February 2002 posts

AS YOU WEREN'T - BUFFY AND SPIKE OVER? -- Angelina, 04:21:00 02/27/02 Wed

I love Buffy and I love Spike, but right now they do not belong together. Their relationship was becoming progressively more and more distructive and unhealthy. Rough sex, bondage, slapping each other around, that is not an expression of love. Please, let's not try to make it that, cause we'd be fooling ourselves. The writers were not painting a pretty picture of this relationship. Why they even put Buffy into this pathetic situation is beyond me. I mean, JESUS H. CHRIST have you really looked at her character lately! Buffy has been the biggest loser ever, and she's been wallowing in it! First of all, the sick-o thing with Spike (and don't get me wrong, I don't think the story of them ends here - but it has to change!), then the LOSER job - if I have to see her with that friggin COW on her head one more time I am going to puke, stinking like rancid meat no less! She's not a stupid girl, she can't get a better JOB!!!!! Then this thing with Riley and his super wife (I like the Barbie and Ken Commando reference!)... and Riley breaking in on her and Spike! Too much for my girl. Gotta pull ourselves up now Buffy! As for Spike, he loves her to death. He just cannot deal in a "normal" way HE HAS NO SOUL! He does the best he can. Was she using him? I don't know, but he WAS using her in that he was dealing with her in the only way that he could, playing off her lack of respect for herself. Yet, I AM 100% SURE he did what he did with the demon eggs to get money for Buffy and Dawn, so Buffy wouldn't have to wear that friggin hat anymore! So....we just have to see how this pans out. But I want to see my BUFFY back! No more dishrag, no more sado-masochistic sick crap. And, I am also 100% sure that Spike is not through trying to win Buffy's REAL love and try to redeam himself. Also, now that Buffy does realize her behaviors with Spike were unfair to him as well, hence calling him "William"; seeing him as a real PERSON, maybe she will be able to appreciate him when he does! Lord, I said it before and I will say it again, "I need to get a life".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: AS YOU WEREN'T - BUFFY AND SPIKE OVER? -- lolagem, 08:59:47 02/27/02 Wed
I am really disliking Spike after this season. I hate the way he's been trying to push Buffy to the dark side and hiding with her in shadows. Of course, he is EVIL. He is the "neutered vampire". The only reason he is not out killing people is because he can't. That means he has to slink around in the muck while every human and his brother invades his crypt and pushes him around. He is hugely powerful and totally powerless. It's a really contemptible existence. For that reason, I feel sorry for Spike.

And I think Marsters does the greatest job in the whole world with the character. I mean he can convey so much with one word or a look...and he is a seriously sculpted HONEY. But, it is the character, not his looks that is compelling to me. That man has charisma.

However, Spike is a bad guy. He said it best when he reminded Buffy that she "knew what he was." A person can KNOW BETTER, but not care. I think that's Spike. Not having a soul doesn't erase a person's objective knowledge of good and evil...it just takes away some of the inhibition against doing something bad. People with souls justify their egregious behavior all the time. They know better, they just don't care. Does having a soul change that? I don't think so. Spike chooses to do what he does and should take responsibility.

I don't love the character as much as I have in the past. The writers are doing a good job with that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: AS YOU WEREN'T - BUFFY AND SPIKE OVER? -- Deeva, 09:25:48 02/27/02 Wed
I admit that this "have a soul/don't have a soul" thing is very tricky. Just because I equate not knowing any better with Spike doesn't mean I thinkt hat it's true for every demon out there. I do agree that a person can know better but not care. I've seen plenty of people do this and later claim that they didn't know.

Spike's always been a selfish being and I think that as William he was selfish, too. Though probably not in such a big and evil scale. BUT if Spike did indeed have soul would he be more like William? According to Buffyverse, what you once were informs who you are now. Would he gain a little bit of William back? We all see how Spike loathes the man that he once was. But did he really reject all of Wiliam and start completely all over?

How do you know that not having a soul doesn't erase your objective? Don't the writers keep pushing the fact that being souless=remorseless. Maybe someone can help me out here cause I'm drawing blank on this, but on BtVS we don't really see any truly good demons like the few that show up on AtS, do we?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Whistler. Maybe. -- Sophist, 10:12:25 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Please keep spoilers this new out of subject lines -- Vickie, 09:55:41 02/27/02 Wed
Nice post, but some folks (like, in the UK) haven't seen the show yet. We try not to make them avoid the board with brand new spoilers, such as in your subject line.

Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Ya know what.... -- Goj3, 12:41:34 02/27/02 Wed
Anti-Buffy/Spike shippers said many of the things you stated Day 1 of the relationship. "he has no soul", "She's using him", etc.

(Insert gloating statement here)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Spike-evil with a pretty face? -- cjc36, 04:44:40 02/27/02 Wed

Spike fans (me included) forgive or at least waste no effort explaining away William's most dastardly deeds.

Why? Is it because, as I used to think, that he has done good? He did help defeat Glory, and he protected Dawn.

But what if he looked a bit less attractive? Are Spike fans under the same 'spell' (animal attraction) that Buffy is? Is Spike--being played by the enormously handsome JM--getting more forgiveness for his badness than an otherwise more, uh, normal looking visage?

If he were ugly and had less of a magnetic presence would anybody defend him? Is he a well-dressed devil?

Thoughts?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> The acting first, then the pretty face.(Spoilers, AYW) -- LeeAnn, 06:07:36 02/27/02 Wed
James Marster may be beautiful and charismatic but his acting puts everyone else on BtVS and most other TV shows to shame. I really think he would get an Emmy if the people who nominate and vote for Emmys had ever troubled to watch him.

But if Spike had been played by, say, Marc Blucas, I don't believe he would have lasted 3 shows. If Spike was played by someone less able to make us feel what Spike feels then I think we would hate him.

But Spike is played by someone who can show us Spike's heart in a word or a glance. JM was amazing in "As You Were." He could make Spike seem both arrogant and vulnerable in the same moment, as during the crypt scene with Riley, or make him seem innocent AND guilty at the same time, or make him seem loving and manipulative and snarky all at once.

I was bowled over by the different emotions that JM showed Spike feeling in his final scene with Buffy. First sadness and resignation that Buffy was with Riley AND that the place he spent so many hours with her was destroyed. When he looked at the burnt bed I could almost see him thinking about their sexual relationship and his love for her. Then he shows some anger when she comes in, still thinking she's back with Riley. Then relief that's she's not and a willingness to play sex toy if that's what she wants. Then scoffing at her, once again, breaking up with him, not believing it, he's heard it so many times before. How many emotions did JM display for us in that one minute scene, at least a dozen, taking us through Spike's feelings.

Yeah, without JM as Spike I'm sure there would be no S/B shippers, but it's not just his pretty face.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Irresistible alchemy: Re: Spike-evil with a pretty face? -- verdantheart, 06:33:24 02/27/02 Wed
If acted with the same skill, it wouldn't matter to if he were plain. Most of the actors whom I admire are, in fact, less than beautiful. It feels strange to be a fan amongst legions of drooling females who would, no doubt, throw themselves at the actor's feet. If, say, Spike were played by Tom Cruise (a younger Tom Cruise), for example, I would not be so impressed. The reason that I am somewhat obsessed is the character that was created (Spike) and the skill with which the actor (James Marsters) brought that character to life (or un-life in this case). If either of these factors were not present, I would not be so fascinated.

I have no trouble realizing that Mr. Marsters is not Spike; he is a real actor -- that is, he is not "playing himself" each time he takes on a role (see Kevin Costner, John Travolta, IMHO). That he is, hm, rather easy on the eyes is a bonus. Without the expression, Spike wouldn't be so vivid or real. Examples: (in "As You Were" he pulled out the stops) the little pout while he was convincing Buffy to have a little roll with him outside her house; the catch in his voice during the "you played me" speech; the open expression at the end as he absorbed Buffy's dump speech; in "Fool for Love," the deep sadness in his voice as he asks Dru "Why do you keep punishing me?"; the broad leer as he groped Buffy in "Triangle" ... obviously I could go on and on. (Looking back at season 2, I continue to be amazed that this evil creature can so frequently have a look of complete innocence on his face--I can't say I've seen many actors able to do that; perhaps it's partly a function of their physiognomy.)

For comparison, I can point to the fact that I developed a similar slight obsession with the character of Garak on DS9. I think that it's arguable that Andrew J Robinson isn't exactly a hottie (esp. in his 50s, sorry Andrew)--and there was all that Cardassian latex, and I can't say I'm continuing to follow his activities with avid zeal, although I do admire his ability (his talents are most often wasted in substandard fare, as are those of Jeffrey Combs). But (yes, I do have a point here somewhere) the character of Garak (patriotism at any cost, altruism disguised as self-interest, hidden pain, etc.) combined with the talent of the actor (his ability to hint at things that the character was trying to keep hidden, the way he built the character with subtle vocal and facial expression and even the way he moved and held himself) combined alchemically to produce something irresistible.

And Spike has been built as a romantic figure. He loves, and the most important thing to him is his love. He suffers greatly for his love, garnering our (especially those of us who are female) sympathy. After all, Buffy was using him, not Spike using Buffy. No wonder all these female posters want to forgive him his mistakes, no matter how egregious.

I suppose that for many viewers the fact that James Marsters is handsome could be a large factor in their response. I note that the fact that he has often appeared shirtless (and less) of late seems to have released a floodgate of, hm, interest. For me, judging from my past experience of going for the less gorgeous, I'd say that for me, it's probably the character/actor combo.

Damn, didn't want to go on at such length ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Spike-evil with a pretty face? -- Anne, 07:02:52 02/27/02 Wed
Like verdantheart, I am not much of a one for the prettyboys, either on screen or in real life -- I tend to fall for the funny-looking rough-cut guys loaded with character. For this reason, good looks on screen tend to go in one eye and out the other for me, until and unless there's something else going on with the actor.

When I first saw Spike, I did not think "wow, what a gorgeous guy", though I did think he was an interesting type and hoped they would have more of the character (as indeed they did). I'm really not sure how many episodes I saw before it surfaced into my consciousness that I was looking at a remarkably beautiful human being. But I can tell you the scene after which I knew I was really hooked: the end of Intervention, when he's got about a pound of bruise makeup on. How Marsters managed to act out from underneath that I'll never know, but the incredibly slight movements with which he reacts to Buffy's kiss are enough to tear your heart out.

I'm sure it doesn't hurt a bit that the face is objectively well structured; that may indeed even encourage some people to be more forgiving than they would otherwise be. But I think the real beauty of the face lies in its mobility and expressivity, and what it is used to express -- and that, of course, is the character and inner life of Spike. Whether Spike should be called "good" or "evil" (and I personally don't find these black-and-white, all-or-nothing categorizations very helpful), Marsters is capable of projecting into the audience the deepest, most gut-wrenching, and universal of emotions. I for one find it impossible not to be moved -- and yes, sympathetic and forgiving.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Spike-evil with a pretty face? -- cjc36, 10:26:50 02/27/02 Wed
Which brings up a point I was trying to hit (but not to successfully): What does this Spike=magnetic presence and sculpted good looks mean to the human tendency to forgive/grant access to and generally treat differently those with personalities and appearances that are at their core attractive rather than repulsive?

Spike is a monster. In the midst of his role in protecting Dawn he smiled fondly at the sight of the demon bikers tearing up the town. He missed the destruction! As he should because in the Jossverse one without a soul (conscience) can act no other way.

Are us Spike fans a fandom version of those who write letters and get infatuated with horrible death-row inmates and/or serial killers? Why do folks get attracted to real human evil?

True evil doesn't look the part, I guess.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Spike-evil with a pretty face? -- leslie, 11:18:51 02/27/02 Wed
But I think these posts *have* responded to your question. Pure evil is a johnny-one-note--it's just pure evil, there's nothing else there. And the same thing with just a pretty face. But Spike--created by good writing, good acting, good directing--is an enormously complex character. That is what makes him fascinating and attractive.

Also gotta say, the vampire face is *not* pretty--and it's the alternation between beauty and distortion that defines the range of the character.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Spike-evil with a pretty face? -- cjc36, 01:22:27 02/28/02 Thu
Again, not 'pretty'; that was perhaps too generic of a description on my part, but magnetic. Charismatic. Elvis or Bill Clinton or OJ Simpson or anybody who's done bad but despite badness attracts defenders despite evidence to contrary. Do we forgive the sins of people who are charismatic more so than those who are more, uh, regular?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> ...and I can smell the pine... -- Goji3, 12:35:16 02/27/02 Wed
Even with this topic, I hear BSers pining over Spike. (I'm not one, just so you know)

I think I'm also going to be the only one to clearly answer the question instead of flip-flopping around the question like a dieing carp.

I'll admit that the actor who plays him does it very well...but that's kinda off the topic (and source of much of the flip-flopping).

If Spike was not as attractive or charismatic, would there be BS?

The Answer, I'd have to say yes.

In several posts, people stated that Character is what draws them in first...

I find that kinda hard to believe, myself.

Every human is programed to look for a 'healthy' mate of some kind, as long as they fit that bill, they're considered 'Attractive'.

It's subliminal, can't be avoided. To deny it's existence is...not smart.

The looks grab a person's attention, the inner-stuff hooks um.

I think one of the reasons people like Spike is for the Anti-hero-ness of his character (i'm not brining the actor into this... I don't find it AS relevant... Hearing People Gush over ANYONE often makes me queazy). He lives on the 'edge', so to speak and does things most people wouldn't consider. Some women are atracted to this, and then spend their time trying to soften that 'edgyness' that attracted them to the person in the first place. Funny, ain't it?

The writers are SO playing BSers. They softened his edge with the chip, increasing his appeal. Now, they remind us of that edge. And, the question in all of our minds is...Will that Edge Cut the relationship of B and S (I hope so).

I could also go on this whole thing about the nature of shipper-ness being projection onto a beloved character....

Buffy being a character many females find themselves relating to, wish to see her make choices similar to what they make, and they are attracted to Spike (be it character of physicallity (is that even a word?))...badda bing, Badda boom...A BSer is born.

And...if you can honestly say that you don't Idenitfy with ANYONE on the show (For me, it's Xander)....Why do you watch?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: ...and I can smell the pine... -- Rufus, 15:15:37 02/27/02 Wed
I hear BSers pining over Spike

The writers are SO playing BSers. They softened his edge with the chip, increasing his appeal. Now, they remind us of that edge. And, the question in all of our minds is...Will that Edge Cut the relationship of B and S (I hope so).

Buffy being a character many females find themselves relating to, wish to see her make choices similar to what they make, and they are attracted to Spike (be it character of physicallity (is that even a word?))...badda bing, Badda boom...A BSer is born.

You're not subtle at all are you? It's too bad that we all can't think the same way that you do, the world would become so simple.

It's too bad you are more interested in trying to make yourself look superior by belittling a group of people that don't agree with your view of things.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: ...and I can smell the pine... -- Goji3, 15:28:12 02/27/02 Wed
I don't mean to belittle, I mearly point out. heck, it's even happened to me (with regards to first BX then later FX, now none). Who knows, i could be projecting my projection.

I didn't realize i was sounding belittleing (again, i think i just made up a word for my own uses) people, I was merely calling things as I see them. I, like everyone else, feel that their opinion has some merit, which brings me to a little original quote.

"I Love America, Everyone's opinion matters. No matter how Uninformed or Ignorant they are"

I feel my opinion matters, yet, I admit to only be speculating, for I am uninformed.

Oh, and, if you could please, find some evidence to disprove my theory? It would belittle me even more to not only have my apparant condescenting nature pointed out, but also be proven a fraud. Afterwards, I would appologise in light of the more logical theroy. Oh, well, thanks for pointing out how I was comming off, didn't mean to, but, eh, I'm human(at least, I think I am :p), I make mistakes. we all do, mistakes make us human. and Buffy's made some major ones, which is why we watch (and from there, i can go off on a tangent...but...i don't feel like it right now).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: ...and I can smell the pine... -- Rufus, 15:55:51 02/27/02 Wed
Your opinion does matter, but you were sounding snide calling people BSers etc. It's the reason I get to hate ships of all kinds is that people bring their preferences to the table in any discussion.

I'd like to think that the writers weren't out to "play" anyone but tell a story without being cruel to some of the fans. I believe that Buffy and Spike are in a transformational relationship where one or both will become better for it. It doesn't mean that they will end up happily ever after, but changed because of their interactions with each other.

I'm not calling you a fraud but pointing out how I feel your post was sounding to me. I understand that many people like an actor or actress because of what they look like, but I think most of the people here are smarter than to accept blindly any actions because they like a pretty face.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: ...and I can smell the pine... -- Goji3, 16:11:54 02/27/02 Wed
Ah, but you forget, Joss often gives fans what they want in the worst way possible: IE- Angel getting his soul back in Becoming part 2, among other things. though they do it in such a way as to continue telling their intended story.

I call Buffy/spike Shippers B/Sers because that is what it was originally called before it became widely 'accepted'. now, they call it SB. I prefer the name that has the double meaning in order to express my dislike of the ship (not the people, merely the ship).

I agree that the relationship is for the growth and development of characters, but it doens't mean i have to like it (opinion is the one thing Logic can't argue with very well).

I didn't say you were calling me a fraud-or at least didn't mean too. I said 'why don't you strengthen your argument by proving me wrong. However, the purpose of your post was simply to point out my 'arrogant' behavior, though I wished to hear an opinion on the ideas expressed within. They were the important part of the post. Thanks for answering.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: ...and I can smell the pine... -- Etrangere, 18:19:20 02/27/02 Wed
Oh, and, if you could please, find some evidence to disprove my theory?

Your theory being that #1 girl finds Spike hot #2 girl identifyes with Buffy #3 girl wants Buffy with Spike ?

I won't say it's wrong, but, sweetheart, you DO know that trying to counter an argument by attacking the one who comes with the argument instead of trying to disprove said argument is a very lame way to argue, right ?

The fact (which is probable for a lot of B/S shippers) that this theory might be true, doesn't mean at all that the B/S ship is stupid, or uninterresting, or unenlightening for Buffy or Spike. By saying that, you don't say anything interresting about the ship itself.
And actually the way you see it (reducing Spike to its Bad Boys personna, my ! you need to watch Restless again, and Buffy to a poor little girl attracted by Bad Boys, gasp) is a simplification that belittles both those characters.
But then, you can stay at the surface of the things if you want... all the less fun for you *shrug*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: ...and I can smell the pine... -- Goji3, 19:06:35 02/27/02 Wed
"Your theory being that #1 girl finds Spike hot #2 girl identifyes with Buffy #3 girl wants Buffy with Spike ?"

Actually, the theory is a Girl who finds Spike Attractive and Idenitifies with Buffy would probably want to see those two characters together

in other words. #1 + #2 = #3

"I won't say it's wrong, but, sweetheart, you DO know that trying to counter an argument by attacking the one who comes with the argument instead of trying to disprove said argument is a very lame way to argue, right ?"

This is merely an observation. I've said many a time before about how unhealthy the relationship is (er, i guess was) how it was abuseive, how Buffy treated Spike like a thing, etc. But, no one responds to it really well. And this is an explanation of why it occurs. it's also the source of all shiping, period. not just B/S.

"The fact (which is probable for a lot of B/S shippers) that this theory might be true, doesn't mean at all that the B/S ship is stupid, or uninterresting, or unenlightening for Buffy or Spike."

Denial is another possibility. Other, more plausable rationalizations for the ship could come up, but my theory would be a 'starting stone', whether a person is aware of it or not. And I didn't say that the ship was stupid or anything like that. Merely that it is not 'healthy', and is mainly supported so strongly by many people (mostly female) due to (at least subconscuosly) my theroy. And, please, Like either of them has never made a bad choice in their lives.

"By saying that, you don't say anything interresting about the ship itself." accept its origins. its subconscous basis. I've posted earlier about how itis not healthy. (that, and you should SEE the amount of B/S fanfiction being writen, it's nauseating!)

"And actually the way you see it (reducing Spike to its Bad Boys personna, my ! you need to watch Restless again," Where he appeared only in Xander's dream? He didn't play that big a part in it. I think you mean 'Crush'. "and Buffy to a poor little girl attracted by Bad Boys, gasp)" Gee, Angel? She came from a bad/single home, and statistically, people from those homes tend to seek out destructive relationships. I kid not. "is a simplification that belittles both those characters.
But then, you can stay at the surface of the things if you want... all the less fun for you *shrug*"

And, enter the B/S rhetoric of 'She really loves him' and all that? I don't think i'm staying on the surface that much, mainly because emotions have to be EXPRESSED by the actors for them to be recognized/cannon. B/Sers, or any other ship could say X loves Y with their being no outward proof of it. I'm dealing with what I see, the information I gather and (hopefully) facts. Using their past and present to determin their motivations. for the past helps determine who someone becomes.

The Theory is on about this: Since Buffy/Spike is/has been shown to be Destructive/unhealthy, why do people continue to support it? The theory is only one possible explination. There are probably others, hopefully someone will figure them out, they might be better than my theory.

Long (To Late) Story short, I asked, 'Why is it being supported?' I felt the same way with Angel and Buffy in Season 3 as I do about Spike/Buffy in Season 6...(Okay, that looks a little creepy to me...it matches up...wow...)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Yeah ! Interresting arguments, now :) -- Etrangere, 19:56:33 02/27/02 Wed
This is merely an observation. I've said many a time before about how unhealthy the relationship is (er, i guess was) how it was abuseive, how Buffy treated Spike like a thing, etc. But, no one responds to it really well. And this is an explanation of why it occurs. it's also the source of all shiping, period. not just B/S.

But I mostly agree with you there, and most B/S shippers would. Offcourse Buffy's been abusive with Spike, that's all Dead Things was about and exactly what she told him in AYW. And no, I won't blame the abusive vibe only on Buffy either.
The word "unhealthy" OTOH bothers me, because it's very judgemental and, what do you want, I'm a relativist. But I understand what u mean and I agree the relationship couldn't go on that way, and happy for both their journey about the ending events of AYW. Offcourse, it's because I think that they're going to be back together after a time.

Merely that it is not 'healthy', and is mainly supported so strongly by many people (mostly female) due to (at least subconscuosly) my theroy. And, please, Like either of them has never made a bad choice in their lives.

Subconsciously ? Not that much. Well, for me it was more the other side around, didn't start to like/identify with Buffy before this season
And granted for the bad choices, but that's the way we learn.
I don't know what you mean by "starting stone"

accept its origins. its subconscous basis.
As if any ship wasn't !

(that, and you should SEE the amount of B/S fanfiction being writen, it's nauseating!)
'm reading a lot of it. You saying i'm unhealhy ?
*raises an eyebrow*

Where he appeared only in Xander's dream? He didn't play that big a part in it. I think you mean 'Crush'
Nope i meant the part in Giles' dream where he was "hiring himself as an attraction", revealing how much the Big Bad thing was a show.
But Crush's a big one, that's one of the most redemptionnist episode. Well with Tabula Rasa offcourse. And yes, before you ask, chains are a girl's best friend :)

Gee, Angel? She came from a bad/single home, and statistically, people from those homes tend to seek out destructive relationships.
I didn't say it wasn't true, I said it was reductive and simplistic. There's also the part where Buffy is extremly repressing any "dark" part of her personnality since S3 for exemple, without going all symbolical.

And, enter the B/S rhetoric of 'She really loves him' and all that?

It's not my cup of tea to sweaten it all. Does Buffy loves Spike ? That's a hard question. There's feelings, I don't doubt that. But what are they exactly, I'd rather let her tell it, because noone else should be telling you what you feel.

I don't think i'm staying on the surface that much, mainly because emotions have to be EXPRESSED by the actors for them to be recognized/cannon.
She's expressed several times that Spike was the only person who made her feel. And Buffy is not someone who would use someone else with absolutly no feelings for him anyway.

Using their past and present to determin their motivations. for the past helps determine who someone becomes.
We're doing that too. But sometimes in interpretation you see only what you want to see, hence disagreeing between me and you without meaning that you or me are righter than the others.

The Theory is on about this: Since Buffy/Spike is/has been shown to be Destructive/unhealthy, why do people continue to support it?

Because the "destructive/unhealthy" side is only that, one side of it, and this relationship has also prooved to give Buffy something she needed and she got back by the time she walked out of the crypt in AYW (call it Fire), and because it gave Spike also so much more depth and elightement since he's in love with Buffy that makes him one of the most interresting character of the show right now. And a not-quite-redemption story line that is very nuanced and polemic. Because this ship raises a dozen of interresting moral dilemnas and amazing symbolism. And because they don't do it clichéed, they don't softened it to a silly forbidden love like B/A was, but asks the true question without being judgemental (whatever AYW made you think) and that's damned entrancing.
Reasons enough ?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> That was wonderful, Etrangere. -- Sophist, 20:33:29 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Well said, Etrangere ;o) -- Wisewoman, 06:46:36 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: ...and I can smell the pine... -- verdantheart, 08:07:58 02/28/02 Thu
I don't support it, as is. I'm not disappointed that Buffy broke it off. You might call me a B/S shipper, because I like the overall romance, but that doesn't mean I necessarily want to see them end up together (after all, if B/A had ended up together, it wouldn't have made for good drama ... the unfortunate nature of the beast is that tension must be maintained). Meanwhile, is the romance over? No. Am I looking forward to the next development? Yes.

Does Buffy love Spike? She doesn't think so. It's possible that there's something brewing underneath the surface, but I suspect it'll be a while before the jury comes in on that one. Fine by me.

Do I relate to Buffy? No. She's nothing like me. I relate (oh so very) much more to Spike. There's sympathy there that tends to make me want for him what he wants for himself -- Buffy. And the romantic nature of the set-up, lovers, impediments, tension -- add to that the chemistry between the actors, good grief! Of course there are B/S shippers. Just because a fried onion loaf (with BBQ sauce) isn't good for me doesn't mean I don't want some.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> *LOL* -- Deeva, 08:20:28 02/28/02 Thu
I love the fried food reference. It explains my B/S-ness very simply! In fact I think that I will some how use this phrase in conversation today. Hmm... I do have a staff meeting to go to...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks! I'm told I sometimes turn a good phrase. -- verdantheart, 08:23:55 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> You said a mouthful -- Anne, 08:49:35 02/28/02 Thu
Wow. I agree with each and every point you made -- including identifying with Spike rather than Buffy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: ...and I can smell the pine... -- verdantheart, 08:21:07 02/28/02 Thu
Would I be correct in guessing that you are male? First, looks matter more to males than females. Longevity matters to females, look at all the females attracted to older men. The biological slant is that males who have survived are more likely to sire offspring who survive.

Sure, attractive men get some attention. For about 5 minutes. And I won't deny that looks are very high in the estimation of some women I have met, so I believe that it is probably a large factor in B/S shippage. But then, remember the women on this board are probably a little more mature than the legion who noticed that Spike took his shirt off. My first reaction to Spike? Yep, I had a strong first impression, I remember it clearly. It was along the lines of "Hm, interesting face, exotic. ... Actually, too exaggerated." (Just call me picky ...) And I kind of shrugged him off until the character sucked me in and I began to re-appreciate his appearance.

Lets see, whom did I first notice as attractive? Well, let's see. There's Orlando Bloom (Legolas), but I can't say I'm in line to see his next appearance (though I intend to see the next LOTR because I love the trilogy). I'm no more in love with the character of Legolas that I was while reading the books. I'm not sure whether I'll be a big fan of his or not. Depends on the characters he plays, the situations, how well he does it. In other words, I'll need character to sucker me.

Meanwhile, in vampire mode, Jonathan Frid developed quite a following when he played Barnabas on Dark Shadows. Certainly not the most attractive actor I've seen, nor anywhere nearly as talented as Mr Marsters, in my opinion. I think it was the character and romantic circumstance that drew people in in this case.

The actor whose appearance I was most attracted by would not be the handsome Mr. Marsters, but Richard Chaves (Predator, War of the Worlds TV series). He probably possesses the most striking profile I have ever seen, and I noticed the director often placed him in profile (it's hard to believe that wasn't intentional, as seldom as we usually see actors in straight profile). Then there are his eyes, his hands ... (hm, where were we?) The really funny thing there was that (surely you won't believe this) it wasn't his looks that first got my attention. It was the intensity he gave his character as they moved through the Predator jungle, the way he used his voice. He was kind of hidden in that ensemble, after all. Then I took a closer look and wondered why I hadn't noticed right away.

Meanwhile, I have never met a man in real life that I was physically attracted to in a strong way (picky, remember?). Even the man I've been married to for 20 years is not physically "my type." There's lots of things more important than physical attraction ...

Well, that was far too revealing. Time for me to shut up.

- vh
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The clues are there... (Spoilers for As You Were) -- Darby, 05:58:23 02/27/02 Wed

Spike was making money, okay. But did he really know what he was doing?

Who was he working for? If "The Doctor" is Doc (and somewhere Joel Grey indicated that his work on the show wasn't done), from the Glory arc, it's doubtful that Spike would work with someone pretty much directly responsible for Buffy's death. Why call the character "The Doctor"? First, to give just this clue; second, it's a very non-Spike alias.

How do we know that Spike was ignorant of the demons' true purpose? First, we get Riley saying that these demons are really rare (and then follows it with tales of their birth rate potential, which makes absolutely no sense at all), which could explain why Spike, with his extensive knowledge of demons, wouldn't be familiar with them. "Keep these eggs safe for money" does not equal "protect these demons that are going to be used to massacre whole cities." And we know that the were kept frozen - if Spike's looking to make money, he'd follow those directions. Unless he was never given those directions.

Now for the conspiracy theory. Who wants Spike dead? Someone thought it more important to have the eggs hatch at Spike's than to make money on them (at that time, these prolific demons were still alive, so it wasn't such a risk). If they had hatched and survived, first Spike and then Sunnydale would have been goners. Could this actually be the work of Doc, shielded by agents from Spike's knowledge of the actual mover?

There's another big shoe poised here, folks - look for it to drop with an explosion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The clues are there... (Spoilers for As You Were) -- verdantheart, 06:43:13 02/27/02 Wed
It's nice to see somebody else noticed! I was about to write up a post mentioning that I couldn't see Spike adopting a moniker like "The Doctor." There's must be more to the whole Spike/eggs scheme than meets the eye. I have no intention of "excusing" Spike, I just think that there's more to this story -- don't know what, though. After all, we never got to hear his side. It is hard to believe that he's suddenly become this incompetent, love-addled or not. (Though why he would willingly hook up with Doc (if they are the same) after last season is beyond me.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The clues are there... (Spoilers for As You Were) -- Rufus, 06:53:58 02/27/02 Wed
If Spike moves into a Tardis I'm going to scream......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The clues are there... (Spoilers for As You Were) -- Angelina, 07:51:14 02/27/02 Wed
What is a Tardis????
Thanks
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The clues are there... (Spoilers for As You Were) -- Marie, 08:01:26 02/27/02 Wed
The Tardis is the time machine used by Dr. Who, and Tardis is the acronym for Time and Relative Distance in Space (at least I hope it is - I'm sure Dr. Who fans will be quick to correct me if I'm wrong!).

To put it simply, the Tardis, an old Police call box, when you walked through it's door was magically altered into a large time-travelling spaceship.

Marie
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: The clues are there... (Spoilers for As You Were) -- Angelina, 09:46:01 02/27/02 Wed
THANKS MARIE!!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> A delusional interpretation by a S/B Shipper (AYW spoilers) -- LeeAnn, 06:58:32 02/27/02 Wed
I've decided that everything we saw in As You Were happens exactly like we saw it, but the backstory is completely different.

In my version Riley comes back to town. Alone. Unmarried. He is still biter that Buffy dumped him and, in his black ops way, starts to sniff around. He finds out Buffy is working at DoubleMeat Palace and is angry and horrified to discovery she is boinking Spike. Instead of killing Spike for touching her, like he once promised, he devises a more elaborate revenge.

Riley has contacts in the Demon world and gets one of his demon connections to get Spike to keep some demon eggs as a favor and for some cash. Riley had acquired the eggs in Central America and instead of destroying them he refrigerated them to use in this scheme. Spike has no idea that what he is keeping could kill both him and Buffy.

Riley has an army buddy, a woman named Sam. He tells Sam about his old girlfriend Buffy, the Slayer, and how she dumped him. He asks friend Sam to pretend to be his wife so he can see Buffy and make her jealous, show her how well and happy he is, and salvage his pride. Sam is a bud, and sees no real harm so agrees.

Riley concocts the story of the demon eggs and "The Doctor" and sells it to his superiors. The night he officially returns to Sunnyvale he releases a demon so he has an excuse to approach Buffy and so he and she can do some demon-hunting bonding.

The plan works. It starts to look like he might be able to stir more feelings in Buffy than jealousy. But there is no way to tell Sam and she shows up as his wife so he has to go along with that pretense.

When Buffy leaves Sam in the cemetery (after Sam's impressing on Buffy how sweet and perfect she and her life with Riley is), Riley guesses where she has gone. He shows up at the Spike's crypt to humiliate Buffy by seeming to discover her with Spike. But he already knows about the boinking and his face shows NO shock, NO surprise, NO disappointment. Buffy does not notice.

Riley gets to punch Spike, who cannot retaliate. This motivates Buffy to punch him too. Bonus.

Finally Riley goes down into the crypt to discover the eggs he already KNEW were there. Buffy doesn't notice that Riley would have to have been psychic to have known the eggs were in Spike's underground crypt or have arranged for them to be there. Another Bonus. Buffy attacks Spike again.

SNAFU. The eggs start to hatch. Buffy and Riley barely escape but Buffy destroys Spike's crypt/love nest in doing it. Another Bonus.

In a moment of clarity Buffy even asks Riley, Did you wait till your life was absolutely perfect then send that demon here so you could throw it in my face?

Weeeell, YEAHH!

Riley leaves happy. Spike is hurt and dejected. Buffy broods over her pathetic life and breaks up with Spike. Riley is very happy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Believe it or not, you may have something... (AYW spoilers) -- vandalia, 08:19:49 02/27/02 Wed
Was I the only one that noticed that at Buffy's house when Sam and Riley held hands while sitting on the couch, that neither of them was wearing a wedding ring? And they deliberately did a close up on the hand holding...

Just file it under 'things that make you go 'hrmm.''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Believe it or not, you may have something... (AYW spoilers) -- Robert, 08:43:53 02/27/02 Wed
>> "Was I the only one that noticed that at Buffy's house when Sam and Riley held hands while sitting on the couch, that neither of them was wearing a wedding ring?"

On the other hand, my wife and I don't wear our wedding rings because our technical jobs do not permit it. In the modern society, I think that wedding rings will continue to become an increasingly unreliable method of determining marital status.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Another explanation -- Wisewoman, 08:09:21 02/27/02 Wed
...and one that I fear is closer to the truth: poor/inconsistent script-writing. IOW, gaping plotholes. I think we were supposed to fill in the gap, that Riley went to his sources, like Willy, and beat the information out of them.

"The Doctor" sounds to me like something Spike might call himself, under the circumstances. Unfortunately, it can't help but remind us of Doc, but there may be no connection at all, just a poor choice of alias.

And as to keeping the eggs frozen, Spike may have been given those instructions, but the difficulty of finding a way to follow them given the number and size of the eggs may have led him to simply stash them in his crypt and hope for the best.

As you pointed out, having a demon that is extremely rare and also incredibly prolific makes absolutely no sense. Why would the rest of the script?

;o)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Another explanation -- Robert, 08:45:34 02/27/02 Wed
>> "As you pointed out, having a demon that is extremely rare and also incredibly prolific makes absolutely no sense. "

Can you elaborate on this please?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> The demons, with a possible rationale (AYW spoilers) -- Darby, 09:12:22 02/27/02 Wed
Just think of the "swath of destruction" they were describing - high reproductive rate and deadly offspring - why would such a creature be rare? It'd either be nonexistent or rapidly known. Think killer bees, which is the only analogy that would kinda sorta make sense in this context. If someone had conjured the first demon fairly recently, then the pattern would be supportable. But then it wouldn't make sense for Riley to then describe them as "rare."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The demons, with a possible rationale (AYW spoilers) -- Robert, 10:23:54 02/27/02 Wed
>> "If someone had conjured the first demon fairly recently, then the pattern would be supportable. But then it wouldn't make sense for Riley to then describe them as "rare.""

Darby, how do you define rare? The applicable definition I found in the Merriam-Webster dictionary is uncommon. If there one or two were recently introduced, then they would be uncommon. Given that they are reproducing machines, they are not likely to stay uncommon for very long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: The demons, with a possible rationale (AYW spoilers) -- Darby, 10:56:57 02/27/02 Wed
True, it fits the dictionary definition, but the connotation is misleading. When Africanized bees first escaped containment in Brazil, it would have been technically correct but misleading to describe them as "rare," but once they had spread up to the southern U.S. (and the demons followed a similar spread pattern), it makes no sense to use that term. I still think it was a deliberately chosen word to explain why Spike would not know what he was dealing with.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Slap from the nature guy -- Goji3, 13:01:54 02/27/02 Wed
A species can be rare and have a high breeding rate...usually due to human intervention or other forms of predation

Sea turtles lay about a hundred eggs at a time, a very high breeding rate, and few things eat them, But when they are small, they are fair game for just about every predator on the block.

Also, Riley and Sam came back from south america...from FIGHTING DEMONS!

They could be the reason this species is so rare (that explainaition has its flaws...but so do many of the flaws you people point out in the episode). If this species is native to south america, there are probably things there that control its population, be it parasites or predators.

Now, if they can die so easy as young, then why would they be so valuable still as eggs to be released on an unsuspecting city?

The answer is simple: NO NATURAL PREDATORS, they'd be like Pidgeons, only deadly. That's being changed in some areas with the introduction of the Peregrin Falcon to some cities (succsuesfully, I might add, and that's an endangered species).

So, That was your slap of logic for the day, and how a species can breed quickly and still be rare.

And about the Doctor thing...Maybe Spike's a 'Doctor Who' fan for all we know. that show had a goofy appeal to it, who knows.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Slap from the nature guy -- Darby, 13:17:59 02/27/02 Wed
The point is true, but the demons don't seem to fit the description - the fact that they blowed up real good isn't much of an indictment of their basic survival skills. They hatched big, quick, and nasty - that's a better indicator.

It is true that there's usually a correlation between how rapidly and prodigiously something reproduces and how likely its offspring are to last long enough to reproduce on their own - higher risk requires more babies. And maybe in their own dimension the demons are in that situation, but that certainly wasn't the indication for Earth. It wasn't that a couple could wipe out a city - it was that a couple would rapidly became an army, even in a hostile technological environment.

There's another weakness of the whole thing - what keeps them from spreading back into your territory once they've chowed down on your enemies? And you'd have trouble moving into newly gained areas...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Slaps not necessary -- Sophist, 13:40:59 02/27/02 Wed
Darby is too polite to say it so I will: You can make your point in a different tone of voice. Darby does know what he is talking about here. You can disagree, but politely.

My problem with the example of turtles is that they are not top predators. These demons were. A better example is to imagine tigers reproducing prolifically and able to eat when hatched. They would only be rare after they ate all their prey.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Slaps not necessary -- Goji3, 14:53:41 02/27/02 Wed
Sorry, I meant it in a sort of silly way, sorry if it came off ofensisive.

At any rate, who says they're aren't 'natural' methods of control for this species? For all we know, it's not the top predator in its natural enviornment.

I think it's like a Giant Praying mantis from another dimesion, feirce and deadly, but many things eat it in its natural environment, obviously, earth is not its natural environment, and it's become a BIG problem. an introduced species.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Rare and prolific -- Earl Allison, 02:34:52 02/28/02 Thu
While I was watching, my friend came up with the same question, "How can something that breeds so quickly be rare?"

After my usual answer of, "Don't ask me, I didn't write it!" I decided to, well, spend a couple minutes and make something up ...

Suppose they are rare only in appearance, but are well known in the demon world? Maybe they are killed on sight by other demons, vampires, and the like -- BECAUSE of the massive risk they pose to them. One such demon could decimate the food supply in days or weeks, something other demons, and certainly vampires, would have a problem with.

They could be a common enemy EVERYTHING else in the demon world hates -- like a plague carrier or something, to be destroyed on sight -- and it's not something that Riley or Sam would know, not being part of that culture (at least, no longer than it takes to kill something, not gather information).

It's like Spike's reason for opposing Angelus (aside from the jealously over Drusilla) in Season Two, he wasn't looking forward to a world without humans to eat -- which makes me wonder at Angelus' reasons -- what was HE going to eat if he succeeded?

Take it and run.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Except... -- Darby, 06:52:59 02/28/02 Thu
Spike had no such reaction, and he's a very knowledgeable demon.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Rare and prolific -- yez, 08:35:18 02/28/02 Thu
I think it's a good theory, and would be an interesting demon factoid.

Or...

It's been mentioned before that typically, species that have tons-o-offspring at one birthing are usually those that have high levels of predation. That was my understanding, too, but then I started thinking about insects. Spiders, mosquitoes, etc., have very high offspring output, but I'm not sure if they also have high predation. If not, maybe this is the model being followed. The creatures did look like insects after birth.

Or -- and this is my favorite theory so far...

The writers didn't think that far into it, and it's just something we all have to try to explain away after the fact.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> They do. -- Darby, 10:50:12 02/28/02 Thu
Anything small has lots of slightly larger, moderately larger, and much bigger things eating them. And littler parasites taking them out from within. Mosquitoes are part of both the aquatic food chain (lots of fish eat the larvae) and the aerial one (swallows, bats, etc).

Young spiders don't put up much of a fight to the many birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, and insects - and other spiders - looking to make dinner out of them. And mites, roundworms, protozoans, and bacteria...

But if a baby spider was the size of the hatched demons, they'd have a heckuva better chance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Sharks? -- Valhalla, 17:17:57 02/28/02 Thu
What about sharks? Do they have a lot of young? They're a top predator. I think some species of shark are endangered or near-endangered (but I'm not sure - haven't watched 'Shark Week' for a long time). If they are, I imagine it's mostly because of humans hunting them and ruining their environment -- maybe there'd be a parallel with the USGov hunting them.

A friend of mine caught the same problem with Riley's description (it bothered her the whole episode). I'm tending toward it just being sloppy writing. If their prolific breeding was meant to help explain why Riley & Wife tracked them across two continents, then I don't see why it mattered whether they were rare or not.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Sharks? -- Darby, 20:35:30 02/28/02 Thu
Depends on the type of shark, but typically for the upper-level predators they don't have a lot of young, since the young are born or hatch much larger than a typical baby fish (a great white might be 20-30 cm long), which puts them well up the food chain right from the beginning.

The whole point here is that the "rare" bothered me, too, enough to think that it was purposely written there, logic or no - that's part of what got the original post up...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The demons, with a possible rationale (AYW spoilers) -- Robert, 13:22:54 02/27/02 Wed
>> "True, it fits the dictionary definition, but the connotation is misleading."

My background is electrical engineering and physics. Thus, I am used to using the word in a technical sense (such as rarefied atmosphere). There is another definition of rare which is "marked by unusual quality, merit, or appeal". This would certainly fit with Spikes motive to sell the eggs for profit.

What other connotations are there for rare?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> There is an explanation : Warren is obviously the "Doctor" -- Etrangere, 13:41:46 02/27/02 Wed
I hope this doesn't sound too much like fanwanking, but i've read some of this speculation and i think it makes some sense.
clue #1 The Smashed Doctor Who discussion between Spike and the Trios showed us that "Doctor" is a name they could have thing for Spike (because he's english)
clue #2 Spike wants to get Buffy some money so she doesn't have to work at the Doublemeat Palace
clue #3 the Doctor is described as being an "evil mastermind" IIRC. Yeah, this sounds soooo like Spike and not at all like Warren
clue #4 Spike wouldn't be able to lie if his life depended on it, he's so obvious when he tries to it's painful :) When Buffy and Riley spoke to him about the "Doctor" thing, he obviously had no clues what they were talking about. Only when Riley mentionned the eggs did he get his faked laugh lying voice

So does it make sense that Spike, who still doesn't know the Troika has been after Buffy, would accept to work with them so as to get money ? I think so
Does it make sense that the Trio, who knows Spike's involved with Buffy would want to set him up one way or another (like, not telling him to freeze the eggs) ? I think so

I trust we will hear about this later... and find out the truth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: the "Doctor" spoilers DT and AYW -- Anne, 14:03:48 02/27/02 Wed
I've read some of the same speculation, and I must agree that it seems extremely plausible in some ways. My only problem is with the question whether Buffy would really have kept Spike in ignorance about the Trio. I know we haven't seen her tell him. But after "Dead Things", wouldn't she have had to explain to him why she didn't turn herself in after all? I know they don't talk much, but this seems like just too big a hole -- he definitely would be curious as to what happened to her after she went into the police station.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> One Stone -- LeeAnn, 14:14:24 02/27/02 Wed
If Spike was working with/for Warren he wouldn't have necessarily been able to control it. If Warren had figured out his chip he might have used/compelled Spike to take the Demon eggs, thinking they would hatch and kill Spike AND Buffy.

One Stone.

And Spike might not even have known what was happening.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: There is an explanation : Warren is obviously the "Doctor" -- leslie, 15:30:24 02/27/02 Wed
Does the Band of Evil Weenies know that Spike is with Buffy? I think not. In fact, what Warren knows is that Spike is so NOT with Buffy that he needs to buy a Buffybot. However, Warren as the Evil Mastermind certainly rings true. Especially since of the three, he's the one who needs expensive equipment for his dastardly deeds.

But if we're making Dr. Who references, wouldn't the Doctor be the opposite/enemy of the Master?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: What the Geeks know - DT spoiler -- Philistine, 16:28:10 02/27/02 Wed
Warren at least knows that Spike and Buffy are friendly - he had a camera running when the Geek Clique tried to set Buffy up in DT. Presumably, he saw Buffy and Spike talking before the fight, and we *know* he saw Spike comforting Buffy and leading her away afterward, because we saw him seeing that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: There is an explanation : Warren is obviously the "Doctor" -- LeeAnn, 18:36:57 02/27/02 Wed
In Dead Things after Johnathan returns to the van we are shown Warren watching Spike and Buffy on a video monitor. Spike is holding Buffy's shoulders as he talks to her and gets her away from Katrina's body.
The Trio has all kinds of monitoring equipment. Warren certainly knows Spike has a thing for the Slayer, having made the Buffybot. It would be easy for him to watch as Spike gets Buffy to "come" outside. It would be easy for Warren to discover their relationship if he was watching Spike or Buffy.
If Warren was keeping tabs on the Slayer then he knows about the relationship.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> There is the scene in Smashed, as well... -- 10zlaine, 19:14:53 02/27/02 Wed
Spike has gone to see the nerds regarding his chip:

JONATHAN: Are you sure we can trust him? I mean, we all have heads too.

WARREN (calm): We help him and he owes us one. See, we get Spike on our side, we get info on Buffy. Maybe we even find out how to keep her away from phase two.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: In fact - (more fan-wanking) .... -- desultory, 06:36:42 02/28/02 Thu
(hi! first post here from a dedicated lurker)
I like the Warren=Doctor & it was all a big setup theory.
Like you, I think Spike was sincerely puzzled by the Doctor reference.

/-start fanwank/
Here's a fun thought - maybe that explain's Riley's scar - it wasn't Riley at all - it was Warren! Jonathan tricked him out as Riley with his spell (or it was a Riley-bot made by Warren). And Warren thinks his new scar is so cool he keeps it while in Riley-guise.
It would explain Sam - she's Jonathan. Notice how cool she was - just like a watered-down superstar! Plus all the good advice to everybody.
/-end fanwank/

Seriously though - any thoughts on the scar theme?

-desultory
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> WWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWW!!!!! -- LeeAnn, 07:06:40 02/28/02 Thu
WWWOOOWWW...now that's an idea!

Suddenly noticing how many of the "evil" guys (and I hate Riley so much I count him amoung them) have scars around their eyes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> thank you for your kind words -- desultory (scar-less), 13:02:09 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> "Who has the eggs?" The Doctor. "Who? Dr. Who?" Yeah. "But who?" I just told you. -- Marie, 07:10:38 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> ROFLMAO, litteraly ! -- Etrangere, 07:56:29 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Send in the cliches -- Sophist, 08:30:59 02/27/02 Wed
BtVS won our hearts by its willingness to violate the expectations created by cliches: the very premise of the show; its celebration of strong women; its rejection of moral absolutes; its acceptance of female sexuality; its affirmation of unconventional relationships like B/A and W/O.*

In a truly shocking volte-face, AYW played out every cliche possible, complete with Sam playing Britney to Buffy's Madonna. To make matters worse, the episode took its premise from the one scene in 6 seasons that never rang true, namely, Xander's speech to Buffy and the mad dash for the helicopter in ItW.

I'm suspending my disbelief for the moment, but the conspiracy better be good. I especially like LeeAnn's.

*If you did a double take on the reference to Oz, expecting Tara instead, you might ask yourself what conventions you accept.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I really enjoyed "As You Were," but... -- Rob, 06:21:00 02/27/02 Wed

I still don't like Marc Blucas, and, from his "witty" and very annoying wisecracks, it's like they decided to bring Riley back, more annoying than ever.

So, episode good, Marc Blucas not pretty...

Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Yeah -- verdantheart, 06:37:26 02/27/02 Wed
I didn't like him either, "together" or not. I guess he just seemed to be too into the commando role. I really liked Mrs. Finn, though. She's cool.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> And the other thing is -- neaux, 07:09:11 02/27/02 Wed
Riley who? I was too caught up in the Spike/Buffy scenes to care...

I think I'm turning into a Spike/Buffy fanatic. someone help me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: And the other thing is -- Angelina, 07:43:11 02/27/02 Wed
Neaux, I know EXACTLY how you feel. This is just nuts isn't it? I wish I knew what was going to happen cause I can't TAKE it anymore!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Neaux & Angelina -- Deeva, 09:59:14 02/27/02 Wed
Neaux, what's so bad with getting caught up in Spike/Buffy? Need help? No, no, no, no. It's a good thing. *g*

And Angelina doesn't it almost feel good to be so anxious about it? It's what keeps me tuned in all the time. I know that this makes me sound sick but if this is wrong then I don't wanna be right, baby!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> "The I'm a dude speech" -- neaux, 10:30:21 02/27/02 Wed
As a dude, I wish I was all Riley Finn is a badass, which he was.. but I was more intrigued with Spike and Buff.

but also as a dude, I shouldnt have got all choked up over THE BODY and Last Night's Ending. That's twice! Movies dont even do that to me.. but BTVS did.

good thing my wife was in the other room!!
Or else I would have had to use the "My contacts lens are acting up" speech! ^_^
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> I dunno... -- Deeva, 11:15:48 02/27/02 Wed
I have three brothers and they were more interested in the Spike/Buffy storyline than Riley's. Although they did think that Sam was pretty cool and Riley's scar was neat, too.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> On the other hand ... (SPOILERS for As You Were) -- Robert, 08:38:56 02/27/02 Wed
you won't have to look at him again. I feel confident that this was the last time we will see him. In a way, this was a necessary episode, as it resolved the leftover tension created by "Into the Woods". Riley has now said proper "goodbyes" to Buffy, Dawn and the rest of the gang.

Riley and Buffy joked about telling each other their stories, but it wasn't clear that they did so. This might have provided some fertile ground for discovery, and I find discovery the most interesting aspect of drama.

I loved the loyalty Willow showed Buffy regarding Riley's wife (I think her name was Sam, no doubt short for ... Sam). For me, this was a welcome episode after the previous couple of episodes. It started off by thoroughly crushing Buffy's spirit and hope. Without hope, she really is lost. Then, suddenly Riley bestows the perfect gift upon Buffy. He gave her hope. She was consequently able to see Spike for what he is and what he always will be. Hope gave Buffy the confidence to go "cold turkey" regarding her relationship with Spike.

This episode answers my question about whether Spike is still evil. He is either evil or merely completely amoral. Either way, I think his days may be numbered.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Willow's cuteness factor last night... -- Rob, 10:44:50 02/27/02 Wed
I think last night, we may have seen Willow at her downright cutest in a long time. She was just freaking adorable! Also, while her "hating" of Riley's wife was comedic, it was also a very sweet and protective-of-Buffy-type thing to do. She is a true friend, and now that she's overcoming her addiction, we can see again the sweet Willow we originally fell in love with.

And how cute is her excitement about the fact that were she to call Tara, Tara wouldn't hang up on her?!? I mean, honestly, I love Willow!

Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Xander and Anya... (spoilers for AYW) -- Dariel, 11:19:28 02/27/02 Wed
...were pretty adorable too. Great portrayal of pre-wedding jitters. Plus Anya's disheveled appearance, a stark contrast to the fairytale perfection she is striving for in her wedding plans.

Loved Anya's remark about the car radio--"the hell radio"!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Definitely...Anya and Xander score major cuteness points, too... -- Rob, 13:42:59 02/27/02 Wed
...especially her lines to him about eating the chips...and how he'd split his cumberbund. Can't wait for the big wedding ep!

Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> the only problem with that... -- celticross, 12:08:52 02/27/02 Wed
"In a way, this was a necessary episode, as it resolved the leftover tension created by "Into the Woods".
Riley has now said proper "goodbyes" to Buffy, Dawn and the rest of the gang."

The problem there is that really the only tension created by Riley's departure was Buffy believing she chases off men, a tension that was resolved when she turned down Ben's offer of a date, realizing she was okay single. As far as I could see, Riley leaving really didn't leave much more to be resolved.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Spike's chip revisited (spoilers for As You Were) -- GreatRewards, 09:34:56 02/27/02 Wed

It just occurred to me that we haven't had any references to Spike's chip for a few eps now.

Last night, when Riley showed up at the crypt, he pushed his way past Spike and Spike reached out and grabbed his shoulder, apparently intent on stopping Riley from going downstairs.

Riley backhanded him, but Spike showed absolutely NO "chip" effect for his obvious aggression toward Riley. Why NOT?

Topic: Is Spike's chip defective, or are the show's writers?

DISCUSS!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Spike's chip revisited (spoilers for As You Were) -- verdantheart, 09:40:47 02/27/02 Wed
Grabbing a shoulder, not that aggressive -- we've seen him act a lot more aggressively than that. I'm willing to shrug it off, so to speak. However, the chip was mentioned in OaFA, something to the effect of "He may be a chip-head, but he still doesn't play well with others." Didn't come into play, though.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Spike's chip revisited (spoilers for As You Were) -- GreatRewards, 09:53:32 02/27/02 Wed
I *do* recall that brief reference in OaFA. I guess, in a literal sense, I was wrong in saying that the chip hasn't been "mentioned". What I meant was that the show has not been really dealing with it lately.

Of course, we've now had a few eps without the Evil Troika, too. I guess there's just too much going on to deal with in every episode.

As for Spike agressiveness... it used to be that all he had to do was lunge toward someone (not even touch them) and he'd be writhing on the floor in pain. I get the feeling that either he's becoming numb to it's effect, or the chip is getting less and less "protective" of humankind.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Spike's chip revisited (spoilers for As You Were) -- Robert, 11:40:19 02/27/02 Wed
>> "What I meant was that the show has not been really dealing with it lately."

What about "Smashed" and "Wrecked"? These eposides were largely based upon what Spike's chip did or did not do. They were only 6 episodes ago. How recent do they have to be?

>>> "As for Spike agressiveness... it used to be that all he had to do was lunge toward someone (not even touch them) and he'd be writhing on the floor in pain. "

It was an agressive act (with the intention of harm) that triggered the chip, whether Spike succeded in actually touching anyone. In this episode, if he wasn't intending harm then I don't think there is any discrepancy.

Re-watch "Fool for Love" from season 5. In this episode, Spike lunges at Buffy, but the chip doesn't activate. He explained that he had no intention of harming her, because he knew he couldn't penetrate her defences.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Spike's chip revisited (spoilers for As You Were) -- GreatRewards, 14:32:37 02/27/02 Wed
Alas, I am forced to yield to superior logic. I just don't have as good a memory of past episodes as the rest of you (or I don't have as extensive a library of taped episodes).

I think my problem with the whole chip thing is that the exact trigger was intentionally kept vague enough to allow simple explanations for things that might seem "outside" the story's continuity.

We still don't know the EXACT reason Spike can hurt Buffy. It could very well be that she came back "different". Or it could be that the chip is failing, somehow. Or it could be that it's Spike love for Buffy that confuses the chip. Or it could be that the smell of DMP that tricks the chip into thinking she's a Sewer Monster (yeah, I know she got that job AFTER we learned he could hit her... I was just being funny).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike's chip revisited (spoilers for As You Were) -- Robert, 17:58:21 02/27/02 Wed
>> "I think my problem with the whole chip thing is that the exact trigger was intentionally kept vague enough to allow simple explanations for things that might seem "outside" the story's continuity."

Do not let this get you down. I avoid problems with my suspension of disbelief by treating technology in BtVS as the same as magic. After all, who cares about the details of the Initiative's blasters and chips, when no technical explanation is given for Willow's magic or extra-dimensional hellgods.

Actually, I believe that this is the intention of Mr. Whedon and ME. The melding of technology and magic is highlighted with the witless troika. Both the invisibility raygun and the cerebral dampener are supposedly technology with magical elements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Spike's chip revisited (spoilers for As You Were) -- anneth, 09:53:17 02/27/02 Wed
"Riley backhanded him, but Spike showed absolutely NO "chip" effect for his obvious aggression toward Riley. Why NOT?

Topic: Is Spike's chip defective, or are the show's writers?"

spike may only have intended to stop or impede riley, not harm him.

also. re. that scene - buffy is clearly shaken when riley punches spike, but then she does it too... and later, when r asks her "can't you make him shut up?" and she replies, almost as an aside "i've been trying" i almost hated her. it was a momentary return to the annoying, sel-rightous s4 buffy. evil riley, to have such an effect on my beloved buffy.

also, recall that spike still thinks buffy's a demon - but when she hits him, he doesn't hit back. maybe because he knows riley will kill him, but maybe because he's still protecting her secrets. i hope for the latter.

i too loved the breakup scene - the metaphores (his devestation - is this the house that falls down in smashed? spike's humanity? and her confident return to the sunlight above-ground, the land of the living), the words, his expressions. jm is yummy, but he's a phenomenal actor. i never cease to be amazed by him.

i see things becoming more extreme for him - he gets a soul/becomes human or he gets his chip out. (maybe via a certain vengance demon/former flame...?) i kind of hope he gets his chip out. i think that part of the reason i've enjoyed this season, despite some really weak eps, is that i have no idea which direction it's heading.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

That final scene in As You Were (spoilers) -- lulabel, 09:38:03 02/27/02 Wed

The final scene for "As You Were" was so rich in emotion and subtext. Buffy decisively relinquishes her denial while embracing acceptance and forgiveness, both for herself and for Spike.

Buffy begins on a serious note "I'm not here to bust your chops about your stupid scheme... That's just you. I should've remembered." Buffy for the first time truly accepts Spike for what he is. Implicit in this acceptance is the release of her anger at him for being immoral, evil, opportunistic. "I should've remembered" indicates a forgiveness for herself in being with him. Most devastating of all is that she has also let go of the hope that he might change, that he might be/become something better.

Spike first begins to realize that this conversation is clearly different when Buffy acknowledges for the first time that she wants Spike, that she needs him because things are easier when she's with him.

She continues, " I'm using you. I can't love you" More relinquishment of denial - she admits her feelings, her motivations. The choice of the word "can't" love as opposed to "don't" love is telling - she cannot allow herself to love him, even if she wants to.

Spike counters, "not complaining here". He's willing to continue with the way things are, even if he can't have all of her. This contradicts his attempts in "Gone" to force the issue.

Buffy replies "It's killing me" This reflects back to her breakdown with Tara in DMP. Her guilt over using him is destroying her. Likewise, any feelings of love that she might have (but is not acknowledging) is destroying her sense of who she is.

"I'm sorry, William". WOW. So much said here in just a few words. She is asking for forgiveness for using him. She is regretful that things have worked out so badly between them - an indication of some abiding affection, perhaps? The use of his human name is her way of indicating respect for his feelings, an acknowledgment that Spike does indeed love her, which she has never admitted to before. And lastly, she is sorry for breaking his heart.

Buffy walks away into the sunlight, Spike remains in his cave, devastated. The metaphor here is pretty obvious.

Overall, this scene reflects back to Buffy and Riley's imploded relationship. Buffy is having the confrontation with Spike that she never got to have with Riley. The situations and relationship are different, but the need for open and honest exposition is the same.

Is this the end of Buffy and Spike? Probably not. Perhaps now that Buffy has finally cleared the air, she and Spike may be able to move forward to some sort of healthier, positive relationship. Buffy's acceptance of Spike's failings and her own weaknesses makes their relationship more like that between her and her closest friends - especially between Willow and herself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: That final scene in As You Were (spoilers) -- yez, 10:17:26 02/27/02 Wed
Nice. Thanks. Makes me appreciate the scene more, because I was disappointed with it as presented on screen. I don't know... for me, it was flat, it was too short. It just left me feeling nothing but "I really don't like Buffy." Like she's taking the easy way out again somehow.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: That final scene in As You Were (spoilers) -- Robert, 11:17:41 02/27/02 Wed
>> "Like she's taking the easy way out again somehow."

Yez, could you please elaborate, because I don't see anything easy about this?

All season long, Buffy has known that Spike has not fundamentally changed; that he is still basically evil who occasionally does good works. She chose to ignore this, because her need to feel something overpowered her sense of right and wrong, good and evil. Even the knowledge that this behavior was destroying her could not impel her to stop.

She still have the powerful urges, but is now choosing to abstain. She now knows that she can abstain; she has Willow as a roll model and a few kind words from Riley.

If this is the easy way out, what would you have her do as the hard way out? What other occasions has she taken the easy way out?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: That final scene in As You Were (spoilers) -- yez, 12:26:09 02/27/02 Wed
Hi, Robert. It seems like an easy way out to me, because, IMHO, the hard thing would be trying to understand the gray areas, not just the black and white -- the good *or* evil. By breaking off the relationship with Spike, she doesn't have to deal with her behavior or face the consequences of her actions. For example, she doesn't have to deal with her friends' reactions, which we know she was afraid of, and she doesn't have to figure out why and how she could physically abuse a lover the way we saw her abuse Spike -- and I'm not talking about the rough play (or foreplay) during sex.

It's also unclear whether this is a situation where her "I can't love you" is an admission that her affection just isn't love and probably won't ever be, or whether she's still having trouble seeing Spike as a person as opposed to some dead thing that she can't stand the idea of having feelings for. IMHO, evidence points to the latter. So I think that ending things gets her off the hook there, too, in a similar way that someone who's gay but perhaps has deep religious issues with homosexuality might force him- or herself to "abstain" from a gay relationship rather than deal with having to reevaluate their world view and deal with other people's reactions and possible rejections.

I'm not saying I think Buffy's making an *easy* choice -- just the *easier* choice. And I don't just mean Buffy, but the writers, as well -- and perhaps more so.

You wrote: "All season long, Buffy has known that Spike has not fundamentally changed; that he is still basically evil who occasionally does good works. She chose to ignore this, because her need to feel something overpowered her sense of right and wrong, good and evil. Even the knowledge that this behavior was destroying her could not impel her to stop."

I don't agree with this characterization of Spike as we've seen him over the last 2 seasons. And if this is what the writers/creator believe, then I think they've failed to present that. IMHO, we've seen a Spike who consistently helps and protects the Scoobies.

As far as the egg scheme goes, we have no idea what Spike's motives were, at this point. For example, it's possible, as someone wrote on another thread, that he didn't know the damage the creatures would do or what their intended use would be, if they are as rare as Riley claimed. It's even possible that Spike was directly or indirectly involved in their sale just to make money to give to Buffy, as we know he didn't like her working at the DP. If that was the case, how does demon trafficking make Spike any more ammoral or evil than your run-of-the-mill defense contractor?

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: That final scene in As You Were (spoilers) -- Sarah, 10:25:38 02/27/02 Wed
I guess I had a different take. This episode was incredibly hard for me to watch. I am not a Riley fan, but I still expected more from this episode. I expected some issues to be delved into. I expected Buffy to realize that Riley leaving was a choice he made, and that she couldn't continue to hold herself responsible for not being what he needed her to be. I expected there to be some conversation about what they had both been through, and I certainly expected Riley to shoulder some of the blame for the breakup. I guess I expected too much. So what I got instead was demon eggs. Huh?

I don't for a second think that Spike was the Doctor. I find it ironic that Spike haters continually maintain that he couldn't do evil with his chip in, cause he's a hands on kind of guy, and not the big plan, strategy type. However, they'll jump on the "Spike is a black market dealer of demon eggs" bandwagon. Sounds like planning and strategy to me, and as Buffy told us, Spike is "incompetent." So, I'm pretty sure he got the chance to store something and make some cash, and didn't even think to ask questions. Short-sighted and irresponsible, yes. Evil, not so much.

So, the breakup scene. I expected to be moved by this, and I just wasn't. To me, this was still Buffy doing her best to categorize her life into good/bad territory.

"That's just you. I should've remembered." I have all kinds of problems with this line. First of all, it's prompted by Riley's comments about Spike. Where he asks her if she's forgotten what Spike is really like. But this is coming from Riley. Riley, who has been gone for more than a year. He missed out on Spike nearly getting killed by Glory and Doc trying to protect Dawn and Buffy, on the 147 days that Spike continued to help the Scoobies even after Buffy's death, on the way he treated Buffy after her resurrection, on the times he saved her life in OMWF and TR. Riley has an excuse for seeing Spike the way he does. Buffy, however, should have remembered those things, and she gives no indication that she does.

"and it's killing me." The girl's good, I'll give her that. She used the one thing she knew he wouldn't argue with. However, it's hard to watch Resolve Buffy, still making this all about her. Listen to the scene. "I" statement after "I" statement. She doesn't feel bad for how she's been treating Spike, she's feels badly about what that says about *her*.

"I'm sorry, William." Now quite a few people were really touched by her use of his human name, but I think it just played differently for me. I see this as an apology to the human part of Spike that Buffy considers capable of love. However, Spike is not William. And for me, her use of that name just drove home the fact that she is still incapable of seeing him. It was all about dividing the human aspects from the demon ones. But these two sides of him exist together. And she is not willing to acknowledge it. She didn't owe an apology to William, she owed one to Spike.

The scene had to be done, but the fact that it leaves me so unsettled does make me think that it's not even close to being over yet.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Very good points -- Sophist, 10:49:38 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: That final scene in As You Were (spoilers) -- valkyrie, 11:05:56 02/27/02 Wed
Good observations! It occurs to me that the episode title is more than a military reference. It also alludes to old ways of thinking and acting..."as you were" a year ago. Nothing ever stays the same, but both Riley and Buffy make errors based on the idea that life and people are static.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: That final scene in As You Were (spoilers) -- Robert, 11:26:42 02/27/02 Wed
>> "She didn't owe an apology to William, she owed one to Spike."

You're right! She didn't owe William anything, and what she owed Spike was a wooden stake in the heart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> I don't understand... -- Wynn, 12:55:54 02/27/02 Wed
Why does Buffy owe Spike a wooden stake through the heart? Because he made a mistake? We don't know why he had the eggs. He could have had them for a "weapons of mass destruction" type of deal, ready to sell them to the highest bidder, or he could have been storing them for someone, completely ignorant of how dangerous they were.
Or does he deserve a stake through the heart for trying to bring Buffy into the darkness or for trying to make her believe that she is a demon? As far as Spike thinking that the only explanation for him being able to hit Buffy was if she was a demon, it makes sense to me that Spike would believe this. He knew nothing of the spell that Willow and co. used to ressurect her, and more likely than not, he didn't have the access Tara did to research it. He knows that the chip still works, so he believes that Buffy "came back wrong." It's a logical progression of thought for Spike. It isn't correct, of course, we know that. Buffy didn't come back wrong; just slightly different.

Everyone makes mistakes, Spike more than others. Buffy, Willow, Xander, Giles, Tara, Anya, Dawn, even Joyce made mistakes that had long lasting ramifications, yet no one says that they deserve a stake through the heart. He lived in the vampire world for more than one hundred years (with Drusilla, no less!) It wouldn't make sense for him to make all of the right decisions. He's been part of the human world for only a few years. Anya has been a human for longer than that and she is still learning the intricacies of humanity.

Spike seems to be trying to find who he is. He can't be a human and he can't be a vampire. I see his choices as the choices of a very confused individual. The same applies to Buffy. Spike's confusion is evident in OMWF, Smashed, etc. Buffy's is evident through the entire season.

Sorry this is so long. I love this board and all of the intelligent and passionate posts. I hope my post did the board justice. :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Spike -- Robert, 16:31:28 02/27/02 Wed
>> "Everyone makes mistakes, Spike more than others. "

Well yes, but ...

>> "Spike seems to be trying to find who he is. He can't be a human and he can't be a vampire. "

I think he knows who he is. He can't engage in the normal vampire behavior because of the chip. Before getting the chip, he would have been staked by Buffy except for circustances. After getting the chip, Buffy was unwilling to stake a seemingly neutered vampire. Thus, in a sense, getting the chip saved his existence.

Based upon the events of this season, I have concluded that Spike is no more reformed that any other vampire. He just is more clever and circumspect due to his chip. Assuming that this conclusion is correct, then you must add a century of blood and two slayers to his rap sheet.

On the other hand, just because Spike is evil does not preclude him from doing good works. His motivation for doing good works might include the hope or promise of getting something he wants in return. This is especially true now that he cannot merely take what he wants.

Another motivation might be an overwhelming sense of guilt -- not a motivation I would expect to find in an evil creature. Others on this board believe that being evil does not preclude one from truly loving another. If so, then guilt might also not be precluded.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike - the one that always gets away? -- Philistine, 17:50:52 02/27/02 Wed
Here's something that's been bothering me for a while - why didn't Buffy stake Spike long ago? Way back in S2, I seem to remember that Buffy had him cold at least once (at the end of 'Halloween'), but after dishing out a few good licks she let him run off into the night. In S3, why didn't she dust him as he walked away after the big brawl in 'Lover's Walk?' And in S4, how much would it have taken for Buffy to hold Spike aboveground after she got the ring off his finger in 'Harsh Light of Day,' just long enough for him to become extra-flamey? This goes beyond 'circumstances' - Spike must be the luckiest not-exactly-man not-exactly-alive!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike - the one that always gets away? -- Robert, 18:20:08 02/27/02 Wed
>> "This goes beyond 'circumstances' "

Well yes, but I was being generous. It was obvious early on that Mr. Whedon could not bring himself to dust Spike because the character worked so well as a foil for Buffy.

The point of my previous posting was that I believe that Spike's chip changed him only regarding how much sympathy he could garner with the gang. The fact that Buffy was ethically unwilling or unable to stake Spike, when he couldn't fight back, changes little. Let us not forget that Spike discovered his affliction while trying eat Willow, with Buffy next on his menu. Some posters have pointed out that good things he has done, but Spike inevitably ends up betraying Buffy. When Spike decided that he wanted Buffy for himself, he sabotaged Buffy and Riley's relationship. Buffy and Riley may not have lasted anyway, but Spike's loyalty and motivations were clear in his actions.

If Buffy staked Spike next episode, I would count that as mission belatedly accomplished.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike -- Kevin, 18:03:21 02/27/02 Wed
I disagree about Spike. Tabula Rasa showed us that Spike has changed. When he didn't know who he was, he identified with the humans. When he found out he was a vampire, he identified himself with the heroic journey...to rise above the hand he was dealt (being a vampire). He doesn't know who he is in that episode, but he knows he doesn't want to bite Buffy so he can't be a regular vampire.

I think that episode, when all of his experiences and memories were taken away and all that was left was how he felt - his inner motivations, he showed the direction that he's headed in...It doesn't mean it won't be a slow journey with trials and backsliding, but the direction is certainly there.

The other problem I have is with the perception that Spike only does good because he wants to keep in Buffy's good graces, get in her pants, or whatever. I look at the fact that he helped to Scoobies all summer even though Buffy was dead and there was no way he could have known she was coming back. If his only motivation and identification with the human gang is Buffy, he would have left the Scoobies and their human concerns when she died. Just because he has a chip, doesn't mean that he couldn't have chosen to follow a more "evil" demony path after her death.

I think it will take awhile for Spike to find out how to follow the path that was layed out for him in Tabula Rasa, but that's definitely (IMHO)the direction they have him headed in. If it was an easy journey, it wouldn't be nearly as interesting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike -- Robert, 18:32:11 02/27/02 Wed
>> "Tabula Rasa showed us that Spike has changed. When he didn't know who he was, he identified with the humans. "

This is a good point and I have a different interpretation of it. Tabula Rasa shows us what Spike could become, not what he is becoming. After he regained his memories, he returned to his old habits and motivations. For me, this episode was heart breaking in the way it showed what the characters could be, sans the baggage of six grueling years of experiences. Once the baggage returned, not much changed. If anything, the memory spell accelerated the disintegration of the group.

>> "I look at the fact that he helped to Scoobies all summer even though Buffy was dead and there was no way he could have known she was coming back. "

I thought about this too. I believe his motivation here was overwhelming guilt, based upon the promise he made to Buffy. The fact that he may possibly feel real love and guilt doesn't change his being evil. Other vampires exhibited passion and love, though I don't think we've seen guilt before.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Doesn't the feeling of guilt imply a conscience? -- Sophist, 20:24:23 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> William -- Kerri, 13:17:49 02/27/02 Wed
I'm sorry, William."...I see this as an apology to the human part of Spike that Buffy considers capable of love. However, Spike is not William. And for me, her use of that name just drove home the fact that she is still incapable of seeing him. It was all about dividing the human aspects from the demon ones. But these two sides of him exist together. And she is not willing to acknowledge it. She didn't owe an apology to William, she owed one to Spike.

IMO the fact that Buffy apoligizes to Spike's human half shows that she recognizes its existence as a part of Spike. This isn't an act of denial, it is, as lulabel points out, an act of acceptance.

There is a level of respect that Buffy shows for Spike and also an acceptance of his character. She says that "its just you, I should have remembered." I see this more as Buffy's realizeation of what Spike is and the fact that he doesn't necessarily need to change.

There is also some self-acceptance here. Buffy admits that she wants Spike and how hard this is for her. Saying that she's using him....I'm not sure whether this is true or just easier for Buffy than believing she loves Spike.

Anyway, I was a bit disappointed with the ep too. I expected the same things lulabel was in terms of a resolution with Riley. Buffy once again blaims herself for her relationship with Riley and feels that she's less than he is.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: That final scene in As You Were (spoilers) -- Robert, 11:04:49 02/27/02 Wed
>> "The final scene for "As You Were" was so rich in emotion and subtext."

I hugely enjoyed this episode and the final scene was the crown jewel. In previous seasons we have seen Buffy crapped upon and stuck in bad places, but never before for so long nor so deeply. This will likely be my favorite season even though it has been torture to watch Buffy suffer such excruciating pain. With the first act of this episode, I felt sure we were in for more punishment. Buffy's coworker is rubbing her face in the fact that she is stuck in fast food hell. Then her university application is rejected, thus further proving she has no future. Her friends and Dawn have been growing more distant by the episode.

Then all this changed with Riley's return. Willow now is showing Buffy not only her loyalty, but the way out. Riley is the only one who could tell her (and show her) that she really is better than her present circumstances would suggest, and that these problems are only temporary.

I have read the opinions of many on this board that Spike was not such a bad guy for Buffy; that Buffy was the perpetrator of the sick relationship. I still disagree. Spike may have wanted Buffy's undying love, but he was quite happy to settle for what he got. He liked Buffy as she was a lot more than Buffy of a year ago. He was not interested in helping her out of her depression, if it meant losing his nightly copulation. He may continue to work on Buffy, but now I believe she will be able to abstain.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: That final scene in As You Were (spoilers) -- Chris Davies, 13:39:42 02/27/02 Wed
> Is this the end of Buffy and Spike?

God I hope so.

Chris Davies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

What does it mean to "use" someone? Spoilers for S6 -- Sophist, 11:19:20 02/27/02 Wed

We've all used the phrase "using him/her", both in our posts and in our lives. I wonder whether we all mean the same thing by it. Let me try to spell this out.

Buffy believes she is "using" Spike. This can be true only if two facts are true: She DOES NOT love him and NEVER WILL(as opposed to CANNOT LET HERSELF love him); and she is violating Spike's expectations of the relationship.

If Buffy does love Spike, but just can't admit it to herself, then she has not abused the relationship (IMO). If she loves him and Spike loves her, then the 2 are on equal footing even if the relationship has major issues to work out.

Expectations are important. Parker used Buffy (in my understanding) because he misled her about his expectations. But what if Parker slept with Faith? Both would have had the same expectation from the experience. The event may not be admirable, but neither would it violate either party.

Spike's expectations about Buffy are ambiguous. Best I can tell, he knows she does not love him now (or at least won't admit to it). He has the hope that this will change in the future. He's searching for the right way to convince her. At the same time, he clearly does get something from their trysts, as does she, and the trysts leave open the possibility that he'll find the right connection. Only if Buffy NEVER will love Spike does it make sense to say that his expectations are being violated. How can she, or anyone else, know this?

The ambiguity at the end of AYW fails to resolve this issue. More significantly, it fails to show that Buffy is right to condemn herself. Help me out here -- What is going on?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: What does it mean to "use" someone? Spoilers for S6 -- Teri, 11:56:54 02/27/02 Wed
Great points and very accurate definition of what being used is all about. But as in all things in life I just don't think it is as black and white as even a very well thought out and written definition tries to make it out to be. There's too much gray when it comes to these types of grounds, mostly all having to do with intent and motive.

Was Buffy having sex with Spike out of an act of love?
Didn't appear so. Not even once.
Was Buffy having sex with Spike as sort of a drug to not DEAL?
Appeared so EVERYTIME.

So her intent and motive? To DEAL.
And Spike's role in this? The DEALER! (which is exactly what he reminded me of when he stops her outside her house before she goes in?)

So the basis of this relationship was never ever on a foundation of a two way street of love. Which makes it not about love...right now.

Can it be later?
After last night..sure. Cause at least Buffy is being honest with herself and with Spike now. BUT! in order for that to happen I think Buffy would have to learn how to deal first and continue to deal without coping mechs before she could have something real with ANYONE. Otherwise...next time round when something bad happens, she'll use the same methods to deal again.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: What does it mean to "use" someone? Spoilers for S6 -- Sophist, 12:41:10 02/27/02 Wed
I completely agree that the B/S relationship does (notice the present tense) not involve love. I just don't get Buffy's moral condemnation of herself when the writers haven't given us the facts necessary to justify that condemnation. Tara was right: "It's more complicated than that." Unless the ambiguity is deliberate in order to set up a future plot line.....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: What does it mean to "use" someone? Spoilers for S6 -- ponygirl, 12:08:19 02/27/02 Wed
Whether Buffy will ever love Spike is a question I don't think she herself can answer. We can all speculate of course but right now Buffy isn't even allowing herself the possibility of entertaining this idea. Spike spelled out the terms of their relationship pretty clearly in Wrecked - he loves her, she wants him, she just doesn't love him yet. Spike has a lot riding on that "yet", if Buffy feels she can't offer him even that then yes she is using him.

Like Tara I believe Buffy's behaviour is more complicated than right or wrong. But for me the most telling image from last night was Spike puzzling over Buffy's kevlar vest while she's already got his shirt half off. The significance of clothing in this episode was already pointed out earlier on the board which helped me to really see the physical and emotional vulnerability that Spike has put himself in, whereas Buffy's emotions remain wrapped in armour, protected even from herself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: What does it mean to "use" someone? Spoilers for S6 -- Teri, 12:20:07 02/27/02 Wed
In brilliant post ponygirl wrote: (and,sorry I don't know how to italisize!)

"The significance of clothing in this episode was already pointed out earlier on the board which helped me to really see the physical and emotional vulnerability that Spike has put himself in, whereas Buffy's emotions remain wrapped in armour, protected even from herself."

Whoa! You so hit the nail on a head that I have been vaguely seeing but unable to put into words and process! Thankyou! Now I have more space in my brain!...not that thats particularly a good...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> clothing kudos -- ponygirl, 12:37:45 02/27/02 Wed
Thanks Teri, but I wish I could remember who originally pointed out Buffy & Riley's clothing vs Spike's nudity in the AYW promos. Thanks to whoever did, it really effected my viewing of this episode.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: clothing kudos *spoilers* -- fresne, 17:41:41 02/27/02 Wed
And weighing in as I take a break from the presentation that wouldn't die and go to Hell/I miss my house, I did and didn't like the episode.

Consider then Buffy's final attire. Low squared neckline (vulnerable and yet resolute) in a soft warm color and fabric. Crinkly even. So, let's see. We have day glo orange clothes of brain deadening slavery. With a hat that has Cow and Chicken on it! A yellow jacket with grass stains. Black camo wear with breast plate. (Interesting, she never changed to camo for Riley before. In fact, bright, "I've often slayed" in this tank top" were the norm). Flat breast plate. De-feminized. Structured. Then finally soft, looked like linen or cotton. No leather. A round pendant. Circular, feminine.

I've all but abandoned the Willow addiction metaphor whatever. Maybe we'll get to some meaty issues on the subject next year. This year would appear to be about the symptom. Shamans etc. may go poof to their pleasure. I don't want to consider what crack = magic does to the whole Jenny, Giles, Tara, Wesley not gibbering for a fix yet. Well, okay, maybe Wesley, but I don't think that's why he's so wonderfully, cooly beautifully going off the deep end baby. Ahem....

Plot threadbare bits there were aplenty. Why didn't Riley say, "hey don't kill the critter"? Why no explanation of the whole Doctor thing to begin with? Where was their Commando backup? Excuse me, under the circumstances, a gentleman doesn't ask to stay over at the ex-girlfriend's house. What no reactions to Buffy dead, mom dead, Buffy working a dead end job? Agent Riley Finn, when you ask for the Slayer's help, say the magic words, "And of course you will be paid as a government contractor, seeing as I may have cost you your job which you clearly need to fill the cupboards with ice cubes." Pffft! Why is Buffy the only person responsible for taking out the trash, cleaning the dishes? Why would Spike store the eggs next to his bed? How is Mr. Short Term planning all of a sudden the Doctor. What a weird name to pick. It's not that I don't think he could be evil enough to sell, blah, blah, it's just, not his style. It's an off note. Like a hammer which doesn't quite hit the bell right. Odd, since their notes are generally so true. So, resonant. Of course this character would do that. The seeds are there 1 and 2 and 5 and 6 seasons ago. He's manipulative, amoral, opportunistic, but this is well structured (governments approached, money has exchanged hands, which all takes time) and yet unstructured (no freezer, eggs in open sight in a common room). Also, rare and yet highly reproductive demon eggs. Very Aliens.

Riley was for most the episode indeed most captain cardboardish, with oddly enough, for me, the exception of the last scene. What Buffy profoundly needs/needed and she needs it over and over and over until it sinks in is, "you're okay, you're a good person, and gosh darn it people like you." Well, actually, we all need that. Thus, Buffy's need to hear Spike say that he loves and wants her. Problem being that it's emotional fast food because she doesn't respect Spike, thus her, "It's Spike. It can't be him because he's incompetent." She needed to hear it from someone that she respects (right or wrong) that she's okay. And really Riley is about the only person that could have given her that speech and she would have believed it. There was corn fed sincerity all over it.

It's not that people can't evolve, (and here I once again return to that essential conundrum of can anyone really change who they are, would they want to, or do they just alter the outward manifestations of their behavior as they come to understand themselves better) it's that the world changes also. The wheel turns. At beginning of each season, Buffy will be cast down. However, the thing about the wheel, if I may steal a phrase, is that while you sometimes may be cast in the dirt, other times you are carried up to the stars.

Then happily Riley and his cool, but 2-demensioned wife sailed away from the complicated world of BtVS back to the simple world of fight, kill, get taken care of by Big Brother, he but a gimlet floating eye in the sky.

Interesting as we return to the final scene that Buffy finally finds herself in both Buffy and Riley's position. Riley, leaving to save his own sanity. Angel, because it's best for Buffy. Implicit within the statement that "it's killing" me is that she understands that this relationship isn't good for Spike either. She is hurting him, she isn't helping him be the best William that he can be. It's just that he's an addict and she has to be the strong one.

I mean, damn. When she called him William, she was finally treating him like a man even as she leaves him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> And Purple. Which is Red + Blue. aka Fire + Ice. -- Etrangere, 21:00:22 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: clothing kudos *spoilers* -- Lilac, 05:38:24 02/28/02 Thu
While it's not an important point, I was amazed that Riley was able to reach back behind his car seat and pull out a tiny Buffy-sized set of black ops clothing. Did he pack that when he and Sam started off, thinking "We'll probably be asking for Buffy's help and she is never dressed appropriately, I think she was a size 2"? Surely no one who normally rides in that SUV would fit in those clothes. I know it's a silly point, and her appearance in those protective clothes is more important than how she got them, but really....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Easy HTML instructions....link inside or use FAQ link above....:) -- Rufus, 12:50:14 02/27/02 Wed
ATPoBtvS FAQ

There are easy instructions on how to underline, bold, italics, link...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Gratzi! -- Teri, 13:04:22 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Can "use" mean rebound? -- neaux, 13:01:50 02/27/02 Wed
Alot of people who feel "used" in a relationship are often "rebounds." Rebounds many times involve sex rather than dating... same situation as with Buffy and Spike.

Could Spike have been the rebound from Riley?

I've forgotten the rules of dating.. its been a long time.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Can "use" mean rebound? -- Sophist, 13:30:10 02/27/02 Wed
Seems like a long time between Riley and Spike for Spike to be rebound guy. Is Buffy a rebound from Dru? Makes more sense, except that everything we know, including affirmation from Tara speaking ex cathedra, Spike does love Buffy. No rebound there.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Can "use" mean rebound? -- vandalia, 09:51:16 02/28/02 Thu
Harmony was Spike's rebound from Dru, not Buffy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Well, okay, but -- Sophist, 10:34:29 02/28/02 Thu
In that case Parker, not Riley, was Buffy's rebound from Angel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Sort of (was Re: Well, okay, but) -- vandalia, 12:00:15 02/28/02 Thu
Parker was her attempt at a rebound that failed miserably because it wasn't a 'relationship' it was a one-night stand. Riley was the rebound 'relationship.' He was her attempt to do what Angel wanted her to do: live a normal life with a normal guy (or as normal as they get in the Buffyverse).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> I saw S/H as a parallel to B/P. S was less subtle than P, but H not the sharpest knife in the drawer -- Sophist, 12:39:57 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I think she is using him. -- yez, 14:10:48 02/27/02 Wed
Sophist wrote:

"Buffy believes she is "using" Spike. This can be true only if two facts are true: She DOES NOT love him and NEVER WILL(as opposed to CANNOT LET HERSELF love him); and she is violating Spike's expectations of the relationship."

I don't think "don't love you" and "can't love you" are all that different. In either case, the other person isn't getting treated in a loving way.

As far as Spike's expectations go, even though in AYW he says he's "not complaining" about her using him, previous eps. have shown that he's really not happy with their relationship being closeted and with her treating him as just a "dead thing," and we've seen him try to end the relationship several times because of that -- unsuccessfully, of course, because he's "love's bitch," as we heard him refer to it in "Lover's Walk," I believe.

I think that as long as Buffy refuses to deal with Spike in an open way, she's right to feel that she's using him, because she's just taking and not giving anything real back -- the sex really doesn't count. I think she believes that Spike loves her, and she uses the physical as well as the verbal manifestation of that to temporarily plug up the big hole she's carrying around in her spirit. It's like she's trying to fill herself up with his penis and his feeling, but it just goes into a vacuum because she's not loving back. The scene in AYW illustrates this perfectly. Faced with the lover who's gotten over her and her own unresolved feelings, she goes to Spike and has him: 1) tell her she's loved; 2) tell her she's desirable; 3) create a tangible, pleasurable connection with another body (i.e., sex). And that's all she allows, telling him to shut up when he says anything else.

Even though I still think she's lying to herself about her feelings, admitting that she's just using Spike is good. As others have said, this is the only chance the relationship has to move forward, whether or not it actually does.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: I think she is using him. -- Sophist, 14:25:42 02/27/02 Wed
You make good points.

I can think of several different meanings to "can't":

1. In the sense of fundamentally impossible. Pigs can't fly.

2. In the sense of temporarily prohibited. I can't go to the store because I'm grounded.

3. In the sense of it shouldn't be true but it is. I can't believe it (meaning amazing but true). An example from the show is Buffy's line to Angel in Angel: "This can never..."

There may be others. The problem I have is that I don't know how to judge Buffy as long as the last scene contains this ambiguity.

I completely agree about the need for a breakup, not just for the relationship, but for dramatic reasons as well. I hated the way they portrayed her motivation for the breakup for lots of reasons, many of which you have pointed out here and below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: I think she is using him. -- yez, 14:36:52 02/27/02 Wed
I'm with you on the ambiguity. At least *this* kind of ambiguity, which so far seems more like sloppiness than the kind that enriches a story by stimulating people's imaginations.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> "Pigs can't fly" - but can a pork roll? (Sorry! It's silly-mood day!) -- Marie, 07:23:08 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Buffy is the mirror... -- Darby, 22:00:10 02/27/02 Wed
...but isn't reflecting anything back to Spike.

Hadda know they'd work that piece of lore back into the show, eh?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> It's all about respect -- Etrangere, 14:51:05 02/27/02 Wed
The reason why Buffy is using Spike has been spelled to us the moment she first kissed him in OMWF : this is not real / but i just want to feel
this is not real, it doesn't mean anything, i'm not building a relationship, i'm just escaping etc.
And why ? to feel... which is, granted, the ambiguity. Would Buffy *feels* with Spike if she had no feelings for him ?
But it doesn't matter because it doesn't change the way she treats him, which is, like a thing, and never like a person. No respect for him, and no self-respect (because treating Spike like this is beneath her, hence killing her) and maybe one of the reason she does it is for self-destruction.
The only time when Buffy started to respect him is when she broke up with him, which is why this episode was hopeful for B/S :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Why Buffy is using Spike -- SingedCat, 14:57:35 02/27/02 Wed
Teri, there was a time when that was my exact definition of a good relationship, and in many ways it still is. But we have to consider the madness of love factor. There is no ambiguity about what Spike wants, only what he says, and Buffy knows it.

I have to interject a little personal experience here. I had a boyfrind who was very much in love with me, though I didn't feel quite so affectionate as he did. I entered into the relationship telling him this honstly, and in the honest hope that we would grow together. When this turned out not to be so, and although I was very honest about it, (painful as that was), I realized that for some time I had let us coast on without any hope of a future for my own selfish reasons (the intimacy *was* amazing).

I saw that even though I had been honest with my guy, and although he *said* that he understood,and that for now he would take what he could get and hope for the best, look after his own heart, and agreed to just ride the ride while it lasted, it didn't change what I couldn't help but know-- that his heart felt very differently, even if he wouldn't admit it, and he wanted much more than he would admit to, in a part of his heart that he wouldn't share but which I could nevertheless see clearly. When it came time to part he was horribly hurt, and if I had acted according to what I knew to be true instead of what he was telling me, I would have done the right thing, the way I would for a friend who was about to drive home drunk.

So here is how Buffy is using Spike. She is taking advantage of a powerful emotion she *knows* he is incapable of controlling to ease her own loneliness and confusion. Part of her wants this, but her conscience is whispering that she is no better than a guy who gets a girl drunk and sleeps with her while her judgement is impaired. If Buffy were herself she would do what he can't, and now she is trying to do that, not for his sake, but for her own.

There's no doubt in my mind that she doesn't love him. She's a better person than I am, and I think that if she had more regard for his feelings she could not have brought herself to do that to him, nor would she feel so bad right now, if she believed anything they were doing was genuine. I mean, I felt bad because I was causing pain to someone I cared about, and I broke up for both our sakes. Buffy certainly owes Spike the "I'm sorry", but she's not going to guilt over his pain; she's doing this for herself.

Anyway, my judgement may be skewed by my own past, but that's what I think.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Putting it in personal terms was very helpful. Thanks. -- Sophist, 17:13:27 02/27/02 Wed
However, I still find it hard to judge Buffy because I'm not sure what she meant in the closing scene. If she meant it like you did, perhaps you're right. On the other hand, I can't be too judgmental and neither should you about yourself. How many times have we said "I'm never ..." and then done it anyway? If you had changed your mind somewhere in your relationship, would you feel the same way now? In Buffy's case, I guess we'll have to wait and see.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The "It doesn't touch who you are" speech and other problems with As You Were (spoilers) -- yez, 11:49:51 02/27/02 Wed

My biggest problem with this ep., I think, was the "It doesn't touch who you are" speech as the moral of the story, so to speak -- it inspires Buffy to get back on track, we see her walking off into the sunlight, etcetera, etcetera.

So, Buffy's actions and choices don't touch who she is. Why not? Don't someone's actions and choices tell us a lot about a person? I agree that working in fast food doesn't define you. But shouldn't it mean something, for example, when Buffy punches her lover in front of Riley, when, for all Riley knows, Spike is defenseless? But it doesn't even faze Riley, and we still get the "you're golden" speech.

Everyone is horrified when Warren et al. create a spell-induced sex slave who he strikes and accidentally kills. That makes him a bad person. But Buffy has a willing sex slave (under the spell of love maybe) who she periodically beats into a pulp, and that doesn't touch who she is. She gets to walk off into the sunlight, and we're supposed to understand maybe that this is some kind of turning point for the character, that she's come to some important realizations, that she's getting back on track? That she gets to be the hero again?

But maybe this idea of what you do not touching who you are is something deeply ingrained in the show's premise. And that disappoints me, because it's too simplistic. So all the good Spike does will never touch who he is, an evil demon. And no matter what any of the good guys do, they'll always be the good guys.

Anyway, some of the other things that bugged me about this episode: the pacing, plotting and writing -- the same substandard stuff we've been getting a lot of this season, IMHO. For me, they all sum up as glossing over the details.

The details, the complexities and richness were what I loved about this show. But now we get lines like this perfect example, "My whole infirmary was wiped out by... well, I didn't know what they were." Bullshit -- the *writers* didn't know what they were and didn't take the time to figure it out, and so the characters don't, either.

Another example: How is it possible that Riley would forget to tell Buffy the most important thing about the mission -- not killing the demon before finding its eggs? Sure, we can buy that he was nervous seeing her again. But c'mon. So the writers are like, "Aha! Not to worry. We'll just have another character acknowledge that it's weird, and so the audience will know that we knew that they knew." That's an old trick, and it's just a cop-out, and it seems like we've been getting a lot of those lately. Like Xander's 'So, any luck finding the three geeks? No? Well, I guess when a geek going into hiding, he really goes into hiding.' Chuckles all around. And we never hear about the trio again.

Just like that demon we saw in OaFW: 'Hey, some demon unlike any other demon we've thrown at the Scoobies turns up in Sunnydale and nearly kills them, but oh, well, why bother to have the Scoobies learn any more about it. We have to leave time to show Buffy in her fast food outfit and environ as much as possible, or show her failing to take out the trash as a symbol of her domestic incompetence because we haven't made that point a thousand times already. Plus, we have to show Buffy being unenthused as much as possible, lest the audience forget she's directionless. And let's not forget the mandatory 5 minutes devoted to some a tiny snapshot of Xander and Anya's life that will substitute for their actual presence in the Buffy-verse, and the mandatory 2-3 line reference to Willow's addiction and/or failed relationship with Tara, which will substitute for her actual life."

Just like Willow's supposed addiction to magic. They had been building that slowly and carefully over the years, until they ruined it, as far as I'm concerned, by strapping a hyperdrive onto the subplot. I thought her use of magic was a metaphor for the addictiveness of power, especially for someone who had esteem issues. That would be interesting. Little did I know it was actually just your basic crack metaphor. As far I'm concerned, they showed us Willow getting addicted and having withdrawal from spells being done *to* her, instead of the rush of the spells she was doing herself, which to me makes all the difference between a quality TV and an afterschool war on drugs special. Again, it's the idea of the choices you make not touching who you are, it seems. Willow's bad choices -- using magic to manipulate other people -- aren't addressed by giving up magic, and yet it all seems to have been boiled down to that.

And whatever happened to the show, in general, as *metaphor* for life's travails? Instead, is seems like we're getting a show that's *actually* about the trials and tribulations of the workplace, housework, paying bills, drugging and dating -- interspersed with a few badly choreographed fight scenes involving generic-looking monsters.

OK, my rant is temporarily over. I'm just frustrated with this season so far -- unlike the Scoobies, the choices that are made for this show do affect what the show is for me.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Wow, are you sharing my brain? -- Sarah, 12:04:28 02/27/02 Wed
I agree with everything you've written. I had so many issues with this episode that I can't even form them into a coherent post. But I think the main problem I had was that final image of Buffy walking into the sun. I'm just praying that this is misdirection, because it seemed like an awfully heavy-handed metaphor. I look to the title "As You Were" in order to make that final image make sense. Buffy is going to try to return to the person she was when Riley knew her, become as she was. But she can't. She can end her relationship with Spike, but she can't deny that it has changed her. And ending it will not fix everything else. If Buffy's life suddenly turns around because she ended a sexual relationship I will be severely disappointed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Wow, are you sharing my brain? -- yez, 12:57:29 02/27/02 Wed
Yeah, "severely disappointed" is a good way of putting it. I'm hoping there's more to all this, too, and that they don't think this wraps everything up.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Another passport scene? -- LeeAnn, 13:55:40 02/27/02 Wed
"If Buffy's life suddenly turns around because she ended a sexual relationship I will be severely disappointed" Sarah

You forget that as she was leaving Spike's crypt she somehow also managed to stop by a hair salon, get her hair bleached, more attractively styled and had her makeup done.

It wasn't breaking Spike's heart that turned everything around, though she never gets tired of that, it was the make-over.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> : D -- yez, 14:12:21 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The "It doesn't touch who you are" speech and other problems with As You Were (spoilers) -- Traveler, 12:35:15 02/27/02 Wed
"But maybe this idea of what you do not touching who you are is something deeply ingrained in the show's premise. And that disappoints me, because it's too simplistic. So all the good Spike does will never touch who he is, an evil demon. And no matter what any of the good guys do, they'll always be the good guys."

This is what bothered me the most about this episode. Also, I have generally been willing to go along with the Willow addiction plotline, but AYW goes over the top. I really didn't like the scene where Sam compliments Willow, telling her that she had seen "black shaman" disappear due to magic addiction. She made it sound like this kind of thing happens all the time. OK, I can buy that there is some kind of physiological addiction to magic, but if it were that common, why have we never seen it before this season? Also, I'm just starting to get tired of this metaphor turned reality. Logically, I understand that it would have to be a slow, painful process for Willow, but I really am sick of watching it. I'm beginning to agree with those who say that this show is losing all its subtlety.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Exactly -- the shaman info was another cop-out. -- yez, 12:48:42 02/27/02 Wed
It's a perfect example of introducing information after the fact to help reinforce a weak story.

"Now [the shamans are] gone. There's nothing left" -- I mean, can you get any more generic than that?

And I have a hard time believing that the lack of detail could be due to time constraints. How about "The magic consumed them. There's nothing left of the people they used to be. They're just these vessels for magic now." Or "The magic destroyed them. Literally." As it is, we really have no idea what Sam meant, and I have to believe that's because the writers don't, either.

I don't know... Maybe Sam's and Tara's lines about Willow's strength are convincing Willow, but they're not working for me. I have yet to see Willow deal with the underlying issues of self-esteem and power that led to this whole mess. I really don't want to go back to the stammering, cutesy Willow of old.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> I agree, and since when did the US Army... (Spoilers) -- Scroll, 13:11:00 02/27/02 Wed
even acknowledge that magic exists, let alone employ real shaman? Considering all we know about the Initiative, their scientists, soldiers, and boys at the Pentagon, are we all of a sudden supposed to believe that magic is something they'll accept without question and immediately start putting to use? We have no evidence that any soldier or scientist other than Riley even knows magic truly exists. Maybe Riley explained it all, but it still feels to me like the writers just through those shaman in there just so Sam could make Willow feel better.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: I agree, and since when did the US Army... (Spoilers) -- Sarah, 13:17:59 02/27/02 Wed
Actually I was incredibly thrown by Riley asking Willow to do the spell. Was he ever involved in the magic aspects of the slayage? It seemed very forced to me, and an obvious set up to get into Willow's 12-stepping lines of the week. Poor AH, having to act this trash.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Closest he came to was in Buffy vs. Dracula, when Buffy asked him to pour spooky sand! : ) (NT) -- Scroll, 13:24:01 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: I agree, and since when did the US Army... (Spoilers) -- yez, 13:25:34 02/27/02 Wed
Yeah -- poor all of them. Things just aren't clicking the way they used to. If it hadn't been so good before, it wouldn't seem so not-quite-good now.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Actually, it was Sam, his wife who suggested magic -- Masq, 16:29:49 02/27/02 Wed
And we know only snippets of her background. But the Army (or someone in the squad) could have been made aware of magic through the strong shamanistic practices of South America.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: I agree, and since when did the US Army... (Spoilers) -- yez, 13:28:29 02/27/02 Wed
I agree that the whole thing was forced for a purpose -- the Willow-addiction thing.

To be fair, though, it's plausible that Riley and Sam would be using shamans, IMHO. We know they acknowledge the existence of demons and have from the beginning, and it seems that once you get into that realm, accepting magic isn't a big leap of faith.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Exactly -- the shaman info was another cop-out. -- Goji3, 14:43:21 02/27/02 Wed
Well, That's Technically imposible given the shows premace (Willow becoming a geek again) - but remember Willows Dream...where she was stripped back to her season one-ep one-attire.

And, I see it more as 'dramatic effect' and less of a cop-out. something for people to ponder. dismissing it as a cop-out is infact a cop-out.

And about the Military accepting shamans, its possible they brought them in as 'cultural aids', and who is to say the Government didn't 'learn their lesson' from the initative about Magical beings and science. It's not often (that I can think of, feel free to correct me if i'm wrong) that the Government makes the same mistake twice. they make mistakes, but when it blows up in their faces, they rarely trip over the same stone twice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Sam and Willow and types of magic -- Wisewoman, 20:49:23 02/27/02 Wed
You hit on something here that's been bothering me, too--the idea that now Willow has become addicted to magic we suddenly have a whole subculture that shares her problem, and attends 12 step meetings with her.

I was led to believe that Willow's power was something truly special, something not many Wiccans (or Wiccas, as they keep saying) could ever develop. Certainly Tara has said time and again that she'll never be as powerful as Willow, and she proved it in OaFA with her revelation spell.

If Rack has been doling out the magic "dope" to people with very little natural talent then I can see how you might find a group of magic addicts in Sunnydale. Willow's supposedly great power should have made her an exception. What was so great about what Rack was doing that she couldn't have done herself? Put another way, are we to believe that Rack would have been able to deal with Glory more effectively than Willow did?

The thing about the shamans was so poorly handled I was left thinking it was something Sam made up to ingratiate herself with Willow after her faux pas. But no, the writers probably do want us to believe that this is one of the pitfalls that await the magically adept--addiction and annihilation.

Funny how people like Tara seem to be able to use magic as a tool with no ill effects. Sam's speech about never meeting anyone strong enough to give it up made me wonder if the true strength isn't in being able to use it without abusing it, in which case having Willow forswear magic altogether is a bit of a cop-out. I look back at the situations she's been placed in since she quit, and how convenient it's been that she's been able to keep herself and everyone else alive without resorting to magic. In DMP she narrowly missed being paralysed and so was able to physically overpower the brainsnake. In OaFA, Tara was there to do the necessary, albeit somewhat less than effectively. In Gone she managed to distract Warren before he could kill Buffy with his super ray gun--but that one was really a pretty close call. What does it take before Willow realizes that the choice may be, "I refuse to do magic, and I die," or "I refuse to do magic, and my friend dies?" I'm getting a little weary of on-the-wagon Willow resorting to the sort of physical heroics we've seen from her lately--they just make no sense. Not only is she not as strong as Buffy, she's not even physically as strong as Xander, and possibly Anya and/or Tara could take her out in hand-to-hand combat as well!

Okay, ranting is exhausting and I'm really hoping against hope that this season is leading to something that will have me apologizing all over for my lack of faith. Those will be the happiest, most heart-felt apologies you've ever heard, believe me.

;o)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Retrofitting the magic concept to patch up the plot -- yez, 08:23:18 02/28/02 Thu
Yeah -- I'd forgotten about the spellcasters anonymous thing Willow had referred to. But it did also strike me as another example of retrofitting.

I'd been looking forward to a situation where Willow had to face something like what you describe -- sink or spell. It could've been very dramatic and interesting. IMHO, OaFA wasn't really developed well. It just kind of passed with an "eh" for me.

The whole Rak (sp?) thing was interesting, but like you, I was puzzled as to how it fit in with what we'd seen so far about magic, and I ended up feeling like they'd pursued that because it seemed cool, but really hadn't thought about how it would work in the long run. And for me, I find the more I think about it, the less sense it makes -- and the more frustrated it makes me, because I feel it was such a wasted opportunity to explore some interesting stuff.

As far as Tara not having the same problems as Willow, though, it seems very plausible to me. Just look at alcohol, for example. The majority of people don't become addicted to it, yet some do. I believe current evidence points to there being physiological and psychological reasons for that -- some people are predisposed to becoming addicted to things. Evidence indicates it may even be genetic and inherited in some cases. While Tara is shy, she seems pretty well grounded in who she is and what magic is for. On the other hand, Willow came to magic with a whole slew of esteem/power issues, I think, and this contributed to her addiction. Also, she got a bigger dose of the magic rush as she quickly surpassed Tara's abilities -- in other words, she got into the "hard stuff" much quicker.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> The drinking analogy... -- WW, 10:47:13 02/28/02 Thu
...could also be seen this way: magic is represented by any manufactured form of liquid refreshment, dark magics by drinks containing alcohol. Most people are happy with water; Tara enjoys herbal tea and soda pop; now that Willow is on the wagon, she not only has to avoid alcoholic beverages, but she's in danger of dying of thirst! Surely she should still be able to drink the odd cup of herbal tea, or a Dr. Pepper now and then?
;o)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Yez, Excellent post! -- Belladonna, 13:17:33 02/27/02 Wed
I think you've really identified my concerns about this season. The writers have been taking the easy way out. For example, Willow. I wasn't really happy about the Willow magic addict storyline. I liked her magic, and was sorry to see it go. But I was interested to see where it was going, under the assumption that "her use of magic was a metaphor for the addictiveness of power, especially for someone who had esteem issues." The scene that made me interested in that storyline was from the end of Wrecked:

WILLOW: It was. But I mean ... if you could be ... you know, plain old Willow or super Willow, who would you be? (looks at Buffy) I guess you don't actually have an option on the whole super thing.
BUFFY: Will, there's nothing wrong with you. You don't need magic to be special.
WILLOW: Don't I? I mean, Buffy, who was I? Just ... some girl. Tara didn't even know that girl.
BUFFY: You are more than some girl. (walks into the room) And Tara wants you to stop. She loves you.
WILLOW: We don't know that.
BUFFY: I know that. I promise you.
WILLOW: I just ... it took me away from myself, I was ... free.

The idea of her being afraid of who she is without magic, afraid that Tara wouldn't love her, that she wasn't special without that power was compelling. Yet, since then, we've not seen any development of that. At all. After all the development of Willow's addiction over the past two years, to have it put on fast forward in Wrecked, then not really fleshed out much at all since then - aargh!
"And whatever happened to the show, in general, as *metaphor* for life's travails? Instead, is seems like we're getting a show that's *actually* about the trials and tribulations of the workplace, housework, paying bills, drugging and dating -- interspersed with a few badly choreographed fight scenes involving generic-looking monsters."
Wow...you really took the words out of my mouth on that one.

I still enjoy the show, even though I'm really frustrated. I guess I'm still hoping that the writers have some Master Plan, and things will come together in the latter half of the season. Perhaps I'm being foolishly optimistic. I hope not.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Thanks. -- yez, 13:37:26 02/27/02 Wed
"I still enjoy the show, even though I'm really frustrated. I guess I'm still hoping that the writers have some Master Plan, and things will come together in the latter half of the season. Perhaps I'm being foolishly optimistic. I hope not."

I second that. : )

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Remembering my favorite Quote.. -- Goji3, 13:58:47 02/27/02 Wed
.."Some people are dumb" (Don't take that as an insult, Everyone has areas in which they are ignorant in, one just shouldn't speak like one isn't ignorant in them.)

Okay...Let me explain a little something about... 'Redemption'.

The whole speach is basically Riley telling Buffy that Buffy can change, can get better since it hasn't truely reached her 'Core'.

More than that(about the comparison to warren), Buffy aknowledges that what she is doing it wrong and is not pleased with herself because ot it. After all, the first steps to recovery is admiting you have a problem (Sweet Jesus, I think that's the real theme this season...or, maybe about life, Cuz Faith couldn't be helped till she admited what she did was wrong).

"But maybe this idea of what you do not touching who you are is something deeply ingrained in the show's premise. And that disappoints me, because it's too simplistic. So all the good Spike does will never touch who he is, an evil demon. And no matter what any of the good guys do, they'll always be the good guys."

Simple things are often at the core of great things. This gets into the dualism of the show with the soul and the body. The Body can be evil, but the Soul wants to do good. The view of what is good can be warped by bad experiences. The Idea that humans (with souls) are inherently good is not new, infact, it's catholic!

Joss has said before that A human soul has one 'enclined' to do good and a Demon soul is 'enclined' to do evil. So, it's not black and white with a line down the center seperating them. Its a gradual transition between the two. I could aslo go into the Yin-Yang idea of how there can be no good without evil, and neither can be pure, but I have the rest of your argument to disect.

As for the glossing over thing and the writing complaints...To rectify your 'quote'...Do you know what an Opabinia is? Icthyostega? Eustinopteron? Pikia? Nothronicys? Phorousracous? Megalainia? I do, but that's not the point. Many demons have complex names like the prehistoric life forms I mentioned above, often in hard to pronounce languages. Also, We're dealing with people who don't have the access to mystic texts like the scoobies do. and even they don't remember all the names. The demon the mayor turned into had a name that was only mentioned ONCE! it was Olvikan, by the way, and it was done very subtly. and the name was never mentioned again. they all simply said the mayor was goint to become a 'Big Demon' and left it at that. If you didn't complain about that, don't complain about this time either.

"Another example: How is it possible that Riley would forget to tell Buffy the most important thing about the mission -- not killing the demon before finding its eggs? Sure, we can buy that he was nervous seeing her again. But c'mon."...do you even remember how BAD they left their relationship.

"So the writers are like, "Aha! Not to worry. We'll just have another character acknowledge that it's weird, and so the audience will know that we knew that they knew."" ... Okay, I didn't understand that at all? what are you trying to say?

"That's an old trick, and it's just a cop-out, and it seems like we've been getting a lot of those lately. Like Xander's 'So, any luck finding the three geeks? No? Well, I guess when a geek going into hiding, he really goes into hiding.' Chuckles all around. And we never hear about the trio again." Why? Well, They might 'say' they aknowledge the trio as a threat...but deep down inside...they still can't do it. It's like the Killer Rabbit in "Montey Python and the Holy Grail"...sorta.

...I'm not gonna use your quotes anymore to save space, but my response it thusly...

About the minimal Monster thing in order to 'beat us over the head with things we already know' such as the 'buffy not being right/depressed' thing and the 'Willow addiction 'mention'' as well as the 'X/A scene'.

X/A is currently a subplot, so it builds underneath the main theme of the episode.

As for the other too...DO YOU WANT THE PROBLEMS TO BE FIXED LICKETY-SPLIT? I DON'T AND NEITHER DOES JOSS? ARE YOU ASKEING FOR THEM TO 'GET OVER IT'? HA! IT'LL TAKE A LOOOOOONNNG TIME FOR THEM TO GET INTO A WORKING MODE OF HOW THINGS WORK! It took the first season for the scoobies to find a rythem, then they had it pretty much screwed with later. as Xander said in 'Prophecy girl', just to remind you of the rythem 'we find, you slay, we party'.

And, yes, THERE IS STILL A THEME TO THE SEASON and it still remains hidden. It is not about the trials and tribulations of the workplace, it's about losing the 'saftey net'.

Buffy loses her fist saftey net in Giles (well, she and just about everyone else). Then, Buffy goes to spike as a saftey net, now she CHOOSES to leave it.

Same with Willow and the Cushon of magic.

Both (or is it all three?) deal with losing a cushon in there lives, and now they are forced to face reality on their own, as it is. (Hence the Magic-manipulation done by Willow, she didn't like things as they were, and tried to change them to suit her needs, now she has to learn to deal with the bad as well as the good).

You seem to be slow to forgive. How can I make this assumption? cuz that is another thing i'm seeing this season.

Admiting mistakes, trying to change and moving on.

The thoughts and reprocussions will still be there, but they will not guide them through their lives anymore. Again, Faith has been brought up in many a recent post, her situation is similar, now it's just happening to other people...

And one final thing. The ENTIRE SHOW is about how people grow up done in a fantastical setting. it's a journey. 'But what is a journey? Is it distance traveled? Time Spent? No. It's what happens on the way, it's the things that shape you. At the end of the journey, you're not the same. [Buffy] is about change. [going through bad times] doesn't just mean your circumstances change,
it means you do. You ascend to a higher level. Nothing will ever be the same. Nothing'

Put that in yout llama and smell it. (Boy, did I go from topic to topic REAL fast...)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> "Some people are dumb." Well, at least we agree on that. -- yez, 14:21:33 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Good thoughts to gnaw on. Thanks! -- Deeva, 15:46:22 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The "It doesn't touch who you are" speech and other problems with As You Were (spoilers) -- Dyna, 16:43:16 02/27/02 Wed
"But maybe this idea of what you do not touching who you are is something deeply ingrained in the show's premise. And that disappoints me, because it's too simplistic. So all the good Spike does will never touch who he is, an evil demon. And no matter what any of the good guys do, they'll always be the good guys."

Thank you! I think my biggest disappointment with this episode was how simplistic it was--the "good" characters were presented as justified in all their actions; the "bad" character did, out of nowhere!, turn out to be guilty of the bad things he was suspected of. Yawn. What an awful follow-up to the complexity and moral ambiguity of "Dead Things."

I was also very dissatisfied with the idea that Riley's pep talk was some sort of source of enlightenment for Buffy. Buffy needs to take a long, hard look at herself, not be granted an epiphany by the intervention of a Riley-ex-machina. Giles left because he felt Buffy was looking to him too much instead of taking responsibility for herself. Buffy responded by turning to Spike as an emotional crutch. Now that Spike has ceased to satisfy that need, we get Riley. Once again, our girl lets someone else tell her who she is instead of trying to see herself clearly and honestly. I think her decision to end the relationship with Spike is a good one, but the circumstances created to push her toward that decision really undermined the message for me.

I have a lot of faith in ME, but episodes like this shake me a little and make me sad. But I just keep thinking of OnM's rec of "Adventures in Babysitting," and try to remember that all works of art won't be 10 out of 10. Right? Somebody tell me I'm right! Please!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Crutches -- yez, 17:12:17 02/27/02 Wed
I agree about Riley, and good point about Giles. Even with Spike -- she does seem to rely too much on others to define her. Or to lead her. Something.

I'm trying to stay hopeful that this season will pick up for me, and if not this season, then next. You're right -- can't always be 10 for 10.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Riley epiphanies was Crutches -- alcibiades, 08:14:52 02/28/02 Thu
I think the whole point of this show is that the Riley epiphany is a false epiphany. In Seasons 4 and 5, Buffy always had a distinct POV from Riley on the demon world, a far more nuanced one. That is the reason she didn't always want him with her when she was fighting. He got in the way, he made things black and white. And Buffy herself and the show are already far too black and white in comparison with the Angelverse. Up until Riley's arrival, with Clem coming over to play, and Buffy dealing with Spike, Buffy's world was becoming a lot more grey -- perhaps too grey all at once, as Buffy couldn't handle it and still recognize herself. So what she is doing here is rejecting that whole stream of thought, the good with the bad, to return to imposing the order of Riley's extremely black and white world on herself. That is okay for Riley, that suits his nature. But it is a limited POV, and that is something that Buffy used to know.

So the fact that Buffy rejects Spike because of a Riley epiphany, IMO, represents nothing more than a pendulum swing which is going too far the other way. It highlights her utter desperation, the fact that she is grasping at straws because she is so lost, such a lost little girl, she has no idea how to get herself out of the woods. So she uses the light provided by Riley's blaring overhead beacon to extricate herself.

The only problem is, as you pointed out elsewhere, the world Buffy has made for herself now comes into focus with significant information divorced from it. Spike is not as he was a year ago, even if he regressed into that being temporarily during Riley's visit to his crypt. And Buffy still has not dealt with the fact that much of the reason their relationship became so disfunctional was not because of the fact that Spike is stupid, and evil and opportunistic and immoral, it's because Buffy herself helped force it into that mold.

I expect Buffy will cling to this new re-inforced black and white vision really hard over the next several episodes until it all implodes. Because really, when Buffy was last herself she had a far more complex world vision than the one she is now assuming. She's trying on Riley's world, the way she is tried on Spike's. It won't be a good fit. She needs her own world. The first is too dark, the second is too light, and hopefully, the third will be just right for Goldilocks.

alcibiades
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Riley epiphanies was Crutches -- yez, 08:27:04 02/28/02 Thu
Good points. I like this read, it makes sense -- it also helps me feel more hopeful about where the show's headed. Thanks.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Not to be taken at face value. (spoilers) -- Dariel, 22:04:28 02/27/02 Wed
I think you are judging the episode by taking it too much at face value. I think the title, As You Were, implies a return to the past, to the good old black and white world that Buffy is comfortable with. Riley is no longer the compromised hero with the vamp-ho fetish--he is back to GI Joe Riley, big and tall, with all of the answers. And Spike is back in his proper place, the evil dead guy. Not Buffy's lover.

So Buffy will feel better, and cleaner, for awhile. And then the Troika will rear it's ugly, evil, human head, and muddy up the waters again!
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of switched decks, missed tricks, and Karmic burdens: Spoilers AYW -- Anne, 12:25:16 02/27/02 Wed

Let me start out by saying that I have no problem with Buffy breaking up with Spike, nor with Spike doing evil things. Despite the fact that I personally would like to see Spike and Buffy together ultimately, and despite the fact that I see Spike as being involved in some kind of redemption process, I accept the dramatic inevitability of the breakup at this point, and the dramatic legitimacy of various possible Spike-goes-back-to-doing-evil storylines.

HOWEVER: that doesn't mean that the breakup or going back to evil can be done any old way. They have to be done with some kind of consistency, and at the moment I think AYW did things awfully awkwardly.

1. The "You know what I am . . ." line made me feel like someone had switched the deck on me. For most of the past year what we have been hearing instead is the "I have changed" or "I can change" line. I'm not trying to argue at this point that it's true that Spike has changed; I'm just saying that it's quite clear that he believes or believed for a while that he had changed and could change more. And that means that for quite a while his angle of approach has been that he can adapt to Buffy by becoming better, not that she has to accept him as being evil. By this same reasoning, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for him to do something evil at this point. To have Buffy spurn him and then do something evil in reaction, okay. But for Pete's sake, what possible motivation did he have to screw things up while he thought he still had a chance with her?

To be fair, though, I must admit that my problem on these points might only be because

2. I may have just missed a trick. In retrospect, the last time I can remember hearing Spike talk about "I can change" was in the encounter where he first found out he could hit Buffy without setting off his chip. Since then, he has been much more trying to lure her to the dark side than saying that he himself could change. So it could be argued that, Spike believing Buffy to have come back "wrong", he decided the course of least resistance would be to lure her over to the bad, rather than trying to be good himself. Still, I found the transition from the one mode to the other quite jarring -- especially since we have seen Spike do things, even since Smashed, like defend Willow in OAFA, that seem quite disinterestedly good.

3. Separately, that beating in "Dead Things" is still sitting in a big undigested lump in my stomach. I sure in heck hope the writers don't think the breakup speech in AYW somehow takes care of it, because I don't see that in any way. "Sorry William" just don't cut it. So Buffy can walk off into the sunlight all she wants, but as far as I'm concerned she's still doing so carrying one great fat karmic burden. (And no, I don't think the beating means that she should have stayed with Spike, or that it proves that he's a good guy, or anything. It is, on the other hand, something she did that I don't think she's square with yet).

4. Now for implausibility: even if we stipulate that Spike is bad, bad, bad, would he really store those eggs in his basement given that Buffy has been coming over nightly for a snog? Well, I guess they wanted an excuse to trash the crypt, but this just doesn't make any sense at all to me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Of switched decks, missed tricks, and Karmic burdens: Spoilers AYW -- Lilac, 12:52:14 02/27/02 Wed
Good point about the stupidity of hiding the demon eggs next to his bed, when Buffy has been dropping by there so often. I strongly feel that Spike's involvment in the demon egg thing was not what it was interpreted as being. I hope we hear the facts eventually.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Of switched decks, missed tricks, and Karmic burdens: Spoilers AYW -- Robert, 13:08:56 02/27/02 Wed
>> "Good point about the stupidity of hiding the demon eggs next to his bed, ..."

How did you come to this conclusion?

Buffy and Spike were caught in bed by Riley whilst doing the dirty thing. Riley then descends into the basement, finds the eggs, and torches the joint (with Buffy's help).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Of switched decks, missed tricks, and Karmic burdens: Spoilers AYW -- Anne, 13:15:41 02/27/02 Wed
They had sex upstairs on top of the actual stone vault or whatever it's called containing the bones of the person buried in the crypt. We've occasionally seen Spike lying on it in previous episodes, such as Intervention. The bed and rugs and all that stuff are downstairs, as was made clear in "Gone".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> If Spike -- Sophist, 13:19:27 02/27/02 Wed
didn't want to get caught with the eggs, he wouldn't have put them in plain sight in a room he and Buffy use all the time. Especially since she frequently comes over unannounced.

They were not in the bed when Riley came in. They were in the upstairs portion of the crypt on top of the sarcophagus.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Great points. -- Sophist, 13:14:34 02/27/02 Wed
In fact, breaking off the relationship makes Buffy's conduct in DT truly horrific. Had the beating caused her to recognize a repressed love for Spike, Spike would have known that his deliberate sacrifice was not in vain. Had the beating never occurred, we could rationalize the sex without love because Spike got something out of it as well. But what on earth could excuse the physical abuse if she never has loved him and never will?

Suppose Spike reacts badly to the breakup. I know that many will say "See, he was bad all along." But what human, soul and all, would behave differently? And if that's the case, what is the moral message?

There has to be more here. Putting aside the whole ick factor of using Ken and Barbie as the vehicle of "revelation", what does Buffy mean when she says she can't love William? Is it fundamentally impossible in the same sense that she can't fly? Is it because there's an unknown rule against it even though she wants to? Is it can't in the sense of "do but shouldn't"? I keep remembering what she said to Angel in S1: "This can never...." (Angel).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Great points. -- anneth, 14:28:01 02/27/02 Wed
"Suppose Spike reacts badly to the breakup. I know that many will say "See, he was bad all along." But what human, soul and all, would behave differently? And if that's the case, what is the moral message?"

too many shades of the angel/angelous arc in spike's reverting to pure evil now. i want some serious angst (he does it so well!) but they've DONE "ex-vamp-beaux goes Totally Evil."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Great points. -- alcibiades, 00:35:15 02/28/02 Thu
Sophist wrote: "Suppose Spike reacts badly to the breakup. I know that many will say "See, he was bad all along." But what human, soul and all, would behave differently? And if that's the case, what is the moral message?"

I'm starting to think it is an excuse to regress Spike back to Season 4 behaviour and then Marti Noxon can come out and say, See, we warned you he was still eevviill. I'd feel pretty evil myself if I were in his situation.

Buffy has not only broken up with him, she has taken away his dream of her that inspired him all summer long, more or less his visitations with Dawn since she won't let him in the house and he can't go there now anyway since they have split up, and his beautiful crypt he was so proud of in After Life. He doesn't really seem to have much left right now.

OTOH, Spike's a fighter and he never lets the odds stop him, in fact, they inspire him to new heights. He's got to figure out his priorities, always hard to do when you are homeless and your state of mind, as represented by the lower crypt, has been shattered. And did you notice that Buffy even blew out the 'small light' illuminating his lower crypt, which is likely a visual metaphor for his moral center. Small but shining and now its out. Doesn't bode well in the short term for Spikey. Long term of course is totally different.

alcibiades
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Good points. -- yez, 13:40:32 02/27/02 Wed
Especially #4.

I don't know... I don't think I *used* to worry that the show wouldn't resolve certain points or issues...

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Am I the only one who can follow what they're doing? -- Goji3, 14:14:18 02/27/02 Wed
I seem to think that, hearing everyone 'bitch' about this and that, and I'm the only one going 'Oh, yeah, that makes sense.' and in a non-sarcastic way.

let me answer, or at least try to, your points.

1. As I said ealier in another response, it goes back to Joss 'teachings' on Human and Demon souls. Demon souls are enclined towards evil, they can do good, but 'feel better' doing evil. it's natural for them to do it. Spike was Forced to change, and, has now shown that he has found other outlets for evil, his relationship with Buffy being one of them. (yes, I think everyone can now safely say that it was a bad one and he didn't give a rats ass about it, and still doesn't).

2. you talk about the Spike leading Buffy into darkness thing, which goes back to the 'outlet for evil' thing i mentioned earlier. one might say that Spike doesn't play mindgames i have to say he doesn't INTENTIONALLY play mind games. He's undermining Buffy unintentionally, because of his nature. because he is a demon.

3. This was done to show how hard it is to give up a 'saftey blanket', much like Willow's magic, it had to blow up in her face in order for her to acknowledge it. Plus, some people are kinda dense, and it takes A BIG explosion. Hopefully, the Egg thing was enough

4. Remember this...'Some people are dumb'. People make stupid mistakes...a lot. And Spike isn't much of a long-term thinker. He's in it for the short term. (wow, just realizing how powerful an insight that is, even in the nature of demons) Everyone thinks they can get away with something at some point or another, and it doesn't always work. It's very 'real' in that sense. as for the spike bad-bad-bad. He's got a thin 'surface' of 'good' so to speak. but at the core, he's bad. that's cuz he's a demon. Humans are good at the core (mental illnesses aside), but that view of good can be escuewed by bad experiences...and i've said it all before in another post and don't feel like typing it again.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Am I the only one who can follow what they're doing? -- Rufus, 15:09:36 02/27/02 Wed
He's got a thin 'surface' of 'good' so to speak. but at the core, he's bad. that's cuz he's a demon. Humans are good at the core (mental illnesses aside), but that view of good can be escuewed by bad experiences...and i've said it all before in another post and don't feel like typing it again.

I forgot all demons are evil...all of them...and humans are only evil if they are mentally ill. You make is sound so simple.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Am I the only one who can follow what they're doing? -- Goji3, 15:15:32 02/27/02 Wed
You really need to see the later post, it goes into much more detail and explains it further, I simplified for time, but, as a 'general' - and be very afraid of that word, as with the phrase 'in theory', because their will be exceptions - human soul is slanted towards good, demon souls (specifically, Vampire 'souls') slant towards evil.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> And one more thing -- Goji3, 15:47:09 02/27/02 Wed
These aren't true 'personal views', but merely observations of the possible menaing/views expressed in the show. to quote Wesely 'No need to get snippy'
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Am I the only one who can follow what they're doing? -- Terrapin, 18:34:42 02/27/02 Wed
Thank you so much Goji3, for pointing all this out. Keep it up!!!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alexis Denisof just gets more amazing every episode! (Spoilers) -- Scroll, 12:50:54 02/27/02 Wed

I'll always love BtVS, but personally I thought "Loyalty" was waaaay better than "As You Were". Whereas people have noticed a lack of nuance in BtVS in the last few eps, Angel seems to have really picked up the ball. The intercuts between Wesley standing in the drive-thru having just heard such terrible news, and Lilah saying she needs a drink... it was brilliant! And I love gritty Wesley. The way he tracked down Holtz and offered himself in place of Angel. He's being pulled between his loyalty to Angel and his fear that the demon within will always be a danger, and that last scene when he sees the fire and just stands there, transfixed by the flames...

I also loved Angel's empathy for Aubrey, the mom whose son was turned into a vamp. Angel understands how she feels and admits that she isn't altogether wrong in her desire for revenge. When I compare Buffy with Dawn and Angel with Connor, I have to say Angel is definitely the better parent at this time. Buffy's dragged down by life and that's affecting the way she handles Dawn, no matter how much she loves her. But Angel's love for Connor *makes him alive* in ways nothing else has ever done.

And the Burger Loa was just plain frightening on *so* many levels!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Alexis Denisof just gets more amazing every episode! (Spoilers) -- Goji3, 14:29:04 02/27/02 Wed
I agree with how good the last Angel Ep was, but people find it easier to bash than Praise, so, expect complaints about Buffy for the next WEEK or so before anyone notices Angel. Sad, isn't it?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Alexis Denisof just gets more amazing every episode! (Spoilers) -- Masq, 15:11:03 02/27/02 Wed
Happy to see other people have noticed this phenomenon. More BtVS fans/chatters here than Angel. Is it because my site is named "All Things Philosophical on BtVS"? It's equally devoted to "Angel", I was just too lazy to change the name. I contemplated "All Things Philosophical in the Buffyverse". Or how about "All Things Philosphical in the Jossverse".

Angel has been equally good, if not better, against the three seasons it's been paired up with "BtVS".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Alexis Denisof just gets more amazing every episode! (Spoilers) -- Rattletrap, 15:20:01 02/27/02 Wed
I'm not sure I'd agree that Angel has ever entirely lived up to the standard set by its big sister, but I've enjoyed both shows this season and last.

That said, Alexis Denisof has been phenomenal the last couple of weeks. He (and his makeup people) did a great job in "Loyalty" making him look progressively more haggard and strung-out through the episode--this is obviously a guy that isn't thinking quite clearly right now, and I'm not sure this bodes well for the future. I found myself thinking how far this guy has come from the prissy overachiever that first showed up in "Bad Girls."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Alexis Denisof just gets more amazing every episode! (Spoilers) -- LorneLover, 15:24:23 02/27/02 Wed
I can certainly agree that season 3 has surpassed Buffy this year---that's not a Buffy bash, but S6 has been "off" all year while Angel seems more focused. And yes, Denisof has turned in a great performance this year, for me he's the best actor this year from either show.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Best Actor of the Buffyverse -- JBone, 18:30:45 02/27/02 Wed
And yes, Denisof has turned in a great performance this year, for me he's the best actor this year from either show.

Hmmmmm, I'm not sure that I would argue this, so I will think out loud. The only other performances on AtS, that I would put up against Alexis, regular or recurring, would probably Julie Benz as Darla or Keith Szarabajka as Holtz. Who both have the advantage of doing more with less. If they're in a storyline, they are a juicy part of it.

On BtVS though, I believe there are many strong performance to go through. I'd start with James Marsters as Spike. Always a strong performer with an enhanced storyline. Amber Benson as Tara who seemingly makes more with a diminished presence. Emma Caulfield is just dazzles me every time she gets a real character scene. EC is probably the most underrated performer on both series. And finally, Sarah Michelle Gellar as Buffy. Her role has probably gotten more difficult this year than anyone else's. Only Alyson Hannigan can make a similar claim. Both have done a fine job, but I have always been, and always be a SMG man.

So I'm going to go with SMG first, AD second, EC third, AB fourth, KS fifth, AH sixth, and JB seventh. Damn I forgot JM, okay make him seventh and move down JB a notch.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Alexis Denisof just gets more amazing every episode! (Spoilers) -- yabyumpan, 17:56:51 02/27/02 Wed
Thank you for your post Masq,I feel reassurd. i don't visit this board as much as i use to because it feels too Buffycentric, which then leaves me in a dilema as you just don't get such wonderful dicussions/observations/insights etc on any other board. I know i could start Angel threads but i must be honest and say that I feel a bit intimidated by the over whelming Buffyness. I have watched BtVS from E1/S1 and am still watching (just) but for me AtS has become far more important. I've been so happy comming here after Loyalty and find all this AtS talk, when i've tried to start something deeper on other AtS boards the post either gets ignored or mis-interpreted also can I say "shipper wars" arrrh. I love AtS (& BtVS too) for the deeper underlying stuff, I don't care who's with who or the fight scenes etc, i'm interested in the themes, the characters and their growth, how they reflect (or not) the "real" world etc.
Anyway, thank you people for all your insights and enlightening discussions, i've had thoughts about Angel and his Shanshu for a while now but haven't posted anything, maybe i will soon when the words in my head start forming proper sentences! :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Alexis Denisof just gets more amazing every episode! (Spoilers) -- JM, 05:08:51 02/28/02 Thu
Please start posts re Angel. It needs more discussion time. I would love to talk Angel but can rarely come up with an original thought. All my best thoughts are responses to someone else.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Alexis Denisof just gets more amazing every episode! (Spoilers) -- Kimberly, 06:50:42 02/28/02 Thu
I have three reasons why Buffy is more talked about than Angel (maybe four):

1. Buffy is shown, in the US at least, the day after Angel. Since most posting is about the latest show the poster has seen, there is only a 22 hour window for heavy Angel discussions.

2. Buffy is now being shown in syndication; Angel is not. Again, posters tend to emphasize the last episode they have watched. This narrows the Angel window by 2 additional hours.

3. Buffy has a strong thematic structure over the seasons. Angel is more episodic. This makes it easier to discuss Buffy as there is an existing structure to clarify thinking.

4. As I live in the US, I don't know the answer: Is Angel even being shown overseas? If not, this will also slow down Angel discussions.

As for me, I'm completely hooked on both shows. It has gotten so bad that they are the only two shows I am watching on TV right now (and I used to be a major TV addict), and I refuse to miss either. I don't post major discussions of the philosophy, metaphorical goodness of the individual episodes because I don't think that fast; anything I would want to say has been talked to death by the time I've put a thought together. But I read and enjoy what others have written (although I do get tired of the negativism).

Masq, your website, your name. Since Angel is a spinoff of Buffy, there is name recognition out there, and you don't feel like changing it, I don't see why you should.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Alexis Denisof just gets more amazing every episode! (Spoilers) -- wiscoboy, 15:24:11 03/01/02 Fri
You may be able to say that, but then again you're comparing an established show trying to sustain momentum vs. a show that is still in its infancy and growing in scope. Maybe that is the problem w/BTVS. Its writers seem to be trying to keep the characters(except for Xander) in high school mode, whereas the Angel writers treat its characters as adults.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> More Angel talk soon hopefully! -- Scroll, 06:06:10 02/28/02 Thu
I think you're right that people prefer to bash rather than to praise. Unfortunately they are missing a terrific thing right under their noses. I posted a message earlier that has disappeared, analysing Wesley's moral dilemma. Too bad nobody seems to see how fascinating the Angel storyline is right now in all the BUFFY/SPIKE BREAK-UP OH NO!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Sorry about that last post... -- Scroll, 06:12:55 02/28/02 Thu
I didn't mean to sound so snarky... I've truly enjoyed all the posts about As You Were and Buffy's situation. I just wish there was a more even balance between the two shows. It sometimes seems that any post with a Spike subject must immediately generate attention. I guess it's true that all threads lead to the bleached one... : )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Sorry about that last post... -- Rahael, 06:49:38 02/28/02 Thu
LOL Scroll.

I must say as someone who prefers to reply to posts rather than start threads, I too would like more Angel centric threads turning up here. I like to comment positively on the show, ie, whatever draws my interest and attention - there seems to be tons of that in Angel this season. There may be not so great stuff going on in BtVS this season (I simply can't judge yet) but everyone seems to agree that AtS is doing great.

Also I have a confession - from about 3 months ago or so, I officially stopped caring about the Spike debate. I don't really care anymore whether he's evil or good or just plain ambiguous. The debate is just too entrenched.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Thank you for your support... -- Scroll, 09:30:04 02/28/02 Thu
I really love some of the episodes of BtVS this season, including Dead Things and Tabula Rasa, but I also agree that Angel is consistently doing better overall. While I'm still interested in how ME plans to deal with Spike and Buffy, I really feel that this is something I should just sit back and observe rather than actively debate about. Wesley, on the other hand, really stirs my sympathies and my desire for discussion. As a relatively new poster, I think I was just a little sad when nobody else seemed interested in discussing Wesley's crisis. But I've seen more and more posts about the Time-Travelling demon and Wesley, so I won't complain any more! : )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> I like your posts. -- mundusmundi, 12:45:03 02/28/02 Thu
For me, much of the problem discussing AtS is that it doesn't appear where I live on Monday nights but rather Tuesdays, an hour after BtVS. This means that I typically spend Tuesday down a hole, avoiding the threads so that I'm not spoiled. (Some claim spoilage doesn't affect the impact of an episode, except that it does. Those crafty devils working on Angel have made my jaw drop this season more times than I can count.) By the time I'm ready to talk shop, Buffy has already aired, the Spike threads have emerged en masse and all the Angel discussions have been archived. I enjoyed your Wesley thread but pressing real-life issues kept me from formulating a response. If you're interested, and at the risk of self-aggrandizing, there's a thread that should be in one of the recent archives evaluating how both shows are using language this season, along with a strange segue about emoticons, that I believe garnered two or three responses or so. Keep on posting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> a problem of timing -- matching mole, 13:12:39 02/28/02 Thu
It is a problem for AtS devotees that the show comes on the night before BtVS. Even we aren't down a hole on Tuesday like mm there is only a limited time for discussion, especially for slow thinkers like myself who might need a day or so to ponder the deeper mysteries of Burger Loas and the like. Unfortunately I'm not sure what can be done about that except for enterprising AtS afficianadoes starting threads on Friday or Saturday when the waters have calmed.

At least with respect to individual episodes I'm like Rahael, more likely to respond to threads than start them myself. While I have noted with some regret that BtVS gets a lot more attention here than AtS I haven't done anything about it myself (bad me), I'm as guilty of BtVS-centrism in my posts as the next person.

But I do really like AtS and I actually look forward to watching it more than BtVS. S5/S2 I liked AtS a lot more than its parent show. This year I'm more equivocal - I like them both but for very different reasons. AtS definitely seems more reminscent of the craftsmanship and fun of earlier seasons of BtVS while the senior program seems to charting new waters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thank you both mm's! -- Scroll, 14:51:16 02/28/02 Thu
I too get Angel right after Buffy on Tuesday nights here in Toronto and so of course much of late Tuesday night is spent picking my jaw off the floor. I read all the discussion on emoticons and found it fascinating and very relevant. I'm thinking of doing a real analysis on Ats: Season 3, perhaps comparing it to some aspects of BtVS. I'm new at starting threads all by myself and your responses are very much appreciated. *happy grins to to mundusmundi and matching mole*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I'll do my part by keeping your analysis out of the archives so it can get some discussion -- Masq, 15:13:14 02/28/02 Thu
In case it takes responders a few days to reply with all the pondering they'll be doing in response to your analysis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I'm so pissed at myself that I abandoned Angel so early on.. -- yuri, 00:59:16 03/01/02 Fri
I watched the first few eps and hated it. Truth be told, I'm not a big David Boreanaz fan, so I ended up missing most of the first two seasons. Sigh. Only recently did I revisit the show and realize how great it is.

Anyway, that's why I don't post much about it. I don't feel like I have enough backstory to post confidently. I'd love to see more in depth posts about it so I can further my understanding.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Spike neutrality -- matching mole, 12:05:24 03/01/02 Fri
Forgive me for I have sinned. I too am apathetic about Spike's redemption. Now I must seek redemption myself or be shunned by all who have seen the light.

Rahael, I feel the same way. I think Spike is a great character and all and the Buffy/Spike relationship has taken an interesting direction I would never have predicted. However I severely limit my intake of Spike redemption pro/con posts in an attempt to retain some shred of interest in that issue. Familiarity really does breed, well not contempt but something dangerously close to boredom.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: just viewed Loyalty (Spoilers) -- desultory, 07:45:58 03/01/02 Fri
I just watched Loyalty last night (taped it) (and I accidentally missed Couplet last week).
I agree - AD was brilliant. JAR also put in a very strong performance. I hope that DB & CC will be inspired and challenged by the amazing talents in their castmates.

About the prophecy - can you really see Angel killing his son as an infant? Or is it going to be a Wesley-fulfilling prophecy, like Laius & Oedipus? Leaving Wesley with the burden that if he'd left well-enough alone it wouldn't have happened. And will it happen at all - is Connor a goner? (bad pun, I know).

Also - that jarring flip remark by Angel at the end. Did Angel really say it (humor in bad taste (and the bad puns keep coming))? Or was Wesley imagining it?

Is anyone else dreading the next Angel ep? I don't think I can bear to watch it - I'm such a softie about babies. I think Joss is going to rip out my still-beating heart and offer it back to me on a sesame seed bun with an option of cheese fries on the side.

desultory
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Poor baby! lol -- Scroll, 21:17:04 03/01/02 Fri
I know what you mean about babies, Connor is just so cute!Btw, I liked your thing about the sesame seed bun, you're very punny... (haha, sorry)

Okay, seriously, I'm really anxious to see whether this will be, as you say, a Wesley-fulfilling prophecy. And I really suspect that last line of Angel's was all in Wesley's head. Either that or the prophecy's is starting to occur and Angel is losing his mind. Hey, Angel might not even know he said it! Poor Wes. Poor Connor!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I thought he was especially good in "Billy" -- verdantheart, 15:52:35 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------

How 'bout this? Is Angel a threat? Wesley's Moral Dilemma (Spoilers for Loyalty) -- Scroll, 14:03:41 02/27/02 Wed

Maybe people just don't like AtS as much as they like BtVS. That's okay, though these past few episodes I can't quite agree. But humour me and somebody please reply to my post! (you don't really have to but it'd be nice... *grin*)

Wesley is faced with the very real possibility that Angel is going to kill Connor some time soon. He's done the research and found the answers. Yes, Angel will kill his son. And the Burger Loa tells Wes that the dark question he burns to ask is: When? I'd like to contradict the freaky Big Mac and say the real question is: Why? Of course it's why, it's always why. How could Angel, who so clearly loves his son, ever bring himself to kill that which he loves?

But then Wesley has to remember that the demon in Angel is always there. Didn't Angel drink from Buffy, whom he loved, in Graduation 2? Sure he was out of it at the time, but the possibility is always there that Angel, despite his good intentions, will slip up. Holtz points this out to Wesley (in his low scary voice) and Wesley doesn't contradict him. Wesley's Watcher training warns him that vampires are evil, that once they've turned there is no turning back. Angel himself says this to their client Aubrey.

So should Wesley trust that no matter what prophecies and portents arise, Angel will never ever harm Connor (or any of his friends)? Or is the prophecy saying that Connor is indeed evil and must be killed, and by Angel? Or should Wesley protect Angel by making sure that Angel will never know the pain of having killed his own son because of some stupid prophecy? Should Angel be killed? Should Connor? Or should Wesley just pull a Buffy and say, screw destiny?

I put this before the board. What do you guys think?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: How 'bout this? Is Angel a threat? Wesley's Moral Dilemma (Spoilers for Loyalty) -- juliaabra, 14:35:04 02/27/02 Wed
my thinking about angel's fulfillment of the prophecy is this: the love of a parent for a child is the truest, most pure, and perhaps most joyful that a person can experience. if it is true that a prophecy cannot be avoided and angel is granted true happiness through the love of his son then connor is truly in danger, in danger of angelus's re-appearance by the lifting of the curse.

but wesley's knowledge of the future puts him in a more precarious place than before. he gets to be tortured by this knowledge like cassandra, yet any action to circumvent a prophecy will only make it more certain to happen. not that prophecies always work the way we think they will in the jossverse. i'm thinking of buffy's death both times and her unprophesied resurrections. imo, no matter what wesley tries in order to avoid connor's death he will only serve to bring connor closer to his end. yet if he does nothing he allows the prophesy to unfold. what a double-edged sword!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> There are several threads below (may now be in the archives) where people addressed this question. -- Masq, 17:01:10 02/27/02 Wed
Monday evening and Tuesday morning posts after the show aired.

Although that doesn't mean we can't keep discussing it!
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I feel like the only one who liked 'As You Were' -- Goji3, 14:23:04 02/27/02 Wed

Everyone complains about it, but, it had good points.

I LIKED the monster, it reminded me of a Zoanoid from the movie 'Guyver 2: dark hero'

I ENJOYED the X/A bitching about the wedding, I found it silly. Chuckle silly.

I LIKED seeing the Riley-story closed up at last.

I LIKED Spike being Evil again, as he is inclided to be, whether he means to or not.

I LIKED the moving away from the 'securty blanket' arc that's been going on this season.

I LIKED seeing Buffy flounder trying to do the 'normal' 'home-ecconomics' thing. It's funny, cuz it's true in real life.

I just think that the B/Sers are pissed at the (apparant) 'End' of B/S.

I go into super details disecting the complaints of others, but you'll hafta go and find them for yourself, i don't feel like re-posting them....i've posted WAY to much today...

Sure, this wasn't Grade A Buffy, but remember, in order to enjoy good Cinema, Ya gotta enjoy good Schlock!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I agree -- Masq, 14:37:41 02/27/02 Wed
This is the first episode I've wanted to watch over again on the night it aired since OMWF. It felt like a more coherent story, interally cohesive (instead of being all over the place like OaFA last week), while including this season's arcs. The jokes were good, the characters were themselves. It felt like an episode from an earlier season, and that felt good.

Not that it wasn't a little jumpy in places. : )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I liked AYW, too. But like everything else there was the good, the bad and the ugly -- Deeva, 14:43:48 02/27/02 Wed
I didn't hate any of it. The things that happened had to happen. Buffy had to end the thing with Spike. Perhaps it will lead to something more productive, healthy or as close to normal as can be. If I happen to complain, and I'm not saying that your saying that I am, it's probably because I had something else in mind. But I'm sure that in the end it will be what we need to see.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> You're not alone! It was sad but high quality -- ponygirl, 14:48:16 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Nope, not the only one! -- Katie, 14:51:52 02/27/02 Wed
I know a lot lot lot of people reaaaalllly dislike Riley, and his wife, and this episode, but I thought it was really good, in a depressing way. I think it's interesting how when Buffy and Riley broke up, Riley's life was falling apart, w/the vamp-hos, and non-military jobs, etc., and now that he's back, Buffy's life is falling apart. Riley needed to get away from Buffy, or take some time, to get back on his feet, and Riley's inspired (I need a better word, I know) Buffy to get her act together.
~Katie
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Nope, not the only one! -- Robert, 08:46:36 02/28/02 Thu
>> "Riley's inspired (I need a better word, I know) Buffy to get her act together."

No, inspired is the right word. I think that we will find this episode to be a major turning point for Buffy. Riley gave her a wonderful gift, if his inspiration pulls her out of her depression.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I feel like the only one who liked 'As You Were' -- Rattletrap, 15:10:07 02/27/02 Wed
I'd generally agree with you Goji. This wasn't my favorite episode of the season, but I enjoyed it. Reading the threads on the rest of the board, I've been struck by a couple of things: I feel confirmed in what I wrote in my Campbell essay that S6 begins the "Return" phase of Buffy's Hero's Journey; the style of writing and storytelling used on S2-S5 were excellent, but ultimately ill-suited to this season's story. I was especially conscious in OAFA and AYW that the writers are pacing episodes differently this season than they ever have before, I think it has been there all along but has been especially pronounced of late. It isn't a case of rushing or stalling, just that the entire rhythm of the show is slightly different this season. This started as a strange explanation and is only getting odder as I go, so I'll stop.

On the episode

+ X/A were great, I especially loved the moment where they realized that their wedding and their marriage were not necessarily the same thing. I've know a ton of people who needed to learn that lesson before they got married, this bodes well for X and A.

+ Buffy and Willow interaction seemed almost like a throwback to late S3, c. "The Prom," a couple nice pieces of friendly conversations that hopefully signals some healing in their relationship.

+ Riley's speech to Buffy was wonderful. I've seen some debate farther down the board about whether Buffy's actions really do just bounce off as Riley suggested. Here's my take: It doesn't matter, that isn't the point. Riley told Buffy what she needed to hear and gave her courage to confront it, whether or not it was literally true is irrelevant. I found Buffy saying out loud "I'm sleeping with Spike" particularly touching, because she's never really said it out loud before, and this seemed like a case of her admitting it to herself for the first time.

+ Buffy's "breakup" (if that's what it was) with Spike was handled quite well. This could have been an over-the-top teary dramatic scene, but it was handled much more subtly with a quiet, adult resolve. I'm more curious than ever to see where this story arc is headed.

I did have a few minor criticisms:

- The VFX need work, the monsters just didn't quite work for me.

- How did Riley find Buffy at DMP?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: I feel like the only one who liked 'As You Were' -- Masq, 15:23:13 02/27/02 Wed
#1 Yeah, even if I was a head-in-the-sand Sunnydale citizen, I wouldn't have bought that those demons were "bears" : )

#2 There were lines to the effect that Riley called Xander. During the scene where Riley comes over to Buffy's house. Xander would have told him about DMP.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Good observations, I stand corrected. -- Rattletrap, 19:05:05 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I liked the moster too. -- VampRiley, 15:15:08 02/27/02 Wed
When Riley told the scared people that it was a bear, I couldn't stop laughing.

VR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Bwah! Yes, that was a truly great moment. -- Rattletrap, 15:22:08 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I feel like the only one who liked 'As You Were' -- verdantheart, 15:44:18 02/27/02 Wed
Hey, I liked it. I just said that though Riley had pulled himself together, I wasn't too impressed with the gung-ho result. I did like Mrs. Finn, though, as I said. The episode has some interesting aspects that I'm looking forward to seeing followed up.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Excellent, necessary, humorous, and sad. Loved it! -- Tillow, 16:22:49 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I think a person's reaction to the whole season depends on his/her reaction to Spike. -- Sophist, 16:38:39 02/27/02 Wed
Interestingly, those agreeing with you here have frequently been critical of earlier eps this season. In general, they are not B/S shippers.

Those critical of this ep, including me, can generally be categorized as B/S shippers. Hmmm.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: I think a person's reaction to the whole season depends on his/her reaction to Spike. -- agent156, 21:20:27 02/27/02 Wed
I know you used the word general as opposed to something more absolute, but this looks like a good place to place my opinion which happens to go against your B/S shipper theory.

I am definitely not a B/S shipper and I was very disappointed by the ep. I feel it was the worst ep (or very close) so far this season. The only part I really liked was Buffy and Spike breaking up, not only because I felt the relationship was sure to end sooner or later, but also because of the way it ended. A sort of poetic justice to it. Just as Spike was the one that showed Buffy what Riley was up to (getting vampire suck-jobs) which ultimately led to their demise, it was Riley who showed her what Spike was up to that led to their breaking up.

Other than that bit of Riley's involvement, I thought he really had no place here. I much preferred the way things had ended previously with him and don't feel there was any need to bring him back. It all struck me as someone going "hey we can bring Riley back for one quick ep, won't that be fun" without ever really coming up with a worthwhile story for it. And his wife was really bad. I don't know if it was the writing or her acting, but she just really sucked.

Perhaps I was just hoping for too much from this ep since the last two were so good, but it still left a bad taste in my mouth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> On the other hand.... -- Tillow, 06:36:07 02/28/02 Thu
I'm definitely a B/S shipper and I LOVED it. Objectively, this was a great ep. Great writing, great acting. And the relationship was killing Buffy and hurting Spike.

Time for that era to end. Something new can now begin.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: On the other hand.... -- verdantheart, 06:42:58 02/28/02 Thu
Funny, I was just about to post a response with the exact same title!

You'd probably call me a B/S shipper because I'm a sucker for a good romance. However, I think my perspective is a little broader than the usual shipper. I don't have specific expectations as to where the writers should take this arc. Therefore, I was very pleased by the episode in all its aspects (even irritating gung-ho Riley, I don't have to like the guy for him to contribute to a good episode), especially the unanswered questions I think it raised. The B/S relationship was in severe trouble and had to change. Can't wait to see how they relate to each other post-AYW!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> I surrender. Too many counterexamples. Nice points all around. -- Sophist, 08:50:08 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I feel like the only one who liked 'As You Were' -- Calluna, 17:07:08 02/27/02 Wed
I rather liked it too.
And wouldn't it be nice if Riley's Black Ops guys sent Buffy a nice check (say $40,000) for killing the demon and its offspring?

Also, is it me or is Buffy's house starting to be like Angel's hotel? A big, fat white elephant. Why hasn't she sold it and gotten a condo or apartment or something? I would nicely segue into getting rid of another "security blanket".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Hey, I liked it...everything and everyone in it, besides Mr. Blucas. -- Rob, 17:10:08 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> At Ease (spoiler for As You Where) -- JBone, 17:25:20 02/27/02 Wed
I feel like for the first time since Tabula Rasa the show is really hitting it's season 6 stride. Even though TR was bookended by dramatic angst and misery, at the core of that episode, the cast and crew are flying. I've often felt that Riley was somewhat neutered in season 5, essential and true to the story as it might have been, but it was nice to see him get his proper goodbyes finally. He turned his whole scene around, so good for him.

What Riley offers Buffy in his "you're still quite the hottie" speech is faith. Not Faith, the Slayer, but that no matter what condition he found her in, he has faith in her that she will end up being whatever she wants to be. Buffy finally gets to see herself through someone's eyes that she loves and respects. This gives her the strength to make a drastic change so she start healing herself.

I thought that I would weigh in on this subject since this seems to be the hot topic of the board. I've got lots to say about the rest of the episode, but don't have the time after all the reading I just had to do to catch up to here. I admit to skimming some of the longer B/S posts, mostly since they seem to echo the other thousand B/S posts on the board. I've noticed an interesting new term on the board today, "Spike haters". I think that Spike is one of the most fascinating and fun to watch characters on the show. But I have never thought that he was right or good enough for Buffy. I've argued against at every turn. I hope this isn't directed at someone like me.

One final thought for now, I said in a post after DoubleMeat Palace, that Buffy would never stop being miserable until after she got away from Spike. Hopefully, she can start "finding the fun now B."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I love it. I adore Petrie. -- just visiting for now, 17:44:29 02/27/02 Wed
Just thought I'd show my support :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I feel like the only one who liked 'As You Were' -- Terrapin, 18:52:20 02/27/02 Wed
I really liked the episode too.

I loved the scene where Sam goes to tell Willow how strong she is to quit; even though Sam seemed to be a little too perfect.(definetely not scooby material)Again Willow is slowly facing her geek infested roots. I think she will be a major part in defeating the trio.

Buffy finally had the strength to get out of the relationship. Hopefully she will continue to be strong.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I liked it -- Apophis, 20:19:52 02/27/02 Wed
It even had me liking Riley for a minute... but only a minute.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I did, and then... -- Darby, 21:42:04 02/27/02 Wed
Really enjoyed it while I was watching it. Wife did too. Son did, except for the smoochies.

Then, it was like one of those movie experiences where the lights come up and you go, "Ha, ha, ha...wait a minute..."

Gotta watch it again to really sort it out.

At one time I would have trusted ME that the bothersome aspects were all purposeful and going somewhere. I can't muster the faith at the moment.

Hope I'm wrong...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I feel like the only one who liked 'As You Were' -- Kimberly, 06:34:02 02/28/02 Thu
Not hardly; I enjoyed it too. Of course, I frequently feel intimidated by all the posters here who've been hating this season. It's different (and, yes, they do need a new construction crew for the plotholes), but I've been enjoying it.

I don't think liking the episode is necessarily correlated with being a B/S shipper. I've been enjoying the relationship--those two have incredible chemistry--but this step HAD to be taken. I also don't think the relationship is over; there's more going on than we've yet seen.

And I'm with you: I loved the X/A moments. For the first time, they're reminding me of my own wedding. (Like Xander, I kept trying for an elopement. Like Xander, I lost the battle.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thoughts on Season 6 (no major spoilers, maybe little bitty ones) -- LadyStarlight, 14:49:19 02/27/02 Wed

Here's a thought: could the reason why a majority of Buffy fans seem to be terribly disappointed in this season simply be that it is so achingly real?

Think about it for a second. Buffy has battled (so far) the evils of elderly plumbing and the Faceless Bureaucrat. She's realizing that a crappy job is better than no job and is struggling with a seemingly unhealthy relationship based on great sex. (which, have to say, sounds like my early 20's to me.)

There's no Big Bad, in fact, there doesn't even seem to be an overall arc to this season. Which is the point, perhaps. Life (usually) doesn't have a clear road, and is about the journey as much as the destination. I will admit, as much as I'm not liking this journey as much as previous seasons, it is hitting home a hell of a lot more often. I couldn't relate directly to high-school, or even college Buffy. (before you start throwing things, I get the metaphors, ok? )

But this Buffy, who misses the garbage pickup, often has no energy or desire to clean up the house, is sometimes frustrated and baffled by parenting, and is struck dumb by the reappearance of an old boyfriend, this Buffy seems more 'real' to me. I see myself in this Buffy, and this is what keeps me glued to the screen.

Yes, there's no apocalypse(s) on the horizon (yet, I could be wrong.), and yes, sometimes it's boring and plodding and makes me want to scream "For Chrissakes, just do something.". But then, isn't that life?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Thoughts on Season 6 (no major spoilers, maybe little bitty ones) -- Rattletrap, 15:14:36 02/27/02 Wed
YES! This is a very good assessment of this season, with which I agree almost completely. I've had the attitude all along that the writers are deliberately frustrating us a little to give us a sense of Buffy's frustration, this is the aspect of this season I've found so resonant with my own experience.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Thoughts on Season 6 (no major spoilers, maybe little bitty ones) -- Dichotomy, 15:19:53 02/27/02 Wed
You may be right. I also often find myself glued to the screen. I'm intrigued because the situations are real and at the same time unclear. I'm not so sure what the "right"course of action is for Buffy and the others, and I'm not really sure who or what the Big Bad is (the Troika, just Warren, Facing Responsibility)--I can't even guess where this season is going to take us. I only know that I've really given some of the dilemmas faced this season a lot of thought because, like life, it has been by turns dull, surprising, titilating, confusing and utlimately unpredictable. This last episode left me anticipating many possible developments--I really enjoyed it!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> True -- JBone, 19:34:50 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Thoughts on Season 6 (no major spoilers, maybe little bitty ones) -- Deeva, 21:17:26 02/27/02 Wed
I agree this season has been one that I could relate more closely to. You know not living in Sunnydale and hello it's tv. I think that a lot of people are disappointed because they're expecting more of the same. But the writers will always push on and away from what was done. Growing up and all that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Thoughts on Season 6 (no major spoilers, maybe little bitty ones) -- verdantheart, 06:34:55 02/28/02 Thu
I've been enjoying the season overall (although the flood one didn't really engage me ...), but perhaps that's because I've been looking ahead all the while. I always have the feeling that all the tasty little tidbits are adding up to a sumptuous meal, so to speak. I suppose I could be wrong (and, extending the metaphor, simply end up with a heck of a tummyache). I'm enjoying the journey. I don't need to get there ahead of myself. No fun in that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Thoughts on Season 6 (no major spoilers, maybe little bitty ones) -- Sebastian, 09:50:30 02/28/02 Thu
i, also, can relate to this season more than any of the other seasons.

as a 20-something, i'm going through (or have just finished going through) the very same issues that buffy has faced this season.

the problems this season have been more concrete - and dare i say - less philosophical than previous seasons.

for example, last season we saw buffy debating the quandry of whether one person's needs (dawn) should be addressed to the detriment of the many (the world).

now we see buffy dealing with bills, a rebellious younger sister, and engaging in a highly sexual and potentially destructive relationship with a man that is clearly wrong for her.

welcome to the world! :-) i'm rather enjoying it.

- S
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Thoughts on Season 6 (no major spoilers, maybe little bitty ones) -- ponygirl, 11:22:06 02/28/02 Thu
Yes! This is a Buffy that I and many of my friends can relate to - the emotions if not always the situations. If it has been a much more painful viewing experience than past seasons, then it is because I can see echoes of my own life in what Buffy is going through. My only worry is that at this point I'm expecting the season finale to hand me the answer to life, the universe and everything.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Thoughts on Season 6 (no major spoilers, maybe little bitty ones) -- Kimberly, 11:53:33 02/28/02 Thu
(Please note tongue in cheek emoticon here)

Ponygirl, you must have missed the book. The answer to life, the universe, and everything is 42. The problem is that no one is sure what the question is.

Mwahahahahaha

(Sorry. I just couldn't resist it.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transformation of Consciousness -- Rufus, 15:44:45 02/27/02 Wed

This season is all about the process of growing up which is what the Hero's Journey is all about. Changing from a dependant under a parents roof, to someone who will spawn another generation of dependants is what it's all about. The process of becoming an adult can be the most frustrating journey of all.

Power of Myth

But the stucture and something of the spiritual sense of the adventure can be seen already anticipated in the puberty or initiation rituals of early tribal societies, through which a child is compelled to give up its childhood and become an adult-to die, you might say, to its infantile personality and psyche and come back as a responsible adult. This is a fundamental psychological transformation that everyone has to undergo. We are in childhood in a condition of dependency under someone's protection and supervision for some fourteen to twenty-one years-and if you're going on for your Ph.D., this may continue to perhaps thirty-five. You are in no way a self-resonsible, freeagent, but an obedient dependent, expecting and receiveing punishments and rewards. To evolve out of this position of psychological immaturity to the courage of self-responsibility and assurance requires a death and a resurrection. That's the basic motif of the universal hero's journey-leaving one condition and finding the source of life to bring you forth into a richer or mature condition.

Buffy is embarking on her most uncomfortable journey of becoming an adult. Many Slayers never make it to that stage, snuffed out before they can reach their potential.

Power of Myth

Campbell: If you realize what the real problem is - losing yourself, giving yourself to some higher end, or to another - you realize that this is the ulimate trial. When we quit thinking primarily about ourselves and our own self-preservation, we undergo a truly heroic transformation of consciousness.

And what all the myths have to deal with is transformation fo consciousness of one kind or another. You have been thinking one way, you now have to think a different way.

Moyers: How is consciousness transformed?

Campbell: Either by the trials themselves or by illuminating revelations. Trials and revelations are what it's all about.

Moyers: Isn't there a moment of redemption in all of these stories? The woman is saved from the dragon, the city is spared from obliteration, the hero is snatched from danger in the nick of time.

Campbell: Well, yes. There would be no hero deed unless there were an achievement. We can have the hero who fails, but he's usually represented as a kind of clown, someone pretending to more than he can achieve.

If you look closely at this season Buffy has had to change the way she views the world and her responsibilities in that world. Her relationship with Dawn underscores that. Dawn had become what many thought was a whiny brat. I feel Dawn was no more whiny than anyone would feel if they were being neglected. Buffy's first revelation was to figure out that she wasn't alone in feeling frightened about her place in the world. In staying home with Dawn after being trapped in their house proved that Buffy had begun to think of more than herself.

Something else that Buffy is learning is that good and evil don't come in labeled packages marked DEMON. Evil and good can exist in some of the most unlikely places. Dead Things changed the way that Buffy views the world. She is no longer slaying monsters but is learning that monsters can come in human form.

Buffy is going through a series of trials that are taking her from one place to another. She is leaving childhood behind and learning to exist in an adult world...one that can stink as much as the DM burgers.

Last night Riley returned to find Buffy with a hat with an animal on it. She was humiliated because she had begun to see herself in a deadend with no hope for relief from the tedious grind she was trapped in. Riley came back appearing together, happy, over Buffy and into a fulfilling life that he was very satisfied with. Buffy saw him as a potential crutch or way out....except that he was married. She only saw herself as a loser that was going nowhere. I feel that everyone experiences that feeling many times in their lives. Riley may have been there to kill demons but he served as another set of eyes that still saw Buffy as the hero she is.

Then there is this slight thing with Spike....her "enemy" the "evil" guy that just doesn't seem all that evil anymore. The thing about that relationship is that in it's sexual state it could only have resulted in a painful dance that could have ended with both parties hating the other. Buffy had to be strong enough to realize that even though he is a demon he also has feelings and she had been using those feelings to hide from getting on with her life. She wants him but realizes that at this point she can't love him.

Buffy is more of a hero than ever because she had the revelation that led her to act. She realized that she had to stop thinking of herself and start thinking and caring about others. Her going through the motions was her way of ignoring the pain that others felt because she wanted to stay in that dependant position where everything was easy. Giles was right to call her on that, leaving and taking the safety net from her. In order to fly the baby bird had to be pushed from the nest. I feel Buffy is learning to fly without a safety net. Her appearence at the end of "As you Were" was that of the Buffy we remember when she had that flush of excitement about the world and the job she was created to do. The light no longer is bright and hard, but warm and welcoming. Buffy didn't change, the way she thinks about the world around her did.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Wow! Thanks! -- Vickie, 16:47:11 02/27/02 Wed
Loved it! Especially your adept translation of Joseph Campbell's gestures (you have been thinking in this way, and now are to start thinking in that way) into comprehensible words.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Transformation of Consciousness -- gds, 17:47:00 02/27/02 Wed
Excellent post Rufus.

I would also point out that this episode was for Buffy what Wrecked was for Willow. She saw that she was racing down a dead end road, then stopped and turned around. She tried to do this in Wrecked - but that time she tried to stop by denying reality and running away from it (and since it was a part of her she could not do it) instead of confronting it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Sort of my ramblings more than a direct response... (sorry) -- yuri, 18:00:22 02/27/02 Wed
It constantly amazes (and delights) me that different people can see things in such different ways. I am sincerely glad that the last scene in AYW was interpreted by some in such a positive light.
That said, I must regretfully add my name to the list of those who found it entirely false. (I know I'm going to repeat people here, I apoligize, it's just good to get this stuff out of my fingers.) Sarah touched on most of the things I had problems with about twelve posts down (we really could win a message board popularity contest at this point) but here I go

I agree that She doesn't feel bad for how she's been treating Spike, she's feels badly about what that says about *her*. Albeit, this is essentially the case whenever someone feels guilty about what they've done to someone else, but to me the subtext of her speech really emphasized the "what it says about Buffy" side rather than the "I'm devastated that I've used someone so terribly" side. (I'm not discussing whether or not she has used Spike terribly, just pointing out what she believes.)

I'm also very disturbed by the fact that Riley is the one who pushed her to the final "revelation" that Spike is evil and can't change. Can Spike change? I'm inclined to say yeah, sure why not, (that's not a challenge, I've read all the arguments on why he can't and just haven't been convinced) but that's irrelevant to what I'm saying. What's relevant is that there doesn't seem to have been any defining moment(s) that have told the audience or Buffy he can't change. I think that, whether or not that/those moment/s will come, the writers would make it clear to the audience when they did. Some moments that people would argue have made that definition are too easily argued into ambiguity, such as Spike's attack on the girl when he thinks his chip is gone, and the whole egg thing which really doesn't add up for me. I don't think even Buffy was ready to take it at its face value until after her chat with Riley. It doesn't seem plausible to me that Riley of all people would be the one to lead Buffy through a transformation of conciousness. First, because it's Riley, (I don't hate the guy, he's just not that transcendent, IMO) and second, (as Sarah mentioned) he hasn't seen a glimpse of all the good Spike's done.

Spike's comment about himself bugged me, and Anne mentioned this as well, because I really was under the impression that he thought he could change. (Again, whether or not he can is irrelevant, just that he thought so.)

And lastly Buffy calling Spike "William" was much more odd and sad to me than touching. Buffy doesn't know William, she knows Spike. Spike isn't William. I wouldn't expect Buffy to be too hot for William, anyway. It almost felt like a betrayal, in some way I can't really describe.

Anyway, I agree that "Trials and revelations are all that it's about," but my gut reaction to most of the so-called "revelations" of late has been that they are false and/or forced and/or confused. Whether or not this is intended by the writers I have no idea. If it is, I think it could make for some really interesting stuff.

I did not by any means enjoy AYW, as in I did not like the feelings I had watching it. The one clichéd thing that really made me squirm with discomfort was when Buffy and Spike wake up and you just know that Riley is about to walk in. I hate those scenes in movies and shows, the last time I felt that way was during Orange County (don't see it) when this guy has a hugely important interview but the whole time you're just waiting for the host of fuckup supporting characters to, well, fuck it up. That anticipation of something unbearably embarrasing that is so obvious -- eeuech. Generally I think these scenes are misused, overused, and ineffective. However, if that was really what the viewer was supposed to be feeling at that moment - okay. I'll bite. I'll go through discomfort and confusion and disbelief if that is the journey that the show is taking me on. I choose to assume the writers want that, instead of speculating that they're writing badly. (Which is equally plausible, but makes life less fun.) Again, I respect - and almost envy - those who found the writing to be good and the ep to be wonderful.

P.S. I'm not a die-hard B/S shipper by any means, though I find that the relationship holds much potential for interesting developments, as well as being consistantly intriguing. I do think that something had to happen, and I'm glad we didn't have another episode where the sex thing stayed where it has been for the past few eps. I think that, as someone said below, the end of this episode actually boded far better for any sort of B/S relations than the past few episodes have. A little clearing of the slate, in a writing-a-whole-new-slate way.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Sort of my ramblings more than a direct response... (sorry) -- Rufus, 19:35:54 02/27/02 Wed
And lastly Buffy calling Spike "William" was much more odd and sad to me than touching. Buffy doesn't know William, she knows Spike. Spike isn't William. I wouldn't expect Buffy to be too hot for William, anyway. It almost felt like a betrayal, in some way I can't really describe.

Boy do I ever disagree with what you said there. Spike aka William the Bloody the guy that Buffy knows and has been aware of both his aliases. Vampires are the ultimate metaphor for isolation and rejection by society. They are stuck in a form of adolescence rebelling against a world that can't suffer their existance. Instead of stealing the keys to dad's car and living in the basement of their parents, they become parasites, following and feeding off man. They may be a demon but the also are who they once were. Angel is Liam, Spike is William. One of Angels conversations with his father was one to remember...from The Prodigal....

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

If a vampire is just a demon using the body of a person, then they wouldn't be bothered with the revenge scenarios I constantly see with them. A common thread among them is that in life they were frequently people who felt powerless, bullied, angry, alone. I don't think it's a mistake that the vampire recruits people who have a grudge with life, insecure, angry, great beginnings for incentive to kill. Becoming undead just puts them in a loop of using their power to bully those who once bullied them, once their old grudges are dead they carry on becoming the ultimate bully, the very thing they hated in life. Liam felt stifled by his family, he took that into his unlife and tried to pervert love wherever he found it. If he saw purity he strove to corrupt it. Darla was a hooker who was used by her Johns, left to die alone consumed by a venereal disease. Darla wiped out families, including the youngest children. Spike, William, was that humailiated poet who felt that no one saw his importance. He went on to become a killer who hunted humans as trophies until the ultimate prize became the Slayer. What makes this so important is that if you think the human is gone then why would Angel bother with redemption as he could reason he was never there when the vampire killed, but he was, the only thing missing his soul or conscience. Back to Buffy calling Spike, William....she knows William as he never left his body, only his soul departed, leaving the undead human to remain "love's bitch".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> The human informs the vampire, but the experiences over 120 years change both human and vampire. -- Sophist, 20:19:34 02/27/02 Wed
Buffy knows only Spike.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> yes, that is how I meant it. -- yuri, 15:18:45 02/28/02 Thu
No doubt aspects of "William" are in Spike, but the name "William" refers to who Spike was over a hundred years ago. (I don't know when he dropped "William the Bloody" for the more concise moniker, but I believe it was quite a while ago.) My mom was called by her middle name until she was in her late teens, when she became estranged from her family. Now she's gone by her first name for thirty years and if someone calls her by her middle name, she tells me, it feels like they're talking to someone she's not, someone she used to be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> I wish I could ramble that well. Great post! -- Sophist, 20:15:57 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Sort of my ramblings more than a direct response... (sorry) -- JBone, 20:43:18 02/27/02 Wed
First a quick disclaimer, I started writing this as an argument against Spike having to change, and somehow it devolved into a diatribe on work ethic. I thought about just erasing it, but what the hell, here it is.

What's relevant is that there doesn't seem to have been any defining moment(s) that have told the audience or Buffy he can't change.

To me, it never or rarely is about Spike changing, it's always about Buffy. Spike is just a scooby. He's arguably the most entertaining and plot-complicating of the scoobes, but he is still just a scooby. It's all about Buffy. It will always be about Buffy. If Spike gets his own show à la Angel, then there will be a show all about Spike and how everyone deals with him. Buffy needs to change. Has anyone argued against that? She's been dying a slow, miserable death, leaning on the crutch that is Spike and sex just to feel something. I want to see a show of hands of those who believe that this is good for her. Is this fair to Spike? Even Buffy says no when she kicks him to the curb. Spike could have changed himself into Riley or Angel, and Buffy would still have had to make some kind of change anyway.

She started making changes when she got a job back in DmP. I've heard a ton of criticism of Buffy for this, but I believe honest work never hurts anyone. The closest I've come to the fast food industry is pizza delivery, and I loved it. It was the easiest job to be great at that I ever had. Of course I grew up working for my Dad before the age of 10 knee deep in cow sh*t. Fast Food is a vacation. Too many people think a job is a paycheck. It's not. A job is not what you are. How you do your job is everything. From what I understand, the American attitude towards work is starkly different from the rest of the word. And I still hear too many examples of people on welfare refusing to work fast food, for some bullsh*t reason or another. How we work is what makes us what we are. If we don't work, we are shadows in the population. I guess I see my parents when I say all of this. My mother raised a large family without many resources, and I have yet to meet anyone else in the world, who worked harder and longer, at a more thankless job to do than my father. Whenever someone is described to me as a "hard worker", I just chuckle. They have no idea. Mules would die of fatigue before they could match my dad's idea of work ethic.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> The problem is -- Sophist, 08:43:29 02/28/02 Thu
that Buffy's job at DMP was portrayed as deadening and part of downward spiral. The fact that she left the job for Riley seems intended as part of her recovery.

I know we won't agree about Spike, but I think her relationship with him was the only thing holding her steady over the last few months. There is a connection there; you can see it even in S5. Spike was not the cause of her decline, he was a lifeline. Her decline came from within, from her inability to reconcile seemingly contradictory aspects of her nature. It preceeded her physical relationship with Spike.

The relationship was inadequate, partly his fault, partly hers. I have no problem with the end of it (though I do with the way it was handled). But the end doesn't mean that Buffy is now "cured", just as the beginning was not the start of her decline.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The problem is -- ponygirl, 11:13:21 02/28/02 Thu
I agree with your comments wholeheartedly. Buffy's relationship with Spike is not the reason she is unable to get the trash out on time, remember which day of the week it is, and generally have some sense of focus and control over her life. She is still going through the motions as hse has been all this season, and her treatment of Spike, rather than the relationship itself is merely a symptom of Buffy's larger problem.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Good points -- verdantheart, 12:30:53 02/28/02 Thu
On the whole, I agree, although my take was Buffy saw Riley as coming to rescue her from the drudgery of the DMP, rather than a part of her recovery. But the white (or, actually, black, in this case) knight scenario was crushed by the revelation that Riley is now married (gee, I wonder how he managed to skip that detail...?). Buffy falls into Spike's arms looking for reassurance ("Say you love/want me"). He may be a source of shame, but he's also a source of support.

I also believe that the inadequacy of the relationship stemmed immediately from Buffy's reluctance to treat Spike "like a man." She hid him away as a guilty pleasure and her whole life began to split as a result. Spike the romantic would have loved to shower valentines on her, take her to the Bronze, dance with her, etc. etc., but he was not allowed to be "real" (her boyfriend, recognized as such by her peers). Instead of trying to lift Spike up, she allowed him to contribute to her own downward spiral. Both of them bought into the if-Buffy's-with-Spike-she-must've-come-back-wrong idea. This is not to say that there are not long-term issues that stem from the fact that Spike has issues resulting from the fact that a demon rather than a human soul possesses his body, though (his "I've changed" vs "I'm still bad" conflict, for one thing).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: work ethic -- yuri, 00:19:35 03/01/02 Fri
First, I must say -- of course I think it's about Buffy changing. And I didn't think the course B/S sex was going was very promising (not that it doesn't have the potential to be)... did it seem like I disagreed with that? But just because the show isn't named for Spike doesn't mean his journey isn't relevant. It is an ensemble show, no?

I believe honest work never hurts anyone.

I'd have to wholehartedly agree with you here, I think one of the travesties of modern society (capitalism, specifically) is that some people don't have to work in order to make billions more than everyone else. The lifetime goal of almost every American is to find some way to make loads of money by doing the least amount of work possible.

However, I think that it's understandable for Buffy's current occupation to be portrayed as depressing and as contributing to her apathy and loss of self.
Even though I agree that doing work for honest compensation should always be a good thing, the fact is that in this society a) You are looked down upon by everyone if you take certain jobs, and you can hardly expect a person to be secure enough to rise above that when they are contantly getting the message that they are dumb and worthless, and b) Many easy-to-get jobs, like fast food work and retail, both perpetuate corrupt systems such as the meat industry and sweatshops, and offer working conditions that are humble at best and are almost always depressing and demoralizing. Not to mention the fact that it takes relatively little skill or effort, and if you can't take pride in the fact that you're doing something that you are good at in your job, you don't have much.

So though Buffy's decision to work is courageous, I don't think we're likely to see any sort of happy, secure Buffy (not that we see that a lot) behind a DMP counter. Considering what a fastfood chain represents in this culture, it wouldn't make sense.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Excellent ramblings! -- Dariel, 21:40:54 02/27/02 Wed
I do believe that the writers intended for the ending to ring false. Knowing yourself is a process, after all. Buffy's come up with the best story to get her through, well, 'til next Tuesday at the least.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Sort of my ramblings more than a direct response... (sorry) -- Rufus, 01:24:01 02/28/02 Thu
It doesn't seem plausible to me that Riley of all people would be the one to lead Buffy through a transformation of conciousness. First, because it's Riley, (I don't hate the guy, he's just not that transcendent, IMO) and second, (as Sarah mentioned) he hasn't seen a glimpse of all the good Spike's done.

Riley didn't "lead" Buffy through a transformation, he was just one of the trials on the way to a transformation that would have happened anyway. This show is about the series of trials and revelations that happen to all as a result of living life. Buffy's conclusions at the end of the show were the result of all the trials she has gone through this year, it was the conclusion she came to at the end of the show based upon her total experiences of life so far. It could be argued that Tara had more of an influence upon Buffy than Riley. His contribution was to be a third party that knew Buffy as a woman and a slayer, and he simply reminded her of the fact that she was more than just an employee of the DMP, more than the "smell", she was still a strong person going through a bad time in her life. He didn't lead Buffy she just interperted what he said into how she felt about life and what she was prepared to do about her situation. What he thinks about Spike and anything Spike has done is unimportant, but it is important that he left Spikes fate up to Buffy instead of dusting him on the sly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> great points Rufus; you're nailing it -- JBone, 17:57:04 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Sort of my ramblings more than a direct response... (sorry) -- yuri, 00:26:09 03/01/02 Fri
I don't think that we'll agree on this because we disagree so much about the tone of the ep, but what the hey, I'll plunge ahead..

I completely agree that there are many other aspects to Buffy's "tranformation," such as Tara, economic issues, etc. However, I think that Riley's presence had everything to do with Buffy's decisions in this episode. I think something would have happened eventually had he not been there, but he accellerated it and affected the way it happened. Though Riley didn't waste many words on Spike, his opinion of him is clear. I think that opinion, coming from the "one that got away" who has a new bright and shiny life had a huge impression on Buffy. And I don't like that, it doesn't seem fair or true, really. Also, to really be influenced by someone who doesn't quite know the details of a situation generally leads to questioning one's own decisions. I'm not sure, this point is debatable, that's just how I see it now. I wouldn't be entirely opposed to changing my mind. (I should mention that I actually liked how Riley talked about DMP and stuff "not touching" who Buffy is. The Spike part - ech - but concerning the DMP I think Buffy has internalized too much of the petty prejudices people have against people who work in the fast food industry, and it was good for her to hear that.)

However, I don't think I'll change my mind about the fact that Buffy's "transformation," (I will call it that because I agree that it was some sort of transformation, just not the way you define it) was not one of clarity and moving towards, er, the light.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Dust him on the sly... -- Lee Ann, 06:08:38 03/01/02 Fri
"What he thinks about Spike and anything Spike has done is unimportant, but it is important that he left Spikes fate up to Buffy instead of dusting him on the sly"

Is anyone but me horrified at Buffy's response to Riley offering to murder her lover? She didn't seem to be at all appalled. Cold Bitch.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Dust him on the sly... -- Rufus, 06:58:54 03/01/02 Fri
A cold bitch would have killed Spike long ago. A cold bitch would have dumped him without the decency of telling him or making sure she got a few nasty parting shots in. A cold bitch would have killed Spike in front of Riley as soon as she found out about the eggs. Buffy showed a caring for Spike, enough so that she broke it off with him without saying he was an evil, disgusting, thing. She admitted to caring about him....a cold bitch would never do that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Dust him on the sly... -- LeeAnn, 08:09:04 03/01/02 Fri
She admitted to sleeping with him, not caring about him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Totally with you on the "William" thing, yuri -- Dyna, 12:18:33 02/28/02 Thu
"And lastly Buffy calling Spike "William" was much more odd and sad to me than touching. Buffy doesn't know William, she knows Spike. Spike isn't William. I wouldn't expect Buffy to be too hot for William, anyway. It almost felt like a betrayal, in some way I can't really describe."

I too felt real discomfort with Buffy calling Spike "William," and the last scene in general, which felt totally false to me. I've been trying to sort out why this bothered me so much, and I think it ties in with my comments in response to Caroline's post above, about "forgetting your place." Buffy comes to Spike in this scene with Riley's words and attitudes in her mouth--"that's just you, I should have remembered." Some viewers have seen this comment as indicative of forgiveness or acceptance. I read it as totally patronizing and dismissive, robbing Spike of agency and seeming to accept completely Riley's view that those who are "inferior" are incapable of change, so any disappointments they hand us are our own fault, for "forgetting" what they are--the way an upper-class lady of William's day might take responsibility for her servants' misbehavior, because she, not they, is responsible for making sure they don't "forget their place." In that context, Buffy calling Spike "William" gave me a weird feeling--it seemed somehow to emphasize her superiority over him. Was it the echo of the upper-class lady, calling grown men of the lower classes by their first names? I don't know, but the whole scene left me feeling vaguely disgusted with Buffy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> You can see it that way, -- Sophist, 12:32:10 02/28/02 Thu
and I completely agree with you about Riley, but I think we could be more charitable about Buffy's intent. I think she meant the use of William as a recognition of the humanity in Spike. "You treat me like a man." Taken that way, it leaves open possibilities for the two. Taken your way, it leaves Spike with only rage and destruction in response.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: You can see it that way, -- Dyna, 14:32:37 02/28/02 Thu
"I think she meant the use of William as a recognition of the humanity in Spike."

Oh, yes! I didn't mean to say that there's only one meaning to that line, I was just trying to put my finger on why, for me, Buffy's words didn't have the resonance that I know they had for many people. My first reaction was it must be meant to show Buffy is acknowledging Spike's humanity, and I sincerely hope that's borne out as the story unfolds!

At the same time, I do feel the scene, and the overall episode context, is ambiguous--Buffy may be "treating him like a man" with words, but she's also denying it in other ways, such as not holding him responsible for his actions on the grounds that "that's what he is," that it's foolish to expect the likes of Spike to be capable of change.

Luckily, I don't think it's necessary that this kind of ambiguous treatment leaves Spike with only the options of "rage and destruction!" Mainly I think it highlights the fact that both Spike and Buffy need to disentangle themselves from the way others view them if they're going to really grow up and find themselves. Spike can't base his sense of dignity or self-worth on how Buffy defines him, any more than Buffy can base hers on how Riley sees her. I hope that, with the end of this destructive phase of their relationship, the possibility now exists for something better to evolve for both of them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Totally with you on the "William" thing, yuri -- Rufus, 15:24:21 02/28/02 Thu
Some viewers have seen this comment as indicative of forgiveness or acceptance. I read it as totally patronizing and dismissive, robbing Spike of agency and seeming to accept completely Riley's view that those who are "inferior" are incapable of change, so any disappointments they hand us are our own fault, for "forgetting" what they are--the way an upper-class lady of William's day might take responsibility for her servants' misbehavior, because she, not they, is responsible for making sure they don't "forget their place."

I think some have misunderstood the nature of transformation. It isn't always in one big event, it comes after a series of trials and revelations. It's how people become what they are.
I didn't see Buffy's words to Spike as cruel, that's because she didn't kill him for being part of a scheme that could have killed everybody in Sunnydale. Riley had the okay to take out "The Doctor", and he didn't, either did Buffy. If Buffy thought that Spike was only evil she would have done everyone a favor by getting it over with and killing him now. But this is a show where we get to see the process of growing up. Buffy has accepted Spike for what he is and has left the door open for him becoming more. It's clear that Spike still doesn't get it, get why some of the things he does aren't acceptable. He may love Buffy, but he has to connect the dots and extend that caring to everyone regardless of who they are.
I saw Buffy's treatment of Spike/William as a step forward in freeing both characters to progress if they want to. Buffy has called Spike, William before, and I take that to mean she was being serious and honest with him.
As for Riley, he may not be the messenger many people wanted, but his words and everything that has happened to Buffy this year brought her to her revelation, her decision to stop hiding and participate in this world. This is only one extra step in the process of growing up. It's a process not an event.....there will be more trials and revelations for everyone in the show. I saw this episode as hopeful for everyone, I didn't limit it to just the feelings of one.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> William before? -- Kevin, 17:07:12 02/28/02 Thu
I can't remember her ever calling him William before, except maybe asking if he wanted William the Bloody on their wedding invitations in Crush....Do you remember which episodes she did?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: William before? -- Doriander, 17:26:16 02/28/02 Thu
If Rufus doesn't mind, I could answer this. In "No Place Like Home":

BUFFY
What are you doing here? Five words or less.

Spike counts the words on his fingers.

SPIKE
Out... for... a... walk... bitch.

BUFFY
Out for a walk at night by my house. No one has time for this, William.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> I put down the ep but forgot to mention why I feel it's so important... -- Rufus, 19:41:06 02/28/02 Thu
The fact that Buffy calls Spike, William that time was the first unconscious hint that their relationship had changed. Buffy was uncomfortable with Spike out front of her house but was too preoccupied to pay attention. The fact tht she called him William was to get the point home to him that she didn't have time for any crap, using his given name accentuates that. Made me think of a parent that will use a full name to a child to bring home the fact that what they are saying is to be taken seriously.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I put down the ep but forgot to mention why I feel it's so important... -- Kimberly, 06:34:32 03/01/02 Fri
Another reason that this episode is so important: It's the first one after Spike realizes he's in love with Buffy. It is here that he is trying to figure out how to start a relationship with her.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I put down the ep but forgot to mention why I feel it's so important... -- Rufus, 06:55:03 03/01/02 Fri
Yes, he is trying to find a way to start a relationship with Buffy. He is on a journey of his own, one that started for the reason of getting Buffy to love him. But in the process he seems to be slowly relearning what it is to be human. Spike started as "William the Bloody", a name that has much irony. As a vampire William the Bloody was a cruel monster that killed with ease, William the Bloody (it is the name that was originally given to him in life in Fool for love)as a human was a man who wanted to think only of thoughts of beauty. I see Buffy's last words to Spike in AYW not as a total rejection but as someone ending a relationship while it could do nothing but hurt both parties involved. She accepted him for what he was and admitted that she still wanted him. Buffy may not want to continue a sexual relationship but she made it clear that she was capable of seeing Spike.

SPIKE (haughty) I prefer not to think of such dark, ugly business at all. That's what the police are for. (looks at Cecily) I prefer placing my energies into creating things of beauty. Fool for Love

His name a cruel joke about his abilities of creating any beauty at all.

ARISTOCRAT #1 Have you heard? They call him William the Bloody because of his bloody awful poetry! Fool for Love

William was seduced into becoming a vampire by a woman who could see that there was more to the man than his appearence suggested. What makes it so pathetic is that William so hated himself that he thought that Drusilla was his salvation....from Crush..

SPIKE: This is Drusilla, girl! You have the slightest idea what she means to me? It's the face of my salvation! (looks at Dru, smiles slightly) She delivered me from mediocrity. For over a century we ... cut a swath through continents. A hundred years, she never stopped surprising me.

Note the difference between Buffy and Drusilla, one light, the other dark....both have an effect on Spike that causes him to do things for them. He has followed Drusilla into the darkness, it is yet to be determined if he is capable of following Buffy into the light. This year is the year of growing up, I wonder if that also includes the vampire that is trying to find a place for himself when he no longer fits into either the world of darkness or the world of light?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: William before? -- Rufus, 19:36:20 02/28/02 Thu
One that comes to mind was last year, after OOMM, No place like home when Buffy encountered Spike lurking by the tree in front of her house.

BUFFY
What are you doing here? Five words or less.

Spike counts the words on his fingers.

SPIKE
Out... for... a... walk... bitch.

BUFFY
Out for a walk at night by my house. No one has time for this,
William.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Dual nature of characters on BtVS -- Spike Lover, 19:47:20 02/28/02 Thu
1) 99% of the time I am disgusted/enraged at Buffy. I continue to wonder if she is capable of loving anyone except herself.

2) On BtVS, characters often have a dual nature: There is the 'Buffy' nature and the 'Slayer' nature. There is 'Angel' and 'Angelus'. So in a real way, I think there is a lot of 'William' in what Buffy has seen of 'Spike'.

I think when B said 'I am sorry, William.', it was a reference to 'Fool for Love' -when 'William' colored so much of Spike's actions. It speaks right to the soul of Spike (and the humanity w/in him). (He has never denied that he was William to anyone.) (Although Angelus often denies that he is not Angel.) It may be that a demon takes over the body of a man, but that man's soul significantly colors the personality of the vampire.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Sort of my ramblings more than a direct response... (sorry) -- Ishkabibble, 13:27:51 02/28/02 Thu
I understand your statement: "I wouldn't expect Buffy to be too hot for William, anyway."

I'm wondering about Buffy's statement earlier in the episode, her fraudian slip about Spike, "He's not getting any gentler." Perhaps William's gentleness (gentlemanliness?) would be more appealing to Buffy now that she has prolonged experience with rough sex.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I could be wrong but the Time-shifting dude is probably. . . (a spoiler?) (txt) -- Patterson, 16:00:06 02/27/02 Wed

The Time shifting dude is probably Angel's son. Angel will kill him as an adult not the baby. The real question is the Time shifting dude Conner or Another son?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I could be wrong but the Time-shifting dude is probably. . . (a spoiler?) (txt) -- gds, 17:21:50 02/27/02 Wed
I see someone else is thinking 4th dimensionally.

There was an earlier poster who also asked the real question - not the one the talking hamburger mentioned. The real question to ask was WHY?

Of course these prophecies are too be considered cautiously. Sometime they are avoided entirely e.g. the Harvest. Other times they are true - but their actual occurrence has the opposite meaning of what is suspected. E.g. the Master will kill Buffy & that Connor wouldn't be born.

There is a movie & title song that always reminds me to careful about interpreting even FACTUAL statements. TOM DOOLEY. The song tells about a man killing his lover who was involved in a triangle. The implication was he murdered her. The story showed that was far from the truth. The other man kidnapped the woman. Dooley went to rescue her. The 2 men fought. The other man almost killed Dooley. The woman moved between them to save Dooley and accidentally stepped into his knife.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: I could be wrong but the Time-shifting dude is probably. . . (a spoiler?) (txt) -- gds, 19:25:31 02/27/02 Wed
I should add that although I considered the Connor=Sahjhan
possibility I have rejected it. It doesn't 'feel' right, and I don't see why Connor would want Connor's blood. Getting someone's blood in the Buffyverse is likely to be about invoking some kind of magic spell on the person with that blood.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: I could be wrong but the Time-shifting dude is probably. . . (a spoiler?) (txt) -- SugarTherapy, 20:54:40 02/27/02 Wed
"Of course these prophecies are too be considered cautiously. Sometime they are avoided entirely e.g. the Harvest. Other times they are true - but their actual occurrence has the opposite meaning of what is suspected. E.g. the Master will kill Buffy & that Connor wouldn't be born."

Ah, but those last two prophecies *did* come true. The Master killed Buffy - she was revived and then killed him, but he still killed her. If he hadn't, we wouldn't have had Kendra or Faith. And Connor wasn't born. There was no birth in that alley, only Darla's death. Connor was a by-product, so to speak, of that. He wasn't born, he was just there.

Sugar
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: I could be wrong but the Time-shifting dude is probably. . . (a spoiler?) (txt) -- gds, 21:09:13 02/27/02 Wed
Exactly my point. The prophies were true, but they didn't mean what they were interpreted to mean. The interpretation of the prophesy about the master was that the master would destroy the slayer and live and win his objective. He did none of these. Killing Buffy did not destroy her and she in fact killed him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The real question is Why? (Spoilers) -- Scroll, 06:17:48 02/28/02 Thu
I'm not familiar with the movie "Tom Dooley", but I like what you said about how prophecies can be misinterpreted. As far as we've seen in the Buffyverse, prophecies always *always* come true, (i.e. Master killing Buffy, Connor not being actually *born*)... But our understanding of the circumstances around these prophecies is often skewed until Joss in his infinite wisdom reveals the Way Things Are. I'm impatient to see how this prophecy will play itself out.

I feel for poor Wesley and the moral dilemma he's facing. He's definitely on the edge, pushed nearly to his limits. The look on his face as the fire erupts is devastating. I posted a message about who should be the one to die, Angel or Connor, but it's disappeared from the board (I guess nobody replied). My big question was, if Wesley agrees with Holtz that Angel is a danger to Connor, then should Wesley kill Angel in order to save Angel's son?

(somebody please respond? you don't have to...)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: I could be wrong but the Time-shifting dude is probably. . . (a spoiler?) (txt) -- Laney, 21:34:44 02/27/02 Wed
A few weeks ago someone on this board half-jokingly suggested that Connor is William/Spike? (my apology, can't remember the poster's name.) After all if you have a time-travelling demon involved, anything is possible. Say, the boy is kidnapped back to late Victorian England, and raised in a well-to-do family, only to be killed/devoured by Drucilla. It'd be as if Angel himself was responsible, for it was he who created Drucilla in the first place.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parallels between Willow and Spike -- Wolfhowl3, 18:56:33 02/27/02 Wed

Does anyone besides me notice that the breakups between Tara and Willow and Spike and Buffy have a similar ring?
Spike was succumbing to temptation, greed, et al. in gathering the nasty egg thingies. He didn't forsee the potential consequences of his actions.
Willow was succumbing to temptation, power highs, et al in casting the forget spell, and visiting Rack. She didn't see the potential consequences of her actions.

Basically, I think the whole addiction metaphor has gone way too far, but it can also be applied: Willow has her so named magic addiction, and Spike, in a way, is addicted to Buffy.

(And, in my opinion, the addiction plot had better end ASAP because it's rendering Willow into a one-dimensional character. Willow=ex-Wicca magic addict. That, and I hate the idea of BtVS showing magic as an addiction in the first place. True, you can be addicted to anything: TV, the internet, chocolate, caffiene, etc., but the real issue is that she is irresponsible. It's not that magic in itself is evil, but that there is a choice involved in what you use it for and when. In this addiction storyline, it's losing sight of that. Once Willow realizes that there is both a time and a place for magic, she can go back to the spells. I would really like to see a really positive & powerful wicca in the series again, to detract from the power corrupts theme.)

What do you think?

W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Parallels between Willow and Spike -- pagangodess, 20:32:18 02/27/02 Wed
Nice comparison on Willow and Spike. I have not thought about it that way before. Although, does this mean that Spike is addicted to Buffy, or that he's addicted to evil?

"Once Willow realizes that there is both a time and a place for magic, she can go back to the spells."

Appearently, it's not that easy. In AYW, Mrs. Finn mentioned a couple of 'shamans' (I think that's what she called them) in South America, who could not stop using magic and died. She said that, she's never known anyone who COULD quit. (Now I'm wishing I had the exact quote) It almost sounds as if it's impossible or at least that there is no middle ground.

I do agree with you about the over-the-top addiction metaphor. Time to move on.

:)
pagan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> oops, spoilerish for AYW above -- pagangodess, 20:33:31 02/27/02 Wed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Parallels between Willow and Spike -- Wicca-in-Training, 21:42:29 02/27/02 Wed
You are close enough to the exact quote for goverment work.

Has anyone else noticed that they have removed all the Good powerful Witches?

Tara has always been shown to be only second best. Willow is now a Magic-addict. Amy is gone to the Dark Side, and Rack is a Demon. They need to bring in a Character that shows that magic in and of itself is not an evil or corrupting thing. They need a Witch (mabey even make it a male Witch) that is about on par with Willow at her best, but make him/her be good, not an Addict.

Talk about it!

WiT.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Parallels between Willow and Spike -- Robert, 09:19:29 02/28/02 Thu
>> " They need to bring in a Character that shows that magic in and of itself is not an evil or corrupting thing."

Why does ME need to do this?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> If I may respond to this... -- Traveler, 22:51:34 02/28/02 Thu
>> " They need to bring in a Character that shows that magic in and of itself is not an evil or corrupting thing."

Why does ME need to do this?

Because real followers of wicca/magic exist and they would like to have a positive role model. The fact that all the powerful witches in BtVS are evil/lost control suggests that all strong practicioners of magic (including wicca) must inevitably fall to the dark side. For comparison, imagine a show that suggests all Christians will inevitably become intolerant bigots...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> shamans -- skeeve, 07:34:54 02/28/02 Thu
Before concluding that magic is inherently addictive, one should get a bit more detail regarding the dead shamans. Questions like "What is a shaman?" and "What had the dead ones been doing?" come to mind.

What should Willow do if Oz shows up and asks her to cure him? Should she do his cousin, too?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: shamans (SPOILERS for As You Were) -- Robert, 09:22:16 02/28/02 Thu
>> "Before concluding that magic is inherently addictive, one should get a bit more detail regarding the dead shamans. "

How do you know they are dead? I believe that Sam said that they were gone, which may or may not mean dead. I took it to mean that their humanity or personality was gone.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: shamans (SPOILERS for As You Were) -- leslie, 12:47:07 02/28/02 Thu
Slight difference between Wiccans and shamans here--shamans operate by letting their spirits leave their bodies to visit the gods in the Otherworld (usually a place either up in the sky or down in the earth). So if the shamans are "gone", I would assume that their spirits are trapped somewhere and can't get back.

Willow's magic is very different--she does spells to request or compell assistance on this plane from Otherworldly beings. Now, one way I could see writing one's way out of this impasse that Willow is in is that she was leaning increasingly toward the "compelling" kind of spell, a thing that will get the Otherworldly beings somewhat pissed off if they are being asked to just run your errands for you and have no choice in the matter. This is also a concern for shamans--one of the things shamans traditionally do is ask assistance from the Master or Mistress of the Animals for good hunting, and negotiate how many animals the tribe can kill, but in return, the hunters have to propitiate the spirits of the animals that are "sacrificing themselves" so that the tribe can eat. You don't just take and take and take--you have to pay somehow, and the shaman negotiates what the payment will be. Willow was getting greedy; she needs to learn how to maintain the balance of power between the worlds. She threw things considerably out of whack bringing back Buffy--I don't think that one tag-along spirit was all the price that had to be paid.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Parallels between Willow and Spike -- Caroline, 07:56:52 02/28/02 Thu
I agree with you about the addiction metaphor. We had a terrific build-up of Willow's growing use of magic, where she gradually started using magic more for her own benefit than the benefit of others. Magic is a way to create a special, wonderful Willow, as opposed to the geeky, boring Willow that she feels she is deep down. Amy comes along and tempts her (so far, so good) but then, just with one session with Rack, where magic was done to her, not Willow abusing magic, she is suddenly addicted and behaving like an addict with the shakes and the water drinking etc? The jump to that is just not logical at best, and pretty darn silly at worst. And now, it's all about beating the addiction, not dealing with the issues that led to overuse of magic. As a result, Willow has become very one-dimensional. I could have gotten over my disappontment with what happened to Willow in Smashed and Wrecked if there was any subsequent exploration of the issues underlying her magic use and there doesn't seem to be. Very frustrating.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Parallels between Willow and Spike -- Brian, 08:34:11 02/28/02 Thu
I certainly agree that the Willow's addiction thread has become one-dimensional. Willow needs to realize that she can be a powerful witch, control the magic, be a "cool" girl and still have a "normal" life. I keep remembering Spike's words about "Magic always has consequences" I don't think we've seen the real consequences of Willow's use of magic to return Buffy. The moments with Rack were moments of bad judgement, looking for a thrill. Magic at its best, and magic at its worst has yet to happen. The question remains, Will Willow have the strength and abiltiy to survive the cosequences of past and future actions, and still be one of the productive "good guys"?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Parallels between Willow and Spike -- Robert, 09:29:28 02/28/02 Thu
>> "Willow needs to realize that she can be a powerful witch, control the magic, be a "cool" girl and still have a "normal" life. "

How do you know that she can? ME may be portraying magic as something that can't be controlled if you submerse yourself too deeply within it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Parallels between Willow and Spike -- Robert, 09:26:32 02/28/02 Thu
>> "but then, just with one session with Rack, where magic was done to her, not Willow abusing magic, she is suddenly addicted and behaving like an addict with the shakes and the water drinking etc?"

She was addicted long before, possibly in the last third of season 5. Tara left Willow before Amy came on the scene. Before Tara left, she was complaining about Willow's cavalier misuse of magic. The scene with Willow (high on Rack's magic) crashing the car and injuring Dawn was merely the point when Willow had to admit her addiction to herself.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Another parallel: Buffy needs Spike just as the SG sometimes need Willow's magic -- Sophist, 08:32:54 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As You Were - retrogradation on Buffy and Spike's progression -- Caroline, 07:09:13 02/28/02 Thu

I enjoyed watching As You Were but it served to remind me how far we have to go both in Buffy's and Spike's progression on their journey. My own take in is that As You Were means the return to the emotional situation that Buffy and Spike were in last season. And the person who got them there was Riley, but he couldn't have done it on his own without their emotional collusion the matter. I'll explain.

I've said last week after the preview of As You Were that I feel that Riley represents, for Buffy, her internalized patriarchal views, particularly her hidden, sexual life, not her public, slaying role. On Riley's return, Buffy seems to be in some kind of awe, almost worshipful of Riley. He seems ideal. The reason being is that she feels that this is how she must be feeling according to her internalization of patriarchal norms. She feels that he fits the mould of the guy she thinks she should be with. Yes, he is stereotypically heroical therefore all his opinions and judgements about Buffy, Spike, etc must be correct. (Did you notice how his lines were so stereotypical and clichéd - stuff like 'you're a hell of a woman' etc merely serves to reinforce this). That's why she allowed his views, prejudices etc to influence her and that's why there was no recrimination on her part for the rather cold, selfish way he treated her before leaving. This is also why she listened to his judgments and pronouncements about Spike rather than looking at the evidence of Spike's behaviour in the last year, which shows far more ambiguity than Riley is aware.

Further exploring what this means for Buffy's progression as I see it through the travails of the Persephone myth, I think that she has stalled and perhaps gone backwards in this episode. Just this week on fx we saw in both Restless and BvsD that there are great depths to her power that Buffy is not aware of or denies. This is the potentially destructive savagery of her primordial instincts as represented by the Primitive. This harkens back in myth to the power of the Great Mother or the primordial goddess with power over fertility and death (two biggies here) who ruled the world (before her overthrow -usually by a son - the birth of patriarchy). The great mother, or the feminine expression of universal energy has been variously expressed in myth. One expression is Kali, the Hindu goddess of death and destruction who, in one interpretation, reincarnated to kill demons but went mad and tried to destroy everything. In the show, I think that she has been well represented by Faith. Another expression is the usurped mother (Tiamat etc) represented by Maggie Walsh, overthrown by her son. Buffy is shown denying the statements that the Primitive and Dracula make about the depth of her power, she fears it. I think that it took something as powerful as her death and resurrection to lower the ego barriers to the unconscious and become more aware of the promptings of her unconscious and to explore this area. This is where Spike comes in - in many ways he is the bearer of this projection.

Ultimately, Buffy must come to some accommodation about the meaning of her shadow side, where her slayer power comes from and what this means to her. I feel that is As You Were she let patriarchal norms that she has internalized and that Riley represented usurp her unconscious promptings to explore this area. Denial of unconscious promptings can often lead to madness and destruction. I'm not saying that Buffy should not end her relationship with Spike but I think that the way she ended it supports my view. Her conscious mind finally accepted that she was sleeping with him but she let her superego and the affiliated patriarchal judgments that rule her behaviour to become primary, rather than seeking further below the surface to find the motivations of her behaviour. For example. I can't love you = I'm not allowed to love you given this world view. So she backed off.

Now that Buffy has stepped back from a relationship with Spike, it may give her some clarity but more likely I think that the denial, once again, of that deep, dark place means that something unconscious will erupt from below the surface, Unconscious promptings, when ignored, tend to become rather explosive because the unconscious does not want to be denied. It could also come in the form of some external event that threatens herself or Spike to make her realize the things she should be exploring. But I can't find it in my heart to hate or judge Buffy on this. The unconscious is unconscious because it's precisely the stuff that we don't want to face and not all of us are evolved enough or brave enough to deal frankly with it.

As for Spike, the guy basically thinks that he's not good enough for her. After showing that he had some balls in Wrecked and Gone, he became willing to take any crumb. Sure, at some point in the future he may have gotten frustrated with the whole situation and let her have it but his relationship-by-stealth tactic backfired on him with the return of Riley. Because he behaved like a wimp, he lost the girl. He wasn't prepared to lose her, so when a challenge came along, he lost her. In the words of many a female lament, he wasn't strong enough to be her man. That says something about his progression, which has also stalled. He is not seeing that instead of being the Big Bad, he is constructing a new Spike, which has some elements that are not entirely evil and may one day be worthy of the love of a woman. (Even if he doesn't eventually win Buffy's love, he needs to get an understanding of this). Hades (Spike) has to think he is good enough for Kore (Buffy) so that she has some level of safety or containment when exploring the darkness and the depths. The underground part of the crypt represents his whole relationship-by-stealth tactic - he did it all up beautifully for Buffy - and now that has been destroyed. Spike has got to realize what it is in himself that is worthy so that he can fight for Buffy and help her break down a lot of those ego barriers that prevent her from seeing parts of herself. While he was fighting for her, she kept coming back, when he stopped, she left. That's why, when Buffy walked out of the crypt in the last scene, she had a look of resolve on her face. The ego barriers were up and her unconscious was back under control.

As an aside, I was annoyed by many of the things that Riley did - dragging Buffy away from her paying job, not telling her he's married, not telling her the purpose of the mission, receiving a hero's welcome after the way he treated Buffy, marrying a version of Buffy and then the whole ascension into heaven imagery with the helicopter. His lines were very clichéd and unoriginal and I realize now that this reflects the fact that he represents a patriarchal archetype - strong, brave, heroic, and placing women on a pedastal - that's why the "It doesn't change who you are" line is there.

Finally, why can't Willow and Dawn help with the housework?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Got to disagree (As You Were Spoilers) -- Darby, 07:57:44 02/28/02 Thu
Riley has rarely actually been Riley the soldier, which is the only incarnation that fits the patriarchy you're seeing in him. Through his arc, he quickly lost his "little girl" ideas about Buffy, and that fact is underlined by his current partnership - if you look at his actions rather than his playful early words, his was always an attempt at an equal relationship with someone he passionately loved who had some unique advantages over him.

Riley's representation, like most things this season, is much closer to the surface - he's the idealized former beau, the person that "got away." Buffy did decide to not let him go (or so we were apparently shown), and must have been replaying Xander's perspective on their relationship a lot, especially lately, with a "what if" extension. It's pretty normal to focus on the good things of an old relationship, especially here where she feels responsible somewhat for the bad things. And the certainty that Riley really loved her, even after really knowing her. It was going to be important to have her find out that his opinions hadn't changed, even if his feeling had.

Now here he is, in a relationship with another strong woman that seems storybook perfection. I think that was part of the reason that he was shown to be flawed still (the heavy-handed omissions of disclosure), but that Buffy was shown to be quite clearly ignoring those. She saw the "dream" Riley that might have been. And it was the dream that she held up to Spike, which is a good thing; we don't want this to be the final closure on that relationship, do we? In life, when the ex has flown, you start to get your perspective back and remember why you knew at the time that things were not going to work out. That same realization will bring her back to knowing that Spike, while maybe not good for her, wasn't really "killing" her. There is more to be resolved in B/S - we all know it; she just has to.

These "slice of life" episodes are hitting very specific fragments of the viewing public. The DMP ep was very well-received by people who had worked fast food or similar jobs. I suspect that many of the people who really liked this ep (especially with that visceral effect you get while watching) have had some contact with similar relationship scenarios - I know that I sure have. Been on both sides - I really felt what both Buffy and Spike were going through.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> I somehow find myself agreeing with both of you. -- Sophist, 08:29:33 02/28/02 Thu
As I said in a post now far below, the cliches in this ep really bothered me. I never bought the idea that Riley was "the one" for Buffy, so I found it downright offensive that his return would have such an impact.

I can't agree with Darby's first paragraph about Riley's relationship with Buffy. However, I like the idea that the too perfect image we saw represented Buffy's POV -- she was idealizing an ex; when h/she is not around every day, it's easy to forget the little flaws (like hanging out with vamp trulls).

There definitely is more to come on this storyline.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: I somehow find myself agreeing with both of you. -- Rattletrap, 12:40:12 02/28/02 Thu
I think Buffy's idealization of Riley was compounded by the fact that the last time she was truly happy was when she was dating him. Riley's departure in "Into the Woods" begins Buffy's downward spiral through late S5--finding out she was fighting a god ("Checkpoint"), Joyce's death ("I Was Made to Love You"/"The Body"), Angel's brief return and departure ("Forever"), Dawn's increasing rebelliousness ("Forever", "Tough Love"), Tara's brain suck ("Tough Love"), Glory's discovery of Dawn, the subsequent flight and kidnapping ("Spiral")--this is just a quick list off the top of my head, but it's pretty easy to see that Buffy didn't have many happy moments after the first act of "Into the Woods." I suspect seeing Riley again brings back happy memories of laughing and playing on the beach as in "Buffy vs. Dracula." As a fan with some emotional investment in these characters, I would love to see Buffy know that kind of happiness again, but I fear she has a long way to go first.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Good points -- Sophist, 12:52:43 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Another example of Spike's low self esteem -- Traveler, 22:34:23 02/28/02 Thu
Watching the episode the second time through, I noticed what Spike said to Buffy near the end.

"I thought you would still be out snogging soldier boy?"
"Riley's gone."
"So you're here for cold comfort?"

Spike assumed that Buffy would immediately drop him in favor of Riley. Also, these lines show that he already knew that she was using him and considered him as a poor substitute for Riley. Not only does Buffy see Riley in idealized terms, but even Spike assumes (despite his jibes) that he can't compete.

Also, a number of people have remarked on how vulnerable Spike looked when Buffy and Riley stormed into his crypt. Many people have remarked how pathetic Spike was during this episode, making excuses, taking anything Buffy would give him, and getting shoved around by Riley. I finally realized who Spike reminded me of. He reminded me of William, who was also sensative, vulnerable, and pathetic. In many ways, this AYW illustrated how all of Spike's defenses have been stripped away. William became Spike after he was rejected by Cecilie, but what can Spike do? He's already evil (small "e"), and it's not helping him much. Thanks to the chip, he can't even take solace in rebellion and independance. How will he regain the strength of character and willpower that he has lost?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Sorry, Spoilers for AYW and FFL above -- Traveler, 22:35:53 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Statement misinterpreted -- vandalia, 09:23:12 03/01/02 Fri
I took the 'cold comfort' line to be a play on words. Spike's dead, therefore his body is cold, ergo 'cold' comfort. Double entendre at its best.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: As You Were - "forgetting your place" -- Dyna, 09:02:11 02/28/02 Thu
I'm in agreement with you, Caroline. I was deeply vexed by Riley's appearance in this "white man's burden" role--fresh from walking tall and heroic through the jungles of Central America, snarking about how much more convenient it is to be in Sunnydale "where both of us speak English and you know who to beat for information." Is there any cliche of American imperialism more blatant that complaining that the "natives" don't speak English?

When Riley lectures Buffy about how she's "forgotten" what Spike is, but Riley hasn't, I couldn't help but hear in that rebuke the echo of the old patriarchal idea of "forgetting your place." Spike has gotten uppity--he touches Buffy in her house in OAFA, is rebuked for joking about killing people "in *this* house!" (which is acceptable in his crypt, right? that's "his place"); in AYW he has the temerity to want to come into Buffy's home, and though she only allows him as far as the yard, there's a sense that she views this as an encroachment; later Spike mouths off to Riley, who takes his insolence with stoic dignity, as if to affirm that Spike is beneath his notice, unable to touch him. Later, Riley takes the same position about Buffy's relationship with Spike: It doesn't touch you, you're just on the down side of the wheel, no matter what you do you walk away clean because you're "better" than he is. As a solution to Buffy's dilemma of not knowing where she (or Spike) fits into the world, it's appealing, but at its heart, it's empty.

Buffy's words to Spike at the end--"that's just you; I should have remembered"--parrot Riley's words as well as their patronizing sense. Buffy is Spike's "better;" it's her responsibility to remember his place, and her fault if she treats him in a way that causes him to forget it. She takes the blame, but for what? For "forgetting" to keep Spike where he belongs? For raising hopes in him that can never be fulfilled because she "can't" ever allow him out of the box where Riley has so firmly (and impressively) put him? In this context, her apology rang hollow to me--it wasn't "I'm sorry I did this awful thing to you," it was, "I'm sorry I put you in this false position, and please allow me to rectify it by reminding you that you're beneath me."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: As You Were - "forgetting your place" -- Darby, 09:24:19 02/28/02 Thu
Interesting observations - are we seeing maybe another level of the "grow up" arc, one that will lead to a basic questioning of the human - demon dynamic? The parallels you drew sound disturbingly like pre-civil rights movement attitudes for American minorities.

(Yeah, I know that the attitudes persist, but the legalities have at least changed - are we headed toward a fundamental change, or attempt to change, the role of the Slayer, as we've seen the role of the Champion change on Angel?)

Would Spike find redemption in a Martin Luther King role? Sure would make for an interesting Season 7!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Patriarchal-archetype, hmm -- Ishkabibble, 09:09:52 02/28/02 Thu
Caroline, I follow your reasoning. I percieved a flaw though, if indeed, the episode was designed as a patriarchal-archetype: When Buffy tosses the grenade into the egg-filled-crypt, she protects Riley's back by pushing him to the floor and covering his body with her's. I'm wondering what you made of her protecting Riley, if he is supposed to be the symbol of patriarchy?

This scene reminded me of Spike's repeated refrain that he has (protects) Buffy's back. Hmm. Is Spike, then, akin to Riley as a figure of patriarchy?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Patriarchal-archetype, hmm -- Caroline, 10:02:27 02/28/02 Thu
In an earlier post, which I basically condensed into a couple of sentences in this post, I argued that while Buffy has always challenged patriarchal modes of female behaviour in her conscious, public life, she has internalized a lot of patriarchal norms about her sexuality and view of her feminine self in her conscious and hidden life. It's the latter that Riley represents for her. So, in her role a slayer, she definitely sees herself as protecting mankind, etc, but Riley, wedded to the notion that he should be the central hero or the protector, could never accept that - he had huge issues with her superior power and that contributed to the breakdown of their relationship. In Buffy's public life, she is never under the control of patriarchal 'shoulds' but she is in her hidden life.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Support, please. -- Darby, 10:42:39 02/28/02 Thu
...Riley, wedded to the notion that he should be the central hero or the protector, could never accept that - he had huge issues with her superior power and that contributed to the breakdown of their relationship

I had a similar impression, but in watching the FX eps, find that no such issues really existed beyond the initial adaptation phase. Once Riley accepted Buffy's role (more quickly than seems reasonable, in fact), he was, as someone called him, supportive and perfectly willing to be Buffy's soldier and sex slave (compare the number of times she initiated sex vs his doing it). The relationship broke down because Buffy took the superior position emotionally (the classic male role), not sharing her life fully with Riley while he stayed invested in her until driven elsewhere (and even the vamp whore was an attempt, as he said, to connect to the darkness of her Slayer side). As Spike might have said, Riley was Buffy's bitch! Where do you see evidence for these feelings and roles you're speaking of?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Support, with thanks to manwitch -- Caroline, 12:04:08 02/28/02 Thu
The excerpt below is a very long quotation from manwitch which can be found currently on page 4 of the archives. It initiated the discussion on Riley. Many thanks manwitch and I hope this does not violate Board rules or etiquette.

So Let's talk about Riley.

Just so we know what we're getting into.

To me, Riley was the image of Hypermasculinity, chemically enhanced. I always felt he was a horrible match for Buffy because of his need to diminish her. From the first moment he discovered she was the slayer, his response was about his own humiliation and how to make up for it. "I don't even know if I could take you." and "Give me a week to get ready, and I'll take you down."

Even after he left the initiative and semi-joined the scoobies, he was never comfortable relinquishing his leadership authority to her. He talked a good game about "Lets agree to take care of each other," but he seemed to me to embody scripts of male protection. Does he like women? sure. Is he polite and chivalrous? sure. But he expects to be the male protector. And he expects women to like it and be appreciative. He's Cowboy Guy, the ultimate white hat from the westerns who will receive the girl as the boon of his hero deed.

Riley never owned up to his own dishonesty at their parting. No matter how cool Xander was in that episode, I always thought it was a great stroke of luck that Buffy didn't get to the helicopter in time. And in that scene, the use of the sound always made me think that Riley knew she was there. We see a close up of Buffy screaming his name. Then we get "pov" from inside the helicopter, looking out past Riley down towards Buffy, and the sound of her cries become fainter, muted. But they can still be heard. If they wanted us to think Riley was just oblivious, we would have just seen her down there waving her arms. I mean, we already knew what she was doing. But the camera "hears" her. Which means Riley hears her. He finally gets the moment he has craved with her the whole time. He's the powerful one. She needs him. He's the man.

That boy makes me so mad. Contrast him to Spike!! I am always amazed at the number of people who think Spike is a bad match for Buffy. He never wants her to be less than. Whether he loves her or wants to kill her, he loves that this is the best slayer there is. That's how Spike measures himself. Selfish perhaps, but he promotes Buffy's self-fulfillment. Riley does not. And Buffy's final conversation with Riley is dead on. "That's what this is about, isn't it? You can't handle the fact that I'm stronger than you."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Support, with thanks to manwitch -- Darby, 13:15:46 02/28/02 Thu
That's what I mean - the only hard images are very early in the B/R relationship and a dream image (from Willow's dream) - the rest are inferences that I don't see at all. I think he embodies Buffy's "perfect match," which is the person you think you want but, in reality, can't quite work up the proper amount of passion over. And he's still that now.

I suspect that, maybe in both cases, we're just extending our own personal baggage over the character.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Riley in season 5 - hypermasculine and patriarchal -- Caroline, 16:48:39 02/28/02 Thu
Sorry about the delay, work was incredibly busy today so I couldn't post much. Here's what you asked for.

Did we watch the same season 5?

The first big clues we have to Riley's unhappiness with his minor league situation is in Out of My Mind episode 4. Buffy is clearly not happy with patrolling with him. In her training room, he deliberately surprises her with a tackle as they are showing her the all the new equipment. He says stuff like "Think you can take me?" When they discover the thing with Riley's heart beat and that there could be serious problems with his superpower thing, he doesn't want to get things fixed. He wants to keep his superpower things so that he could at least be equal to Buffy. He refuses Graham's help. Buffy has to go find him in order to save him. He's proud that he can't feel any pain. He says to Buffy that he's more powerful than he's ever been and that he can handle it. He says that if he does let the government get to his innards again, he's just Joe Normal and that it wouldn't be good enough for her. He's totally projecting. He tells her that she gets more powerful everyday, and he can't touch her, that she gets further and further out of reach. They then have a whole conversation about his and her desires and you can see there that she wants him and he wants to be the hypermasculine male protector, as manwitch states. At the end of the episode, Graham tells him that his place is not with Buffy, he used to have a mission and now he's the mission's boyfriend.

Episode 5, No Place like Home. Not much of Riley in this except all the usual manly stuff about having recovered and agreement to take care of each other. Ep. 6, Family - Tara-centered episode. He wants to get the government involved in the search for a demon, Buffy refuses and he gets all upset and accuses her of pulling away. He's not happy with Buffy being the decision-maker and asking for his input only as required. In other words, he's not happy being a Scooby. This is his first trip to the vamp underworld. Ep 7. Fool for Love, Riley patches her up after the vamp got her. Ep 9. Shadow. Is pissed off with Spike's rundown of Buffy's type of guy and also by the fact that she's in the hospital with Joyce and didn't let him know. His conversation with Dawn about Angel doesn't make him feel any better, it just confirms what Spike says about her type of guy. Next thing you know, Riley is with Sandy, the vamp ho. In ep 10, Listening to Fear, Riley gets to feel a bit more useful - leading a Scooby mission to look at the meteor. He calls in on Graham and the government for assistance. But, it turns out that Spike and Buffy get the Queller demon under control.

Episode 11. Into the Woods. Riley is hurt that Buffy never let herself cry in front of him about Joyce's illness. After their lovemaking, he sneaks off to the vamp hos. And in his final confrontation with Buffy, he told her that he want to the vamp hos because they needed him and Buffy didn't. He admits that it's hard for him to deal with the fact that she is stronger. Then he gives her his ultimatum about going with the military etc.

So, that's my view of Riley in season 5. I think it pretty much supports both manwitch's and my view of Riley. It's one long slide down for their relationship, because he can't except her as she is. He needs to be the protector and realized it in Into the Woods and that's why he left. The army offered him the opportunity to be all he wanted to be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> I think his issues were with Buffy, not women in general -- Sarah, 18:52:05 02/28/02 Thu
I've always looked at Riley's insecurities about his strength as stemming from his uncertainty about his relationship with Buffy. It's after he confesses to Xander that Buffy doesn't love him that these issues begin to take hold. I think he felt so cut off from her emotionally, that he needed to constantly prove himself physically in order to convince himself that Buffy needed him. When the strength factor was removed, he felt he had nothing left to offer. He couldn't support her emotionally or physically in the way she needed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Ditto -- Darby, 20:29:41 02/28/02 Thu
Apparently we didn't watch the same season 5.

Just goes to show that all of this filters through our own agendas. The points you outline, to me, support my opinion - Riley doesn't need to be superior, but starts to worry about being so inferior that the relationship won't be equal. The physical stuff is a combination of play and, as Sarah said, the need to be needed - not as the protector, but as the partner. Even you see that he wants things so that he could at least be equal to Buffy, but that obviously means different things to each of us. (and, to me, the "farther and farther away" line is foreshadowing for the emotional distance they were about to showing Buffy taking from him)

You can see this play out, however, in the partnership with Sam - you don't see patriarchy there, too, do you?

Get the feeling we're gonna have to just agree to disagree?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> An attempt to reconcile opposites -- Sophist, 09:17:05 03/01/02 Fri
I watched OoMM again last night. I think this ep is the source of disagreement about Riley.

This ep clearly supports Caroline's view; I don't think anyone would disagree. The disagreement comes because of what happened after. In later eps, Riley says all the right things about equal partners, not being intimidated, etc.
These do seem to support Darby's view.

To me, OoMM was very powerful in showing something deeply felt by Riley. I bought it completely, partly, I suppose, because it fit with my image of the character. Although he said all the right words later, that wasn't enough to get me to disregard what I had been shown in OoMM.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: An attempt to reconcile opposites -- Caroline, 12:23:40 03/01/02 Fri
Many thanks for this post, I do agree. Riley doesn't bet a whole lot of screen time to discredit the view we build of him in Out of My Mind and all I see later is him saying the right thing (as manwitch pointed out) but not doing the right thing. That's what I wanted to say but you said it better.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Age-nda Spoilers BS1-6 to 'AYW' -- Age, 10:05:48 03/01/02 Fri
Firstly, I want to say how interesting I have found this debate. People do interpret and see things differently; and it's one of the reasons I like coming to this discussion board.

I can see merit in both your points of view. In season five Riley becomes the mission's boyfriend when he thought that he'd be mission's partner. He tries to remain strong enough to patrol with Buffy, but that doesn't work out when he's nearly killed and Buffy doesn't really want him on patrol. He then, thinking that Buffy doesn't love him, tries to be the shoulder on which Buffy can lean for comfort, but is shut out. Not wanted as a mission partner, not loved as a romantic partner and not even needed in any emotional way, Riley begins to fill the void with prostitute substitutes who at least need his blood, need something at least of Riley until he gives Buffy an ultimatum: either there is an us or what's the point of him sticking around. In this way, Riley's needing to be needed can be confined to his relationship with Buffy and not seen as part of a patriarchal theme.

However, a patriarchal theme has been part of this series since it began with religious imagery in season one, Angel/Angelus as quintessential patriarchal male in season two, the Mayor as patriarch/phallic symbol in season three; and Adam as patriarch of a new race in season four. A patriarchal reading of Riley's need to be needed, I don't think is out of the question. One has to ask how a young man who became a part of a patriarchal organization like the Initiative could escape without some patriarchal pattern of thinking still left to be undone through perhaps the fairy tale of his relationship with Buffy floundering and then burning up. Nor do I think that we can confine all elements of the dreams of 'Restless' to the perspective of the characters themselves given how much foreshadowing was put into them by Joss Whedon.

What could be perceived as a desire for partnership on Riley's part could be interpreted as an attack on Buffy's autonomy based on the patriarchal idea that women need men to lean on for support. The very fact that Riley believes that he should come on patrol and be as strong or stronger than Buffy shows that he's filtering their relationship through this idea. He doesn't allow Buffy to play out her superhuman role; he isn't allowing her to rely on her superhuman strength; his presence on patrol can be interpreted to mean he feels that she needs him there, that she cannot be self reliant. It is the undermining of female autonomy through the insistence of male participation being required. This gets extended to Buffy's crisis with her mum's health. Buffy chooses to take on the burden herself and stonewalls against a perceived attack on her autonomy.

One has to ask why Riley believes that Buffy's needing him is enough for there to be a relationship as he clearly thinks she doesn't love him. Has he based their future time together on a patriarchal idea that women need men for support and that's enough to keep the woman he loves? Is that then enough for Buffy? Surely Riley, if indeed he was in love with Buffy, should have done what Buffy did for William this week, and let her go in order for her to find someone that she could love.

I might also point out the emphasized phallic symbolism in the (upraised) staking of Sandy the vampire as Riley starts to get his need to be needed met. This may be a representation of the patriarchal act of sex in which the man takes from the woman in an act like staking(his pleasure only, her use as vessel, thrust as conquest.)

In this week's ep we have several instances where this patriarchal interpretation can be extended: Riley has Buffy hold onto him when they go down the line by the dam; the dam could represent the damming of the dark female waters that patriarchy attempts to do through walls of restriction; Riley may put Sam on a pedestal in regards to her fighting abilities, but, as he does in this ep, he still has to save her; and Sam makes reference to the idea that Riley thinks he's the boss.

If we look at season four we see that the basis of Riley's relationship with Buffy while a vehicle for his love for her, was need. He came at a time when Buffy needed someone to pull her out of her hellmouth of relationship despair when Parker sends her into a depression questioning what's wrong with herself. Riley's love then gives Faith what she needs. And in this week's ep, we have Riley and Sam, portrayed in a way as two bright suns(again star/sun imagery of this season) of Central America dropping in(to replace Tara for this ep) like two bodhisattvas(Santa(historical figure whose life has become parable legend and whose function is to teach the value of selflessnss in a way that children can understand, ie concrete giving of gifts,) or Buddha(historical figure whose life has become parable legend and whose function is to teach the condition of selflessness and taking responsibility for oneself in a way adults can understand, ie deconstruction of oppositional thinking)reference, wheel of life and then the Nepal destination as allusion to buddhism's birthplace region) to illuminate the darkness that is season six for one episode, coming in to give the Scoobies what they need(the light to balance out their darkness), ie the basis of Riley's visit is meeting needs. Whether or not these people are bodhisattvas or patriarchally driven individuals, their bright presence helped the Scoobies to balance out the dark thoughts that were beginning to breed and multiply about themselves as symbolized by the demon and the eggs. Xander could only see the wheel of life in a dark way; Willow could only focus on the negative of being an addict; and Buffy had the smell of death about her believing that this moment's changing form was actually her when in fact, as Riley points out, we can't be touched by it as all is change, the wheel keeps turning(another buddhist concept.) It's isn't facile of Riley to say this because at any moment he or Sam could be killed given that their jobs aren't exactly nine-to-five behind a desk(impermanence, another buddhist focus.)

There is buddhism in all three of the Scoobies' dark problems: the wheel of life is seen only negatively; the value of the need for daily practice of taking responsibility is not seen; and Buffy starts to believe that what she is is defined by what is around her. Riley mentions that the wheel is just what it is, sometimes negative and sometimes positive; Willow's strength as one taking responsibility is valued, ie she's not defined by being simply an addict but by her doing something about having an addictive nature; and Buffy is given the pep talk which reminded me in part of the words of zen buddhism in the sense that we are no thing which can be touched(although I don't think that was Riley's vision; he was imparting his idea about Buffy, not giving a lesson in doctrine.)

Okay, so now I've driftly into my own age-nda.

Anyway, I just wanted to say that I can see both interpretations of Riley. I applaud as usual the opportunity to read different and even opposed points of view.

Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Lovely post! -- ponygirl, 11:43:15 03/01/02 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> More on buddhism... -- Caroline, 12:39:23 03/01/02 Fri
I love the image of the wheel in buddhism and how we die and are reborn in an eternal cycle. Unlike western mythology, where the Great Mother is overthrown by her son and things move along in a linear fashion, in eastern mythology, there is always return to the great mother after death and rebirth from the great mother in an endless cycle. In my interpretation, this is similar to the birth and death of the slayers. Slayers die and are born in an eternal cycle and I agree that Tara can help Buffy to get in touch with this source of power, part of her slayer power. The energy of the great primordial mother is just there, it is the choice of subsequent incarnations whether they choose to return in order to benefit all beings, such as the Green Tara or become agents of destruction like Kali.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> q on Persephone -- desultory, 09:49:30 02/28/02 Thu
I really like the way you've tied the season into the Persephone myth.
It makes me wonder, if Buffy is Persephone & Spike is Hades, who is Demeter? Is it Buffy herself, since it's her show, she does her own rescuing? Is it Tara with her earth-motherliness? Is it Willow, who moved heaven & earth, to get Persephone back?

- desultory
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: q on Persephone -- leslie, 13:04:11 02/28/02 Thu
You know, in a way, I have to see Buffy as both Kore and Demeter in this archetype. For one thing, although she is the one who was dead for half a year--like Persephone in Hades--she is also the one who had been the living-dead--winter--since her return, just as Demeter withheld summer from the earth until she got her daughter back.

The other thing to remember about the Persephone myth is that she does end up living with Hades for half of each year. And it is apparently a very happy marriage. She gets to be a happy carefree girl when she is in the upper world (Buffy's eternal complaint that she isn't allowed to be a "real girl") but when she is in the underworld, she is a powerful queen. The best of both worlds, as it were.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: q on Persephone -- Laney, 19:49:14 02/28/02 Thu
Remember in OMWF? Anya blurted out something about underworld bride deals that usually never end well, with perhaps one exception. Could this be what she meant?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Myth retellings (OT) -- fresne, 07:07:30 03/01/02 Fri
Okay, I just can't resist this any longer. Here is a retelling of the Persephone and Hades myth, from Hades point of view.

http://pw1.netcom.com/~fresne/waiting.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Beautiful -- Kimberly, 08:10:42 03/01/02 Fri
And Spike would certainly fit your portrayal of Hades.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Willow and Dawn and Housework -- Valhalla, 16:47:33 02/28/02 Thu
Yes! I'm so glad someone pointed this out. Dawn was very nice when she complained about the glut of DMP fare, but she is 15, for pete's sake! She could make toast or throw a frozen dinner in the oven. And all Willow does lately is mope around the house, waiting for someone to ask her to do magic so she can get all teary -- she could help out a little.

Also, why is Buffy shouldering all the financial responsibilities alone? Willow IS living there. I can't recall whether she's still going to classes, but lots of people work while in college (I certainly did). I realize she is in recovery, but maybe some sort of definite activity would help the process along -- and would be better than mooching off Buffy. And Dawn is young, but I started babysitting when I was 13.

More disturbing than just the fact of all the burden being on Buffy is that it shows that the Scoobies have really lost all the community they've built up with each other. Each of them is secluded in their own little orbit, even though just a little cooperation and reaching out to each other would lessen their burdens overall.

It seems like this season is more about how things start to go in your 20s -- you grow up, and often grow away from friends, but they're still all there together physically, just not emotionally. It's frustrating and self-defeating. I'm hoping as Buffy starts to come back to herself (if that's the journey she's on), the gang starts to re-coalesce.

The rest of the above post was fabulous, especially Spike as Hades.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Willow and Dawn and Housework -- yez, 12:24:30 03/01/02 Fri
Yeah, all the seeming mochiness is really start to get to me, too -- plus, it just seems out of character. For Willow, anyway. I know she helps pull "Dawn duty," but I'd just feel better knowing she was paying rent and doing some cleaning or something.

I don't know... can a hero have some sort of hero's complex? It seems like Buffy has always been prone to taking all the responsibility, at least in the "It's all my fault" sense, and not letting others share in the failure/blame. (Yes, even though she used to like Giles to handle the grownup detail.)

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Willow and Dawn and Housework -- leslie, 14:01:17 03/01/02 Fri
I don't know what kind of college experience you guys all had, but the Summers residence seems preternaturally neat most of the time for a household inhabited by 3-4 people between the ages of 16 and 21. I mean my god, have none of you ever seen _Withnail and I_? Now, THAT is a sink full of dirty dishes! Also, in purely practical terms, Willow has to be contributing monetarily to the household, because Buffy would never be able to pay property taxes on that house on DMP wages.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Willow and Dawn and Housework -- yez, 14:15:27 03/01/02 Fri
Yeah, it is too neat. I was noticing in AYW, when Buffy was approaching the house, there were hanging plants on the porch, and I was wondering which one of them had the time and inclination to tend to plants, when they don't seem to be able to keep food in the house.

This is how you know it's TV and not real -- if it were real, Buffy, Dawn and Willow would be resentful, snippy and yelling about who hasn't washed the dishes in the last month.

It makes sense that Willow would be paying rent and doing chores, but it would be nice to have a reference to it.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------

wild, frothy speculation - much like beer, it's fun! -- Lanna de la Rosa - nervous like a school girl, 09:44:38 02/28/02 Thu

I've never posted on this board, so I don't know if I'm breaking any rules with this post. Hopefully not. But it has been pointed out to me that this board needs a good laugh, so here it is! (Edited to make longer and all the more funnier. Enjoy.)

Here are some more theories as to what will happen to our favorite BtVS characters. I think there have been many foreshadowy moments to prove that these things will actually come to pass! And remember. Joss is God. And God is a little crazy.

Spike realizes that when Buffy dumped him she was wearing a very cute lilac peasent top and sees that as the reason why he was dumped. Because, obviously, he wasn't wearing a very cute lilace peasent top. Inspired, he begins to wear many a lilac peasent top with oh-so nice acid-wash jeans to subtly say that he is on Buffy's side and will follow her whereever her journey of good may go. B/Sers see this as a miraculous change in character and the redemptionitis sets in. However, Spike is a bit incompetent when he tries these things and goes too far in the "following her where ever her journey of good may go" scenario - and hops, skips, jumps, and frolicks out into the sunlight. Hello, Mr. Big Pile of Dust!

Buffy, though trying to internally deny her feelings for Spike, realizes that she dreadfully misses Spike and his oh-so sexy body. Upon discovering his sexy ashes, she immediatly falls apart and has a really good, but nonetheless shameful, time with his ashes. Disgusted, she turns to Tara for confirmation that all once-dead-and-resurrected people have a thing for vampire ashes. Fans speculate that she is really an Angel, but Angel shows up and says "Not in my city! Whoops. This isn't LA." and takes off. Everyone is dutifully impressed by the crossover. And Tara dutifully continues to spend the episode looking into many a spell book, itching her non-credited ass, and comes up with sad news. Buffy is not Wrong, she is just neener-neener-neenah! Buffy tries to cope. Unbeknownst to friends and family, she keeps Spike ashes in the kitchen cookie jar and regularly pulls him out for some very special one-on-one luvvin'. In point of fact, there is a whole BtVS episode completely dedicated to her physical love of Spike Ashes. At the end of said episode, she decides that her new obsession is unhealty and leaves the Cookie Jar of Love locked up in the pantry. (And somewhere down the road, several seasons away, we will see another climatic moment between Buffy and a different pile of ash. That said pile of ash will quip: "I'm just saying. Vampire ashes make you hot." Buffy will snarl: "One Pile of Vampire Ash made me hot. One!" B/SA shippers will feel validated.)

Tara goes missing and the Scoobie Gang become incredibly worried. In a Scooby meeting, everyone agrees that there is nothing that they can do to find her. All of the Scoobies are devestated. Anya counts her money, Buffy grooms her hair, Xander burps and Willow sits on the couch and nods! It is all so very heartbreaking. Discussion goes rabid on the boards as to What Happened to Tara? And Why Won't Willow Use a Locator Spell to Find Her? We eventually find out that, in point of fact, as OMWF has foreshadowed, Tara is cured - she wants the boys. She gets a great job with benefits as a hooker in the Red Light District and Amber Benson writes, directs, and stars in a movie about the experiences of a hooker with James Marster playing The Pimp with a Heart of Gold.

Willow continues having a hard time dealing with the No Smoking of the Magic Weed policy in the Summer home. In a desperate bid for satisfaction, she ransacks the Summer home for magic supplies. Spotting the Spike ashes in the Cookie Jar of Love, she huffs and she puffs and almost blows the house down - but mostly kills herself in the process. Dawn stomps her foot because somebody else left her. Buffy hustles about, sweeping up the Willow ashes, washing the dishes, and scrubbing burnt-encrusted clothes. But we all know that she is harboring a tortured soul: Spike's sexy ashes are gone! The Kansas song, Dust in the Wind, plays in the background.

Xander stops by, post-wedding jitters and Anya bailing. He tries to quip but keeps cutting an imaginary somebody off before that imaginary person can say anything and we all feel bad for Xander that Anya isn't there for him to cut off.

And this is one for the Anya/Spike shippers everywhere! We get treated to a shot of Anya, full blown vengence demon again, and making with the happy, with Spike no less, in hell of all places. And then the camera pulls back to show that, in fact, there is a very long line of girls and fans and -- wait! is that Angel!? -- all awaiting their turn with the joyride called Spike. Everyone on their boards are very please that Spike got his just reward, in all its ambiguity.

And for those other characters and couples we love? Clem and Sophie have a baby named Father that eats other babies named Connor. Tito wields his hard, throbbing pipe, leading Xander to the realization that he just needed a bear of a man after all (X/T 4ever!). Gunn and Fred make amateur smut videos called "His Thang made me Sang: Or How To Orgasm A Hundred Times in One Night." Cordelia returns, Groo-less, but not to Angel - but to Skip! They have many fine demon babies and we are all proud that Cordelia has become an equal oportunity luvver. It is revealed that Angel, in fact, is a big homo-queer and has supported a crush, not on Cordelia, but on her wardrobe. We are treated to a very special cross-dressing Angel epsiode.

Fade to black. End of Season 6/Season 3.

xoxo,
Lanna de la Rosa
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> More - ROTFWL -- Brian, 09:58:56 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Stop! Stop! It hurts so good! -- Deeva, 10:22:57 02/28/02 Thu
No wait! Gimme more! Oh man, pass the cigarettes. Lanna de la Rosa, where have you been hiding yourself? Whew! I need to go lie down now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Muhaha! -- Lanna de la Rosa, 10:38:45 02/28/02 Thu
Not so much with the hiding. Mostly unaware as ATPoBtvS had a message board. I tend to hang out on the Buffy Cross and Stakes Spoiler Board, with a bit of cross-hopping between The Bronze and the Angel Spoiler Board. But hey! Now that I know where to discuss full blown analysis of Buffy Philosophy, I know where to come. =)

xoxo,
Lanna
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: You neglected Faith -- Brian, 10:51:38 02/28/02 Thu
After several years in prison, Faith finds God and becomes very spiritual. Eventually, she is released early as a result of all her good works while in prison. (Hey, she only killed a couple of people.) After leaving prison she joins a nunnery and becomes known as Sister Faith the Vampire Prayer. She still slays them, but now only uses the phrases, "See the light" & "Go to the light" as her banter.
Eventually, her good works get her to the Vatican where she becomes head of the Vatican Hit Squad. She retires (See Fray for that story!) and writes a best seller called:
Getting 5 by 5 with God.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> And how about Giles? -- Deeva, with her feeble go at it, 12:17:28 02/28/02 Thu
Giles comes back to the States to bust his old pal Ethan out of Immigration limbo. While in England he realized that Ethan was the only one who ever understood him. Besides, when he was Ripper, they had a torrid affair that they swore to never bring back up again, writing it off as a youthful transgression. Guess what? It wasn't! Together the two old sorcerers cut a wide swath and conjure up all sorts of mayhem and merriment. The Scoobs are too preoccupied to react to Giles' switch of teams.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> More - Faith Speculation -- Lanna de la Rosa, 13:28:16 02/28/02 Thu
I agree with Brian that Faith will see the light. After basking in the sweet love of Bertha, who couldn't? She spends her time in prison trying to convert others to the Holy Faith in Bertha campaign. Prison guards and wardens are duly impressed, not quite getting that this is indeed a campaign for the holy Faith to get into Bertha's pants. Every night, we overhear the miraculous and ecastic shouts of "Praise Bertha! I see the Light! Oh, Lordy! Give it to me! Harder! Give me the Light. Harder! Harder! Oh, God, Yes! Yes! Oh, Sweet Jesus, you are good. Wooh." They release her early from her sentence on good, spiritual behavior. She wanders California trying to convert others. Small churches pop up throughout. The Holy Faith in Samantha. The Holy Faith in Rebbecca. The Holy Faith in Kerry.

(hee! Faith the Vampire Prayer, Getting 5x5 with God. Me likey.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> So you noticed the chemistry between Sophie and Clem, too? -- verdantheart, 12:36:34 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> I laughed till I cried. -- Traveler, 22:06:27 02/28/02 Thu
It sounds like something a movie critic would say.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Research on mating choices vs. BtVS -- Ishkabibble, 09:54:22 02/28/02 Thu

If you have time, take a look at this research paper (long). Then compare and contrast it with your observations on BtVS.

http://home.earthlink.net/~jeffsyrop/links/your_cave_or_mine.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Research on mating choices vs. BtVS -- Darby, 10:23:50 02/28/02 Thu
A fairly comprehensive article, but the research described is a combination of "hey, we're animals after all," (Duh!) "give me a grant to determine something everybody already accepts anyway," (not that there's anything wrong with that) and "I'm gonna take these fuzzy results and interpret them the way I wanted them in the first place." It is valuable insight to anyone who hasn't considered the impact of millions' of years of instinct-building on their dating choices. The Discovery Channel's (or maybe the Learning Channel)covered it better, though (John Cleese and Elizabeth Hurley, what's not to like?)

Missing is some of the more interesting work on human pheromones, which really might apply to Buffy - one would assume that vamps produce potent pheromones as part of their hunter's attractiveness (we've certainly seen enough who are not all that attractive physically), and how could a Slayer be exposed all the time and not develop an attraction when a vamp is not dangerous and is attracted to her? After all, Buffy isn't really attracted to "bad boys" - she isn't psychic enough to have picked those qualities up from Parker or Riley - she's just attracted to available vampires.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Research on mating choices vs. BtVS -- Ishkabibble, 15:59:29 02/28/02 Thu
I appreciate that you read the research and note that your background is in biology. I also note you have several decades of real-life experience from which to draw. So, I'd like your thoughts on something:

Engaging in sex is a normal activity, just like eating, drinking, and sleeping. Buffy's superior strength necessitates that she hold back when engaging in sex with humans (as with Riley) in order to not injure them. She was able to let herself go with Spike because he could handle her strength.

Now here is my question (maybe concern is a better word): With whom, if not Spike, is she going to be able to have uninhibited sex if their break up is permanent? (Surely, Joss does not intend for Buffy to remain celibate for the rest of her life.)

This is a sincere question, honest. From a biologist's perspective, has the show introduced any other being who would attract Buffy's attention (pheromone or otherwise) and who would be able to hold up strength-wise as a possible mate?

The reason I ask is....unless someone else is introduced into the show (deus ex machina) who can keep up with Buffy physically, it seems as though Spike gets the job by default. (Unless Joss really is going to harness her with eternal celibacy.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Oops. Spoiler above-So sorry (NT) -- Ishkabibble, 16:33:38 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Who can "handle" Buffy? -- Darby, 20:15:07 02/28/02 Thu
I'm not sure that we've got a fair question here - even in humans, you have pairings that are not "even," without parties getting injured. Sex, even the way B/S conduct it (ignoring the foreplay) shouldn't cause physical harm just because one player is much weaker than the other. Sex isn't muscle against muscle, power against power, unless there's some S&M going on. Buffy may like that with Spike, but I doubt that it's a necessity to a fulfilling sex life. She just needs someone who touches her on more layers than Spike does now.

There was never any indication that Buffy hurt Riley (and remember, he bruised easily). Even if at first she thought that he might be hurt, experience showed otherwise - they didn't seem terribly inhibited as the relationship progressed.

Another piece of evidence - Faith and Xander did fine the first time. Faith wasn't one to hold back, and Xander seemed undamaged.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Are there different types of magics on BtVS, like "dark" and "white"? What's the difference? -- yez, 13:55:27 02/28/02 Thu

This question stems from a post by WiseWoman below (which was is in reference to viewing Willow's addiction to magic -- and Tara's lack of addiction -- as similar to an addiction to alcohol).

Date Posted: 10:47:13 02/28/02 Thu
Author: WW
Subject: The drinking analogy...
In reply to: yez 's message, "Retrofitting the magic concept to patch up the plot" on 10:47:13 02/28/02 Thu

"...could also be seen this way: magic is represented by any manufactured form of liquid refreshment, dark magics by drinks containing alcohol. Most people are happy with water; Tara enjoys herbal tea and soda pop; now that Willow is on the wagon, she not only has to avoid alcoholic beverages, but she's in danger of dying of thirst! Surely she should still be able to drink the odd cup of herbal tea, or a Dr. Pepper now and then?"

I don't quite agree with the analogy -- and it may have been made playfully -- but it got me thinking. I'm used to shows and films presenting this idea of there being dark magic and... "light" magic? "White" magic? I'm not sure what the opposite is called. (Glinda vs. the Witch of the West springs to mind, though I feel like it's very common lore.)

But seems like, from the beginning, Willow has been involved in what's occassionally been referred to as dark magics. She's made reference to taking spells from books Giles has kept "out of reach." Then there was the spell with Anya, and the spells for Angel, the Buffy-raising spell, etc.

Does anyone know if there's a distinction between dark magics and white magics *in the Buffyverse*, and, if so, what that difference is? Does it have to do with demons or other entities summoned, for example?

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> yes, magic on BtVS is much like chicken -- Feeling snarky, 14:06:33 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> :D "I'm a breast girl myself. But you already knew that." -- yez, 07:33:48 03/01/02 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Are there different types of magics on BtVS, like "dark" and "white"? What's the difference? -- Vegeta, 14:30:56 02/28/02 Thu
I honestly don't recall any real distinction made on the show. They seem to refer to all magic's as being "dark". Obviously, if there is "dark" magic there must be "white" magic. But, no one seems to be using "white" magic enough to make any mention of it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Are there different types of magics on BtVS -- Robert, 16:02:33 02/28/02 Thu
I don't recall any mention on BtVS about magic being "white" or "dark". There was the one episode "Tough Love" where Willow breaks open a book entitle "Darkest Magick". I can see this being interpreted either way. It could mean that there is "white", "dark" and "darkest" magic. It could also be a simple case of marketing on the part of the publisher. I am not inclined to believe that the buffyverse makes such a distinction until a more definite reference is so made.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Are there different types of magics on BtVS -- O'Cailleagh, 16:23:04 02/28/02 Thu
Ummmm.....there have been several references to magic being dark (the dark arts etc), mainly made by Willow. I can't think of any instances when it was referred to as light or white. In the realverse of course, magick (note the 'k') is neutral...it's the way it is used that is good or evil...and us realverse Witches always perform good magick.(any Witches practising evil magick are not Witches, they are warlocks, or oathbreakers.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> The lighter side of BtVS Magic -- Wisewoman, 18:09:17 02/28/02 Thu
Think of Willow and Tara strolling through the park in OMwF. Tara waves her hand through the air and leaves a trail of pretty coloured sparkles behind. Then Willow follows suit with more sparkles. Nothing very dark there.

If all Buffyverse magic were "dark" then why the heck would Tara still be doing it? Why would anyone? Are they all addicted and can't stop?

Willow decorating the house for Xander and Anya's engagement party didn't have anything to do with "dark" magic. As she said, the decorations were completely biodegradable, better than buying paper and plastic.

I'd also argue that any magic used for protective purposes shouldn't be classed as "dark," but I agree that it depends on the purpose to which it is put. Willow needed to check out Darkest Magic in order to find out how exact revenge on Glory for Tara's brain-suck. She was motivated by vengeance rather than protection. On the other hand, she and Tara both participated in the spell that allowed Spike to plough through Glory's human minions and race to the top of the tower to try to save Dawn. Both spells could be said to be cast against Glory, but the purposes were very different.

I was being somewhat fey with the drinking analogy, but there is an issue here that isn't being addressed. Unlike indulging in alcohol or crack, we've been shown that in Sunnydale indulging is magic is sometimes necessary, and the right thing to do. I don't think you can say that about most addictions.

Maybe a diet analogy would be closer to the point. You develop an addiction to Ben and Jerry's Cherry Garcia, eat it constantly, and you gain 20 pounds. You see this as a negative effect of your addiction, so you swear off Ben and Jerry for life. You still keep eating though. You have to, to stay alive. You just take pride in being strong enough to resist the temptation that is ice cream.

Why can't Willow still eat the good, healthy, life-supporting food and stay away from the bad stuff? Why does she have to undergo total starvation?

I really don't know if this is making any sense, but it's obviously time to make dinner!

;o)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> IITS (It's In The Script) -- Earl Allison, 18:34:15 02/28/02 Thu
First off, please forgive any animosity that comes with this post, it isn't directed at anyone her -- I've been snippily attacked in the buffy newsgroup for arguing about this very point, so it's a sore subject.

The Buffyverse HASN'T made any real allusion to "white" magic at all, ever. Sure, there has been some of the really dark stuff, stuff Giles tried to keep from Willow, but until this season, the subject of addiction as a physical thing never surfaced.

The line was, IMHO, an attempt, albeit too little and too late (again, IMHO) to alter the whole addition arc, to add some clarification. It was just done poorly, with little thought to the past and how it was presented -- it just doesn't mesh with what we saw.

Heck, why weren't Ethan Rayne or Mrs. Madison consumed by the magics they performed? Where were Giles' more specific cautionary tales? If magic lent itself to this end result, why did they (the Scoobies) even ATTEMPT to restore Angel's soul -- THAT wasn't a powerful spell that led down the path to ruin? And the Angelverse doesn't show this at all (I know, the two are different shows on different networks, but they EXIST in the same world).

The only difference I can see was already brought up, INTENT. Sure, there are dark magics, and using them in anger or hatred is a Bad Thing, but magic itself has been a tool in almost all cases (the most objectionable thing we ever saw was Willow killing the deer for her spell to bring Buffy back).

Until it's better fleshed out, and actually fits with the mythology ME has set forth in the past five years, this whole "dark versus light" distinction just doesn't work for me.

Hope I kept it civil, advance apologies if I didn't.

Take it and run.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Hmmm -- dubdub, 18:41:40 02/28/02 Thu
I kinda feel like you're agreeing with me, Earl, so no animosity felt here! Maybe we're just phrasing it differently, but your comments on Ethan Rayne and Mrs. Madison are exactly the point I was trying to make.

;o)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> yeah--ethan, mrs. madison, and... -- anom, 22:35:32 02/28/02 Thu
...don't the Trio seem like prime candidates for magic addiction? Weak personalities, no spiritual grounding, playing around w/it for personal gratification--they're on borrowed time. Unless, of course, rather than being defeated, they're confronted with an intervention led by Willow & they all end up in Spellcasters Anonymous together. Although they might resist joining until the group comes up with a cooler name.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: yeah--ethan, mrs. madison, and... -- leslie, 16:47:08 03/01/02 Fri
This reminds me of my father's ominous warnings to me as a child that I should not try LSD until I was psychologically sure of "who I was" (and pointed to my second cousin as a case in point of what happened from ignoring that advice). A double-edged warning--I didn't try LSD until I was psychologically sure of who I was, but as soon as I did--yee-haw! (Nowadays, of course, I claim to have simply been doing the fieldwork for my dissertation on Otherworld journeys.)

And this little anecdote should illuminate my stance on substance use versus abuse. I can't go along with the "just say no" approach. And I have to say I am also a little leery of the "just as long as you stop before you hurt anyone" line, too. You can't go through life without hurting people, and being hurt, and if you never do anything you regret, you never do anything at all. Yes, you want to minimize damage, yes, no-one wants to hurt someone they love, and most people don't want to hurt anyone, even people they are only mildly acquainted with. And dear god do we have to live with the consequences of what we do. But it's better to know how to handle a double-edged sword so you can cut with the correct edge when the time comes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> But what about Giles? -- Rahael, 02:29:35 03/01/02 Fri
He fell into 'the wrong crowd', was in a band, meddled with dangerous magic, dropped out of university - and then his past came back to haunt him. He and his friends were literally possessed by their mistakes, marked by it.

Also note that Giles instantly hit the bottle during the episode. He hid his past from the Scoobies because he was ashamed of it.

My take on the Willow as magic addict thing is not so much ME saying that magic use is addictive, but that magic is a bargain - you have to give something back for being able to possess it. Giles eventually had to pay - the spirit they conjured for their own use eventually used them. Willow used magic to gain more power and influence, be able to shape her world better - now, she is powerless, in thrall to something she just saw as a tool. When the Scoobies brought Buffy back, they conjured and equal and opposite something at the same time, just as Jonathan did in 'Superstar'. The point is Tara understands this, understands the gravity of what she's doing.

As Willow said in Afterlife, the world doesn't like to just give you something for nothing - as Spike said, magic always has consequences. I like to view the magic as a metaphor, and the addiction to it as a metaphor - as a flight from reality, and not just a crude drug addiction thing.

Willow's attempt to abstain and control her impulse to use magic for the littlest and simplest thing, perhaps is just a necessary step to eventually gain the wisedom to one day exercise these moral decisions well. I can't comment how ME have shown this, I haven't seen enough eps, or only seen them in a very fragmentary way.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> hope you're right about this part (foreshadowing theory) -- anom, 12:14:32 03/01/02 Fri
"I like to view the magic as a metaphor, and the addiction to it as a metaphor - as a flight from reality, and not just a crude drug addiction thing.

Willow's attempt to abstain and control her impulse to use magic for the littlest and simplest thing, perhaps is just a necessary step to eventually gain the wisedom to one day exercise these moral decisions well."

I've been hoping Willow can learn to use magic in a healthier way, as people with eating disorders can't give up eating but need to learn to eat in a healthy way. Is this hope supported by anything we've seen on the show? Possibly, in All the Way (before Willow gave up magic in the 1st place). Look at the book Willow is holding as she berates the stereotyped Hallowe'en witch in the Magic Box (just before cute little Witchy Poo totally disarms her asking for candy corn). The book's title: "Remedial Magic"! Foreshadowing? I thought it might be until Sam told Willow about the addicted shamans in As You Were. Seemed to pretty well scotch that possibility. But as someone else said, maybe Sam's knowledge & experience of this kind of thing is limited, & it's not as definitive a statement as it seems to be. Here's hoping....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: IITS (It's In The Script) -- parakeet, 02:45:04 03/01/02 Fri
I basically agree with what's being said here; however, I can't help but try to play Devil's advocate. OK, good points about the magic itself not being addictive (Ethan Rayne, etc), and Willow's ultimate problem would certainly seem to be psychological (power trip, low self-esteem). What about Rack, though? (I'm sorry if this point has already been brought up.) We don't really know what exactly he does to his clients when he "tastes" them. He's obviously performing a spell, with effects and consequences. He has a clientele desperate for their next fix, but what exactly are they addicted to? Magic, or Rack's spell? While Willow was going down the wrong road prior to meeting Rack, this was due to the aforesaid psychological problems and not, perhaps, magic itself. Magic is now completely affected by the experience with Rack.
Of course, there are problems with this scenario. Who are the other members of Spellcasters' Anonymous (a very lame idea, though this may have something to do with AA's gradual loss of hipster credibility)? Are they all victims of Rack and his ilk, or maybe there are only three (to pick an arbitrary number) members? What of Sam's comment about the bad shamans? Was she sucking up to Willow, confused by limited personal experience, or relating a general truth? If the last, then the show might have a continuity error, but there is the matter of subjective experience -- Giles had his own issues and the others were teenagers, so maybe they wouldn't have discussed this aspect of magic.
I think it would be foolish to assume that any one variable is the "cause" of Willow's addiction, though I do sometimes fear that that is the direction in which the show is heading. This show rarely disappoints me for long, though (this is a compliment), so maybe I should have faith that they've got more up their sleeve or that it ultimately won't matter and they'll wow me with something else. Heck, I've even forgiven them for the Dracula episode.
BTW and apropos of nothing, I really wish Buffy would enjoy having sex with Spike, even with the genuine problems with this relationship.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Rack ... *must ... control ... fist ... of ... death* :) -- Earl Allison, 03:16:49 03/01/02 Fri
You're right, Rack could well have something to do with things, but that seems to fly in the face of what Sam said, then -- unless said shamans visited Rack or a reasonable facsimilie therof.

Unfortunately, IMHO, Rack was a terrible idea. Here was someone who had been in Sunnydale for at LEAST three years (Amy was going to him in Season Three -- another goof, in my opinion, that I don't want to get into), and yet no one noticed. No one ever mentioned him, and BAM! He's in Sunnydale, apparently giving magic-users a fix.

It just seems that the entire analogy went sour once Rack entered the picture, and Sam's comments didn't help any, besides a very cursory, half-hearted attempt to explain this story arc.

I have to be honest, it just seems like the writers did one of two things;

One, they realized they had painted themselves into a corner with Willow -- after her displays against Glory, what possible, credible threat could be devised that she couldn't defeat that Buffy could? Sort of a Superman syndrome, where everyone and his brother had Kryptonite, else there was no point. So, BAM! We find a way to make Willow swear off magic, problem solved.

Two, and this is still up for debate, the original arc called for Willow to become REALLY nasty (she may yet, especially with hints from the Trollop Board), consumed by her own lust for control/power/esteem -- and they backed off this one for whatever reason. This seems a bit less likely, but since the season isn't over, who knows.

Still, if powerful magic itself eventually leads to temptation, then for Giles to allow the Scoobies to attempt ensouling Angelus again was the height of neglect -- again, that's if the analogy as presented holds -- I wouldn't be surprised to see the whole thing change again in an episode or two, not the way it's going ...

Just my opinion.

Take it and run.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Rack ... *must ... control ... fist ... of ... death* :) -- Rufus, 04:14:40 03/01/02 Fri
I had to weigh in on this. In Becoming, Giles said something to Willow that I have never forgotten.

Giles: Um, well, this, um... certainly points the way, but... the
ritual itself requires a greater knowledge of the black arts than I, I,
I can claim.

Willow: Well, I've been going through her files and, and researching
the black arts, for fun, or educational fun, and I may be able to work
this.

Giles: (very concerned) W-Willow... channeling... such potent magicks
through yourself, it could open a door that you may not be able to
close.

Giles should know about opening doors, as he did just that in The Dark Age....

Willow: Ah! Aha! It's not Egyptian, it's Etruscan (goes over to Buffy
with her book) mistaken for Egyptian by the design pattern, but any fool
can see it predates their iconology. Look, the Mark of Eyghon, worn by
his initiates. (reads) 'Eyghon, also called the Sleepwalker, can only
exist in this reality by possessing an unconscious host. Temporary
possession imbues the host with a euphoric feeling of power.'

Buffy: Yeah, but what about non-temporary?

Willow: (reads) 'Unless the proper rituals are observed, the possession
is permanent, and Eyghon will be born from within the host.'

If you stick with the drug metaphor for magic I can only say this....drugs are not always addictive...some are medically needed for a patient to survive...but there are some, the hypnotics, sedatives, opiates, that can be abused leaving the patient lost in an addictive loop, attempting to get that "high" back. With Willow, her high is not so much a euphoric one as much as a search for personal power. Willow was fine as long as she used magic the way it should be, for good. Once her intention was of revenge, anger, she may have used magics that are the type that open a door, allowing the user to lose track of themselves. Just as an addict can safely use some medications without becoming hooked, I feel that Willow was fine until she crossed the line tempting fate. Where they are taking this too I'm not sure of, but I feel it's not over.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: IITS (It's In The Script) -- Ishkabibble (on a rant), 20:06:55 03/01/02 Fri
I'm in complete agreement with your statement: "BTW and apropos of nothing, I really wish Buffy would enjoy having sex with Spike, even with the genuine problems with this relationship."

I touched on this a bit with Darby yesterday (now archived). I'm a health educator and equate sex right along with eating, breathing, and sleeping. It's natural. Why Joss is repeatedly creating obstacles for Buffy to participate in such a natural activity, is beyond me. Buffy doesn't have to marry the guy, nor even be in love with him, to share a few hours of pleasure with him. Spike, himself, wasn't complaining, so why is Buffy depriving herself (and Spike) of this opportunity. Their's was a monogamous, mutually enjoyable, respite. Can somebody get a message to Joss/Marti/et al? Let Buffy enjoy what she can...she has to sacrifice enough as it is.

As an aside and apropos of nothing: As our population ages and more senior citizens lose spouses through death or infirmity, our society is going to be in dire straits. What are these people supposed to do...remain celibate for 10, 15, 20 years? In times past, people didn't live so long, so the fact that sexuality continues past the age of 60 and into the 70s and 80s was a moot point.

Our society is going to need a sex-therapy enterprise that is well regulated, medically overseen, and legal (spouse is a prosecutor, so I gotta throw this in), if such a thing could be developed. If you don't believe that the elderly are interested in maintaining a sex life, just look how viagra sent the stock of its pharmaceutical company into the stratosphere. So, a young, healthy, woman like Buffy should have an outlet for her biological urges. Get with the program Joss/Marti/et al(End of rant).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: IITS (It's In The Script) -- leslie, 09:48:59 03/02/02 Sat
On the whole I agree with your rant as it relates to society. However, considered as a "work of art," I don't think we can demand that the show present an ideal world to us. There are characters on the show who have good sex lives and who enjoy sex--Xander and Anya, Willow and Oz, Willow and Tara. And even when Willow is feeling threatened and anxious about her newly discovered lesbianism, it is not the fact of lesbian sex that is making her anxious, it's social expectations of what is "correct" sex for a woman. The sex is presented as completely positive.

It's Buffy's sex life alone that is problematic. And here we really have to draw a distinction between what is happening within the character, in that alternate reality that exists inside the tv box, and what the audience experiences. Buffy's having a hellish time; we can see that this is a problem. We don't look at what Buffy is going through and say "Hey, that's how I want to live *my* life--constantly being left by the men I love and now sexually obsessed with a man who makes me extremely uncomfortable both physically and emotionally! Not to mention the grass stains on my nice new jacket! And the fact that technically speaking this is necrophilia!" (At least, I certainly hope we don't.)

The thing is that Buffy fights monsters. The monsters are physical metaphors for the stresses and terror of modern life. Sex has its terrifying and stressful aspects. And Buffy is the one who has to face the Sex Monster, just like she is the one who has to face all the other monsters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The lighter side of BtVS Magic -- O'Cailleagh, 18:46:11 02/28/02 Thu
Sorry...I wasn't very clear. Obviously, very little of the magic used by Willow and Tara is dark/evil, I just meant that it is usually referred to as dark magic/the dark arts.
What is just as worrying is the depiction of addiction to magic. If the usage of magic causes addiction, why isn't Tara addicted? Is it just when one uses magic for everything, like Willow has been? This should be made clearer. As much as I love BtVS/AtS, I can't help but wish Joss had researched magic/Witchcraft a little better. I was overjoyed at seeing Wiccan characters in a prime time show, even more so to see them being portrayed in a positive light (especially after the whole Catherine the Great debarcle). I even had no objection to the Sabrina-like magic being used (but then I rarely do...especially when it is necessary to the plot). But to then show Willow being corrupted by magic (which is what has been happening)...well, it starts to become offensive. I fully understand the reasoning behind it (geeky Willow..ooh magic, I'm cool now...yadayadayada) but I don't like the way it is going at all. As someone said in a previous post, they should bring in a Witch, preferably male (for balance) who is at least as powerful as Willow became, who can help her to (re?)discover the Spirituality of the Craft and therefore be able to use magic correctly. And maybe he should start sleeping with Xander!(I'd be more than willing to play this character! for free!)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> general response: why the substance-abuse paradigm fits, why some magic is dangerous -- yez, 10:30:40 03/01/02 Fri
Interesting stuff. Am pressed for time today, so please forgive me for not making note of who said what in this discussion so far; I'm just going to make a general response.

I also can't remember any statement that has made a distinction between "black" and "white" magic on BtVS. But I can, as others mentioned, remember several statements about specific spells being part of the "black arts" and the like.

I also, from other films and lit. had this idea that the difference between "black" and "white" magic was intent, motivation, etc. Not necessarily the spells themselves. (And thanks to the practicer that shared some info on this, and please accept my apologies for any questionable vocabulary I'm using -- I'm just not sure what the right words are.)

That said, I imagine that the things one does to complete a spell, as well as the forces one calls on -- at least in the Buffyverse -- would make a spell less benign, even if the intent was good. For example, Willow's intent in restoring Buffy was well-meaning (she thought she was saving her). Yet, the spell called for bleeding/murdering a helpless creature -- not really a warm fuzzy kind of thing, at least for someone like Willow.

We've also seen other individuals essentially working spells that involve sacrificing people, haven't we? The mayor was sacrificing babies to that demon, and that frat cult was sacrificing girls to a demon. In both cases, the people doing the sacrificing were receiving benefits from the demon -- special powers, prosperity, etc. So even though they were calling upon corporeal forces (i.e., demons in the flesh), I don't see the difference in calling on forces that aren't tangible, as we see Willow and Tara invoking.

Somebody quoted Giles' early warning to Willow that channeling forces through yourself can open doors. And I think that's a good example of how, *in the Buffyverse*, there is the idea that practicing certain kinds of spells -- regardless of your intent -- can be somewhat dangerous.

I may have said before, but I think that the writers are definitely using a generic substance addiction paradigm for Willow's situation, at least with the introduction of the whole Rak (Rahk? sp?) thing, which I agree is problematic in that it doesn't seem to mesh well with what we'd seen to date.

For example, Willow is depicted as being euphoric when taking a "hit" of Rak's spells; we see her "tripping" -- the "Trainspotting" kind of footage; we see that her senses seem to be affected -- she seems to slur a little when talking to Dawn, seems to weave in her walking, and then wrecks the car (cliché of clichés); and we see her crashing/withdrawal when the spell wears off.

That paradigm also continues in the "recovery" phase -- she's jittery, can't stop thinking about magic, is tempted, has to get rid of her triggers (clean the house of all potential magic paraphenalia and stop seeing Amy), and she can't use at all any more, not even a little.

That paradigm would also explain why someone like Tara can use magic without being addicted -- just like some people can drink or smoke pot, and not fall into a destructive pattern of use.

The silver lining to the paradigm, possibly, is that most addicts don't quit successfully the first time around, and I think this is Willow's first quit attempt; even though she promised Tara she'd quit, she didn't make a single effort, just tried another forgetting spell. So maybe we still have a chance to see this issue explored a little more deeply.

It frustrates me to think that the writers have so far passed up the dramatic goldmine they had in exploring an increasingly powerful Willow. We've seen her asking "but why shouldn't I use magic?" in the past, and this theme could have been blown out; as she got more and more powerful, and more and more prone to using magic all the time, it would have become a conspiracy against her that everyone was telling her she was using too much magic. We could have seen that idea she mentioned briefly, that people were jealous of her power, explored more. And then there would be the conflict caused when Willow became strong enough to defeat the slayer.

Agh... there is just so much they could do with this. So much that doesn't involve trapping us in fastfood limbo with Buffy.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> since we are discussing magic... -- Amkath, 11:30:39 03/01/02 Fri
(I am new to this board, so perhaps this topic has been covered before.) I have recently been wondering how the whole "casting of spells" thing works. Specifically, who can cast spells? Can anyone, or does it require something special in the spell caster? Is it a matter of knowledge or power? Can some spells be cast by anyone, and some spells not?

We know that Giles used to cast spells, Amy and Anya have cast spells, Jonathon cast spells, even Xander claims to have cast a spell (OMWF). In "No Place Like Home" Buffy performs a "ritual trance" which may or may not be a spell.

On the other hand, Xander has to ask Amy to cast a love spell on Cordy for him in "Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered". In "Couplet" Cordy needed to pay a witch to make a protective potion for her. I'm sure there are other examples, I'm just not thinking of them right now.

I was wondering if this somehow ties in with Willow and her "addiction". Maybe some spells can be cast by anyone, no special power required, no chance for "addiction". Maybe others can only be cast by someone who is somehow different, (has some sort of access to supernatural powers). Maybe it is the nature of these spells, which require some supernatural power from the caster, which can lead to "addiction". We know that Tara can cast spells, but she is not as powerful as Willow. Maybe there are some spells she cannot cast? Maybe she does not have access to this supernatural power that Willow does, and is therefore protected from becoming "addicted"?

I know, it's a strange theory, probably not even a plausible theory, but just some random thoughts. I would appreciate it though if anyone could answer the general question of "who can cast spells?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> magical abilities -- yez, 11:58:48 03/01/02 Fri
I'm not sure, but I would guess it's like chemistry (a comparison I think Willow has made a couple of times). Most everyone can do some form of chemistry -- even if it's just dropping an Alka-Seltzer tablet into a glass of water. In other words, some spells are easy. But then there's the kind of chemistry that's very complicated and that calls for working with dangerous substances that can react, etc.

In the Buffyverse, the ability to cast spells seems to be related to information -- knowing where to find spells, being able to read them, knowing how to implement them, etc. There also seems to be a level of talent or natural ability involved -- Willow, for instance, seems to catch on to how to do spells quicker than Tara. And maybe, there's something like the inexplicable slayer strength involved; Buffy's strength isn't proportionate to her muscle mass, for instance, so maybe there's some sort of intangible witchy strength that's coded into Willow's genes somehow.

Speculation.

yez
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Are there different types of magics on BtVS, like "dark" and "white"? What's the difference? -- Eric, 18:45:54 03/01/02 Fri
As near as I can tell the difference in "white" and "black" magic in the Buffyverse is that "white" magic is usually just mild, weaker spells with little or no potential to unbalance the universe or endanger life and or souls. Dark magic is the opposite, being more potent, and tempts the user to misuse it. There doesn't seem to be any kind of religious perscription for using magic of any type. That being said, magic displayed in the Buffyverse so far is almost absent of spells designed for altruistic purposes. There are no spells for curing cute kittens or even curing allergies though there are wards against vampires.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Are there different types of magics on BtVS, like "dark" and "white"? What's the difference? -- Slain by Buffy, 15:42:53 03/02/02 Sat
You can't really compare magic addiction to anything else - it's not like alcohol or 'drugs'. Heroin, which was the chief inspiration behind 'Wrecked' is just a substance, and is not good or evil. Whereas magic can be good or evil.

It's not a case of light or dark, but it's not just a case of the way magic is used. While intent is important, magic itself can be evil. It's dangerous, and Willow began using dangerous magic because she wanted to help people.

But with certain types of magic, original itent becomes irrelevant - the power itself preys on weaknesses and insecurities. All very powerful magic in Buffy is, without exception, a dark and corrupting force.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Are there different types of magics on BtVS, like "dark" and "white"? What's the difference? -- O'Cailleagh, 22:27:51 03/02/02 Sat
Perhaps it's time that Joss/ME looked at their definitions of magic/Witchcraft and brought it more into line with the realverse. I'm not aying do away with the sparklies and the 'hollywood' stuff, but be clearer on magic (not even powerful magic) not being dark/evil. Magic(k) does not corrupt.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Freshman, AYW, and the image of the ideal -- Sophist, 16:39:46 02/28/02 Thu

One of the best things about BtVS is that there are always parallels within the show. The writers play a scene one way, come back 2 years later and play it different.

Riley's speech to Buffy in AYW brought to mind Xander's similar speech in The Freshman. Both came when Buffy was down, confused and ineffective (was it just me or were her initial attempts to fight the demon very unSlayer-like?). Xander's speech worked for me, Riley's didn't. Why?

To put Xander's speech in context, remember that Buffy was feeling uncertain and intimidated about college. She had her ass kicked by vamps she normally would have taken out in no time. She came to the Bronze like she needed a security blanket. Xander entered fresh from his unsuccessful road trip. He got her back on track by telling her "You're my hero."

Why did this work? Xander, whatever his faults, worships Buffy. He has from the beginning. He is the most ordinary of the characters. By ordinary, I mean typical for the 90s. He's not an image, he's a person with flaws and strengths. His recognition of that fact is both endearing (sometimes) and the reason why we accept his hero worship; people who don't recognize their own flaws can hardly worship others. Buffy could recover from her funk because she and we could see the sincerety in Xander.

Riley is ordinary too, but in a very different way. He is the stereotype of ordinary. He's the child from Seventh Heaven or Ozzie and Harriet. Too good to be true. I think of him as an image from the 50s of what we were all "supposed" to be.

When Riley delivers his speech to Buffy, there is no sense of hero worship in it because we can't believe Riley sees Buffy as a hero. RILEY is the heroic image (or at least the sterotype of one). When delivered from this background, his speech is condescending. Not "I admire you", but "You're better than this". Buffy reacts not because she felt his sincerety but because she felt his reproach.

The problem is, I reject Riley's image. His is a black and white world, always has been. The constant overly polite manner reminds me of Eddie Haskell. He may be an image from the 50s, but the 50s are NOT an ideal. They were a time of racial apartheid, intellectual conformity, and gender stereotyping. BtVS rejects these attitudes as well. Why then should Buffy feel a reproach from that quarter?

For all her current troubles, Buffy's life is one I'd prefer to Riley's. Riley lives in a world of simple moral certainties; Buffy accepts the ambiguities. Her life is rich because of its variety; Riley's is sterile because of its sameness. Buffy knows her flaws; Riley is self-satisfied. Buffy constantly examines her own life; Riley never does. Riley's life is not a reproach to Buffy's, hers is a reproach to his.

My apologies to Dyna and Yuri for stealing some (or many) of their ideas. My thanks to them for some great posts, even if I disagree on some points.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The Freshman, AYW, and the image of the ideal -- Caroline, 19:33:20 02/28/02 Thu
Very good points here. I continue to be amazed by the wonderful observiness and insight on this board. In season 4, I must admit I did find some things admirable about Riley, particularly when he took a stand against the initiative based on what I considered to be a good moral choice. But he couldn't live outside the box in season 5 so he went back in to an organization, this time to the military. I think someone here (can't remember who) made the point that Riley is a creature of organizations and can't operate well outside them, he can't really think for himself (In Into the Woods he called on his old buddies from the initiative to help - the scoobies rely on themselves). The scoobies operate in a somewhat more anarchic and less organized way - and are inherently distrustful or orgnanizations - government, military or commercial.

But the Riley in As You Were seemed even more cliched and stereotypical than previous seasons. Lines like 'you're a hell of a woman', 'you're better than this', 'you're still the strongest woman that I know' - cliches, not original, heartfelt stuff. I felt like he really earnt the Captain Cardboard moniker. His patronizing manner grated on me. I wonder if this was what the writers wanted - to make us that he may be 'perfect' in a conventional sense but that he's a good bureaucratic tool. His values are those of the institution and they define him. This may be me reading it into the script but his character and dialogue were so stiff, even compared to previous seasons that it seems really obvious to me. And, comparing his pep talk with Xander's in The Freshman, I felt like Xander really knew and admired Buffy and her uniqueness and what made her Buffy whereas I didn't get that sense from Riley. He just seemed so clueless to Buffy's needs (esp. offering to kill the guy she's sleeping with) that it just didn't ring true. But I think that's because he never got to know the real Buffy, he just left when she couldn't be what he needed her to be.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The Freshman, AYW, and the image of the ideal -- Shabidoo, 21:28:20 02/28/02 Thu
Caroline and Sophist both make great points, but, then again, I am biased by my seething hatred of Riley and everything he represents. However, with regard to Caroline's comment that "Riley in As You Were seemed even more cliched and stereotypical than previous seasons," I maintain that nothing can top, "She's the truest soul I've ever known," as the cheesiest Riley line ever.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The Freshman, AYW, and the image of the ideal -- BigBub, 00:54:13 03/01/02 Fri
You do know that the non-thinking military person, cop, etc is a stereotype right? Yes, they are an organization, but each man has to think on their own in dangerous situations. Simple minded? Hardly at all.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> In defense of Riley, a rant. -- JBone, 20:54:13 02/28/02 Thu
You know, there are such things as golden boys in this world. They exist, I've seen it myself. I have this friend, not me, who could just get on these rolls every once in a while.

I guess what I'm getting at is that I think you are being very unfair to Riley. Condemning him for being an icon of the fifties? Please. People who work at what they already have a talent for, and love what they do, well, they're in all times everywhere. There aren't enough Rileys in the world. Good, decent, tolerant people who just throw themselves in headfirst, just because they're to naive to think of another way to go about things to make the world a better place. Hell, I'd like to buy the world a Coke, and live in harmony. But don't worry, people like Riley usually retreat to a safe haven to live out the rest of their life, or die young. The rest of us just can't accept such a simple storybook life, and refuse them theirs.

If you are a Riley, I salute you. Keep doing your cornball American magic. You are making this world a better place. Riley is a cop in Oklahoma, or a soldier somewhere on hostile soil. Riley may be a firefighter in New York or a medic in Fargo. You give blood, coach little league, and conduct neighborhood watches. You speak in cliches, because you don't have a masters in literature, and neither do the people you help. Simple, concise, and easy to understand, because there is someone else out there who needs your help.

Rileys make the world go round. They're everywhere. I'm really getting sick and tired of all this patronizing, bureaucratic tool, Eddie Haskell crap. This is a brave new world we live in people. Join us, you might like us.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: In defense of Riley, a rant. -- Shabidoo, 21:42:00 02/28/02 Thu
"You speak in cliches, because you don't have a masters in literature..."

No, he doesn't have that masters, but he was supposedly an excellent psychology grad student which should be enough education to avoid at least the sheer number of nauseating platitudes that he vomits up.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Whatever -- JBone, 22:24:18 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The Freshman, AYW, and the image of the ideal -- ponygirl, 07:29:56 03/01/02 Fri
Riley certainly is a divisive character isn't he? Yeesh. For me Riley never was an interesting character until the end of The Replacement when he said Buffy didn't love him. That was the first time I ever sat up and looked again at Mr. Finn. His subsequent tumble into darkness was his last best chance of becoming a well-rounded person. That he failed his test is understandable. He deserves credit for turning his back on his entire world and identity when the Iniative was revealed, but when faced with the task of creating a new role for himself without the assurance of Buffy's love he retreated back into the life he had rejected. Again perfectly understandable. It makes him far more interesting a character because of his failures. The danger is that Buffy in AYW seems to have forgotten his flaws.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Danger? -- Robert, 08:42:56 03/01/02 Fri
>> "The danger is that Buffy in AYW seems to have forgotten his flaws."

Danger to what or whom? I don't see Buffy shacking up with Riley now that he is married. I don't even see Riley showing back up in Sunnydale now that his mission is completed. What kind of danger do you perceive? How does Buffy forgetting Riley's flaws accentuate such danger?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Danger? Plus weird thought on Lover's Walk -- ponygirl, 09:16:45 03/01/02 Fri
Hmm. I think the danger is if Buffy internalizes Riley's values as her own, that she could see his life and his relationship with Sam as the ideal. Riley may be in a good place right now, loving his job and loving his wife, but he was in a good place when Buffy first met him -- following the orders of an organization later found to be deeply flawed.

You know as I was mulling over this post I suddenly started thinking about Lover's Walk. There are a lot of similarities to AYW: a long gone character shows up unexpectedly (Spike). His presence and comments cause Buffy to re-evaluate her current relationship (B/A). In the end Buffy decides to be the strong one and ends the relationship.

Now we can only hope that Riley's appearance in this episode won't lead to him returning next season!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The Freshman, AYW, and the image of the ideal -- leslie, 09:34:16 03/01/02 Fri
Getting back to my original gripe with Riley, what really annoyed me in AYW was no mention whatsoever of Joyce's death. Nothing! Not a peep! I still think that what was unforgivable in Riley's breakup with Buffy was his complete disregard for the emotional wallop of having a seriously ill mother. Coming back to find out that hey, whoops, she really *was* terminal, Buffy was *right* to have been so wrung out by the whole brain surgery experience, why was this not even mentioned?

I'm lucky that both of my parents are alive and in relatively good health for people who qualify for social security, but I have seen a number of people dealing with the deaths of their mothers over the years, and I have to conclude that it is the most horrible thing in the world to go through. Even people who didn't get along with their mothers were sucker-punched by the experience. And at least one friend described the period after the death of her mother as feeling like she was dead herself--she had been very busy and that made her able to gloss over the emotional numbness, but in retrospect, she realized that she had been a zombie, that all the things she regarded as just life's usual shit were really the reverberations of losing her mother. And furthermore, her mother's illness and death made her really reassess the quality of her relationship with her boyfriend(s). Who was there for her, who wasn't? She was seeing two people at the time, and the one who was, on paper, Mr. Perfect, was not there for her, the one who was, on the surface, Mr. Going Nowhere, was.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> An aside -- Dochawk, 11:42:24 03/01/02 Fri
Not that it changes the force of your arguement, i think you make a great point about Riley ignoring Joyce's death. But having seen alot of death and grief (because of my job), the most horrible thing is the death of a child. it is far more devastating than the impact of losing a parent (which is normal part of the cycle of life no matter how crushing it is). Losing a child is not. Nearly every parent I have ever met would change places with their child if they could.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: An aside -- leslie, 13:44:36 03/01/02 Fri
Well, there's horrible and there's horrible. And I don't know anyone who has lost a child, that's true. The thing is, losing parents is something that we can all pretty much expect to happen (and when it doesn't happen, it's because our parents lose a child--I guess these two traumas are in complementary distribution), and so Riley's failure to acknowledge this strikes me as a very big thing that he won't deal with. And now that I'm thinking about this, how does his inability to acknowledge Buffy's mother's death relate to his own loss of his "mother," Maggie Walsh? Hmmm...

It also occurred to me (duh) watching the FX reruns last night that Joyce's brain tumor rears its ugly head just as Spike is having to deal with the fact that he is not going to be able to remove the "tumor" in his own brain. While Joyce does not specifically die from her brain surgery, it seems to be implied that the cerebral hemmorrhage that kills her is a side effect of it. So, successful brain surgery = nonetheless bad; unsuccessful brain surgery = nonetheless good?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Weakness in As You Were - a whole bunch of ramblings -- Spike Lover, 19:22:41 02/28/02 Thu

The one thing that really stood out for me in this entire episode is how weak Buffy & Spike came across. First, the Slayer is attacked by a vampire, and in the wrestling match that insues, Buffy's neck looks like it is lost. Wait- the monster is repelled! What repelled him? A blow? A snappy comeback? No, an odor that Buffy is unable to rid herself of.

Next(strangely) the Slayer is too tired to chase down the garbage men (strange for someone w/ super strength and speed). When a scene is given special attention and has no relevance to the plot, I usually suspect it has symbolic meaning. Buffy is still burdened with the past?

Anyway, so she is at work and suddenly Riley is there. He is talking rather fast and she is mentally not keeping up. She is babbling and actually says 'I have a cow on my head.' He wisks her away into the street and they confront a monster, and it basically kicks her ass in the street. Riley holds his own and I am wondering what new drugs is he on? As you then go to the dam, you see Buffy again get hurled by the monster. Then super wife shows up and starts kicking ass and taking names. Who is this? The new slayer in town? No, an ex-peace corp girl.

After not too long w/ Sam, B runs to Spike and asks him to tell her that he loves her. Then they make (sweet) love; the lack of broken furniture makes me believe it was sweet. (It reminded me of the B/R sex of previous seasons because R usually told B that he loved her right before they jumped into bed. (Everyone remember the episode w/ Faith in B's body?)

So what is Buffy doing? Is she pulling a Riley? She can't get what she needs from R, so she goes to the most convenient vamp for a thrill/substitution? Is she seeking comfort or indulging her weakness?

More signs of weakness: Later in the crypt, when R wants to go down and look for the eggs, he tosses Spike out of the way like he was a ragdoll. And Vamps are always stronger than human beings.

Furthermore, when R comes in, Spike gloats for a moment and then becomes incredibly defensive. He attacks- with a retelling of R's history -showing fear and weakness. (The words fall off R's shiny black chest like bullets off of Superman.) When B & R discover the eggs, he goes into (I could hardly believe my ears) an adolescent whine and finger pointing.-- "Games! What about you? All you do is play games- and you make up the rules." or (something like that)

Over and over again, Buffy/Spike are weak, childish and R/Sam are strong and cultured. Even Willow is 'strong' because she can stop her addiction. A/X are strong because although they are eating chips and hiding in bathrooms, they have not chickened out and are continuing to walk thru their fire.

Anyway, enough of that. So why the emphasis on weakness? I think it has to do with the chopper ride at the end. Once again Riley is leaving. Last season when it occurred, Riley was leaving because he knew that Buffy did not love him, (and was "using" him,) he suspected that she was falling for Spike, and these realizations along with some other problems had driven him to allow himself to be vampire fodder.

Now he is leaving again, and Buffy is forced to think about the last time R left. Once again she finds that she is using someone (with sex) that she does not love. (I argue that if Buffy can't love Spike, then she can't love anyone. She is handicapped.) Riley did the right thing by leaving before. He realized that they had to break up or she would continue to use him (and he would in some ways destroy himself or his self-respect). He left. That made it easy for Buffy. She did not have to face her demons. She did not have to recognize that she had been using R.

Buffy now (I think) realizes that Spike needs to leave in his helicopter. But she knows that Spike won't leave, so she is forced to be strong and break up with him.

And Spike- he has said several times that he wants all of Buffy. But she isn't giving herself and rather than hold out for a whole plate, he has given into his weakness and settled for the scraps like a dog under the table.

What has made R strong? What is the one thing R did that B has not? He has dealt (according to Sam) w/ his relationship w/ Buffy and the past, put it behind him (or so we believe) and has moved on. He is not in the jungle anymore and has gone to Nepal. Buffy has returned from the dead, but finds herself in basically the same place as she was before. Doing what she has done before (using someone who loves her and gotten involved with a vampire.)

(This is just analysis. I am VERY MUCH in favor of a s/b relationship.)

Now What? Well, B has admitted to 2 people at least that she was sleeping with Spike. That is a small step. She admitted to Spike that she wanted him. That was a huge step.

I wonder if Giles will come to the Wedding next week.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Weakness in As You Were - a whole bunch of ramblings -- astrid, 22:40:27 02/28/02 Thu
What has made R strong? What is the one thing R did that B has not? He has dealt (according to Sam) w/ his relationship w/ Buffy and the past, put it behind him (or so we believe) and has moved on. He is not in the jungle anymore and has gone to Nepal. Buffy has returned from the dead, but finds herself in basically the same place as she was before. Doing what she has done before (using someone who loves her and gotten involved with a vampire.)

I'm not so sure that Riley necessarily dealt with what happened with Buffy, or that he's so different. He's still the shining warrior guy, fighter for good, foot soldier and government employee. Not that these things are necessarily bad - just that it's exactly the place he came from, and so it's not really surprising that once he has back the security of that certainty and purpose, he also recovers his self-confidence.

He comes back with a strong, capable wife, whom he watches proudly as she fights the bad guys, and is comfortable with letting alone to do her job. On the face of it this is a big change for him, since it's certainly not how he was with Buffy. But the dynamic is fundamentally different - Buffy was way out of his league, physically speaking. She could *always* kick his ass, and she really didn't need his protection. I don't think it was the idea of her strength that freaked him out as much as the fact that he never really felt like she needed him, either emotionally or for protection. He couldn't accept that, and it's what finally made him leave.

On the other hand, his new wife is strong, but not supernaturally so. She almost certainly isn't as strong as he is. He can admire and respect her, but it doesn't fundamentally challenge his manhood - he's can be comfortable with the idea that they're at least equals, and he's probably more physically capable than her when it comes right down to it (since he's certainly had more training and experience.) With Buffy, he knew he was never going to be her physical equal, and I think it made him insecure. With Sam, he doesn't have that problem.

He can afford to be self-confident and relaxed when he meets Buffy again - he was probably bitter when he left (since he was convinced that it didn't work out because she didn't love him, which may have been true as far as it went, but wasn't the whole of it), and now he's got someone he's happy with. It would be only human to want to wave that in front of her face, just a little bit. I think it's significant that he doesn't tell her about the marriage - he lets Buffy stumble over herself (showing all the signs of not being over him, although I think that's not really it) until the wife shows up. It really seemed to me like there was a bit of "Nyah, nyah" in there. I think if he had really dealt with his feelings about the end of their relationship and moved on, he would have told her about the marriage during the car ride. Instead, he completely played into Buffy's awkward "Oh god it's the old boyfriend" thing.

Riley came off as larger-than-life Hero Guy in this ep - he has a mission, a sense of purpose, adventure, cool weapons, a new marriage to an adoring wife, decent relationship with Buffy's friends, and he has the ninja gear rather than a hat with a cow on it. He's everything that Buffy thinks she failed at, and left behind. Whether this is really true is something that we won't find out, and probably don't need to - what's important here is what he represents to Buffy. He's the kick in the stomach when she's already on the ground - there to make her feel just a bit more awful.

The kick might actually have worked a little bit - as Spike Lover says, she did admit the "I'm sleeping with him" (and implicitly, "and therefore, don't want him dead") part, and sort of tried to treat him like a person for the first time in a while, even if it wasn't quite what it should have been. Remains to be seen if it really helps her get herself together, I guess.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sam -- Spike Lover, 19:37:21 02/28/02 Thu

Did anyone else think Sam was a little too perfect? And strong- I wonder if she is a robot...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Sam -- Corwin of Amber, 20:13:04 02/28/02 Thu
I think that both Riley and Sam were made to seem larger than life in this episode. Buffy isn't at her best right now, and Riley and Sam simply have less emotional baggage, a clearer purpose, and a healthy outdoor lifestyle. So they seemed a lot stronger and generally more on the ball than Buffy, and we were pretty much seeing the action through her eyes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Sam -- vampire hunter D, 20:39:03 02/28/02 Thu
Sam seemed like an idealized Buffy to me.

Of course, I like her more than Buffy. I want to kill Riley and claim her for myself.

I'd like to see her as a regular
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Sam -- desultory, 04:43:29 03/01/02 Fri
No, Riley was the Warren-bot. Sam was illusion-Jonathan. (just kidding)

desultory
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second Chances (or, Buffy the Angst Girl) -- Corwin of Amber, 20:38:23 02/28/02 Thu

Does anyone else here feel that most of Buffy's problems this season are self inflicted?

She had a big shock (ok, thats an understatement) being yanked out of whatever heaven she was in at the beginning of the season. I can accept some existential problems because of that (who am i? what am i? why am i here? whats my purpose?) But a person with a more optimistic outlook would have realized that she has the ultimate in second chances. She was DEAD and now she's ALIVE again. She has the opportunity to do things the right way this time! But for
the most part, Buffy is the same essentially mopey girl she's been. There were hints that she was going to become something more at the end of Season 4 ('you think you know -
what you are, what you will become...' says Tara in the dream) but i don't see it happening to this girl. She finds
it too easy to wallow in her pathos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Second Chances (or, Buffy the Angst Girl) -- Rufus, 22:57:28 02/28/02 Thu
I don't see Buffy as someone wallowing in pathos, I see someone who has attempting to make some sense of her life. Sure she has gotten a second chance, a second chance to die violently doing what isn't appreciated and valued in the world. She is the ultimate sacrifice to humanities survival, Buffy carries the burden of saving the world, numerous times now. I can cut her some slack in finding it hard to adjust to being brought back to life. Her second chance doesn't give her much time to smell the roses because she is working two jobs, one with no pay, and attempting to keep a household going with next to no help. As for second chances, I don't know if I'd be too thrilled to take up where Buffy left off, doing a job that she can't retire from other than being killed again, and getting to see the worst of what the demon and now human world has to offer. I'm surprised she's doing as well as she has.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> I agree, Rufus! Very well put! -- Rob, 23:22:25 02/28/02 Thu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Second Chances (or, Buffy the Angst Girl) -- Wiscoboy, 08:48:23 03/01/02 Fri
You mention there was a hint of more to Buffy than was/is being shown. My thought is that that is the most dissappointing aspect of the writing. There have been numerous occurrences in the history of the show in which the viewer is led to believe there is more to a character's personality or promise, which then is inexplicably forgotten about in future episodes. Perhaps if the series extends long enough, JW will again take over the writing and close the many "holes" that have been created over the years by the varied external writers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

There's No Greater Power Than the Power of Goodbye: Willow's Finest Hour -- Rob, 23:14:05 02/28/02 Thu

I was rewatching AYW tonight for the third or fourth time, and I noticed something that I'm not sure has been mentioned here before. I must confess, I haven't had time to read the other posts yet from the past few days. So, stop me if you've heard this one...

Or stop reading, or whatvever... ;o)

Anyway, the scene where Mrs. Riley tells Willow that she had never known anyone who could successfully overcome magic addiction before...I realized tonight, more than the other times I saw it, not only what a sweet thing that was for her to say, but how helpful that must be for Willow.

Willow had told Buffy In "Wrecked" that she was always the shy, gawky girl who couldn't do anything special. And then, all of a sudden, like her best friend, Buffy, she also became a sort of superhero...and didn't want to lose what made her special. Even though Buffy pointed out to her there that she was already a special person. Besides her great personal qualities, she is immensely smart and a computer whiz to boot.

That, however, didn't seem to be quite enough of the convincing that Willow needed, so here's what I'm getting at...

Willow, as I'm sure everyone here will agree, was on a major power trip. She found herself with this great power (perhaps even more powerful than the Slayer herself!), and feared that the magic is what made her powerful. Once it was gone, she feared she would become a small, meek little mouse again. But this validation that she is, at the very least, one of the only, and at the most, the only person ever able to overcome a magic addiction, changes everything. That validates that the power within herself is greater than magic. She was able to beat magic, where others had failed. She was able to break free from it, and survive intact.

Some people argued that Willow's recovery was too swift; that it was unrealistic for her not to have had relapses; that it seemed too easy.

Perhaps now, in the light I'm reading it, we can see that that was the point...Willow's inner power was always stronger than the magic, and thus it was this inner strength that made it easier for her to beat the addiction. As a teenager, she always was able to succeed when she put her mind to it, using computer skills, science skills, etc, although she never gave herself enough credit for it.

Maybe now, she can give herself true credit, not just for having been one of the most powerful witches ever (even more powerful than a natural witch, like Tara), but for having the strength to say goodbye to these strong forces...and still emerge as complete as ever.

Your heart is not open so I must go
The spell has been broken, I loved you so
Freedom comes when you learn to let go
Creation comes when you learn to say no

You were my lesson I had to learn
I was your fortress you had to burn
Pain is a warning that something's wrong
I pray to God that it won't be long
Do ya wanna go higher?

[Chorus]

There's nothing left to try
There's no place left to hide
There's no greater power
Than the power of good-bye

Your heart is not open so I must go
The spell has been broken, I loved you so
You were my lesson I had to learn
I was your fortress

[Chorus]

There's nothing left to lose
There's no more heart to bruise
There's no greater power
Than the power of good-bye

Learn to say good-bye
I yearn to say good-bye

--Madonna, Ray of Light

Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: There's No Greater Power Than the Power of Goodbye: Willow's Finest Hour -- BigBub, 00:46:37 03/01/02 Fri
Which all be fine and dandy if the writers had been more inventive than a trite drug addiction metaphor. A perfect setup on the responsibility and potential corruption of power ground into so much dust.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: There's No Greater Power Than the Power of Goodbye: Willow's Finest Hour -- Terrapin, 01:29:52 03/01/02 Fri
Rob, I'm so glad that you had brought this up. That scene with Sam and Willow was really important. Everybody is so wrapped up in the addiction metaphor, that they forgot how hard it would be for Willow to find the strength in herself to give it up.

Her strength was shown numerous times after "Wrecked." In "Gone" she fights to not use magic, to figure out how Buffy became invisible. Instead, she uses her brain. Then in DMP, when Amy puts a spell on Willow, Willow even is able to resist it. She again resorts to her geek infested roots, and saves the day once again. In OaFA, she is being pressured to use magic by her friends, but still says no. Tara realizes the progress that she has made, and even gives her a little credit.

Obviously, Willow is staying strong and will continue to be strong. She is even starting again to use her brain power. It even looks as though her and Tara will soon be getting back together, which will help Willow to be strong.

"Take up your china doll
Take up your china doll
It's only fractured
Just a little nervous from the fall
La,la,la,la,la,la,la"

Grateful Dead
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: There's No Greater Power Than the Power of Goodbye: Willow's Finest Hour -- BigBub, 01:44:11 03/01/02 Fri
Everyone is wrapped up in the drug metaphor because before this season it was clear Willow's problem was with power, the power got her accepted, got her noticed, not addicted.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: There's No Greater Power Than the Power of Goodbye: Willow's Finest Hour -- Rob, 08:52:30 03/01/02 Fri
My suggestion--just take the drug metaphor for what it is...a metaphor. It doesn't have to equal every real-life drug addiction parallel. It is just meant to allude to, not to be exact. So, if you don't like the metaphor, ignore it, and just try to see it as I do--an examination of Willow's power.

Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: There's No Greater Power Than the Power of Goodbye: Willow's Finest Hour -- BigBub, 14:48:32 03/01/02 Fri
Sorry, this season has been to literal, there are hardly any real metaphors. She actually said Spellcasters Anonymous. Please. Bad writing is bad writing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> I don't think it's bad writing...Perhaps overliteral writing, but not bad. -- Rob, 15:46:16 03/01/02 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Sam is an enabler of Willow's addiction -- Ishkabibble, 09:27:17 03/01/02 Fri
It is possible that Willow was strengthened by Sam's statements...I can see how it could be interpreted that way. But, there is another potential interpretation (and I hope this does not come to pass).

You said: "But this validation that she is, at the very least, one of the only, and at the most, the only person ever able to overcome a magic addiction, changes everything. That validates that the power within herself is greater than magic. She was able to beat magic, where others had failed. She was able to break free from it, and survive intact."

Maybe. Maybe not.

Believing that she is the exception to the rule and has the power to overcome her addiction is classic "addiction thinking." This is what tricks addicts into thinking that they can dabble just a little in their drug of choice, because, hay, they've now proven that they can stop. Their thinking goes along the lines of, "I stopped once. So if I dabble a little bit it's ok because now I can handle it. And even if I get hooked again, I stopped before and could do it again if need be."

I believe that Sam was an enabler....knowingly or not. Willow is now ready to jump right back into active practice of her addiction.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> I disagree... -- Rob, 10:19:46 03/01/02 Fri
Watching Willow's reactions, it doesn't seem at all like she took it that way. She seemed genuinely proud of herself, for quitting. There were no hints at all that she has ever any intention of ever dabbling again. If she ever were going to, wouldn't she have done so in OAFA? They were trapped in a house, with a very powerful demon...And Willow's spell could have been the only thing to save them, and she still refused to give into temptation. I just don't see her doing it now.

And, further, I don't see Sam as an enabler. For starters, she made one comment that can possibly be stretched to mean something else, but really is completely innocent, I believe. Sam was congratulating her and boosting her self-esteem for the great job she did. I just don't see the logic that Willow would be congratulated on this great job, and take that as validation that she could do it again. I think if there was going to be any negative immediate effect, we would have already seen it.

Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Ah, but... -- Darby, 11:14:15 03/01/02 Fri
You're looking at it rationally, with some perspective, which makes it different than what someone like Willow's probably seeing. I thought that Ish' points were quite plausible, the moreso as Willow does fight the temptations that you've mentioned. It might only be a matter of time before she begins to believe that, having mastered her addiction, she can "dabble" without falling down the rabbit hole. As Ish mentioned, she's too into the battle currently to start thinking that way, but a little success and reinforcement from people like Sam that she actually can gain and keep the upper hand may change her mind.

Think about all of the illogical things people convince themselves of to get some sex, or even to increase the experience a smidge, despite actually realizing the risks. Humans are really good at ignoring potential consequences that they are fully aware of if they can derive a little pleasure doing it. It's the old "it won't happen to me" syndrome, but the scary part is where it's already happened and the syndrome becomes, "I've learned my lesson, I've got it under control, and that's why I can do this now without the bad stuff happening." I think that Willow has one of those personalities. That pride you see in her current accomplishments could be an indicator of it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> And then again... -- Rob, 13:05:40 03/01/02 Fri
...the magic and drug parallel breaks off at the point that, whereas drug use is a purely selfish act that benefits no one besides the user, with a temporary high, magic can be used to help, and even save other's lives. I'd argue that if Willow did go back to using magic, only when completely necessary to help others, it would not be a bad thing. She could then use her own inner strength not to use it negatively again. Whereas magic is not necessarily a bad thing by itself, drugs almost always are. I personally would like to see her use magic again, for postive reasons. If this knowledge that she could overcome the addiction is a validation for Willow that she could do magic and survive the temptation to be addicted...I'm glad. Finally, then this magic/drug parallel can end!

Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Addict equals Vampire? -- Ishkabibble, 16:47:08 03/01/02 Fri
Thanks, Rob for your comments.

I've been rehashing what you posted and a light bulb went on inside my head. After reading your thoughts, it dawned on me that there is a strong similarity between someone who becomes an addict and a person who changes into a vampire. (If this is a subject already discussed ad nauseaum, my apologies.)

In both instances, the person who once was, is taken over by something else, an evil something else, be that a drug or a vampire. The person still looks like our loved one, walks, talks, even has the memories of our loved one. But this really is just an external visage of the former person. An external force (again, drug or vampire) has set up housekeeping in the body and mind of someone we once knew.

The chances of an addict permanently overcoming his or her addiction are as uncertain as Spike's potential for overcoming his vampireism (is this a real word?). I wonder if ME had such a parallel path in mind for Willow and Spike, or if I'm just seeing patterns where none exist.

Anyway, thanks for keeping the cognitive juices flowing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Ah, but...Spoilers for S6 to 'AYW.' -- Age, 18:46:58 03/01/02 Fri
It seemed that Riley and Sam as deus ex machina devices were dropped into this dark hell from their sun bright Central American heaven in order to balance out the dark thoughts of the Scoobies. What effect that will have later on may or may not be positive. But I think in Willow's case she was shown to be concentrating on a negative self image as an addict and not the reality of a person who is dealing with her addiction. Sam's 'light' rebalanced the dark image that Willow had of herself as an addict, giving her a vision of the Willow who is taking responsibility for her addictive nature. Willow is discovering through her addiction a strength of character she didn't know she had.

As you say, she can't overcome an addictive nature in the sense that it's under control, ie seeing it as a thing she has(an under control addiction, something she has gained through actions in the past) rather than an ongoing process in the present with strategies employed for the future. Perhaps the trap that Willow may get into through thinking she can lick it again can be avoided through her going to her Magics Anonymous classes? It is certainly early in her period of addiction management, and the two special ops agents were dropped in rather early by the writers to do their mission of light.

In 'AYW' were Riley and Sam real characters or simply devices to show how the Scoobies themselves were beginning to see themselves in a different light? How much were Riley and Sam simply supernatural device(in the sense that they were dropped in from heaven by chopper) as much as the Suvolte demon and the litter of eggs which represented the dark thoughts breeding in the Scoobies? Riley's and Sam's strategic mission was to get in there and take out those dark thoughts before they could overwhelm the Scoobies: Buffy was smelling of death, killing herself; Xander was seeing the circle of life only in terms of monsters; and Willow was seeing herself only in terms of being an addict. What they lacked was perspective, and perspective means standing back and looking from some distance; well, the agents of the FSB(From Some Distance) came in their helicopter and brought the sunshine from the jungle and then went back up into the light, leaving their secure telephone connection.

Age.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Very interesting point. Thanks. -- yez, 12:36:08 03/01/02 Fri
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Current board | March 2001