had Willow smile more.

(Sure, we're dealing with THE EVIL, but let's smile anyway! -_-;)

These are just a few things I think about...just for the record, I still liked season 7. I am Spike fan. I liked where they went with him. I liked "Chosen." I liked a lot of stuff about season 7...but there was so much more, for lack of a better word...potential.

(Agreed, but some of your suggestions downright suck/would skrew up everything else. My opinion on the suckage is only an opinion, but the world-screwing is a definite. I'm not trying to be mean, really, I'm just blunt and Stubborn. They are your opinons and your entitled to them, but so am I.)

[> [> Re: Evil Disection of Ideas! -- Gyrus, 14:34:55 08/14/03 Thu

(Oh, sure, get rid of the entire meaning of the First even existing. And have Buffy kill it too!

Killing the First's physical form wouldn't have to mean killing the First -- just returning it to its noncorporeal state. As you say, evil can't die.

-Did not include the episode "First Date".
(Just because you didn't like the episode, does not mean it didn't serve a purpose...)

Couldn't someone with better acting skills than Ashanti's have served said purpose?

-Had Willow go specifically to Amy (not the lame-ass Wicca group) when she turned into Warren, only to find that Amy was either A.)an agent of the First or B.)The First appearing as a dead Amy.

(What? People can't be evil all on their own?!)

Sure they can, but having Amy be the First's agent would explain how she knew that Kennedy was a Potential (something that was never explained on-screen).

-Didn't have Kennedy
(Ignore the roll she played for Willow's development. Sure, you could probably have asked for alittle bit more from her, but removing her completely does more harm than good. finding a better replacement, OTOH...)

Right-O. A new girlfriend for Willow was a good idea -- just not THAT girlfriend.

-Had Willow smile more.
(Sure, we're dealing with THE EVIL, but let's smile anyway! -_-;)

Now and then, plot development must be made secondary to showing off the sheer cuteness of Willow. :)

[> [> I think they could have pulled off killing the First -- Finn Mac Cool, 16:31:14 08/14/03 Thu

A while back, I speculated that in 7.21 the First Evil would die, and they'd have to finish off its minions in the final ep. That would show that evil continues to exist with or without the First; it was just an embodiment of evil's origin, not the total sum of all evil.

[> My First Evil -- dmw, 14:35:59 08/14/03 Thu

Gave the First a concrete plan

I have some quibbles with the particulars of the plan, but the First needed to have some sort of reasonable and interesting plan. Here's some of what the FE did in my season seven:

-The FE appeared as Buffy to lead (i.e., corrupt and generally harm) the Scoobies and SITs for an episode.

-The FE haunted Buffy by appearing as all those who had been killed during Buffy's tenure as Sunnydale slayer.

-The FE became near omnipresent in Sunnydale by late season--it's the clerk at the grocery store, your next door neighbor, the helpful policeman--terrorizing the populace and giving them a real reason to flee Sunnydale.

As for the other characters in my season 7:

-Buffy remembered her leadership skills from Graduation and retained her ability to deal with stress from season 5, so there were fewer speeches and more action.

-Dawn remembered that she was the Key and so did Giles, with their research revealing that there was a purpose for the monks turning a potentially world-destroying artifact in a teenage girl. The Key had an essential part in defeating the First instead of some deus ex machina from another show.

-Willow didn't feel guilty about killing Warren (though she felt a bit guilty about not feeling guilty), but her darkness over the season was more a result of grief about Tara and guilt for hurting her friends last season.

-Willow didn't spend the entire season worried and whining about how afraid she is to use magic either; she's more like Wesley on Angel, dark but with a purpose. She also didn't forget Latin, and Dawn didn't suddenly know Sumerian.

-Anya actually found herself after Selfless, formed new friendships with the Scoobies, and started the Magic Box again as a safe retail establishment in the land of the First, but didn't get back together with Xander.

-Xander became Buffy's closest confidant (who else can she trust after season 6?) The two grew closer together and we saw the glimmerings of the beginnings of a relationship, which both put aside until the First Evil was defeated.

-Faith and Willow talked on the ride home, discovering how each of them has changed. They approached each other warily but gradually developed trust in each other.

-Faith always got along with Dawn, especially as Buffy hid the worst of what happened to shelter her little sister. Buffy is irritated by the fact that Dawn idolizes the cool, dark slayer.

That's it for now.

[> [> My Willow/Kennedy -- dmw, 14:47:24 08/14/03 Thu

I forgot to add:

-My Willow wasn't ready for another relationship so soon. I've waited longer after a bad breakup, and though I like Kennedy as a SIT, I think W/K was there to show people that Willow was still gay. My Willow might have had sex in a heat of the moment impending doom situation (as in Lover's Walk, though not with Xander) but nothing more.

[> [> Re: Dawn on Faith (not in a nasty way) :-) -- Just George, 21:44:08 08/14/03 Thu

dmw "-Faith always got along with Dawn, especially as Buffy hid the worst of what happened to shelter her little sister. Buffy is irritated by the fact that Dawn idolizes the cool, dark slayer."


I've seen this idea in some fan fics. I think it would have been more likely if it had emotionally happened the other way, ie that Dawn hated Faith. Buffy doesn't have to tell Dawn anything bad about Faith. Everyone Dawn admires could tell her stories about times when Faith had almost killed people that Dawn loves:


* Xander telling Dawn about how Faith held Willow at knife point and almost killed her. And Xander telling how Willow was so brave to stand up to Faith. The "badder" Xander makes Faith, the better Willow looks.

* Willow telling Dawn about how Faith almost killed Xander by choking him to death and was only saved by Angel. And Willow telling Dawn that she must never ask Xander about it. Secrets are always delicious.

* Tara telling Dawn about how "wrong" Buffy's aura looked when Faith stole Buffy's body. Tara would be appropriately proud of this observation. It was one of the first times Tara made a "big" contribution to defeating a threat to the Scoobies.

* Joyce telling Dawn about how brave Buffy was when she shattered the window and saved Joyce from Faith. Remember that Joyce called Faith a "psycho" and told Faith that "my daughter is going to kill you." Joyce was proud of Buffy. The "badder" Joyce makes Faith look, the better she makes Buffy look.


Given this, I'd think it would be more likely that Buffy would be annoyed that Dawn held a continuing distrust of Faith, even after Buffy had forgiven her.

Anyway, having Dawn threaten Faith would have been funny. Dawn could have reused the "you do sleep..." line. It worked so well the first time.

-Just George

[> [> [> Re: Dawn on Faith (not in a nasty way) :-) -- Malandanza, 08:12:36 08/15/03 Fri

"I've seen this idea in some fan fics. I think it would have been more likely if it had emotionally happened the other way, ie that Dawn hated Faith. Buffy doesn't have to tell Dawn anything bad about Faith. Everyone Dawn admires could tell her stories about times when Faith had almost killed people that Dawn loves:"

The same reservations you have about Dawn/Faith could be said about Dawn/Spike -- Willow or Xander could tell Dawn about the Lovers Walk kidnapping and threatened murder (Spike told Willow that if she failed the love spell, he'd kill Xander and she'd try again). Willow might also mention the implied sexual threat (I haven't "had" anyone...) both in Lovers Walk and later in Season Four when Spike attacked her in her dorm room. There were plenty of times in Season Two and Four when any of the gang could talk to Dawn about Spike's attempts to kill them. In Season Five Buffy could mention the serial killer shrine Spike built to her; the knocking out, chaining up, and threatened murder if she didn't say she'd be his girlfriend; the Buffybot he had Warren build so he could have sex with a totally submissive plastic Buffy... and so on. Yet Dawn had a little crush on Spike until Xander told her about the attempted rape.

I can see the same thing with Faith. After all, even Willow and Xander thought Faith was a cooler version of Buffy when they first met her. The hostility between Dawn and Faith is easily imagined, though -- just add Dawn as a hostage just before Faith took over Buffy's body. A real threat to Dawn (and her mother) would do much to dispel any romanticization of the dark slayer (darkness is sexy and cool until it affects you).-- it seems reasonable to me that Dawn may once have had little Faith worship, but outgrew it after an attack. A better question might be why she forgave Willow so quickly for threatening to turn her into a ball of energy.

[> [> [> [> Re: Dawn on Faith (not in a nasty way) :-) -- dmw, 08:46:15 08/15/03 Fri

That was my thought too: that Dawn might romanticize Faith in the same way she did Spike. There's one other major reason that Dawn and Faith may get along. Dawn's past isn't real. The monks made Dawn Buffy's sister to ensure her protection; however, slayers die, so why not add the possibility of extra protection by creating a good relationship between Dawn and Faith? It's just as easy for the monks to give them a good relationship as a bad one, so it doesn't cost anything to add this extra potential protection for the Key.

From a writing standpoint, I think it's more satisfying to the viewer that animosity between Faith and the Scoobies be based on what we actually saw during those seasons; however, it's also good to have a contrasting character who reacts differently to Faith. As we don't know what happened with Dawn and Faith in seasons 3-4, there is complete flexibility in writing their interaction in season 7, making Dawn the obvious choice for that contrasting character as she has a past relationship with Faith, but it hasn't been shown to be a bad one as her relationship with the other Scoobies has been shown to be.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Dawn on Faith (not in a nasty way) :-) -- heywhynot, 10:19:28 08/16/03 Sat

The monks couldn't use Faith to protect Dawn. Dawn was inserted at the end of Buffy v. Dracula. Faith was in prison. The monks gave the key the physical form that Buffy would protect with her life. That is what we saw in Weight of the World. Dawn being brought home and Buffy self-annointed as her protector because that is the type of person Buffy is even as a child.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Faith could leave prison any time she felt a need to do so, as she demonstrated on AtS last season. -- dmw, 10:54:56 08/16/03 Sat


[> [> Awesome...especially the Dawn important-as-the-key thing...that's always been a big wish of mine! -- Nino, 10:41:18 08/15/03 Fri


[> [> [> Thanks -- dmw, 11:18:47 08/15/03 Fri

Thanks for the starting this thread. It's been fun and I'm glad you've enjoyed my ideas. I always wanted more to be done about Dawn's Keyness. I did a little with it in The Dark Rose and her Keyness is a core story element in the fic I'm currently writing.

Tulipp has some great ideas about the Key in her early s7 fic Terra Firma too.

[> Re: My Season Seven -- Pathfinder, 10:03:35 08/15/03 Fri

I should preface this by saying I really liked the Kennedy character and I liked her with Willow. That said, My Season Seven:

--Allowed Joss to bring back Tara as he reportedly wanted to do. It could have had much more emotional impact than the 'Willow moves on' story line. I'd still love to hear more of the specifics of just how Joss envisioned the whole 'Tara comes back from the dead' story line playing out.

Also, My Season Seven:

--Would've spent more time on the so-called Core Scoobies and their history. Such as...

--Xander's lie from "Becoming" in Season 2 ("Willow said...Kick his a**"). Still seems a bit odd that neither Willow nor Buffy would've come back to that after "Selfless."

--Would've dealt more directly with Giles snuffing Ben at the end of Season 5. Whether you think it was absolutely necessary and entirely justified or not, it was still a major act, and Joss and Co. usually aren't big on writing their core characters committing major acts without some sort of major repercussions. Given that, I was kind of surprised that it wasn't dealt with in a more direct way in "Lies My Parents Told Me."

[> [> Re: My Season Seven -- dmw, 11:15:28 08/15/03 Fri

I thought it was great that they finally brought up Xander's lie, then nothing happened, so I'd definitely agree with doing something about that.

And about Giles killing Ben too. I always thought that someone might figure it out, especially as Tara apparently forsees the event and accuses him of it early in The Gift. It might help this arc along if Tara comes back as you suggest.

[> [> [> I'm sure someone reported... -- KdS, 15:06:07 08/15/03 Fri

... around the time that Lies was first broadcast that in the original shooting script Giles told Buffy about Ben in the graveyard scene, but they decided not to do it for some reason. Personally, I think it's in character for Giles to do it and never say anything about it to anyone, although it was disappointing that the First didn't bring it up.

[> [> Re: My Season Seven -- Gyrus, 11:24:23 08/15/03 Fri

My Season Seven:
--Allowed Joss to bring back Tara as he reportedly wanted to do. It could have had much more emotional impact than the 'Willow moves on' story line. I'd still love to hear more of the specifics of just how Joss envisioned the whole 'Tara comes back from the dead' story line playing out.

I don't think there were any plans to bring Tara back from the dead; I think the idea was to have the First impersonate Tara in "Conversations with Dead People". But Amber Benson wasn't available, so the woman who played Cassie Newton in "Help" had to take over.

--Xander's lie from "Becoming" in Season 2 ("Willow said...Kick his a**"). Still seems a bit odd that neither Willow nor Buffy would've come back to that after "Selfless."

Heck, I was happy they brought it up at all. It was more than I expected.

--Would've dealt more directly with Giles snuffing Ben at the end of Season 5.

It certainly would have been nice for that act to have some sort of repercussions (however justified it may have been). Of course, I don't know how the Scoobs would have found out about it, as I don't think anyone actually saw Giles kill Ben.

[> [> [> Actually... -- Nino, 13:32:12 08/15/03 Fri

I remember the interview that he was talking about that Joss said he wanted to bring Tara back in a a huge, elaborate arc..it sounded kinda corny to me, but the more Tara the better, I suppose....

...and I forgot to mention on My Season Seven the Giles/Ben thing...I was waiting for that too...

I loved the "Becoming" reference in "Selfless" and it is one of the reasons I love Drew Goddard, because he writes like a fan and brings up things that we have definitly not forgotten. How much more "back to the beginning" can you get?

[> [> [> [> Tara's Return or Lack Thereof -- dmw, 18:48:20 08/15/03 Fri

Joss also said more than once that Amber would be coming back but not as Tara and also that Tara's story was over and Marti confirmed those views, so I don't know whether you should believe that one interview over all his past ones.

I would've liked to have seen a resurrection done right on Buffy (Darla's was pretty good on Angel), especially after the disappointment of Bargaining. I wanted to see something a bit more mythological.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara's Return or Lack Thereof -- Yellow Bear, 20:37:30 08/15/03 Fri

Then again if Joss was planning to bring back Amber as Tara, would he really announce it in the press.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara's Return or Lack Thereof -- Pathfinder, 22:01:58 08/15/03 Fri

/Then again if Joss was planning to bring back Amber as Tara, would he really announce it in the press./

Exactly. Given a certain demonstrated lack of veracity among the writers when commenting on upcoming plot points and character development while the series was in production, I would actually tend to take what Joss said after all was said and done a bit more seriously.

Just my opinion...

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Tara's Return or Lack Thereof -- dmw, 10:56:00 08/16/03 Sat

Given the lack of veracity from the writers, I'd be more inclined to believe Amber Benson's explanation rather than Joss's.

[> Agree with all your points. -- s'kat, 19:28:42 08/15/03 Fri

Fly On The Wall game... -- ZachsMind, 13:28:40 08/14/03 Thu

The "My meme" threads that played out here the past few days were lotsa fun, so just to continue playing with this concept that each of us saw the same show but have uniquely interesting differences in what we see, I thought I'd try this parlour game on ya. I call it "Fly On The Wall."

There's moments in the show that we didn't see. Moments that would have been nice to see either cuz they were poignant or funny or dynamic or otherwise would have quenched the thirst of our endless curiosity about these characters. Think of your favorite ones and list them. Maybe if you feel like it, add your two cents on what you think happened in that moment, as if you were a fly on the wall at the time, trying if possible to keep continuity in mind and all that. Here's my list to use as a suggested example on how to participate.


Whoops. And I'm outta time for now. Feel free to add your own.

[> One Rah and I came up with after "Orpheus" -- KdS, 13:58:12 08/14/03 Thu

Some point in BtVS Season Three:

We see Angel listening to The Very Best of Barry Manilow sobbing his little heart out. Suddenly we hear (Angel's Vamp!Sense POV) the sound of Buffy's footsteps distantly approaching. Angel hastily turns the stereo off, grabs a copy of La Nausee and arranges himself in a deeply intellectual fashion just as Buffy walks in...

[> [> Except wasn't it Spike who peeked in and saw that? -- Masq, 16:16:08 08/14/03 Thu

The scene we see of Angel reading Sartre was from Spike's pov, I'm pretty sure. And Angel gave no indication he knew Spike was there.

Yay! My power's back!!! -- Rob, 19:55:05 08/14/03 Thu


[> You had no power to begin with!! All the power is mine!! -- Rochefort, 22:32:54 08/16/03 Sat


[> [> Speaking of which... -- Rob, 09:25:36 08/17/03 Sun

Roche, did you see that post I made to you a few days ago? Since you didn't respond I figured you either (a) missed it or (b) were crying. Here it is again, to rub salt into the wound:

Date Posted: 12:51:39 08/14/03 Thu
Author: Rob
Subject: Oh, Roche!!!! Guess what I just got tickets to see?

The new Broadway revival of "Little Shop of Horrors," opening in September...

And guess who's playing Audrey...

KERRY!!!

We will meet once more. :o) :o) :o)

Oh, and :P

Rob

;o)

[> [> [> WHAT!?!? WHAT!??!!? I'm speechless!! I'm without speech! -- Rochefort, 19:52:56 08/17/03 Sun

I'm totally crying; this is just not fair. Oh I know! Rob, I'll pretend to be gay if you'll bring me as your date, yes?

Rochefort

[> [> [> [> I'm gonna need flowers, chocolates, and presents from ya, Roche. Then, we'll talk. -- Rob, fluttering eyelashes, 11:07:53 08/18/03 Mon


[> Hooray! (OT) -- DS, 20:27:11 08/14/03 Thu

But I just saw on CNN that it could be days for Ohio and that it's caused problems with Cleveland's water supply.

[> [> Confirming that Cleveland's water is unappetizing today -- d'Herblay, 09:19:02 08/15/03 Fri

But I, at least, have power.

[> Rob is re-empowered?!? -- LittleBit, 20:41:38 08/14/03 Thu

I'd have thought you could power the entire Eastern seaboard with your cheerleadery energy alone!

[> [> LittleBit is empowered?!? Yay! -- DS, 21:02:51 08/14/03 Thu


[> [> I would've thought so, too...but that was knocked out too! -- Rob, 21:22:10 08/14/03 Thu


[> Missed you last night [smoochies] -- Diana, 04:57:08 08/15/03 Fri


[> Something eerily cool about this blackout thing.. -- ZachsMind, 08:41:38 08/15/03 Fri

Ya learn something every day. Imagine my surprise when I was watching Nightline last night and saw them put up a map showing that one half of the US is on one power grid, the western states are on another, and Texas (where I live) is the only state where 85% of our power is supplied in a self-sufficient manner. This doesn't mean we're completely immune to the concept of blackouts, but if the rest of the country goes, there's less of a chance we'll go with it.

I didn't know that about my own home state. I wonder why we're like that and all the other countries are so interconnected power-wise? Doesn't seem all that wise, does it?

Fanficionadoes should take note of this by the way: Cleveland was part of what went blackoutty. It's conceivable to write a fanfic where the Scoobies go to Cleveland, and spend two months hunting down the hellmouth there, leading up to a battle in mid August that's so tremendously powerful, the eventual permanent closure of the Cleveland Hellmouth mystically causes the blackout.

Then you could have a closeup of Buffy, after establishing that the blackout is her fault, and she's holding one of the three heads of some beastie that had tried to escape from the hellmouth, then she looks into the camera with a big smile and goes, "oopsie!" Fade to black. Run Credits.

[> Brooklyn is back but Manhattan is still half out, it's last -- s'kat, 09:03:24 08/15/03 Fri

Apparently everyone got power back before Manhattan (ie. New York City hub). They had to rescue 1000 people from subways. Over 800 people from elevators. The subways, LIR
and Amtrack are not running. There is no service out
of Penn Station. Cable is completely out. Air conditioners
are off. It's supposed to get in 90s today and was in 90s yesterday. Nice now at 80 degrees with a breeze.

Most people walked home. Or took ferries. But a ton of people are stuck in Manhattan - sleeping on the sidewalks, and in the station.

New Jersey got their power back before most of New York.
My area came back on around 9am. Manhattan is still out.
According to the news - it was an error that occurred in somewhere in midwest - they don't know where exactly - they think part of Ohio. At least we have water. Cleveland doesn't.

sk (getting off to conserve power)

[> got electricity back this a.m., but couldn't get online till now! -- anom, 11:45:56 08/15/03 Fri

I was actually able to finish a rush job yesterday--it was on paper, not computer, & I get enough sunlight to work by, although I worked the last hour after sunset w/a Tops Light strapped around my head like a spelunker! After clearing up some questions w/the client this morning, I called FedEx to make the pickup. Their communications are still down, so they can't notify the driver to come for the package! I'll have to take a bus (did I mention bus service is reduced?) 65 blocks to their closest center w/counter service, unless I can find one of their trucks making deliveries scheduled before the blackout.

At least my fan is working now. It was pretty yucky there for a while.

[> [> realized i never explained that subject line -- anom, 23:03:46 08/17/03 Sun

In case anyone wants to know: Power came back on in my neighborhood ~8:15 the next morning, but apparently my (local) ISP's server was in a part of town that didn't get power restored till that afternoon. Very frustrating to get "Unable to connect to remote server" all day. BTW, a FedEx pickup location in walking distance was open later that day, so I didn't have to go downtown & deal w/all the transportation problems.

[> Our power came back, went, then came back again! -- Scroll, 13:18:24 08/15/03 Fri


[> Thank the PTB and/or Con Edison -- sdev, 17:16:27 08/15/03 Fri

I just got power back 8pm. I could not take another hot,dark, waterless night and was contemplating flight!
Not even water has been available because it runs on an electric pump.

Anyone want to speculate on causes? I don't know how they could dismiss the big "T" so quickly with the hacking possibilities.

[> [> Causes... -- s'kat, 19:21:41 08/15/03 Fri

Well...they've discounted lighting strikes. They've discounted it being Canada's fault or the Niagra Mohawk
area.

Right now they are speculating it occured off of a line in Cleveland and caused a cascading effect. There's apparently an electrical loop : Detroit/Toledo/Cleveland/Buffalo/Toronto - which connects to Boston, Syracuse, NYC, Hoboken, and PA. Somewhere along the loop - most likely Cleveland there was a failure at one of the plants or short - which caused the other plants to shut down and cascaded through the system.

What's amusing - is that the federal government run by the Rebulicans (who had "too much governement" and worked hard under the Reagan administration for deregulation), has decided as a result of this disaster that maybe de-regulating the electric companies was a bad thing and want to regulate again and take the regulatory power away from the states and give it back to the federal government.
(According to some politicians, *cough*Hilary*cough*, Enron may have caused some of this - I guess Enron was involved with the electric companies and the deregulation/privatization of them?)

It's all sort of interesting considering this is the worst blackout in history - and has given NYC a huge economic blow it did not need. (Hurt Detroit and Cleveland pretty badly as well.) Good news? Broadway is up and running. The MEts are playing tonight, and power is back. The only things not back? The subways they are still unoperational.
We don't expect to have them back up and running until sometime Sat afternoon.

Glad you got your power back, sdeve. Sounds like you had it worse than most of us. (No water or electricity? ugh.)

[> I'm back (back in the New York Groove) -- cjl, 20:57:17 08/15/03 Fri

OK. Everybody I know from New York to Jersey to Cleveland is in one piece. I can relax and post on the board without worrying that I've missed an important phone call.

Anything major happen while I was gone?

[> [> talk about rl problems interfering w/a board meet! is that movie opening rescheduled? -- anom, 23:44:01 08/16/03 Sat

'Cause if it is, maybe I could go after all. I probably could've in the 1st place, since my brother wanted an early lunch on his birthday...but that ended up cancelled too.

So, at the risk of being a nudzh again...are we gonna make another try to get NY folks together to see "American Splendor"? Any idea yet when it'll open?

[> [> [> NYC "American Splendor" meet postponed until further notice. -- cjl, 05:37:44 08/17/03 Sun

Shadowkat said she'd be into it after she comes back from vacation, which should be just around Labor Day Weekend. Not sure how many people will be around the city for a big three-day weekend, but we can try to schedule a movie day around then.

[> [> [> [> looks like i'll be around that weekend--maybe it'll make up for... -- anom, 23:15:07 08/17/03 Sun

...not being able to go to DragonCon after all. It'd be nice if we could have our own meet the same weekend (although I'd rather have one sooner!). Can we get a head count?

[> [> [> [> Re: NYC "American Splendor" meet postponed until further notice. -- s'kat, 06:13:05 08/18/03 Mon

no longer going on vacation - so should be around this weekend.

sk

[> [> [> [> [> this weekend, then? anyone else? -- anom, 10:55:35 08/18/03 Mon

"no longer going on vacation - so should be around this weekend."

I know I said I wanted a meet sooner, but I'm sorry you had to cancel your vacation, shadowkat.

So is this weekend a possibility? Who else can do it then? And when then? Saturday, of course, is out for me (Shabbes ends ~8:30). Anytime Sunday should be fine, although I would like to go to the 11th annual Charlie Parker Jazz Festival, starting at 3 pm in Tompkins Sq. Park. But if that's the best time for everyone else, I can manage to be satisfied w/part 1 on Saturday in Marcus Garvey Park (which I can walk to from shul!).

So once again: head count & preferred times for American Splendor this weekend?

[> [> [> [> [> [> I'm booked for Saturday and Sunday this week. -- cjl, 11:15:22 08/18/03 Mon

And since Shabbas starts at 8 on Friday night, that's out too. We always have the option of combining American Splendor movie nite with the Sept. 7 board meeting. Anybody who wants to head out to the movies after the big get-together could just assemble after the meeting breaks up and either hop into the nearest subway or walk to one of my local movie theaters (if American Splendor goes into wide release).

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> the original plan was for 3:15 on friday--is that ruled out for this week? -- anom, 11:50:10 08/18/03 Mon

If that's a possibility, I could go to the movie, hang out a while afterwards, & still get home in time for Shabbes (which actually starts closer to 7:30). If it's not, this weekend doesn't look likely. Either of the next 2 weekends is OK for me. But we still need input from other folks.

(In my case, "the weekends" amounts to the Sundays. I'm starting to feel bad about cutting the possibilities in half! Look, if the best time for everyone else is on a Saturday, go ahead...I don't want to be the one holding things up. As long as there's another opportunity coming up soon!)

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> That might be the most workable plan for all concerned. -- s'kat, 14:51:23 08/18/03 Mon

Do it around Sept 7th. I honestly don't see the movie disappearing soon - it's gotten way too much positive buzz.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> so *is* that the plan? how about a vote--labor day weekend or 9/7? -- anom, 23:44:10 08/19/03 Tue

Hey, maybe there'd be a better response if I set it up like one of JBone's faceoffs: Holiday vs Birthday. My vote: Holiday. It'd mean 1 more meet (yay! more is better!), & on a more personal note, it'd make me feel a little better about missing Dragoncon (sigh). And maybe it'd mean more time w/more of the people at the restaurant on the 7th--another way more is better!

Drusilla vs the Beast -- JBone, 20:17:03 08/14/03 Thu

Aw, crap! You mean killing the Beast really does bring back the sun? I thought that was just Angel's retarded fantasy.

http://www.geocities.com/road2apocalypse/showtime.html

[> I know I was rather vocal in my admiration of the Beast... -- ApOpHiS, 21:57:49 08/14/03 Thu

but Dru is my Dark Goddess; I can't stand against her. So here's how it breaks down: A week before she ever meets her opponent, a vision informs her of the Beast's weakness. Some helpful hallucinations lead her to the Beast's boneknife, which she pockets and forgets about until she runs into a giant demon made of volcanic rock. She takes a beating like the rest, but, as history has shown us time and time again, crazy beats powerful every time. Dru's deranged ramblings confuse the simple-minded Beast long enough for her to remember the trinket stashed in her dress and put it to use. Dru's survived battles with Angel and co. for 5 years; the Beast couldn't last one. Ergo, Dru wins and has a neat story to tell her dolls.

[> [> I agree! -- HonorH, 22:30:23 08/14/03 Thu

The Beast was a mere minion. Dru was the one who housebroke Spike all those years ago. She wins exactly the way Pops says.

[> [> [> Re: I agree! -- Arethusa, 06:21:03 08/15/03 Fri

I agree too, although I think she hypnotized him and had him do the Hokey-Pokey just for fun first.

[> [> I agree; now could you write it as a fic? (-; -- dmw, 07:34:32 08/17/03 Sun


[> [> You must have been there? -- mamcu, 08:12:33 08/15/03 Fri

Though I think she also took a snack or two from him before he expired.

[> Drusilla all the way! -- Anneth, 11:23:34 08/15/03 Fri

Dru'd crush that mangy beast, and his little dog, too. She's no fool for love, and wouldn't be caught alive snogging with Evil Cordy, much less working for her. The Beast may think he's all special and powerful, what with the sun-swallowing, but really, he just ate a marble. Dru bagged a slayer, and a pretty effective slayer, at that. Plus, Dru's got that vision thing. She'd dream about Rocky's knife beforehand and finish him off in 34 seconds flat. Drusilla victorious!

[> I'm sorry, but--- -- MaeveRigan, 11:49:37 08/15/03 Fri

Drusilla's a sweetheart in her insanely psychic way, but the only outcome I see in this outcome is the Lava-Beast of apocalypse nowish stomping away from the Pile-of-Ashes-Formerly-Known-as-Dru.

I realize I'm completely outnumbered, but that's my vision and I'm sticking with it.

[> Well, I voted for the Beast... -- Masq, 13:15:20 08/15/03 Fri

in my continuing, if pointless, effort to support the minor AtS characters against the heavy-weights in these sometimes way off-kilter match-ups.

But if you ask me which one I'd rather see back on AtS next season, it'd be Dru! Dru! Dru!

[> I'm confused -- Gyrus, 13:22:03 08/15/03 Fri

Is this vote about which character we like better, or which one would win in a fight? 'Cause for this matchup, I'd definitely have two different answers.

[> [> Both, of course. -- HonorH, 13:42:05 08/15/03 Fri

Y'see, the trick is to figure out how you can make the one you like best win the fight. If you absolutely can't do that, though, go for the one you think would actually win. The rule is: there are no rules. Except vote once and be snarky about it.

[> [> [> Good summary H2O -- Jay - who is finally back online (at least temporarily), 18:55:41 08/15/03 Fri


[> [> Dru would beat the Beast anyway. -- cjl, 20:50:56 08/15/03 Fri

Rocky may be powerful, but let's face it, he ain't too bright. (Getting stabbed by your own sacrificial knife? That's got to be an all-time low in demonic stupidity.) If the guys in A.I. didn't overdose on testosterone and go all John Woo on us in Apocalypse Now-ish, they might have figured out a way to puncture his hide without wasting all that ammo. Dru, blessed (cursed?) with second sight, steals the boneknife from Daddy's weapons cabinet, and dispatches Lava Boy with all due speed--and much taunting about his thing for Cordy: "Ooh," she coos, "poor, sweet Beastie dies from Mummy's love."

"Nightmares" Revisited -- Darby, 09:39:05 08/15/03 Fri

I think that this is the episode that told me that I wasn't watching just any old show, back in the day. Things had been fairly Monster-of-the-Week, with some soap opera elements, up to this, but Nightmares showed writers who were looking beyond the superficial aspects. One of the strongest aspects of this episode is how so many of the inner fears of the characters are so mundane, which makes the Slayer-related fears easier to connect to. As others have said, the episode is also about facing and moving past your fears, not letting them paralyze you (or put you in a coma), and this it does well.

As several have said, this episode has things in common with Restless but isn't up to that caliber. But, like Restless, there are many details that will be used in later shows.

The opening sequence in the Master's lair is effective and thought-provoking. First, we don't know that it's a dream, so there seems to be real peril. On repeat viewing, a couple of questions pop up: is this a prophetic dream for Prophecy Girl, with its accurate depiction of the Master and his sunken church? I know it was easy to use the set and actor they had, but the sequence could have been a bit more vague. Does Buffy see herself (her dream-self) in pigtails? She does wake up with them, but they're not usually her hairstyle of choice. Is the dream connected to Billy, or just setting the stage?

And, we've got the first instance of fear keeping someone from acting - this is not the mind mojo that the Master will use later.

There are several classic dream images. The first is the segue from being grabbed in the dream to Joyce shaking Buffy awake.

More family issues. Buffy's family situation gives her a new vulnerability that the audience can at least imagine themselves in, and hints at some of Buffy's fear issues - first, that her Dad will just stop coming to see her; second, that her Slayer activities contributed to her parents' breakup.

Willow's distant parents are hinted at. We had gotten an earlier hint at absent-minded professorness in I Robot, You Jane, when it was revealed that her father often forgets his house key.

Wendell, the spider guy, is described in the script as "studious looking, perhaps overweight," but the actor could have been in Oz's band. It's nice when casting avoids the obvious "types," which the show is inconsistent about. Of course, he may have been the only auditioner that would let spiders crawl on him...

"Our most fundamental need...is to be heard" leads into Buffy seeing Billy for the first time. It is indicated in the script that most of the students don't notice Billy, but Buffy seems to be drawn to him. Psychic Slayer powers, Buffy empathy, or a history of seeing the boogedy when all around her ignore it?

The book Wendell is using (in Health class) appears to be physics, open to a chapter about light generation. Yeah, that's about right.

The Master is given the expository theme statement - we are defined by our fears and how we deal with them - which is a trifle heavy-handed. Interesting that the Master sees fear as the seat of Power, but too bad the First Evil substituted nagging.

The Master talks about the current situation being a "change for the worse" with no irony - but wouldn't he see a change for the better?

Buffy and Joyce in the car, two lines from the script didn't make it:
BUFFY: "Mom, don't worry. I'm over the divorce. I officially release you from all guilt."
JOYCE: "That's not what I was getting at -- you feel like putting that in writing?

Teleplay by Greenwalt, Story by Joss. That's an odd credit on the show, isn't it?

Willow's spider fear seems to be foreshadowing, but we just get to, um, fear where it might be going (it does show up in Fear Itself though). Somehow, I would have expected spiders to creep out Xander, and Nazis to be Willow's. Maybe that's too predictable.

Giles getting lost in the stacks - does he fear becoming too much the librarian, being pulled so far into the role that he can't find his way out? It is just a cover, it makes sense that he really doesn't want to be one.

He also mentions, rife with portent, that he couldn't find anything useful back there. Another fear: uselessness.

Buffy's history test that she didn't remember - it takes a while before we can be sure that this is a nightmare sequence, since Buffy does miss lots of classes. And is Cordelia a convenient guide figure through this, or does her presence represent something deeper?

Wendell's spider collection wasn't really something a kid should have had - some squiggly nasties in there!

Wendell's real nightmare makes a connection that will rise up very subtly through the whole episode - the close connection between guilt and fear.

Buffy's test experience hinges on another dream classic - the odd progression / jumps of time. Used later in Life Serial.

Interesting that right after playing through a dream based upon her not being in classes, Buffy skips out with Giles to visit the hospital. Some fears are conquered more easily than others, I guess.

The girl in the boiler room leads to one of the more inexplicable subplots - the Ugly Man. Okay, he's Billy's Boogey Man, and attacks Buffy when she's with him, and clues need to be laid about "who" he is, but does he just represent some other fear in the girl he attacks? Maybe Billy fears his coach will hurt others. The Ugly Man never attacks him directly.

Willow still has the photo of her and Giles in her locker. And a Nerf Herder bumper sticker.

Showing up for class in your underwear - can't get more classic than that, right? What I want to know is - is this a gender-specific nightmare? Do girls have this dream too?

Giles fears losing the ability to read? Or does he fear that at some point the critical information will be in a form he can't read? Five languages might not be enough. Foreshadowing of Anya trying to read the spell to counter Dark Willow?

Is "asteroid body" the first case of Buffy inadvertantly substituting one word for another?

The Hank Summers scene is one of the show's most effective ones ever - it's so deliciously underplayed, with Hank just explaining reasonably and Buffy fighting to not cry. Before it became necessary to make Hank a villain in absentia (because, ironically, they needed him absent), he was a fairly interesting character, well-played. The actor seems to have found another profession, though.

Yes, you did help to break us up, and you're a huge disappointment to me. Even as Buffy realizes that something isn't real, she can't help but still feel the devastation. This also sets up a series theme - Buffy is much more beatable and less physically resilient when emotionally crippled.

"That would be the musical comedy version of this." But it would be 5 years before they did mount a musical comedy version.

Billy, like the First Evil, enters doors that are opened by others. But Buffy touches him.

Cordelia's grooming and fashion nightmare seems to fit with the geek / Chess Club one, but we will find out later that Cordy is actually pretty brainy but doesn't like it known.

Willow goes into the basement - makes me realize how rarely the show has those horror-movie moments where we say, "Don't go in there, you idiot!" Willow seems to sense the idiocy, but "Buffy" did call to her.

Once the gang splits up, the order of scenes really starts to vary from the script, even though the scenes themselves stay largely intact. This script is much-more-than-usual with the stage direction, not too surprisingly.

Willow's nightmare is the one most like the sequence in Restless, as if Joss thought there was more to mine from this particular fear. But in Restless, it becomes more a fear of being seen as she truly is. Funny opera sequence, though.

Ah, chocolatey goodness. The clown isn't wearing quite the same outfit Xander did as a pizza / ice cream guy - wouldn't it be neat if he did-? And do people really fear being sliced and diced by clowns?

What would be the last Slayer the Master saw ("You're prettier")? And how'd he see Disney in his trapped church?

Buffy fears being buried alive, something that played out with terrifying effectiveness in Bargaining. And the way it plays into Giles' nightmare makes perfect sense.

Xander is the first to really face his fear, but as a solution it has no force.

Giles' soliloquy on Buffy's grave doesn't quite work. But vamped Buffy does, a preview of the weird repulsive / attractive thing they'll do with Drusilla.

I still tend to believe that Slayers can't be vamped (even though it's been done many times in the non-canon Buffy stuff), but in seven years it's interesting that this has never been directly addressed. Saving it for the feature film-?

How'd they get to the daylight hospital without Buffy combusting? And, the light in the hospital is very confusing.

How did Billy reach out to Buffy? Why was monster Buffy better able to deal with Billy's monster? Did we have a warlock potential here?

The sideways quote from The Wizard of Oz is definite Joss-speak.

The human-as-monster thing is rarely as stark as the kiddie-league coach, but never as lightly dismissed. Every other time human baddies are implicated, it's quite the big thing.

The last scene, not shown:

The Master is sprawled in his chair, sleeping quietly. Suddenly he sits up with a start. The child is nearby.

COLLIN: Bad dream?

The Master nods, but he is not at all unhappy. He turns to the child.

MASTER: Horrible.

And off the Master's delight...END OF ACT FOUR.

[> Re: "Nightmares" Revisited -- Anneth, 11:56:02 08/15/03 Fri

First of all, Darby, (and everyone else), I really appreciate your S1 rundowns. My Buffy collection has spent the summer languishing in storage and for some reason, FX hasn't been running the show in my area, so I've been almost totally BtVS-free for nearly 3 months. It's dreadful. So, as much as I'd like to revisit the S1 eps, I have to do so via the scripts, during my lunch-hours - it ends up getting pretty complicated, and I get through half a script, usually, and then run out of steam or into more work. To conclude, I'm really glad that you and Q and Manwich and everyone else have been contributing these posts. I don't have the time to devote to S1 reviews that I wish I did, so these give me something great to work off of.

That aside - on to the meaty stuff!

"Nightmares" gives the characters and audience a fascinating look into those basic insecurities that make up everyone. Can you even imagine walking into the nightmares of your closest friends? Having them walk into yours? It would be worse than the nightmares themselves, in a sense - you would be left psychologically nude, voulnerable, and helpless.

Xander, in S3, is crushed that he doesn't receive the Class Clown award. And yet his great fear is of clowns. Also, while class clowns are notorious for drawing attention to themselves, Xander is horrified when he realizes he's appeared in class (nearly) naked. All attention is on him, everyone's laughing - but Xander's not in control of the situation. And so he flees. There's some element of this need for control in "Restless" as well; there again, Xander is superficially pleased with his aimlessness, but having it revealed to him without his consent seems to bewilder and terrify him. This basic fear of his, losing control, returns over and over during the series. Fro example, he tries to maintain some semblance of control over the impending disaster of "The Gift" by asking Anya to marry him.

I'd like to go through and talk about each of the Scoobies' nightmares, but I don't have the time right now.

Two last notes - the Giles/Buffy father/daughter relationship receives heavy treatment in this ep, as does Buffy's fear of her inner darkness, which becomes especially relevant in light of Seasons 5 and 6. (as noted by Darby)

[> Addenda -- Darby & Sara, 15:59:56 08/15/03 Fri

Couple of points -

Could the Buffy - Master sequence at the beginning have echoed Billy's own experience at the hands of an older, more powerful figure? Substitute the characters and see if it doesn't creep you out just a bit.

What were they thinking, Sara wants to know, putting Giles in the paisley scarf - with fringe????

[> [> It's just Giles' Dr. Who period -- Vickie, 16:33:46 08/15/03 Fri


[> Re: "Nightmares" Revisited -- Cactus Watcher, 06:41:19 08/16/03 Sat

I agree. Several Buffy episodes in season one had little going for them other than snappy dialogue. "Nightmares" largely changed that. From then on in the series there were more arc stories and fewer stand alones, as if there was a sudden realization at ME they could move the show to a higher level.

I think you're right about Giles and reading. I think more of this could have been explored. Giles' personal feelings except for concern over Buffy were pushed aside as the emphasis in season 2 and 3 focused so much on Buffy and romantic relationships. It changed back in season 4 and we had Something Blue in which something happens and Gile's can't read again. Giles dream in Restless concentrated on his usefulness, but by that time, Willow's research skills were fairly good and Xander was contributing heavily in his own way. Giles was still the best deductive reasoner in the group, but obviously many times reasoning wasn't much help. Ominously, he'd start drinking more...

SEE JANE DATE -- neaux, 10:15:15 08/15/03 Fri

I apologize if this had been mentioned before.. but I was in the breakroom at work and saw this commercial and my jaw dropped.

SEE jane Date

I might actually watch a little of this just to see if Charisma still has a little Cordy in her!

[> It was actually pretty good -- s'kat, 19:43:51 08/16/03 Sat

Oddly enough. For once the lead wasn't a stick figure with no bust to speak of and tiny. She was tall, full figured,
with hips, and long legs. She looked like me and most people I know, real. Go CC!!! You look wonderful!!

Also the story did not end up with the girl getting the first goregous guy she meets. It showed the pit-falls of dating and left us with the message that you don't have to have a significant other to feel fulfilled.

Very surprising. Also CC? She was quite good. Held her
own. I give it three stars out of five.

Worth a watch!

sk

[> Apologize..for SEE JANE DATE -- neaux, 10:17:50 08/15/03 Fri

ok.. I apologize for posting this.. after realizing Evan Marriot is in this movie. @_@

Gomen.

[> [> Re: Apologize..for SEE JANE DATE -- Rendyl, 11:19:50 08/15/03 Fri

Not to be contrary but why are you apologizing for a performance you haven't seen? Many actors have less than stellar lives and still manage to do a decent job on screen. (Tom Cruise comes to mind -- he comes off as such a dork in interviews but he is a decent actor) Evan might be really really bad or he might surprise us all. But until we see how he does there is no need to apologize.

BTW - Charisma was on Jimmy Kimble's show last night. (I caught her on while I was waiting for the Fab Five to show up on Leno) She seemed a little uncomfortable. (But Jimmy annoys me so I could be projecting-grin) She didn't talk about 'Angel'. I missed the end of her interview so she might have loosened up by then.

Ren

[> [> [> Jimmy Kimmel makes everybody nervous. -- ZachsMind, 11:52:02 08/15/03 Fri

I don't know who he conned to get that gig, but I don't like watching him interview anybody. Didn't catch C.C. last night cuz of Kimmel. Won't tune in to his show anymore.

[> [> [> [> Re: Jimmy Kimmel makes everybody nervous. -- Dead Soul, 23:57:08 08/16/03 Sat

I've watched his show a grand total of twice. Once to see AH and the second time to see CC. Never again.

I was writing an email to a friend while I was watching and this is what I said:

She looks very good. sheer white off the shoulder peasant top and jeans. her hair's just above shoulder length and dark again (thank god). Icky beige pumps, though. You just should NOT wear pumps and jeans together. She has a tattoo around her left wrist, abalone earrings, shell bracelet.

She was named after an Avon perfume. They have some - it comes in a snail-shaped bottle. She went to catholic schools and she graduated in 1988.

Showing a clip - eh, the Joe Millionaire guy. And that's all. She hardly said a word and she was mic-ed really low, I could hardly hear her, but everyone else was good and loud. She's still on the couch. I'll tell you if she says anything more.

Then I wrote some other stuff while commercials ran and the other guests were on.

Then some more about the show:

Super Dave Osborne is sitting way too close to her on the couch and she leaning away from him, looking very uncomfortable.

And now the show's over. I think she said a total of ten words, nine of them muffled or talked over by the so-called host. At least Lorne lets her get a word in edgeways.

[> [> [> [> Amy Acker was on Tom Green last night... -- Rob, 12:06:37 08/15/03 Fri

...but it was a complete disappointment. She got on stage with only 3 minutes left to air, and was forced to sit there and watch Tom put green Gatorade and York Peppermint Patties in a blender (because he knew from an interview, that she likes both of those things, but not, of course, together), and then coerce her into drinking it. He asked her one question, about her days as a ballerina, and then said that he wanted to see her do some ballerina moves...But we didn't get to see them. The camera moved to a bunch of dumb guys dancing and drinking the GatoPatties concoction. What a complete waste.

Rob, now suddenly remembering why I never watch Tom Green

[> [> I understand he's only got a cameo -- HonorH, 10:23:53 08/16/03 Sat

--as a jerk, actually. So I wouldn't worry too much.

Spike and Darla -- Claudia, 10:29:28 08/15/03 Fri

Many fan fiction stories have hinted of Spike and Darla's dislike of each other. And yet, I cannot think of a BtVS or AtS episode that ever really reflected their feelings toward one another. Can you?

[> Re: Spike and Darla -- HonorH, 11:15:58 08/15/03 Fri

Well, in both FFL and "Darla," she didn't seem overly fond of him. In FFL, she blamed him for them barely getting out of London alive. Then, in "Darla," there was first the eye-rolling incident when he ate the gypsies she was holding hostage, and later she said to the newly-souled Angel, "While Spike--Spike!--was out killing a Slayer, you were hiding missionaries." The repetition of his name carries the connotation, "Spike! Can you believe it?" While those two incidents don't add up to seething hatred necessarily, I think you can infer that she, at least, wasn't exactly on the Spike love train.

[> [> One more example -- Gyrus, 11:38:45 08/15/03 Fri

Also in FFL: Darla, after advising Drusilla to choose carefully when selecting a man to turn into a vampire, says, "Or you can just go for the first idiot who comes along" after Dru chooses William.

I certainly can't picture Spike and Darla getting along well. They're opposites in a lot of ways. Darla always plans, while Spike is impulsive; Darla places her own needs above those of her lovers, while Spike puts the ones he loves first; and Darla usually chooses manipulation over violence, while Spike defaults to his fists whenever possible.

Not to mention that Spike is Darla's great-grand-offspring, so he's a walking, talking reminder of how old she is.

[> [> [> they seemed to part ways -- Ray, 01:35:03 08/16/03 Sat

Darla sent Dru to Sunnydale to get Spike back into the family. So, I don't know if that means she wanted him back, she wanted the family back (even if she didn't like him), or she needed someone strong after Angel set them on fire.

[> [> [> [> Where do you get that idea from -- Diana, 12:11:59 08/16/03 Sat

Drusilla tells Spike "I want us to be a family again, my William." Never got the impression that Darla sent her. If that was the plan, why didn't Dru come back to LA?

Dru found Darla in the sewers and let Lindsey know (per "Reprise"). There was no grand plan to get Angel after that. Darla is convinced that Dru has abandoned her and she is right.

Darla has little hope of getting Angelus back at that point. "Who is he?" she asks. Angel and Angelus are gone as far as she's concerned. Now Darla is after power and then vengeance against Angel.

[> [> [> [> [> Agree with this. -- HonorH, 12:35:52 08/16/03 Sat

There's no evidence that Darla sent Dru to get Spike. It could just as easily have been Dru's own idea--and, per the evidence Diana gives, likely was.

My Favorite Scooby Mindsets... -- ZachsMind, 19:12:33 08/15/03 Fri

Buffy after Restless and before No Place Like Home when she was the most self-confident ever. After she'd taken down Adam and before Glory knocked her down a few pegs. She and Angel had come to a painful but acceptable understanding, and Spike had not yet registered in her libido. She was Business As Usual Buffy, where nothing short of a banished hell goddess with exquisite fashion sense could get our favorite Chosen One down.

Xander right after The Zeppo when he realized that being the ordinary one could still be pretty extraordinary.

Willow immediately after Spike unsuccessfully bit her in the season four episode The Initiative, just before she knocked him unconscious.

Giles when he appeared at the Magic Box all stoked up by the Coven to take on Dark Willow in Two To Go but before Dark Willow actually kicked his ass in Grave.

Jenny before we found out she was a descendant of the gypsies that cursed Angel, but after we figured out she and Giles were destined to techno each other's pagans.

Oz in New Moon Rising after he came back from Tibet, but before he smelled Willow all over Tara.

Faith in Bad Girls after she taught Buffy how to steal from normal humans but before she demonstrated how to kill normal humans. She was the Want Take Have Slayer, at the height of her game, living on the edge.

Tara in Once More With Feeling when she was walking with Willow through the park and singing to her. Cuz that was sweet. Even though Willow'd screwed the pooch by putting her under a spell, it made for a great song.

Joyce at the end of School Hard when she was so impressed by her daughter's selflessness and confidence that she promised at least a week of going easy on Buffy.

Spike chipped and tied up getting shot by Native American spirits in Pangs. "Hey! Watch the heart!"

Wood when he lured Spike into his lame trap, but before he failed in taking Spike down in season seven's Lies My Parents Told Me.

Anya when she caused Xander to squeeze his juicebox.

Amy immediately after Willow cured her from being a rat in Something Blue, but before she turned her back into a rat. The look on her face was priceless (and Elizabeth Allen nekkid was priceless too).

Jonathan in Superstar. 'Nuff said.

Angel in the first season of Angel the Series, when he was a mad dancin' fool.

Cordelia after Dennis' mom called her a bitch.

Doyle after he decided to sacrifice himself to save his kind, and before he actually did.

Wesley, pretty much any time after he got some balls.

Gunn when he still had a cadre of teens and his sister hadn't been turned.

Fred after she realized Jasmine had turned her whole known world against her, but before she kissed Angel (yuck! vampire cooties!) cuz she was resourceful and quick thinking, but also scared and on edge.

Lorne when... Hell! I'd take Lorne pretty much whenever! When is he NOT fantastic?

Connor.. when he was still a baby.

[> Fabulous! -- Nino, 22:47:28 08/15/03 Fri


[> Re: My Favorite Scooby Mindsets... -- Pathfinder, 06:52:45 08/16/03 Sat

Buffy
--At the end of 'Checkpoint', laying down the law to the Watcher's Council. I almost expected her to broach the issue of a living wage for Slayers while she had the Council on the ropes.

Yep, Xander in 'The Zeppo.' ("I like the quiet.")

Willow
--In season four, from revelling in the joy of "spurty knowledge" in The Freshman to taking a well-aimed verbal swing at Parker in, yes, the much-mocked Beer Bad ("I got your number, Id Boy!"). And Protective Willow giving Riley fair warning in The Initiative. ("Hurt her and I'll beat you to death with a shovel. A vague disclaimer is nobody's friend.") Also, would have to include everything from New Moon Rising (the 'Istabul' scene still makes my allergies act up. Sniff-sniff...) right through to Family. And really liked her Willow-esque stoicism before the essence of the scythe spell in Chosen ("You might have to keep me stabbeded") as well as her giddy reaction to the spell itself ("That was nifty" indeed.) Perhaps I've mentioned that Willow was my favorite character?

Giles
--Letting his inner Ripper out as he 'encouraged' Principal Snyder to let Buffy back in school in Dead Man's Party. ("Would you like me to convince you?")

Oz
--When he flaked out on his Senior year and summer school so he could stay with Willow (Don't try this at home, kids.) Also, when he defined "stoic panic" in Graduation Day. And, of course, at the end of Graduation Day II..."Take a moment to deal with this."

Joyce
--When she threw Buffy's impending re-enrollment in Snyder's face in Faith, Hope & Trick. ("I think what my daughter's trying to say is nyah-na-nyah-nyah-nyah..." ) Elevated her to Lorelei Gilmore Cool Moms of TV status in my eyes.

/Lorne when... Hell! I'd take Lorne pretty much whenever! When is he NOT fantastic? /

Gotta agree with you there. Here's hoping the next season of Angel brings more Lorne, as well as more Wesley and Lilah (I think they actually had even more chemistry after Lilah was killed.)

Connor
--When 'The Destroyer' finally got to just be Normal Boy, happily bantering with his joe normal family at the end of the season finale. Broke my heart right along with Angel's.

[> [> Re: My Favorite Scooby Mindsets... -- dmw, 20:10:51 08/16/03 Sat

You listed almost all my favorite Willow mindsets, except for my very favorite: the Willow of Choices, from her bravery in facing down Faith, her daring in getting papers from the Books of Ascension to the Mayor, and her choice to stay in Sunnydale.

Actually, my favorite Oz is in that episode too--when he shatters the pot for the Box destroying ritual.

[> [> [> Re: My Favorite Scooby Mindsets... -- Pathfinder, 11:58:11 08/17/03 Sun

You're quite right, that was certainly another of Willow's finest moments. Especially liked her having a bit of fun with Giles about the 'way overwritten' books of ascension before handing over some of the 'Best of' pages from said books. That was definitely her day for suave. One of them, anyway.

Just to throw in a couple more Favorite Scoob Mindsets...

Tara:
--After leaving Willow in season six, as she continued to come into her own. Especially liked her in "OAFA" when she put Spike in his place ("a cramp in your pants?") and stood up to Anya ("You're gonna back off").

--And when the almost preternaturally evolved Tara went back to Willow at the end of Entropy. She seemed fully aware that she was skipping a few important steps in the process, but just missed Willow too much to be patient. It was a very human, and endearing moment.

Anya:

-Her big 'fruit punch' speech from The Body. Summed up the shock of death nicely. Also summed up why I loved that character.

Dawn:
-In "Potential", when she realizes she's not a Potential and gives up the spotlight to Amanda without missing a beat.

Xander's speech to Dawn at the end also would qualify as another of my absolute favorite Xander mindset moments, along with "The Zeppo" and his 'crayon speech' to a broken Willow at the end of season 6.

[> Re: My Favorite Scooby Mindsets... -- seven, 11:34:57 08/16/03 Sat

This seems fun but i doubt i'll do all the characters

buffy
Talking to Faith in beauty and the beasts, "Wait, how down low?"

Willow

When she puts Faith in her place in Choices - "It's way too late."

Oz

the Zeppo - Xander says "why are you so cool? is it your short-spoken, non-commital phrases? Oz - "could be."

Wait, i'm really doing my favorite character line's aren't I? oh well.

Giles, Definatly agree with above post. "I'd like to test that theory." the coolest line in the shows 7 years.

Can't think of any more off the top of the noggin, maybe later.

[> Re: My Favorite Scooby Mindsets... (curious about two character omissions) -- Fenugreek, 16:30:36 08/16/03 Sat

I really enjoyed reading this post. However, I noticed you did not include Riley or Dawn. Was it an unintentional omission or have you never liked either of their mindsets? Just curious.

[> [> Well, yes and no... -- ZachsMind, 20:39:10 08/17/03 Sun

After posting that post, I realized I'd neglected Riley. I was going to add a response to my own post listing my favorite mindset moment regarding him, but I got sidetracked. I come in here largely to pass the time in between other things in my life, but offline stuff takes precedence. I forgot to come back in this thread when I was done.

My favorite Riley mindset? When he stabbed Spike in the heart with a plastic stake. For me that was Riley in a nutshell right there. Loved that. Running a close second, when he and Angel fought in a back alley. Not that either of them really won, but just that Riley stood his ground that was really cool. Though both men were being stupid and childish and a bit too much with the testosterone. A sad but very real moment was when he confided in Xander that he knew Buffy didn't love him. Ouch. But it's honest and though harsh, the truth will set you free. I strongly believe people don't give Riley enough credit. Not that I thought he belonged with Buffy or whatever. I just think he was a better character than most fans give him credit.

Regarding Dawn, I have no idea. Your mentioning her is the first I've noticed that I didn't include her in my list. Dawn is my favorite Whedonessque character, so I am more flumoxed than you that I didn't include her. I thought of all the major Angel characters. Jonathan and Amy are higher on my list of favorites than most anyone in Angel. Yet my most favorite character? I did a brain fart. I got absolutely no answer there.

Favorite Dawn mindsets:

Real Me when she was talking (voiceover) about how Xander looked at her as if she were a woman, not realizing that she had syrupy stuff all over her face. That was precious.

Blood Ties when Dawn starts her kleptomania by breaking into the Magic Box with Spike in tow.

Crush when she was hangin' out in Spike's crib listening to his storytelling.

Forever when Dawn does the stupid but brave thing and gets the egg. Throughout season five, Dawn & Spike made a great team. Would like to have seen more of that.

Flooded when Dawn decides she's old enough for research, and then immediately rethinks that.

All The Way when Dawn took out a vamp with a chopstick.

Once More With Feeling when Dawn got to dance.

Wrecked when Dawn slapped Willow.

Seeing Red when Dawn was happy to see Tara and Willow back together.

Grave when Dawn proved she's a chip off the old block.

Lessons has a lot of great mindset moments for her - Dawnie OWNED that episode.

Beneath You when Dawn put Spike in his place.

Same Time Same Place when Dawn made with the researching. It's smellementary.

Conversations With Dead People is about one third Dawnie kicking ass, be it nuking marshmallows or freaking over The First's mind games.

Potential when Dawnie realized she wasn't, Amanda was, and Dawn so did the right thing. Also when she and Xander had that moment there.

Get It Done when Dawn suddenly knew Sumerian.

Empty Places when Dawn finally stood up to her sister in a big way.

End of Days when Dawn stun gunnned Xander.

[> [> [> Thanks for the response... I fully agree with much of it -- Fenugreek, 22:26:44 08/17/03 Sun

"I strongly believe people don't give Riley enough credit. Not that I thought he belonged with Buffy or whatever. I just think he was a better character than most fans give him credit. "

Me too. My favorite Riley moment, the one that I felt epitomized the character's early mindset, occurred in Hush. It was during the battle in the clocktower just as he smashed one of the glass jars that contained a heart. He thought he had followed Buffy's instructions (frantic gestures actually) to a tee and saved everyone. He had such a look of self-satisfaction on his face. But, as you know, the good-hearted well-meaning goof was mistaken and all he had done was make a mess. He did what he thought was the right thing but that didn't turn out to be the case. Fortunately, in that instance at least, he redeemed himself moments later.


"Potential when Dawnie realized she wasn't, Amanda was, and Dawn so did the right thing. Also when she and Xander had that moment there."

Oh yes! That's it exactly. Dare I say that was a big step up the maturity ladder for Dawn. She is one character (among several) that I really would be curious to see five years or so down the road.

At any rate, thank you for your thoughtful and detailed response.

CC finally speaks! -- Nino, 23:00:56 08/15/03 Fri

Here is a short article on CC in which she addresses her departure...

http://theedge.bostonherald.com/tvNews/edgeTV.bg?articleid=14&format


I know I'm not the only Cordy-Lover out there, and its nice to hear her be so positive and finally say SOMETHING about what happened...even if it isn't too much.

[> My theory of CC's departure -- Ace_of_Sevens, 20:27:49 08/16/03 Sat

Beyond the rumor that they had to cut someone from budgetary reasons, I suspect Cordelia was removed because she just wouldn't work with the current storyline. She was the most sensible of the group and would never have agreed to working with Wolfram and Hart.

Angel and Fred and kind of naive. (Fred more than Angel, obviously.)

Gunn knows better, but is pissed off at the status quo and not really thinking things through.

Welsey has touched the darkness before and sort of come back and done good out of it and thinks he can push it a little bit more. He'll probably have the most reservations, though.

God knows what Lorne is thinking. He didn't really discuss his reasoning. I think he just doesn't appreciate what they've gotten in to.

Cordelia, however, would have been very much against this and likely been able to talk some of the others out of it, so they had to keep her out of the picture for the time being.

Here's hoping they bring her back later and if they don't have the money to keep her on Angel, put her on the new spin-off. Amybe somethign where she, Andrew and Faith are roomates with hilarious results.

[> Forget bringing back Conner! Let's change the home page to lobby for Cordy's return! -- Kizzmet, 08:38:20 08/17/03 Sun


[> [> I second that motion... -- ZachsMind, 06:31:32 08/18/03 Mon

At the risk of mildly annoying Masq, I think it's far more important to see Cordy returned to the show on some recurring basis than it is to see Connor return. In fact, if they could just leave Connor where he is, I think that's the best sense of closure one could warrant for the character. Angel did all he could under the circumstances to be a good father, but now his involvement with W&H has meaning, because so long as Angel keeps that firm happy, Connor is assured a place living a relatively normal existence. Anger the "Partners" and Connor's life may take a serious turn.

Similar things are possible with Cordelia. In essence, W&H has them both hostage and it's Angel's actions through season five which insure or endanger their safety. The difference here between Connor and Cordy is that we saw closure with Connor in the final scene. Provided Angel behaves himself and is a good lad, Connor is guaranteed a life free from the knowledge of his origins and childhood. He has an illusion of normality kind of similar to that of Dawn's, relatively speaking. It's an illusion of happiness, but whose to say a happy lie is worse than a sad reality?

However, the reality of Cordy is that she's a vegetable. Personally I believe that's because the lights may be on but no one's home, and *our* Cordy is still locked up in that gilded cage Skip left her in. It can be discovered that the only one with the 'keys' to Cordy was Skip, and when Angel killed Skip he killed any chance to get the real Cordy back in her physical body. Who was in that body for much of season four? From Las Vegas on, I surmise it was Jasmine.

They CAN write out any chance of Charisma Carpenter returning, saying that her physical body was destroyed by W&H in attempts to get at Doyle's heartlight. That'd be mean though. Perhaps Carpenter has somehow developed bad blood among the writers. If she hasn't, I see no reason why they can't come to some kind of arrangement.

Connor hasn't been with the series since the beginning. Cordy has. It's more imperative that some sense of closure be offered for the character of Cordelia. Connor's already had a sense of closure. Reintroducing him now would start a whole new thing and I for one have seen enough of Connor.

[> [> [> Third... -- Nino, 09:08:37 08/18/03 Mon


[> [> Please, NO!!! -- Q, 10:13:31 08/18/03 Mon

I would vote AGAINST that! Cordelia quickly became the most obnoxious, cheesy, badly written, character in Jossverse HISTORY in the last few seasons. Hearing that she wouldn't be back is all that has kept me excited about a new season. Don't (re) soil the show with requests for the return of THE WORST aspect of Ats for the last 2 seasons! Please!

[> [> [> Oh piffle. -- ZachsMind, 13:50:21 08/18/03 Mon

I'm recommending not only a return of Cordelia, but a return of the Cordelia we knew prior to the whole Evil Cordy storyline. Perhaps prior to her receipt of Doyle's little gift. Say W&H are able to somehow extract it from Cordy, Cordy wakes back up and the last thing she remembers is Doyle kissing her. The last three years a total blank. She coulda been a rat in a cage for all she knows - total blank. Then the writers could try evolving her again, but getting it right by this time. Cordy shouldn't be half demon any more than Xander should be a Slayer. Cordy's a Zeppo. Always has been. The writers screwed her up, and it's the fans and the talent that suffers.

[> [> [> [> I think I love you... -- Nino, 18:20:57 08/18/03 Mon


[> [> [> [> Double piffle. -- KdS, 06:15:14 08/19/03 Tue

Sorry, but for me Cordy was a caricature who didn't get interesting until she started developing morals post-To Shanshu.

I must admit, my favourite period was the S2-Birthday one, because of her ability to switch between waspishness and compassion when either were needed, but the hatred for her in the latter half of S3 boils down to two things which were the fault of execution rather than concept. Firstly, she was very badly written in her reintroduction, Double or Nothing (my personal W.E.E.), and secondly there was the deus ex machina introduction of her powers to solve plot problems.

And recent Whedon interviews state unambiguously that the portrayal of Cordy from City Of... to Birthday was his attempt to do what he didn't manage to in the original BtVS movie - to show how somebody can be driven by circumstance from shallow self-centeredness to heroism. Pity that they couldn't decide to do anything with her after that arc was complete except turn her evil...

[> [> [> [> [> Piffle cubed? -- matching mole, 12:26:02 08/19/03 Tue

IMHO the BtVS Cordelia was a brilliant if somewhat limited creation. However it was clear by the end of the third season that she had no further role on the series other than to lapse back into the Scooby's social nemesis.

However her move to AtS allowed ME to do something different with her and boy did they ever. I consider the evolution of the character from the series beginning to 'Birthday' to among the most subtle and effective on either series.

However what happened to her after 'Birthday' was perhaps the worst character arc in ME history.

So we have the best and the worst. As much as I love Queen C I can't see a very compelling case for bringing her back. The ship has sailed.

[> [> [> [> [> [> It's easy to get old Cordy back. Spike just calls her a b!tch. -- ZachsMind, 16:56:19 08/19/03 Tue


[> Good article. Semi-reassuring -- Masq, 09:06:03 08/17/03 Sun

I hope CC does get a chance to do closure on Cordy at some point.

[> Thanks -- Ray, 01:29:33 08/16/03 Sat

I thought she had chosen to leave, but it sounds like they just fired her. Too bad, she'll be missed.

[> Must... resist... spoilers... -- Tyreseus, 19:47:08 08/18/03 Mon

I'm not saying that CC's departure or some of the other well-publicized cast changes are exactly spoilers anymore, but this kind of article almost sends me running to the spoiler board to find out more.

But on the "Cordelia closure" subject, I wonder if our favorite (now out of work) Zeppo could make a guest appearance for this purpose? I feel that we need a bit more post-Anya closure from Xander and maybe the way to do that is a final meeting between Cordelia and Xander. Have the two even spoken to each other since high school? They left on good enough terms, maybe they've both grown to the point where they can find happiness (although not true love) together. Any other X/C shippers out there think it'll work?

[> [> Oh, and... -- Tyreseus, 19:48:57 08/18/03 Mon

Cordelia's half demon now, right? That makes her perfect for Xander.

[> [> [> I don't know... -- Masq, 19:58:47 08/18/03 Mon

If I were Cordelia, I'd want to get away from anything and everything supernatural, and anything that reminded me of it. Like it betrayed me or something.

And that includes Xander, who may be a Zeppo, but was part of her supernatural high school experience and remains a member of the Slayers' (plural!) team.

New dinosaur discovered in India -- Sophist, 07:40:54 08/16/03 Sat

For your educational fun and secret amusement, I report the discovery of a new dinosaur species in India this past week. Named Rajasaurus narmadensis, or "regal dinosaur of the Narmada", it is described as horned and carnivorous. Figures. :)

[> Link -- Darby, 09:18:37 08/16/03 Sat

National Geographic - 5 pictures.

[> Reading the name, I assume it's a fire-breather too -- Random, 10:12:10 08/16/03 Sat


[> Oh, you hush, you men, you! -- dub ;o), 11:16:23 08/16/03 Sat


[> What's the Narmada? -- Finn Mac Cool, 13:33:54 08/16/03 Sat


[> [> Heh. Good question. -- Sophist, 14:10:05 08/16/03 Sat

A quick Google gives this information:

The Narmada is one of the great rivers of our country. It flows through Gujarat and Central India. ...

This river starts in the centre of India and flows west. This river is also called Reva. The word Reva means noisy. ...

Narmada was originally a goddess. She was born from the body of God Siva. She prayed to Siva. Siva blessed her and said, "May you become a holy river, and may your waters always be full! Goddess Narmada was slim and beautiful. Gods and demons wanted to marry her, But she ran this way and that and dodged them. They chased her wherever she went.

When they were very near, she would disappear. That is why she was called Narmada. The word means one who is playful.

There may be other meanings as well.

[> [> [> This is the coolest! -- Rahael, 08:17:17 08/17/03 Sun

Oh, and one of the other versions of the myth is that the goddess Narmada emerged from the beauty of Siva meditating.

The other Gods, on seeing her, chased her - she in her panic jumped over a cliff, and the Gods, feeling sorry for what they had done, turned her into a river so that she wouldn't die when she hit the ground.

But I like 'playful' too. That's one of my favourite words to describe works of art I particularly like!

[> [> [> After that, the goddess ran off with a 17th-century French swordsman -- Masq, 14:16:46 08/16/03 Sat


[> [> [> [> Heehee! -- Dead Soul, 23:48:32 08/16/03 Sat


[> [> [> [> LOL! -- Arethusa, 14:46:24 08/16/03 Sat


[> [> [> [> Oh, that's good!! LOL!!! -- LittleBit, 15:52:46 08/16/03 Sat


Angel's Curse -- manwitch, 07:47:11 08/16/03 Sat

The Who is Angel thread below is interesting me. But I find I am confused about some basic things, namely the curse itself and how it works or exists or whatever.

Here's how I understand it. (But I haven't seen every episode of Angel, so maybe I'm wrong).

1. Angelus was cursed by gypsies. Angel was not, Liam was not, the soul itself was not. Angelus was.

2. That curse involved the restoration of "his" soul. The idea is that the creature walking around is still Angelus but now has a conscience and cares about all the acts that he, Angelus, has perpetrated. Hence the creation of a new, but clearly related moniker, Angel. So that's all well and good so far. But here, mass wacky confusion ensues. By "restoration" do they mean the original soul that was lost when Liam became a vampire? Is it Liam's soul that inhabits Angelus? Or is there simply a soul repository, like the jacket rack at a nice restuarant, and restoring simply means putting one on that fits? Will any soul do? Or are they distinct?

3. And the curse also involved the losing of that soul if ever for one second Angelus ceased to be haunted by the deeds of his past. At a symbolic level this is a no-brainer, since if Angelus is not haunted by his conscience then he doesn't have it. So he's just Angelus again. In terms of the gypsy motivation its a little more like bad city planning. Because it can only hurt other innocent third parties, like Buffy and Giles. Unless Angelus knows that he can't ever sidestep his conscience for even a second. In which case, he must seek to be remorseful at all times and must recognize that he is not worthy to be happy, that it is not right that he be happy. Is there any conclusive evidence that Angel (Angelus haunted) knew this? Did Angel (Angelus cursed with a soul) know what would happen with Buffy? I grant that she's worth losing your soul for, but its not clear to me that Angel (Angelus with a conscience) knew that was happening.

4. Angelus is relieved of his soul by his happiness with Buffy. He is now simply what he is again.

5. Willow "recurses" Angelus. Again it is Angelus that is cursed, not Angel, not Liam, not the soul. But is it the same curse? The magic used to restore his soul originally is lost. Jenny Calendar says that the kind of magic used to restore his soul is lost even to her people. But she attempts to create something. It seems to use translation technology of some kind, suggesting that she has some kind of text that exists in a lost language. But that is total speculation on my part. Willow and Buffy find whatever it was. Willow clearly has to finish working it out. So what they end up with is not the same as what the gypsy woman originally did. Probability is way against it. Plus, I believe that in listening to them, they are in fact different. And here more confusion ensues. Does Willow include the "happiness clause" when she curses Angel?

6. Angel is unsouled by means of magic, not by a moment of happiness.

7. His soul is kept in a jar which is stolen, and there seems to be some concern that only that soul is the soul for Angelus and if it is lost there is no substitute.

8. Willow arrives and resouls Angel again. Again, does she include the happiness part. Or is she just putting a soul back in?

I do not know the answers to these questions. While I think there might be consensus on these eight items, there is still clearly a lot of ambiguity circling around them. For example, to me, Angel, the Angel that we know and, er, watch occassionally, doesn't come into existence until Whistler. The curse isn't what produces the incarnation we think of as Angel. That is the result of a FREE choice (I work in marketing, "FREE" must always be all caps, bold red if possible, and big, can you make it bigger? In fact, can you make everything on the page bigger? It all needs to pop! Why don't we just make the page size smaller?). I'm sorry. The Angel we are familiar with is the result of a free choice, under pressure from Whistler and inspired by Buffy. But the Gypsy's don't force Angel to do good. They force him to feel bad. Totally different things. But that's just my interpretation of the curse. I don't see them as cursing him with a desire to do good or make amends. They just want him to feel like crap. So a question to consider might be whether or not seeking to atone is in fact flying in the face of the gypsy curse by seeking to be worthy of happiness? They set up an extra clause precisely to discourage this sort of do-gooding behavior. Or perhaps, as long as it is atonement there is lingering conscience, and it is therefore acceptable. Whereas if he simply aspires to do good in the world, then he is flying in the face of the curse, doing something for the sake of it rather than out of concern for past misdeeds?

Anyways, am I in the ballpark about the curse, and can any of you answer my lingering questions?

[> Maybe some Joss Whedon quotes will help? -- s'kat, 21:45:13 08/16/03 Sat

From most recent to least recent, regarding who Angel is and his whole curse thing from the mouth of the creator:

1."Angel was at full-tilt evil, that just got clothes lined by those Gypsies and spent 100 years going, 'Ah yah aha hah,' trying to figure it out -- what it was he had to do."
Joss at Comic-Con July 2003

2."Redemption has become one of the most important themes in my work and it really did start with Angel. I would say probably with the episode "Amends," but even with the character itself and the concept of the spin-off was about redemption. It was about addiction and how you get through that and come out the other side, how you redeem yourself from a terrible life. I do actually work with a number of reformed addicts, if thatís what you call them. I call them drunks. But my point is a good number of people that are most close to me creatively have lived that life, and it informs their work. I never have, and so Iím not sure why it is that redemption is so fascinating to me."
Joss regarding what Redemption means in NYTimes 10 Questions article May 2003

". I would love to give you a more in-depth coherent explanation of my view of the soul, and if I had one I would. The soul and my concept of it are as ephemeral as anybodyís, and possibly more so. And in terms of the show, it is something that exists to meet the needs of convenience; the truth is sometimes you can trap it in a jar; the truth is sometimes someone without one seems more interesting than someone with one. I donít think Clem has a soul, but heís certainly a sweet guy. Spike was definitely kind of a soulful character before he had a soul, but we made it clear that there was a level on which he could not operate. Although Spike could feel love, it was the possessive and selfish kind of love that most people feel. The concept of real altruism didnít exist for him. And although he did love Buffy and was moved by her emotionally, ultimately his desire to possess her led him to try and rape her because he couldnít make the connection -- the difference between their dominance games and actual rape.

With a soul comes a more adult understanding. That is again, a little vague, butÖ can I say that I believe in the soul? I donít know that I can. Itís a beautiful concept, as is resurrection and a lot of other things we have on the show that Iím not really sure I can explain and I certainly donít believe in. It does fall prey to convenience, but at the same time it has consistently marked the real difference between somebody with a complex moral structure and someone who may be affable and even likable, but ultimately eats kittens. "
What a soul means to Whedon in NYTimes Article 10 questions
May 2003 on Angel and Spike

"Shivers: What was your approach to Angel's vampirism and fitting it into the theme of the show?
Whedon: Well, he'd a good vampire. He's a good guy. He doesn't bit people anymore. The fact that he's a vampire informs the show enormously. Thematically, the show is all about that terrible isolation. Angel is trying to redeem himself. He is trying to reclaim his humanity, and he's trying to become a person. Even though, on some level he's not. And that deals with everybody's feeling that everyone else is normal and the same, it's just me that;s different. In terms of the show, it kind of makes him a little bit of this superhero. It's a liability because he's not getting a lot of day work, but at the same time he is stronger and faster and harder to kill then other people. So yes, it's very much a part of it."
From Shivers Magazine:Whedon, Writing and Arithmetic
by Joe Mauceri
Article appeared in the Shivers, May 2000

I think we're overanalyzing this. For what it's worth I think the curse is a plot device/contrivance that Whedon came up with in Season 1 Btvs in order to have a murky good vampire in a sea of evil vampires. Then the perfect metaphor - the good guy turns evil the moment she sleeps with him (which happens a lot when a teenager sleeps with a 20-something, not all the time but a lot, Whedon stole it
from one of his writer's experiences. Guessing Marti, she seemed to have all the bad-luck stories ;-) - this we find out from Whedon's DVD S2 Innocence commentary. Then in S3, he came upon the idea of redemption. Can I redeem someone who was "evil" or a bad man? So the vampirisim became a bit of a metaphor for alcoholism or addiction at this stage.
Of course, they had to deal with the logistics of the curse, which was tricky but doable until well the character of Spike showed up. Then it got much trickier.

What is interesting about the whole cursed soul contrivance is the creator of it, does not believe in souls per se.
So - with that in mind - we can throw out any religious interpretation. The creator, according to the IGN interview, did have quite a bit of psychology in undergrad, specifically Freud, so that leads me to believe the psychological interpretation is probably the most valid.
Which means - Zachsmind's multiple personality disorder is probably pretty close to the mark.

I think - Angel does have Liam's soul and Liam's personality. If you ever get the chance - try to catch the Joss Whedon written episode Spin-The-Bottle which shows Angel as a 17 year old Liam - he even gives his name as Liam not Angel, when he loses any memories past the age of 17. Evidence he is in fact Liam. Another informative episode
is the Prodigal Ats S1 and Dear Boy Ats S2, these episodes show that Angelus had Liam's personality. He was Liam, just without any conscience. When he gets cursed - he get's the conscience - and the pain that goes with it. Remember Angelus was the most vicious vamp alive - the worst thing for him to deal with is a soul, a conscience, something forcing him to feel the pain of all those people he killed.

Do all souls have this effect? More or less. When Spike gets his soul - it shatters his mind, he goes briefly insane. (OF course the FE helped). But he goes nutty long enough for the FE to plant a trigger. And he states to Buffy on more than one occassion - Beneath You, Sleeper, Help, NEver LEave Me - that he feels every person he killed.
They all haunt him. They all talk to him. Much in the same way that Angel's victims haunted and talked to him in Amends. We also see Darla in the episode Darla Ats S2 (catch that episode too if you get the chance) and Dear Boy Ats 2, and The Trial - where she feels all the pain she caused. It torments her. This theme is reprised in Ats S3 Lullaby where she tells Angel that she is haunted by what they did to Holtz. The idea is revisited with Willow in Killer in Me - where Willow is so haunted by what she did to Warren that she becomes Warren. So, clearly being haunted by your crimes is the effect of a soul not a curse, or we wouldn't have Darla, Willow, and Spike haunted by theirs. OR Faith for that matter, who is also haunted. They all deal with being haunted differently. If they didn't the show would be boring and very unrealistic. No one acts the same regarding guilt and remorse. Some people brood. Some get defensive. Some nervous. Some edgy. Some dissassociate it from themselves - pretending it was someone else who did it. Some vent. Some are stoic. Just because Angel broods and eats rats in a gutter b/c he's in pain - does not mean he feels it more than Darla did, or Willow, or Spike or Anya. They just all dealt with the pain differently.

I also think Angel was Angel in that gutter, he did suddenly become Angel when he got approached by Whistler. He really hasn't changed that much. He still needs a kick in the rear to get moving sometimes. He certainly needed Xander to kick him in Prophecy Girl. He needed Buffy to kick him in Graduation Day and Amends. And heck Doyle had to kick him a bit in City of... He tends to shut down and retreat when he gets overwhelmed by things - which is why we have assertive characters like Lorne, Cordelia, Doyle,
Buffy, Xander, etc appear to kick him or prod him out of it.
Unfortunately, he didn't have any one like that for 90 years. Darla had been that person before Whistler showed up.
(It's one of Angel's flaws/coping devices - his tendency to mope or withdraw from the world when he gets hurt or overwhelmed. Also known as brooding. ;-) )

In short, to borrow, I believe it was Valheru's formula (or Zachsmind, not sure which), Angelus=Liam+demon-soul
Angel=Liam+demon+soul. When Angel gets a happy, the soul gets subtracted and we get Liam +demon. When Angel gets cursed by Willow or the gyspies, we get Liam+demon+soul.
Simple. How Liam deals with the addition or subtraction of the soul had to do with Liam's core personality which is the totatlity of his emotional and behavioral characteristics. Dead or alive = Liam's personality informs whatever animates his body. It's the memories, the totality of his being, what escapes from that is his soul or moral center/compass, the part of him that is connected to life and humanity, that is replaced by a demon which is connected to death and chaos and demons.

From the Paley Festival: in March 30, 2001

Joss Whedon explains souls:

"Essentially, souls are by their nature amorphous but to me it's really about what star you are guided by. Most people, we hope, are guided by, 'you should be good, you're good, you feel good.' And most demons are guided simply by the opposite star. They believe in evil, they believe in causing it, they like it. They believe it in the way that people believe in good. So they can love someone, they can attach to someone, they can actually want to do things that will make that person happy in the way they know they would. The way Spike has sort of become, an example is Spike obviously on Buffy, is getting more and more completely conflicted. But basically his natural bent is towards doing the wrong thing. His court's creating chaos where as in most humans, most humans, is the opposite, and that's really how I see it. I believe it's kind of like a spectrum, but they are setting their course by opposite directions. But they're all sort of somewhere in the middle."

Hope that helps clarify it a bit.

It confuses me too. For more of my attempts at analyzing the whole soul metaphor thing - see www.geocities.com/shadowkatbtvs - the soul metaphors essay, also available in the ATPO archives with all the responses.

SK

[> [> Oops typos abound. Sorry. Hope it makes sense. ;-) -- sk, 21:48:54 08/16/03 Sat


[> [> Y'know, if they were tasty... -- ZachsMind, 16:07:22 08/17/03 Sun

"With a soul comes a more adult understanding. That is again, a little vague, butÖ can I say that I believe in the soul? I donít know that I can. Itís a beautiful concept, as is resurrection and a lot of other things we have on the show that Iím not really sure I can explain and I certainly donít believe in. It does fall prey to convenience, but at the same time it has consistently marked the real difference between somebody with a complex moral structure and someone who may be affable and even likable, but ultimately eats kittens." - Joss Whedon

Y'know, if I learned that kittens, or rather cats in general, tasted as good or better than chicken, I'd eat'm. I'd play poker with them as currency with other fans of catgut and I'd eat'm. Does that make me evil? Nope. It makes me a dog person. I don't think I'd eat puppies no matter how tasty they were, but far as I'm concerned kittens are fair game. The ultimate problem with morality and scruples and ethics is that there seems to be no way to quantify it objectively. Some believe murder in any form, even flyswatting, is wrong. Others believe the criteria for right & wrong is dependent on the situation. Self-defense, wartime versus peace time, whether or not you can get away with it, and so forth.

So to equate a soul with a human conscience is by necessity going to be vague, because we simply don't understand enough about the concepts which this juggles, to make a solid determination. I STILL believe Clem ate Kitty Fantastico when no one was looking, and more power to'm. One less cat on this planet makes the world a better place. I'll assume Clem ate K.F. until M.E. canonizes otherwise. Does anyone happen to know what kittens taste like? I don't want to be the first to try it, but I'd really like to know if there's a market for a kitty burger franchise. There's gotta be some good use for the little buggers.

[> [> [> Okay- Do you want to turn this into a cat vs. dog war?? ;-) -- s'kat (extending the claws), 22:04:31 08/17/03 Sun

Well, you know in some cultures - dog's are a delicacy.
(Actually more than cats - have more meat on them, cats tend to be scrawny, not very much meat and very diseased.
All that panting? Makes dogs cleaner apparently (according to someone I once knew who worked in animal control).
Hence the reason that dog's are known to be a possible food source and delicacy and not so much cats. And one less dog?
What's the problem? )

But back to the topic, tee hee!

So to equate a soul with a human conscience is by necessity going to be vague, because we simply don't understand enough about the concepts which this juggles, to make a solid determination.

I think that was Whedon's intent actually. I honestly don't believe ME ever intended the soul to be anything else but a grey area. At the Pailsey festival he calls it a compass, or
a spectrum.

But just in case we don't get it - ME puts it in the text of Long Day's Journey - where Manny is introduced, the human part of the Ra-TET, he tells Wes and the AI gange that he's neutral on the spectrum - neither good nor evil - that's what a human soul is - he states, neutral, it can go either way. If it was anything else? We wouldn't have free will.

So the beings that are pure good? No free will there, whatever they do - good. No choice. Same with anything that is pure evil. No free will there. They will do evil. They have no choice. But beings that fall within the spectrum?
They have choices on how much evil or how much good they do.

Soulless Spike and Angelus for instance - fell somewhere between Manny (neutral) and The Beast (evil). So they tended to do evil, but not all the time - they would never be neutral and evil would most likely be the end result.

In fact it probably looks a bit like this in Whedon's brain:

Pure Good .....Manny...Spike...Angelus/The Beast...Pure Evil

The ultimate problem with morality and scruples and ethics is that there seems to be no way to quantify it objectively. Some believe murder in any form, even flyswatting, is wrong. Others believe the criteria for right & wrong is dependent on the situation. Self-defense, wartime versus peace time, whether or not you can get away with it, and so forth.

Again, I think that may be ME's point. Otherwise why go to all the trouble to show us every single character in the story commiting horrible acts. Which act you consider the most horrid probably has more to do with your individual makeup than anything else. (OR which character you happen to identify with or favor the most). One persons orange is another's lemon or keeping with the analogy, one person's dog is another's cat. Same thing with acts of violence, I think. Truth is none of the characters in the Buffyverse or Whedonverse have pristine records, all without exception have tried at one point or another, either deliberately, by deliberate design, or as a result from some self-involved action violently attacked or hurt someone else, some even murdered (whether by their own hands or those of something else conjured or enabled by magic). Which ones crimes are worse...really is a matter of subjective taste.


sk

[> [> [> [> Manny's actually dead center on your spectrum... -- ZachsMind, 07:11:00 08/18/03 Mon

Manny's actually dead center on your spectrum...

Have we ever really seen anybody in Angel the Series who fits the other side of the spectrum? Would Fred fit to Manny's left? Lorne might perhaps, if he's totally sincere in being entirely un-evil as demons go. Gwen stands somewhere between Manny and Angelus, with Spike flitting about all over the place, depending on what time in history one places him. Season two Spike is equal with Angelus and just shy to the left of The Beast. Season seven Spike may be further to the left than Fred. It's hard to say.

While both Liam and Angelus were evil in their own ways (Angelus moreso than reckless & selfish Liam), Angel is purposefully "champion" material with this evil side pulling him the other direction, meaning ultimately he's a little of both. Ironic that, that Angel might be just as neutral as Manny, whom Angelus (we are led to believe) dispatched under Evil Cordy's influence. Angel's dead center. ...Or is he?

And with the destruction of the five totems, and the ritual by The Beast to blot out the sun, does this mean the Ra-tet is destroyed, or was it just changed? Nature abhors a vacuum. So too perhaps could the unnatural.

Is our fang gang the new Ra-tet?

1. (Sunrise) Ma'at - Fred
2. (Mid-morning) Ashet - Lorne
3. (Noon) Manjet - Wesley
4. (Afternoon) Samkhet - Angel
5. (Sunset) Mesektet - GUNN

Is THIS what the black panther said to Gunn at the end of season four? Is this why W&H has chosen to let Angel think he's won? When The Beast killed Mesektet, the firm was cut off from its superiors. If we learned our fivesome was the new Ra-Tet, it'd explain why W&H is now bowing to their every whim.

[> [> [> [> [> The Ra-Tet, Spoiler for WKCS for AtS Season 5. -- Arethusa, 08:30:45 08/18/03 Mon

I'm speculating on Fred as Ma'at, Spike as Ashet (light encased within male human shell), Angel as Manjet (a blend of good and evil), Gunn as Samhket (the tiger) and an unknown someone as Mesektet (the link with the Senior Partners). Perhaps the Senoir Partners need to recreate the Ra-Tet to obtain Ra the Sun God's power--if W&H try to make all of AI immortal, I'll suspect we're on the right track. ME hates to be predictble, however, so who knows what they'll do? Still, they did have the amulet harness the sun's energy....

[> [> [> [> [> [> Which means that .... -- seven, 09:14:02 08/18/03 Mon

If this scenario is true, W&H was trying to change Angel into whatever it is that Spike turns into.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> BINGO! -- ZachsMind, 10:01:23 08/18/03 Mon

I realized that when it happened. Here's what we know:

Lilah (as representative of Wolfram & Hart) gave Angel the talisman. Angel then went to Sunnydale and gave the talisman to Buffy, who then told Angel she'll take care of it and for him to leave Sunnydale and be ready to marshall a second front if Buffy failed. Buffy then gives the talisman to Spike, who becomes the conduit.

ANGEL: Buffy can handle herself.
LILAH: But isnít it more fun when you handle her?

Wolfram & Hart expected Angel to step in and be a man. They figured he couldn't resist wearing the amulet himself and doing whatever was required to protect and defend his little Buffy. W&H could not under any circumstances (I don't care how creative the writers get) have forseen that Angel was gonna give the amulet to Buffy, who would in turn give it to Spike. THAT was SO not in W&H's plans. Of course, they'll adapt, and perhaps like a cat that just walked into a patio door, W&H may pretend they meant to do that all along, but make no mistake; they wanted whatever happens to Spike to have happened to Angel. That's a given.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Hmmm...that poses a few interesting questions -- s'kat, 14:25:39 08/18/03 Mon

1. If W&H intended Angel to wear the amulet, does that mean that it was supposed to be worn by a vampire with a "cursed" soul?? Or did it matter?

2. Assuming they did intend it to be worn by "cursed" soul
vampire - what affect would the amulet have had on the curse? What affect would a cursed soul have on the amulet?
Was that what "scrubbing bubbles" was supposed to mean?
Was W&H giving Angel the chance to sacrifice himself for the world and get the Shanshue - ie. lift the curse - by scrubbing it clean?

3. Did W&H know Spike sought his soul? Did Spike register on their radar screen? (Assuming not, since they seemed to assume Angel would be the only one to wear the amulet.)
If they did know about Spike's existance - I doubt they
could have anticipated Angel/Buffy or Spike's actions in Chosen?

4. Why was it important to W&H for Angel to wear it? Why is Angel important to W&H and why don't W&H know about Spike? (assuming they don't). Is it just an ensouled vampire that is important -- or the cursed ensouled vampire that is?
If so, what is it about the curse that is so important?


5. What does the amulet do exactly? And how would it have affected Angel's essence which again is cursed as opposed to Spike's which is as far as we know un-cursed and free?

Will ME pursue any of this? Or are we overanalyzing/overestimating them again?? ;-)

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> A simple approach.. -- ZachsMind, 17:12:32 08/18/03 Mon

Perhaps it didn't matter really who wore it. If it was a vampire they were gonna get zapped by sunlight and their soul/demonic_equivalent would be connected to the amulet. At the mercy of W&H. If a nonvampire wore it, perhaps nothing would have happened, or the nonvampire woulda gotten a bit of a sunburn but not much else. I mean it's just sunlight.

OR maybe I'm completely wrong:

LILAH: That nifty little bauble comes with the file. Apparently itís crucial for some kind of ìfinal battle.î Guess theyíre in short supply up Sunnydale way. Bit gauche for my taste but heyó not a Slayer.

Maybe W&H thought the Slayer was gonna wear it - in which case maybe the amulet woulda turned the Slayer immaterial and connected her to the amulet. Maybe the amulet doesn't kill you - but it does make you immaterial and gives the impression that you're a ghost. It's all speculation until October. That's what makes this so fun!

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Maybe W&H weren't sure exactly what it did. -- Finn Mac Cool, 21:36:33 08/18/03 Mon

They knew that it would be crucial in the fight to save the world, but they may not have been clear on all of the specifics. It may have come as a surprise to them that the wearer of the amulet would die.

[> [> [> [> [> [> M.E. and predictability... -- ZachsMind, 10:21:40 08/18/03 Mon

Last year when "Proserpexa" was mentioned in the Dark Willow finale, I was expecting that to become the Big Bad for season seven, with Proserpexa being awakened by Dark Willow's actions, but still trapped inside that church. Somehow she'd take on the likeness of Tara MacLay and try to convince Willow into finishing what she started, so Proserpexa could finally be rid of existence altogether. Made perfect sense to me. However, obviously Prosperpexa was a throwaway. Just something to use for Dark Willow in that one last episode of season six. Utterly ignored afterwards.

The scene with Gunn near the end could very well have been him interfacing mystically with Samkhet and not Meseket as I had previously suspected. Samkhet is the tiger after all. Meseket was the black energy in the little girl. OR perhaps it's a combination of both, as the previous Samkhet was skinless, and we saw The Beast take the black energy out of the little girl. Perhaps now, Samkhet and Meseket are one in the same, and have chosen Gunn to be their champion. Right now all we got to go on is speculaton, and we may be toying with puzzle pieces that don't even fit in the upcoming picture.

The use of the sun god helped build suspense with The Beast in Angel Four. It gave The Beast something complicated that slowed it down, and gave the fang gang a chance to follow some clues and play catch up. It was useful for plot purposes in Angel Four, but may have no validity to the writers in Angel Five. You and I can see validity, but writers of the series may just see a boa constrictor. The longer you lay with continuity, it more restrictive your movement becomes, until you can't go anywhere at all without disrupting continuity.

Did we ever figure out "The answer is among you"? Was the Red Girl talking about Angel/us or was she referring to Gunn?

Especially since they're trying to steer away from continuity complications for this new season, as part of an effort to make each episode more self-contained and rerunable. In Angel Five they don't want viewers to feel like they have to have the past four seasons memorized in order to understand and appreciate Angel Five. We may indeed be on the right track, but its equally plausible the writers will steer the gang as far away from what was going on last year as possible. Preferring instead to focus only on what is introduced in a given episode, referring back to past episodes as rarely as possible. They may even fall just short of rewriting past continuity, if it serves the present plot. We're dealing with an entirely new beast in Angel Five, and it won't be until October before we find out if it's anything like the Angel we've come to expect.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Semket and Mesektet -- RadiusRS, 02:58:54 08/21/03 Thu

I knew I'd seen a picture of a large cat with Mesektet in one of the Angel episodes. After a little digging, I found what I was looking for in "Long Day's Journey into Night", when Gwen arrives to give the Gang a piece of the puzzle that allows them to figure out that the Beast is destroying the Ra-Tet. Apparently, Semket ("some cat", heehee! I love the Whedonverse writers) was Mesektet's favorite putty-tat, and was pictured as a large skinless sabretooth with black lines and designs inside, which looked like sinews, but also maybe stars or the cosmos, kind of like Eternity in Marvel Comics. Yet when Angel and Gwen arrive at its lair, they find a humanoid looking demon (with many features of a cat but decidedly not the look of the picture in Rhinehardt's Compendium) that has been ripped apart, with Angel saying it was "definitely their guy".

Now I may be reading too much into it and it will probably never be explained, but so far, the panther and Mesektet are the only beings we've met that originated in the White Room, and until I rewatched the episode, I always thought that the cat in the picture with Mesektet WAS the panther Gunn saw in the last episode. Either way, I find it interesting that there is this tenuous connection, and it certainly bolsters those who think that the Ra-Tet will be reformed with the Angel team as the new totems. Another side note is that perhaps there is greater reason behind the Beast's destruction of the Ra-Tet beyond severing the earthly connection to the Senior Partners (wouldn't other W&H have their own middle-um-evil-little-girls?) and blotting out the sun. In s3.17 "Forgiving", Mesektet says she was the one who made Sahjian's race immaterial because she "likes trouble but hates chaos". She also says she sees why "they" respect Angel, which I took to mean the Senior Partners, indicating that she herself was not allied with them in thgeir assessment of Angel, but appreciated their viewpoint. This made her pretty powerful in my estimation, and it's easy to see how killing her would avoid a lot of problems for Jasmine/Cordy/The Beastmaster.

But was the whole point of killing the Ra-Tet only to block out the sun? It never seemed to serve much of a purpose in Jasmine's plan beyond taking the population of L.A. to such a dark place that they would be more susceptible to the "hope" and "light" she was bringing. Was she upset when the Beast was lost because it was one less distraction for the Gang? Because the Beast would never have jibed with her whole love, demon-jihad persona, so at some point he was expendable. And why was it necessary to kill Lilah with the Beast's bone (teehee), when Cordy could have used any number of weapons? Seems like the Beast's bone was also his undoing. Was this planned? Or was Jasmine simply making the most strategic move? I have a feeling that, despite the new approach and opening it up for new viewers, some of these questions will be answered for us on the show this season. Also, W&H will be demystified, and we'll find out if it's really all it's cracked up to be (remember that, despite all their resources, all their battles with Angel usually end in a draw or with them losing).

[> [> [> [> [> Agree with Aresutha's Ra-Tet and Zachs summary -- s'kat, 08:49:56 08/18/03 Mon

I agree with Aresthusa speculation on Ra-Tet, but remain uncertain whether ME will literally go there. I'm not sure if they are just dropping the whole Ra-Tet and all the story threads from S4 or not. Can't tell. Am hoping they aren't, b/c I love the Ra-tet idea, but that's what worries me...the fact I love it, means they probably won't do it.
ugh.

I agree with Zachsmind's take on the spectrum. Yep, Manny is dead center - I think all human beings are born in the dead center and our actions/behavior/etc puts us in different places along the spectrum through our lives.

For example Connor was dead center. But Holtz' training of him pushed him more and more to the right of Manny.
But as Zachs states, it's a bit hard to place people objectively. Becomes a guessing game with ME.

Logically I think Angel is close to or Manny and I think to a degree Manny was meant to be a metaphor for Angel in Long Day's Journey - since Angel gets his curse lifted in the very next episode and flips to the right of MAnny. (EvilCordy btw killed Manny, not Angelus - we see this in Inside Out where Cordy is shown in flashbacks naked and chopping up Manny. I can understand why you forgot it, it made little sense to me when I watched it. EvilCordy storyline was deeply flawed in my humble opinion.) Spike as you state is all over the place - but I agree I think he starts just to the right of Angelus (Angelus is more evil than Spike, but only by about 5% if that, pure evil no humanity remember? The Beast is about even with Angelus - they were apparently competitors in the "who's more evil and has nastier tastes" sweepstakes - watching them go at it and figuring out whose worse is well sort of like Freddy vs. Jason.) then slowly drifts just to the right of Manny.
It makes my head hurt trying to place the characters.

Question is - where is ME going with this? IF anywhere? With the Ra-TEt? Or something else?

[> [> [> [> [> [> Ra-Tet, and chasing rabbits down the rabbit hole again. -- Arethusa, 10:24:20 08/18/03 Mon

Heh. I've read that ME/Whedon will change plot points if the audience starts speculating correctly on what will happen in the future. So we could be eliminating the cool Ra-Tet idea by discussing it!

And perhaps they won't explore the Ra-Tet because W&H will provide enough opportunity to explore Angel's issues. I see the entire series as Angel's attempt to reconnect with humanity after his disasterous decision to become a vampire/victimization by Darla (take your pick). Angel is very gradually becoming more human by living with humans and seeing himself as one. But he is constantly undermined by his desire/need to be greater than human.

There's some great stuff in the archives comparing Forever Knight and AtS. You made a very interesting observation about Angel, Nick Knight and Jeanette:

"This is the old Catch-22, you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. IF you take pride in your accomplishments, you're not humble. If you don't take pride in them than you are wretched. For instance - Angel who is proud of being the Champion - but the more proud he is of this role, the less important and more meaningless it seems. OTOH, he should be a champion and help others and feel proud for helping them not stop doing that. So the trick? To help others but not care about the title. The middle road so to speak. Always found this whole thing ironically amusing. In the show Forever Knight, there's a vampire who is continuously grasping for humanity, doing all these great works, but his ex-lover, a vampire club owner, quietly turns human just for living. What did he do wrong? He was proud about his grasping. She just humbly lived."

http://www.atpobtvs.com/existentialscoobies/archives/jun03_p11.html


On 1/4/03 HonorH said, " On "Forever Knight", it was once revealed that the symbol of Ra, the Egyptian sun god, had the same effect on vampires that crosses now have. I wonder if the same mightn't be true for Jossverse vamps." Which makes me want to write a fan fic where Egyptian priests try to improve on life-after-death beyond mummification by merging immortal demons with human bodies and create vampires, royally pissing off Osirus (who still hasn't gotten over it, as Willow learns). After all, the temple where Buffy meets the old woman is covered with Egyptian symbols, and she says they forged the Scythe there, despite the fact the Shadowmen who created slayers were African.
Just a little idle speculation.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Some good points. And I agree with your take on the series. -- s'kat, 14:42:34 08/18/03 Mon

see the entire series as Angel's attempt to reconnect with humanity after his disasterous decision to become a vampire/victimization by Darla (take your pick). Angel is very gradually becoming more human by living with humans and seeing himself as one. But he is constantly undermined by his desire/need to be greater than human.

I'd agree. See the series pretty much the same way. But with the addition of the whole addiction/redemption thing - man has evil past which demonized him - now trying to reconnect to what he once was, human. Also agree on ME. I have this nasty feeling that they read the Ra-Tet theory on the net and deep-sixed it.
Ugh. Yet another example of Fans breaking the fourth wall in the tv medium. This rarely happens in other mediums.

Also agree on the whole Egyptian/Forever Knight take.
I see a lot of interesting illusions to both in Angel, which makes me wonder if Whedon was a Forever Knight fan?
Probably just conicidence. The Egyptian thing? Definitely.
We see even more references to Egypt in Angel than we do in BTVS. What with the whole Shanshue Prophecy, The Ra-Tet,
The Dinzai thing in Grounded....No expert on Egyptology, so can't be much help. But Ramses2 on ASSB has done some stuff on it.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> What's so great about the Ra-Tet? -- Finn Mac Cool, 19:29:45 08/19/03 Tue

What little we saw of the Ra-Tet wasn't that good. A big, skinless cat? A horny, annoying guy? An only-slightly-creepy villainous boss (plus, the fact that he seemed to be contemplating killing Gwen doesn't fit with the fact that he was supposed to be further towards the good side of the spectrum than Manny)? The white room girl was the only one of them really worth watching, and she was conceived long before the Ra-Tet was. None of the original members really spark any desires to see something similar.

Then there's the fact that they were just a plot device to begin with (weren't mentioned until an explanation for the Beast's antics was needed, and were never mentioned after).

Plus, turning Angel and Co. into the new Ra-Tet would is just plain limiting. Why do we have this board, if not to read into the characters and events, try to determine the moral and philosophical implications? If the stars of Angel became the Ra-Tet, we'd have textual evidence ranking them on a scale of Good to Evil. Doing so robs us of the chance to interpret the series in our own way. No more wondering over whether a certain action was right or wrong, who is on the path to salvation or destruction, what is the moral status of this character. Instead we'd have ME very clearly laying out the order of the characters on the moral spectrum, removing all ability to see the series through our own lens of moral and philosophical ideas. A mystical ranking of morality only worked when it was with one shot characters who didn't get a lot of screen time. With regulars, it just wouldn't work.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> What is the Fourth Wall? Never heard the expression -- sdev, 18:47:08 08/20/03 Wed


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Here's a web site that explains it. -- Arethusa, 09:02:04 08/21/03 Thu

Fourth Wall

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Trying again. -- Arethusa, 09:04:40 08/21/03 Thu

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_wall

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> much thanks -- sdev, 09:44:50 08/21/03 Thu


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Oh, that's what that means! Thanks. -- jane, 21:38:35 08/21/03 Thu


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Huh? -- ZachsMind, 07:06:27 08/20/03 Wed

"Heh. I've read that ME/Whedon will change plot points if the audience starts speculating correctly on what will happen in the future. So we could be eliminating the cool Ra-Tet idea by discussing it!"

Huh?

That's assuming Mutant Enemy bothers reading this forum, which I doubt. The legalities are too complex. If they did, and it could be proven, whoever guessed what they ended up doing could sue. Whether M.E. got the idea from the forum or not, it's a matter of convincing a jury. So it is safest (unfortunately) for M.E. to not bother. Besides I think they have a few more important things to do than read our reactions.

In short, I really don't think we have anything to worry about, chasing down rabbit holes. Perhaps WhedonVerse plot discussion is moot, but that doesn't make it less fun. =)

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Wasn't there a recent interview where Whedon specifically said they looked at fan boards? -- Finn Mac Cool, 08:54:32 08/20/03 Wed

He said it was because they used them to judge audience reaction, to see how people reacted to what they put on screen.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yes, there was. It's the Comic-Con Panel -- s'kat, 09:10:13 08/20/03 Wed

They have people scan fanfic, fan boards, and websites to see which characters are taking off, what's working, and whether someone has come up with an idea before they have.

"Audience: Do you read or routinely scour the websites, because we've talked about stuff and then like 4-weeks later it'd be on screen?
Joss: "Obviously I've gotten most of my ideas from you. When we go to websites what we're looking for is a general feeling of; what's not playing, what are people really passionate about and what are they debating and where are we getting it right and where are we getting it wrong? If you see something 4-weeks after it comes out on your website that means we've been working on it about 8-weeks before that, at least." "

From Comic-Con Angel Writers Panel, cityofangel.com

Also in The Official Buffy Magazine #8 - the writers admit that the line Andrew uses to refer to Jonathan as Jonathan/the First was lifted from one of the posting boards. Mere Smith was posting on Bronze Beta prior to her involvement with ME. Also several of the writers: Whedon, Minear, Goddard, Greenberg, Espenson, RRK, Deknight, and Fury post on Bronze Beta after an episode airs. Minear has been known to post on ASSB.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks, Finn and shadowkat -- Arethusa, 09:41:43 08/20/03 Wed


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Humm. -- Arethusa, 09:26:35 08/20/03 Wed

Audience: Do you read or routinely scour the websites, because we've talked about stuff and then like 4-weeks later it'd be on screen?
Joss: "Obviously I've gotten most of my ideas from you. [I think we can safely assume he's being sarcastic.]When we go to websites what we're looking for is a general feeling of; what's not playing, what are people really passionate about and what are they debating and where are we getting it right and where are we getting it wrong? If you see something 4-weeks after it comes out on your website that means we've been working on it about 8-weeks before that, at least."
http://www.cityofangel.com/behindTheScenes/index.html?news.php~content

I doubt the writers read the websites like we do. That's what minions are for.

Sorry, I can't find the article where Whedon says he changes plot points if the audience is guessing correctly. Can someone help me out?

And it's very evil of you to send me off searching for proof to back up my statements, because I'm spending too much time reading Whedon articles. Although I did find out that it's organized religion, not religion in general, that gives Whedon the wiggins and that Angel's tattoo has no meaning at all.

(SHARON: Is there any story behind or meaning to Angel's tattoo?

JOSS: Angel's tattoo actually has a very fascinating story behind it. When we said we wanted a tattoo, TODD McINTOSH, our makeup artist, said, "How about this?" And we said, "Okay." And one unexpected side note to that story is that I asked, "What is that, a bird or something?" And Todd said, "Uh huh." )http://www.etonline.com/television/a2760.htm

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Heh, too slow. -- Arethusa, 09:30:17 08/20/03 Wed


[> Re: Angel's Curse -- About #6, 04:48:21 08/17/03 Sun

Angel did lose his soul this past season through amoment of happiness. The Magic may have made him happy, but it wasn't a case of the magic simply removing the soul,the way the spell the shaman that the Mayor hired was supposed to have worked. Whether or not the soul can simply be removed without a moment of happiness is still an open question.

[> Re: Angel's Curse -- luvthistle1, 08:47:44 08/16/03 Sat

I look at it another way. Angelus is the demon, and Angel is the cursed soul, put upon Angelus to imprison him. Angel is like a guard, for Angelus. to make sure he doesn't go free..so, if the guard is having fun, out partying, or sharing a intimate moment with someone. he's not guarding his charge, which allow for Angelus to escape/be release.
To remove the curse, is to remove Angel. That is probably why Angel never tried to have the curse removed, or find an way around it. Without, the curse, he would cease to exist, and all that would remain is "Angelus".

[> [> That's pretty much the problem: As things stand right now Angel IS the Curse -- Doug, 18:53:32 08/17/03 Sun


[> Re: Angel's Curse -- Arethusa, 10:17:14 08/16/03 Sat

Romania, 1898. Two famous vampires are about to meet their fate. One is being chased by a small band of men and a brave and pure woman, and will meet his death at their hands-or so everyone thinks. The other is also about to meet his (very different) fate, thanks to his girlfriend's kidnapping of a beautiful gypsy girl.

When Darla sired Liam, Liam's soul left his body and went "into the ether,"(1) where it would stay until it was returned to his body. Angelus was the result-a human body controlled by the demonic infection that possessed it, conscienceless and bloodthirsty. He hunted and killed eagerly until the day when Darla kidnapped a gypsy girl. In revenge for their favorite's rape and murder, a powerful old gypsy woman from her clan returned Liam's soul and cursed him.(2) The woman wished him to suffer eternally, even long after all she knew were dead. If Liam would ever know even a moment's relief from eternal suffering, the soul would be lost again and the demon would again control the body.(3) Not the most logical of curses, since Liam would be gone if he knew happiness, and killer Angelus would return. But the gypsies kept watch over Liam, who now called himself Angel. And when he met a beautiful girl and fell in love they sent another beautiful gypsy girl to keep Angel and Buffy apart. But they didn't tell her exactly what the curse entailed, they just told her to keep the two apart.(4) She failed; Buffy gave Angel a moment of bliss, and Angel's soul left his body. And Angelus killed Jenny.

But Jenny had found and translated the original curse performed by her ancestor, and recorded it on a computer disk. Willow performed the curse and returned Angel's soul, with its loophole intact, as far as we know.(5) Much later, Angel again knew a perfect moment of happiness when he magically "lived" a perfect day, and Angelus reemerged, but Willow again performed the curse she had invoked years earlier and Angel's soul was restored from the ether after she released it from the Mo-Ping jar.(6)



(1)Angelus: I heard. You went shopping at the local boogedy-boogedy store. The Orb of Thesulah. If memory serves, this is supposed to summon a person's soul... from the ether... store it until it can be transferred. (Passion)

WILLOW
And then Angel's soul is still released into the ether, andóand there's something called Delothrian's Arrow. We don't even need to know where the target is.(Orpheus)

(2)Rumania, 1898.

Elder Woman: Nici mort, nici de-al fiintei, Te invoc, spirit al trecerii. Reda trupului ce separa omul de animal!

Translation: Neither dead, nor of the living, I invoke you, spirit of the passing. Return to the body what distinguishes Man from the beast!

Elder Woman: Asa sa fie.

Translation: So it shall be.

Elder Woman: Utrespur aceastui. (

Translation: Restore this one. (Becoming, Pt. 1)

(3)Gypsy Man: You don't remember... everything you've done for a hundred years. In a moment, you will. The face of everyone you killed... our daughter's face... they will haunt you, and you will know what true suffering is.
Rumania, 1898. (Becoming, Pt. 1)

Jenny: Nothing has changed. The curse still holds.

Enyos: The elder woman is never wrong. She says his pain is lessening. She can feel it.
Jenny: I promise you. Angel still suffers. And he makes amends for his evil. He even saved my life.

Enyos: So you just forget that he destroyed the most beloved daughter of your tribe?! That he *killed* every man, woman and child that touched her life?! Vengeance demands that his pain be eternal as ours is! If this, this girl gives him one *minute* of happiness, it is one minute too much!

Enyos: (interrupts) To the modern man vengeance is a verb, an idea. Payback. One thing for another. Like commerce. Not with us. Vengeance is a living thing. It passes through generations. It commands. It kills.

(4)JENNY: (interrupts) I didn't know... exactly. I was told... Oh, God. I was sent here to watch you. They told me to keep you and Angel apart. They never told me what would happen.

GILES: Jenny!

JENNY: I'm sorry, Rupert. Angel was supposed to pay for what he did to my people.

BUFFY: And me? What was I supposed to be paying for?

JENNY: I didn't know what would happen until after. I swear I would've told you.

BUFFY: So it was me. I did it.

JENNY: I think so. I mean, if you...

GILES: I don't understand.

JENNY: The curse. If Angel achieved true happiness, even just a moment of... He would lose his soul. (Innocence)

(5)WILLOW: Te implor, Doamne, nu ignora aceasta rugaminte.

Translation: I implore you, Lord, do not ignore this request.

OZ: (to Cordelia) Is this a good thing?

WILLOW: Nici mort, nici al fiintei...

Translation: Neither dead, nor of the living...

CORDELIA: (freaked out) Hey, speak English!

WILLOW: Lasa orbita sa fie vasul care-i va transporta, sufletul la el.

Translation: Let this Orb be the vessel that will carry his soul to him.(Becoming, Pt. 2)

(6)WILLOW
I'm way avoidy. Too many memories. I'm just glad I don't have to be in the same room with him when I re-ensoul him.

CORDELIA
Oh, you really think you can pull it off? (feels around under her blanket)

WILLOW
Putting his soul back? It's the first spell I ever learned. I'm not gonna forget that.

CORDELIA
(grabs a knife under the blanket) What about the Muo-Ping?

WILLOW
The jar holding Angel's soul? Therein lies our boneage.

CORDELIA
Stolen right from our safe. And if we can't get the soul out of the jar, we can't put it back in Angel.

WILLOW
Yeah, question is: how do we get the soul out if we don't know where the jar is?

CORDELIA
And apparently, the thing's impervious to magic.

WILLOW
Yeah, I know already tried a standard locator spell, but zero joy.

CORDELIA
(puts down the knife) Right. Plus, Wesley's shaman says there's no way to extract the soul from a distance.

WILLOW
Soul trapped in a glass jar, impervious to magic. It is complicated.

CORDELIA
(nods) Tough nut to crack.

WILLOW
(gets an idea) Are you thinking what I'm thinking?

CORDELIA
(grabs the knife again) I doubt it.

WILLOW
(stands) We just break the jar.

CORDELIA
(gestures to her nightstand) Can you hand me that drink?

WILLOW
(backs to the door, excited) That way we don't have to magic the soul out. We just break the glass around it!

CORDELIA
(impatiently) Great idea. I'm really thirsty.

WILLOW
And then Angel's soul is still released into the ether, andóand there's something called Delothrian's Arrow. We don't even need to know where the target is. (opens the door) Cordy, this is fantastic! We're gonna get him back. (leaves the room)(Orpheus)

[> [> Re: Angel's Curse -- Arethusa, 10:19:43 08/16/03 Sat

Quotes from http://vrya.net/bdb/arc.php?arc=54.

I'll be happy to answer any more questions I've neglected, or clarify anything confusing or unsupported by evidence. Hope this helps.

Areth

[> [> [> can the curse be removed without removing Angel? -- luvthistle1, 20:00:38 08/16/03 Sat


[> [> [> [> I don't know. -- Arethusa, 23:11:28 08/16/03 Sat

I can't remember a single instance of anyone mentioning a way to remove the curse.

[> [> [> [> [> The only way seems to be if he becomes human (IWARY) -- s'kat, 08:00:10 08/17/03 Sun

The only time Angel wasn't cursed was in I Will Always Remember You - when he turned human and he and Buffy got together, which is one of the reasons why becoming human is so important to Angel - once he becomes human, the curse is lifted - since it only works on the vampire. But it's a double-edged sword - if he becomes human - he loses his ability to be "champion" or "super-powered". (Reminds me a lot of the comic books - specifically the X-Men and The Incredibly Hulk - characters cursed with super-powers that separate them and isolate them from human society, yet at the same time empower them. They want to lose them to be normal, yet if they become normal they lose what defined them or made them at least in their eyes heros.)

The curse may in a sense be an extended metaphor for that double-edged sword. Angel can be a champion as a vampire but he can't ever be truly happy or "in love and happy" while a vampire. To be happy he has to give up being the vampire - which is the shanshue or becoming human. But does he really want all that entails? IWARY raises that question
as does The Trial.

So I think the writers may never lift the curse - because they need it to give Angel a strong reason to still want to be human.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: I don't know. -- luvthistle1, 23:36:29 08/17/03 Sun

..that because the curse was not put upon "Angel", it was put upon "Angelus. Angel is the curse put upon Angelus, to remove the curse, is to remove Angel all together. Angel can not go an ask to be resoul, like spike did. because he is a soul. the problem is, is he's Liam's soul, or Angelus" soul? Angel is suppose to be Liam, yet he does not act like Liam, nor do he have his accent. actually, very little about Angel, reminds anyone of Liam.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Respectfully disagree -- s'kat, 06:33:39 08/18/03 Mon

Angel is suppose to be Liam, yet he does not act like Liam, nor do he have his accent. actually, very little about Angel, reminds anyone of Liam.

How do you know he doesn't act like Liam? We've only met
Liam twice and both times Liam exhibited behavior Angel has exhibited. Liam was religious, Angel appears to be religious. Liam had Daddy issues, Angel has Daddy issues.
Liam was a bit of a womanizer, Angelus certainly was.
Liam had an accent, so did Angelus.

Actually Angel acts more like Liam, than Spike acts like William with or without the soul. (And Spike is clearly still William, just as Angel is still Liam. They are just
William +demon+soul(without a curse) and Liam+demon+soul(with a curse). )

So why do people keep saying Angel isn't Liam? Especially when the writers have gone out of their way to say otherwise? Examples: Becoming - we see Liam get turned and see that Liam was a bit of a prodigal, explaining Liam's authority issues. We are reminded Liam was not a great man in Amends - with flashbacks to him stealing and womanizing.
Then in the Prodigal, we see Liam argue with his father and leave. Darla even tells Angelus that Liam informs all he is.
And Angel relates to Kate in The Prodigal and Kate's relationship with her father, through memories of his - Liam's. Not to mention Spin The Bottle - where we have Angel thinking he is 17 year old Liam and even gives his name. (The accent is the only part that's really different and that makes sense, people can lose their accent after 20 years in another country, Angel spent a hundred in US...
why would he still have an Irish accent?)

So I think it is safe to assume this is Liam's soul. There's absolutely no indication otherwise. (Can you point to a textual reference? All the one's I see over the past 7 years on both shows - show it is Liam's soul, heck even the writer's interviews support that.)


Angel is the curse put upon Angelus, to remove the curse, is to remove Angel all together. Angel can not go an ask to be resoul, like spike did. because he is a soul.

Actually not entirely true. Angel is not a soul. Angel is the soul+Liam+Demon. If he was just a soul than he'd be a fuzzy cloud in the jar. Liam has a soul and a personality.
Angel is the Liam (soul and personality) +demon.
Angel is not a distinct personality from Liam or really from Angelus. He is between the two.

So the question is what would happen if Angelus fought for a soul?( Something that is completely counter to Angelus' personality - not because he's evil per se, but because going after a soul for a vampire isn't exactly logical and Angelus tends to be a thinker and logical. He doesn't follow his blood.) If he did - he'd be soul+Liam+demon sans curse. But it goes counter to Angelus' personality, so won't happen.

Can Angel do it? Seems unlikely. But hey if they can have a cave-dwelling demon with the ability to return vamp souls, why can't they have a shaman with the ability to lift curses? Let's face it ME can do whatever they please.
So if they lift the curse - does Angel cease to be Angel?

Again no. The curse does not define Angel. Angel is Liam +soul+ demon. If the curse defined Angel - he wouldn't be Angel in I Will Always Remember You. Nor does the demon define Angel - if it did, again he wouldn't be Angel when he turns human in IWARY. What defines him is the totality of the memories, experiences, emotions and concience of Liam as a man, a vampire, and ensouled vampire. Just as what defines us is our totatlity of experience, behavior characteristics and emotional ones.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> The curse would still exist, the clause wouldn't -- Finn Mac Cool, 07:52:25 08/18/03 Mon

Simply having the soul is the actual curse. Losing it in a moment of true happiness is just a clause attached to that curse.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Good point. The happiness clause is how he breaks the curse -- s'kat, 08:33:10 08/18/03 Mon

Simply having the soul is the actual curse. Losing it in a moment of true happiness is just a clause attached to that curse.

You're right - it's the subversion of the fairy tale.
Instead of the hero being cursed by a monster that only "true" love's kiss/happiness can free him from, he's cursed with a soul that only "true" happiness can free him from.

Doesn't mean the soul isn't his or that losing the soul makes him no longer Liam or Angel, it just makes him Liam/Angel without the soul or the guide the soul grants him.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> But are you saying that Angelus is Angel without a soul? -- luvthistle1, 21:48:51 08/18/03 Mon


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yes. Angelus = Angel sans soul (or Liam(-soul)+demon) -- s'kat, 22:13:56 08/18/03 Mon


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Good point. The happiness clause is how he breaks the curse -- Claudia, 11:55:44 08/19/03 Tue

So, is there a way for Angel to get a soul, without the curse? Would he be the same if he lost the cursed soul, became Angeleus and regain his soul without the curse attached?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Would Angel be the same if he lost the curse and sought soul instead? -- s'kat, 13:50:23 08/19/03 Tue

So, is there a way for Angel to get a soul, without the curse? Would he be the same if he lost the cursed soul, became Angeleus and regain his soul without the curse attached?

Someone could come up with a spell that gives him a soul but overrides the curse. (Some viewers believe Willow already did this in Orpheus, I strongly doubt it, but you never know what ME might try.) Or he could become human like he did in IWARY. When he became human he was still Angel just without the curse or the super-vamp abilities. So there's no reason to believe he wouldn't be Angel if he was given a soul sans curse. I believe he'd be the same without the happiness clause. I honestly don't believe the clause defines who Angel is so much as it is just an obstacle or a punishement. After all in Btvs S1-2 he didn't even know it existed.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Would Angel be the same if he lost the curse and sought soul instead? -- Claudia, 15:08:33 08/19/03 Tue

If Angel had acquired his soul, via spell or simply becoming a human, wouldn't that be a cop-out to his acquiring redemption?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Would obtaining a curse-free soul be a cop-out to Angel's redemption? -- s'kat, 08:57:55 08/20/03 Wed

If Angel had acquired his soul, via spell or simply becoming a human, wouldn't that be a cop-out to his acquiring redemption?

No. I don't believe it would. Because having a curse-free soul does not redeem you - all it does is provide you with the choice to redeem yourself or continue to be evil. The soul according to what we've seen in the Buffyverse really is just the mechanism of free will.

Angel getting a curse-free soul does not automatically mean he's redeemed any more than Spike's acquisition of his soul automatically redeemed Spike. What redeemed Spike was selflessly giving his life to save the world. The soul provided him with the ability to choose that alturistic action, without a soul - he would never have done it or even considered it. It would not have occurred to him or made logical sense. (Spike's acquisition of the soul was not an alturistic act. It was a good act but was also somewhat selfishly motivated...it's not until he got it that he understood any of that. It's a bit like a child - who thinks if they do this good deed, Mommy will forgive all their past wrongs - they don't do the deed because it's good, they do it for Mommy. When the child grows up - the adult does the deed because it is good and because doing good things makes them feel good. Mommy has zip to do with it. IF you look at Spike's acquistion of the soul as a metaphor for maturation or growing up - it might make more sense.)

Remember Warren, Willow, Wesely, Holtz, Justine, Fred, Gunn, Connor, Andrew, Amy, Anya, and Jonathan all had souls - yet all did nasty things. How they chose to atone for those nasty things - led to or against their redemption. While the act itself does matter and have weight, what we do after committing it has equal weight and also matters - (I think that is ME's message). Redemption isn't a shiny trophy you get at the end of a race. It's a process...and continues until you are dead. Even if Angel became human tomorrow, he still would be on a journey for redemption - every act he does he is responsible for as are we. You can't undo what you've done, you can only try to do better in the future. That's what Angel story is more or less about the struggle to do better, to become a better man and overcome his dark nature.

While losing the curse or becoming human may change that journey somewhat - it would not end it. All it would do is place Angel on another, possibly parallel path.

So no, if Willow or someone else gave Angel a soul without the "happiness clause attached" or if Angel became human - it would not be a cop-out, his journey would not come to a grinding halt. Since humans are quite capable of doing horrible deeds and being cursed and in just as much need of redemption- as are ensouled vampires. Also Angel still remembers what he's done, that would still haunt him.
All the soul grants Angel is the ability to instinctively choose good over evil, when without the soul he instinctively chose evil over good.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Depends on your view of redemption -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:43:35 08/20/03 Wed

I've seen two different definitions of redemption on this board:

Pseudo-Christian, making up for evil done in the past.

Pseudo-Fairy Tale, relief from a curse.

Getting a soul without a happiness clause, I think, might fit into the parameters of the second definition.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I agree s'kat -- Angeloz, 03:34:26 08/20/03 Wed

Someone could come up with a spell that gives him a soul but overrides the curse. (Some viewers believe Willow already did this in Orpheus, I strongly doubt it, but you never know what ME might try.) Or he could become human like he did in IWARY. When he became human he was still Angel just without the curse or the super-vamp abilities. So there's no reason to believe he wouldn't be Angel if he was given a soul sans curse. I believe he'd be the same without the happiness clause. I honestly don't believe the clause defines who Angel is so much as it is just an obstacle or a punishement. After all in Btvs S1-2 he didn't even know it existed.

I agree with s'kat in that I think Angel is still cursed with his human soul but that doesn't preclude the possibility of someone or something (using magic) making the soul permanent. I also agree that there would be no personality change the only thing that would be different is he wouldn't be cursed so no happiness clause. Also in I Will Always Remember You his personality wasn't much different although he did embrace his humanity enthusiastically (food for example) for awhile but still was understandably hesitant about his relationship with Buffy & vice-versa. But partly due to self-esteem issues (that he doesn't deserve happiness) also partly self-sacrifice (he would do anything at the time to prevent Buffy's death if he could) not to mention helping people which I think he liked doing he chose to give it up (humanity). So I don't think he would be any different without the curse but with a permanent human soul. He'd be like Spike was in BTVS season 7 theoretically.

Angeloz

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Can the curse exist without an escape clause? -- Doug, 12:08:05 08/18/03 Mon

It was my understanding that traditional curses required a means of escape from them. This could be certain acts that need to be performed, a set duration to the curse (usually measured in generations), or a change in condition (this specifically applies to Angel, the moment he stops being miserable the curse unravels). As long as Angel's souled status is maintained by a curse there has to be an escape clause, though a modification of the escape clause could be possible if someone capable of modifying the original spell came along, changed the escape clause, de-souled Angel, and then re-souled him with the new spell.

[> Anatman -- Diana, 11:45:13 08/16/03 Sat

Simple lesson in Buddhism: There is no self that exists in the sense of a permanent, eternal, integral and independent substance. There is no dividing line between Liam, Angel and Angelus in "reality." All are just different incarnations of this one changeable personality. When you start to divide them into separate creatures, you lose him. I use the three names to distinguish different phases, but they are all still Liam/Angel/us, normally refered to as Angel. But even Angel with soul isn't some fixed entity. He's always changing and he isn't his past, whether that past was as a human, an evil soulless vampire, a pathetic schlub or anything else.

With that in mind, I will answer your questions.

1. The body that Angelus has was cursed. Maybe if we focus on the body rather than the personality, we can follow the changes because of the curse.

2. The soul that was restored to Angelus is the soul that inhabited the body when he was human. It isn't Liam, Angelus' or Angel's. It is just the soul of that particular body.

Are soul's distinct? Never really been answered, but I would say no mostly. Joss refers to them as a guiding star. It is just a switch from good to evil in the Buffyverse, not something that departs individuality. It is what is around the soul that makes someone an individual.

So why does it have to be "his" soul? When Faith stole Buffy's body, Tara could see that she didn't fit right. I would say that the soul has a similar fit to the body it inhabits. It's like organ donation. Perhaps the body would reject a foreign soul.

3. The spell that restores Angel's soul is a vengeance spell. Uncle Enyos talks about how vengeance is a living thing. This living thing is what drives the spell. Should something come along that is stronger than this, for example Buffy/Angel's love, that would break the spell.

Angel does not understand what drives the spell. He knows he is being punished. He is told as much by the Gypsy father. He does not realizes that he must be punished in order for the spell to work. He does not realize he can "kill" vengeance.

4. Separating Angel/us works when we are talking about how they differ in moral compass, but when talking about the creature, they are one. He is always simply what he is.

5. Words match up for the spells, so I would say that Willow used the same spell. More importantly something happened to Willow when she did that spell, which doesn't happen in "Orpheus." I would say that the Gypsies saw a way to resurrect their vengeance and worked through Willow to recurse Angel. I wasn't aware that Willow had a Romanian accent like that.

6. I would say incorrect. Magick ALLOWS for the moment of happiness. Angel being the great guy that he is can't be happy enough to allow the curse to be broken. He has his perfect day and what the magick does is allows "The vision becomes reality." He has happy dreams. He worries about his happy dreams. These don't undo the curse. What Wo-Pang does is allow for the boundary between dream and reality to be blurred enough to allow the dream happiness to translate to real happiness. Even the beginning of the dream is this way as what really happens blurs into Wo-Pang attacking him.

It was still the happiness that broke the curse (maybe even thoughts of Buffy, who knows).

7. See #2

8. "Orpheus" was different from "Becoming" so whether there is still a happiness clause or not is up to the writers to determine as the needs of the plot unfurl. Personally, I think it isn't there. She is powerful enough and cares enough about Angel to run the spell off of friendship. She may not have done this deliberately, but she didn't turn herself invisible deliberately either. I think if it is gone, Angel knows this. Lilah told him before he left. That is why he was able to offer himself to Buffy "shoulder to shoulder" in "Chosen." Willow's friendship with Angel was highlighted by her hug goodbye. Why else was that in there?

Just how I see things. I think much of the debate about Angel/us misses the point. Rather than see them as two distinct creatures, they are about what are we and forgiveness. We are a changing heap of all sorts of things.

[> [> About #8 -- Finn Mac Cool, 13:31:39 08/16/03 Sat

I think the happiness clause is still there. Yes, Willow can have unexpected magical effects, such as in "Same Time, Same Place". However, that spell was a thought spell, one accomplished entirely through the caster's force of mind. The spell to restore Angel's soul is a mixture of spoken and ritual magic. As such, Willow's subconscious has less chance to work its will since she's working within certain guidlines.

[> Liam is Angelus is Angel but they're all different people... -- ZachsMind, 16:35:54 08/16/03 Sat

This curse was made by the gypsies. Not by Willow. Jenny was able to come up with part of the spell that can resoul Angel, and Willow filled in the blanks, but what Willow has done twice now has not been to affect the curse in any way. She doesn't recurse Angel each time. She just resouls the body that Angelus inhabits with what once was Liam's soul, thus creating Angel. Kinda like putting the magic hat back on the cold snowman to bring Frosty back to life... Okay. Not EXACTLY like that.. The gypsy curse is unaffected by the souling or unsouling or resouling. This was intended to be an eternal thing. So that no matter what Angelus does, he's still perpetually in torment somehow. If he's free, it's not for long, and there's always the fear of being resouled to torment him. If he gets resouled, he's forced to watch like an observer having no control over the host body and believe me, every glass of pig's blood is like an eternity of horror to him.

The gypsies wanted Angelus to suffer. Forever. So any and all contingencies were taken into account. Angelus is not intended to ever have a moment's peace, even when Angel gets one now and then. The fact this means Angel suffers too? The gypsies not only didn't care about that - THEY DIDN'T KNOW. What Angel is after the curse matters as little to them as what Liam had been before Angelus came into being. Angel's not Liam. Angel's not Angelus. Angel is a byproduct of the gypsy curse. He's the result of a defense mechanism after great trauma. He's a split personality - and not the original one either. The mind used to operate the host body that was originally Liam suffers from something called Dissociative Identity Disorder, formerly known as Multiple Personality Disorder.

Liam is dead. Just as the man who was once Spike is dead. Just as the woman who was once Drusilla is dead. A vampire is a completely different entity from the living human whose mortal coil the evil presence inhabits. This evil presence, while not a replacement for a soul, serves similar spiritual functionings for the mind and now dead body. The vampire has the memories of its human body, for it uses that human body's brain to think with, but the body now operates through evil magicks that are older than recorded history. We don't understand the details of how this works, and Whedon certainly isn't going to dwell on such details unless they're beneficial for story purposes. Still, what we DO know, is that Liam is dead. His soul left for the "ether" and was retrieved when the gypsies cursed Angelus for torturing and eating one of their own.

When that occurred, the evil presence that had manifest in Liam's dead body when Darla turned him was forced to take a backseat. This may have been a gradual thing. The gypsy curse did not replace the evil presence with Liam's soul. The evil presence was not forced out of the host body. It's still there. As Angelus makes it very painfully evident when he and Faith are sharing dreams near the end of season four, Angelus is dormant but consciously aware of everything that Angel does and thinks and feels. Everything. Every moment. Probably every waking AND every sleeping moment.

There's your torment. There's your curse. So yes. The gypsies cursed ANGELUS. Liam was long gone. When the soul was returned to the body of Liam, Liam didn't miraculously just come back from the dead. What was there now was a recessive demonic presence, and the returned soul of a dead Irishman (with an outrageous accent). Angelus is perpetually and eternally tortured by the curse. Just as all the horrid things that Angelus did haunts Angel today, so too does all the good wholesome things that Angel does torments Angelus. They are equally as wigged by one another. Remember that Angelus is ALWAYS in torment. Every championing thought or action of Angel is a slap in his face. A twisting of the knife. A poke in the eye. A jab to the midsection. Figuratively speaking of course.

ANGEL is an amalgamation of both Liam and Angelus. He is both and yet neither. Though physically these are all the same guy, existing in different periods of time and if one's around it means the other ones are not, these are not the same people. When Angelus arrived after the siring of Liam, he was a vampire with the memories of the host body but he certainly was not Liam. So what was he? Let me explain.

To completely shift gears, and I do have a method to my madness, let's look at "Conversations With Dead People" a moment. This season seven episode with Buffy talking to an old schoolmate of hers that had recently been turned, we get a very strong glimpse into how this works. The body of the guy was a person Buffy recognized. This body operated through use of a brain that remembered Buffy, remembered the kickboxing classes he'd taken, and how he was studying psychology, and remembered all the girls he had a crush on in school, remembered that a mutual friend of theirs had gone mad and was in an insane asylum after high school graduation. Holden Webster, the man who demented Spike had recently sired, who was now alternately fighting with Buffy and shrinking her head, this man was dead. His body was dead, now animated undead by ancient magicks and a presence of evil connected to the chaos of the universe which perpetually threatens armageddon. Webster's soul? Gone to the ether. His mind was now being operated by a demonic presence that while not an exact substitute for the soul, functions in a spiritual way to inhabit the dead host body that had been infected with vampirism, using ancient magicks which cause vampires to exist in Buffy's world, this entity that believed itself to be Holden Webster, so very much was NOT anything remotely Holden Webster. The store front's still open but they're makin' new stuff in the back now. The car's the same but somebody else is in the driver's seat. There's been a mutiny and the captain has jumped ship. Eventually, if Holden Webster had managed to survive that night and live to be as old as Spike or Angel, he'd have figured that out.

So when the human soul was returned to what was originally Liam and what had been Angelus since the abscence of the soul, suddenly there were two people trying to drive the same car. Angelus got kicked to the backseat, and the human soul was running, but this was a car with a hundred years of mileage on it, and a hell of a lotta blood on the bumpers and windshield wipers. The human soul, or more specifically the mind of the entity that I'll refer to here as ANGIE, was in a moment of trauma. Imagine coming home to your house after being away for awhile and seeing not just that it had been ransacked and turned upside down, but that the walls floors and ceilings were covered with blood, there were piles of corpses in every room, and somehow though you hadn't had time to let it sink in just WHY this is true, SOMEHOW, ALL this is YOUR fault. Your house had been responsible. Although it was due to factors completely out of your control, your abscence is no excuse. You are largely responsible.

It's fair to say you'd have a bit of a wiggins.

And like Lady Macbeth in the Scottish Play, you can wash your hands all you want but it doesn't make the blood go away. Well. That's what happened to ANGIE. He could no longer be Angelus. The demonic presence wasn't capable of fighting consistently and staying in the driver's seat. A human soul's a perfect fit for its host body. The evil presence is forced back into a recessive position. Forever taunting and bitterly reminding by its very presence just what has been done in the abscence of the soul. He could no longer be Liam, because he was still a vampire which Liam had never been, and though Liam was quite an arse in his living days, he never did anything remotely as bad as Angelus had done. So a new personality was forged: Angel, who is a culmination of all these memories. He's the memories of Liam and Angelus combined, and yet he is neither psyche. So okay. They're all the same guy. AND they're three different guys. Liam died and was replaced by Angelus, who took a back seat when Angel came into being. Angel is Liam's soul AND Angelus' evil presence. Remove the evil presence? You remove the vampirism. That means Angel ceases to be. The human soul returns to the ether and two hundred and fifty years of decay catches up with the body.

Angel needs the demon as much as he needs the soul. Otherwise he ceases to be. And THAT won't happen at least until the series gets cancelled, and maybe not even then. I mean there's still the possibility that Buffy figures out how to become cookies, Angel figures out how to keep Angelus from ruining a perfectly good day, and in a couple few years they all live happily ever after.

Hey. This is television. Anything can happen.

[> [> That is what I been trying to say -- luvthistle1, 03:29:34 08/18/03 Mon

....Angel was created out of the curse. remove the curse Angel will cease to exsit. he's like a guard, that makes sure Angelus, never gets out.

[> [> Happily Ever After? -- Claudia, 12:14:15 08/19/03 Tue

[I mean there's still the possibility that Buffy figures out how to become cookies, Angel figures out how to keep Angelus from ruining a perfectly good day, and in a couple few years they all live happily ever after.

Hey. This is television. Anything can happen.]


I don't know. If Darla, Anya and Spike all had to redeem themselves through death, I don't see why Angel gets to escape this fate.

Current board | More August 2003