February 2003 Archives

February 2003 posts

January 2003
More February 2003

Touch My Cape / Save Me - Thoughts on *Potential* - Part I -- OnM, 06:24:18 02/01/03 Sat

*******

Me, I got so much strength I'm givin' it away.

............ Buffy Summers

*******

sleep walking through the all-nite drug store / baptized in fluorescent light
i found religion in the greeting card aisle / now i know hallmark was right
and every pop song on the radio / is suddenly speaking to me
art may imitate life / but life imitates t.v.

'cuz you've been gone exactly two weeks / two weeks and three days
and let's just say that / things look different now
different in so many ways / i used to be a superhero
no one could touch me / not even myself

you are like a phone booth / that i somehow stumbled into
and now look at me / i am just like everybody else
if i was dressed in my best defenses / would you agree to meet me for coffee
if i did my tricks with smoke and mirrors / would you still know which one was me

if i was naked and screaming / on your front lawn
would you turn on the light and come down
screaming, there's the asshole / who did this to me
stripped me of my power

stripped me down / i used to be a superhero
no one could touch me / not even myself
you are like a phone booth / that i somehow stumbled into
and now look at me / i am just like everybody else

yeah you've been gone exactly two weeks / two weeks and three days
and now i'm a different person / different in so many ways
tell me what did you like about me
and don't say my strength and daring / 'cuz now i think i'm at your mercy

and it's my first time for this kind of thing / i used to be a superhero
i would swoop down and save me / from myself
but you are like a phone booth / that i somehow stumbled into
and now look at me / i am just like everybody else

............ Ani DiFranco

*******

I think the whole Power/Strength dichotomy touches painfully close to the roots of this entire storyspace-- a
"normal" girl, burdened with the weight of Power, finding the Strength to forge her own path.

............ Haecceity

*******

You find inspiration in some of the strangest places, at the strangest times. After watching the previous BtVS
episode, Showtime, my brain jogged back about 20 years or so to a time I was watching one of the
(several) film versions of Pauline Reage's Story of O on some late-night cable channel.

The film itself was generally unremarkable. In fact, it was one of those erotic flicks that allows itself to get so
high-toned and artsy-fartsy that it forgets to become erotic, and you end up with what would normally be an
antilogy-- boring kinky sex. Nevertheless, you do occasionally find the diamond nestled amongst the coal, and
this film was no exception, and it's why I remember the gist of this particular scene to this day.

(Note: It's been nearly thirty years since I read The Story of O, and there is no guarantee that any
version created by another artist, based on the book, will be faithful to it. I really don't recall for certain whether
or not this basic scene occurred in the original novel. I do think that there was something towards the end of the
story regarding O taking on a much more dominant sexual role, and either taking over the day-to-day operations
of the chateau at Roissy, or something essentially similar. So, please keep this in mind when I describe the
following scene, re: literal faithfulness to the novel.)

O is seated behind a large wooden desk in a decently sized, library-like office. The door opens and a man enters,
apparently wanting to contract for the services of one of the chateau's resident submissive women. O studies the
man intently while an initial conversation takes place, and decides that she does not like him very much-- he
appears to be a self-important, arrogant bully bent on simple abuse for his pleasure alone. She suggests that he
leave, that what he wants is not offered here. He demurs, and begins to argue with her, and the discussion
eventually leads to a description of what he thinks is the proper role for a submissive individual, and the power
relationship involved.

O stands up from behind the desk and moves over to a cabinet, where she opens a door and withdraws a thin,
reed-like cane. She then calmly walks over to where the man is standing and hands it to him. He looks slightly
surprised, and then even more so when O removes first her suit jacket and then her shirt, and seats herself on a
nearby chair, facing the chair's back, her own completely exposed. The intent is rather obvious, but the man
hesitates. What's going on here?

Go ahead, O bids him, a close-lipped but effortless smile playing on her face. Isn't this what you
want?

He hesitates a few seconds more, then swings the cane and strikes O on the back with it with a modest, but still
significant amount of force. O doesn't even flinch.

You can do better than that, she tells him, slightly mockingly. Slowly becoming angry, he strikes her
again, much harder this time. This time O flinches, but just barely. The smile remains on her lips, and she remains
seated impassively. Flustered now, the man hesitates, and strikes a third blow, this time with considerable force.
O flinches again, and there is a short, sharp breath sound, but still there is no cry of pain or attempt to escape the
punishment. A thin red line has appeared where the last, harshest blow was struck. The man is now completely
bewildered and exasperated.

What's the matter with you?? Doesn't it hurt? he nearly bellows.

She turns her head over towards him without otherwise moving from her position on the chair. The tight-lipped
smile is harder now, and there is a look of utter contemptuousness on her face. (Think Buffy 'warrior stare'.) She
speaks, harshly.

You fool. Of course it hurts. She pauses briefly, then continues.

You understand nothing about power. Power isn't a measure of what you can dish out. Power is a measure
of what you can take.

She then rises from the chair just as calmly as she sat down upon it, and faces him, naked from the waist up. She
begins to put her shirt back on, cutting off his view of her body once more. It's a completely dismissive gesture,
and after a few more flustered moments, he takes the rather pointed hint and leaves, still angry.

Now, originally I was going to post this revealing little excerpt from an otherwise fairly pointless flick as part of
my 'thoughts on' Showtime, but eventually decided to leave it out of the final edit. It somehow seemed to
be very appropriate, since we all know that one of the 'big themes' of BtVS Season 7 is power, and what that
concept means to both the Buffyverse and our own realverse. Before Showtime aired, I had been
wondering if Buffy was going to resort to some advanced technology (rocket launcher redux, perhaps?) to defeat
the evil Ubee. The attempt to bump off Principal Wood with something more than a sword or crossbow even
appeared to be a kind of foreshadowing for this possibility.

But no, Buffy instead decided to duke it out with Ubee in a far more hands-on manner, obviously to pass on a
critical lesson in the meaning of Power to the proto-Slayers now under her guardianship. While the main text of
the 'lesson' might be that Buffy is a powerful being, who when she sets her mind and body to it, can defeat a
supposedly 'undefeatable' foe, the subtext is far more important. It isn't really a matter of what Buffy can dish
out that makes her powerful-- it's a matter of what she can take.

This same theme shows up again in a recent (and much better, overall) film, The Messenger, a retelling
of the myth/historical account of Joan of Arc, starring Milla Jovovich as Joan and directed by Luc Besson. Film
critics in general were not overly appreciative of Besson's vision, but it pretty much worked for me despite a
modicum of occasional over-the-topness and the sometimes faltering acting work by Jovovich in what in all
honesty was an incredibly demanding role for someone of her modest talents.

The key scene here was one that happens during one of the very early military campaigns that Joan involves
herself in. Insisting on being in the thick of the battle, she is seriously wounded by an arrow in the chest, and
appears to be on the verge of certain death. Since she represents the 'moral force' behind the French revolt, this
situation frightens and dispirits the men who serve at her behest, and morale rapidly deteriorates. But,
miraculously, Joan survives her unsurvivable wound and goes on to fight another day, thus emboldening her loyal
followers and leading them to victory, not to mention seriously freaking out the opposing army.

I'm mentioning these various cinematic allusions because not only is the power issue a critical one in the current
BtVS seasonal story arc, but because I think that it may be somewhat unfair to criticize Buffy for her 'arrogant'
or 'militaristic' behavior patterns as exhibited during the training of the proto-Slayers. While I agree that by the
end of the season, Buffy may need to reconsider whether her current modus operandi is the appropriate one for
reaching ultimate victory over the First Evil and its minions, for the moment I truly believe she is doing the right
thing.

In the Besson work mentioned above, some detractors felt that a disservice was done to Joan's historical legacy
by depicting her as-- well, a high-functioning schizophrenic. Besson suggests the possibility, while not
insisting upon it as historical fact, that Joan's visions were schizophrenically self-induced as a result of a
horrific childhood trauma, rather than being actual communications with the Almighty. What is far more
important, though, is that Besson also appears to think that the actual reason for Joan's passion is irrelevant-- her
gift was to enable others with her passion and the seemingly endless strength that flowed from it. Joan was
powerful not only because she could 'take it', but also because she brought power to others.

When Tabula Rasa first aired, fans were immediately struck that Buffy's amnesia-spurred choice of name
for herself was 'Joan'. Was it a reference to Joan of Arc? Of course. Was it also a reference to a plain and simple,
very ordinary name? Also, of course. Buffy is someone who appears to be a totally ordinary person placed by
either random fate or 'divine intervention' into the thick of a battle for the literal destiny of humankind. Such an
action could easily become schizophrenia-inducing in and of itself, or perhaps more correctly, inductive of a
multiple personality disorder. Buffy, faced with the conflicting desires to become a mythic warrior for good while
trying to remain 'just a girl' ends up compartmentalizing her psyche to survive.

That this adaptation has happened, as evidenced by Buffy's behavior over the course of the season so far, I
would present as a given. But is this a positive adaptation, or a negative one? I would argue that the conclusion
is not an absolute given, but instead depends heavily on the situation at hand. The ideal scenario might be
that Buffy recognizes that she is compartmentalizing herself, and work toward integrating or balancing the
passion and the prosaic. But doing so at the moment could also bring about disaster, and I believe this is what
ME is really getting at in terms of subtext when we see 'general Buffy' speechifying and cranking up the
Slayer Pride Parade for the SIT's. This isn't the Council of Watchers training style at all, not when you look
beyond the surface-- Buffy is being far more discerning, compassionate and caring for her charges.

Pay less attention to what Buffy overtly says, and more to what Buffy covertly does, and you will see that
her behavior towards the protos really is not as formally militaristic and role-playing rigid as it might first appear.
Yes, she initially gets their attention by throwing a battle axe at a target, and then gives a very Patton-esque
speech to the 'troops'. But, she also makes a significant effort to appeal to the latent passion stirring within the
souls of her students, trying to get across to them the nature of what it means to be a Slayer, to have a destiny or
a calling. She states, seemingly coldly, that "some of us will die" in the battle to come, but immediately follows
that remark with "decide right now it isn't going to be you". Tough love, yes, but it is love. There really isn't the
luxury of time for anything else right now, and once again the weight is on Buffy's shoulders. If the protos
manage to survive the coming apocalyptic battle, there will be time enough to start teaching them the
discriminating nuances and subtleties of existence in a grey world when demons can be forces for good and
humans can become the most horrific of enemies.

Even so, there are chinks in the armor that Buffy doesn't attempt to hide, and I suspect this is intended as a
important subliminal message for the SIT's. As one example, Buffy takes the troops to a bar where she knows
there will be a crowd of demons. If the Council was in charge of this outing, slaughter and mayhem would
quickly ensue, because in their black and white world the only good demon is a dead one-- an attitude that, be
they evil or not, doesn't sit well with the 'enemy'. Buffy's long tenure as Night Sheriff of Sunnydale has
apparently effected a surprising change of behavior on a significant part of the resident demon population-- at
least that portion intelligent enough to realize that Buffy isn't your typical hate-driven demon-basher.

Buffy normally does not slay without cause. If a demon species generally does not attempt to harm
humans, she adopts a live and let live attitude. It is certainly well-known among the demon population of
Sunnydale that Buffy has had close personal relations (of various forms and intensities) with several members of
demonkind. The result is that, begrudging though it may be, this has to generate a modicum of respect for
someone who normally is a sworn enemy, fit only for killing. The sheriff might be tough, but she's not a bigot--
she's only looking to protect 'her own'. Not to mention, she always seems to win in a fight, and to
demons, power IS a matter of what you can dish out. You think her recent dusting of the 'invincible'
Ubee went unnoticed among the night shift? Kinda doubt it.

Another good example is what some fans have referred to as Buffy providing a variety of 'Cruciamentum Test'
for the protos when she and Spike 'lock' them in a crypt with an angry vampire. But is this so? I don't think it
holds up at all.

In the test that the Watcher's Council fabricates, the Slayer is relieved of her super-human strength, and then
locked in an enclosed space with a vampire, whom she must defeat using only her normal human strength and
wits. This doesn't sound too awful when you describe it in its simplest terms, as I just have here, but the reality is
far nastier and more cruel.

First, the Slayer is secretly deprived of her strength-- she has no clue what is happening, or is about to
happen. There is no way to prepare, mentally or physically. Second, the deprival of strength and delivery to the
scene of the test are acts administered by the Slayer's Watcher, a father or mother figure that the Slayer
has been conditioned to have absolute trust in. What is the participant to think, should she manage to survive the
test? Surely, it would be that the one person to whom she had placed her utmost confidence upon is a liar and a
betrayer, someone so inhuman as to lead her, coldly and indifferently, to a possibly painful and horrific death.

Third, the deck is stacked as unfairly as it can be. There is no one watching to offer any last second assistance
should the vampire gain the upper hand and the Slayer about to be killed. The vampire chosen is no ordinary
vampire, but a particularly violent and sadistic one. The Watcher is branded a failure if he or she offers the
slightest sign of caring for the one enduring the trial. This isn't an honorable coming of age rite whereby an
adolescent gains entry to the rights and privileges of adulthood-- it's a degenerative exercise in pointless sadism
(or pointless other then the possible desire to keep the Slayer from getting too old and perhaps too 'uppity' with
the Council).

By contrast, the proto-Slayers know they are going on an outing where they will be called upon to dust a
vampire. They have been trained to do so by someone who is a Slayer, not a well-meaning but
mostly sidelines coach. They see the specific enemy first, even watch the techniques employed as their trainer
'softens him up'. There are four of them against one of him. The vampire is a plain, garden-variety vamp,
not a super-vamp. Each of the four protos has greater strength, agility, speed and instincts than a normal human
would have.

So, there is no comparison. The Council's test left Buffy uninformed, without recourse, and all but helpless in a
face-off with a foe who is a vampire other vampires might fear. The planned result was to put Buffy in her
(submissive) 'place', or else violently kill her. Buffy's test gave her students multiple advantages so that the trial,
while challenging, was far from unreasonable. The result was four young women who now have gained the
power of confidence in themselves and see their teacher as the dispenser of that power. They have
learned that they can take more than they expected to, and not just survive, but grow stronger as a result. They
have learned that their 'place' is whatever they want to make it.

Lastly, there is the 'destiny' speech that I touched on at the beginning of this section. To me, this again is an
example of confidence-building effort on Buffy's part. Is the speech corny? Maybe to someone looking on from
the outside, and knowing Buffy as well as we know her, many faults and all. But to the protos I tend to think it
was inspiring, because the woman speaking to them isn't some draftee from a desk job parked on the front lines
to inspire them with clever speeches-- she's someone who walked through the fire and came out tanned, not
burned. She doesn't just talk the talk, she has walked the walk, right in front of their eyes. She has strength, and
so much that she will share it. Saying that you have a capital-D Destiny means something when someone
like Buffy uses the word.

***

That General Buffy's 'destiny' speech is so effective is evidenced by how it affects Dawn, who is seated on the
basement steps, watching and listening. In this season, Dawn has finally gotten what she has wanted for the last
several years, namely for Buffy to stop coddling her and treat her like the young adult that she feels she is.
Having obtained this new level of responsibility, Dawn is now finding that there are entirely new problems to face
as a result, one of the leading ones being the gaining of an understanding as to who she really is and what she will
become. Her sister has told her that she 'will be powerful' one day, but after the original thrill of hearing that
praise passes by, the knotty question arises as to, like, how?

For a while, her sister trains her in self-defense, prepares her for high school, makes her feel needed and worthy.
Then along comes the new 'big bad', and the proto-Slayers. For a short while, she gets to feel superior to the
SIT's because of her far more extensive experience in actual monster-dealage and sharing the limelight of her
famous Slayer sister. The newly Welcomed-to-the-Hellmouth SIT's are more plainly terrified than anything else,
and Dawn gets to be Miss Calm and Knowledgeable around them.

But now this is changing. The protos are gaining in confidence only after Buffy realizes that the basic honesty of
the "I'm scared too" admission isn't going to be the best policy in front of a group of very young, largely
inexperienced youths who know of her supposedly amazing deeds only by distant reputation. (And, to make
matters worse in that regard, all they have seen a mere few days after arrival in Sunnydale is the sight of a
Watcher who seems to be despairing with every other sentence, a reputedly powerful witch who freaks out at the
thought of performing a spell, a wacko carpenter guy who cracks goofy jokes about death, and a real Slayer who
gets painfully and horribly beaten, nearly to death, by the bad guy's henchman. Yeeesh-- your instincts
say run? Good instincts!)

So Buffy hatches a plan to defeat Ubee, and makes sure that the protos will see her do it. Would the rocket
launcher have done the job faster and less painfully? You betcha, but are the Scoobies going to equip all the
protos with rocket launchers? Not bloody likely. Buffy is willing to suffer to prove that her power isn't an
illusion, and in so doing imparts a lesson that would normally take the protos far longer than one short evening to
grok. The lesson becomes even more effective given the level of defeat Buffy suffered just before re-engaging the
battle with Ubee.

So now we have a bunch of SIT's who pretty much hang on to every word that Buffy utters, who see her as a
champion not just in storied legend but in actual light of touchable day. Will Buffy get too enamored of the
hero-worship riff and become unable to change gears quickly when the need arises? Maybe, maybe not, I think
it's too early to tell. But let's shift back over to the first of two people who are reputedly 'powerless' and see
what kind of influence they actually bring to bear-- Dawn and Xander.

( ~ ~ ~ Continued in Part II ~ ~ ~ )

[> Touch My Cape / Save Me - Thoughts on *Potential* - Part II -- OnM, 06:34:33 02/01/03 Sat

( ~ ~ ~ Continued from Part I ~ ~ ~ )

One of the truly neat things about Potential is that while it spends a fair amount of time with Buffy and
Spike training the protos for battle, the quieter, more important battle is the one that Dawn is fighting to discover
her purpose in life, and gain a sense of power for herself. Buffy has had a Destiny for seven years. The SIT's
have all been newly presented with one, and appear to be actively embracing it. Dawn is-- well, the ex-key and
otherwise pretty ordinary-appearing young adult.

As I mentioned just a few paragraphs before, Dawn has been granted increased responsibility and a much greater
role to play in the life of the Scooby Gang, and has largely stepped up to the challenge of dealing with it. But the
one constant in life is change, and now the attentions of the gang in general and her sister in particular have
moved in the direction of protecting and training the growing number of proto-Slayers. Dawn once again feels
very 'ordinary' in the midst of all the special 'potential' that literally surrounds her, filling the household that was
an emotional refuge. How she handles this new disillusionment is very telling, and shows clearly the degree to
which she has matured in just the last half-year. Consider that:

1. Dawn was the resident 'research queen' up until Willow returned. But now that Willow is back, Dawn is not
only not being snippy about being upstaged, but is even actively assisting Willow. At the end of this week's ep,
she is even initiating the work on her own.

2. Dawn's relationship with Andrew is very telling, when you consider that she is several years younger than
him. I find it very interesting that her initial distaste for him now seems to be increasingly tempered by feeling a
certain sympathy for someone who really doesn't 'exist' in a conventional way-- Andrew exists only as an
extension of others, not really as just himself. When Andrew first came to stay at the Summers' house, she
openly intimidated him and even abused him when she could get away with it. Now, it is growing increasingly
clear that Andrew latches on to associations with people he sees as powerful because he knows no other way to
validate his existence. Just a few short years ago, Dawn literally didn't exist as a corporeal being, yet she now has
far more collective 'substance' than this shell of a being. Watch her face when he sadly asks her if she'd 'like to
play some Dragonball Z', and you realize that Dawn has made the connection that 'there but for the grace of...'
goes she.

3. The revelation that Dawn could be a proto-Slayer hits her hard, but she doesn't collapse under the weight of
the thought, just gets a little flustered. (You will note that only Xander sees and understands this reaction
accurately-- Willow and Anya quickly jump to the conclusion that Dawn is 'freaking out'.) I found it amusing in
a very touching way that Dawn deals with the tension by climbing out the window and going for a walk-- a very
Buffy-like decision. There was also the nice subtle touch right before this where Dawn sizes herself up in the
mirror, trying to decide if the Slayer mantle really fits the image she sees staring back at her. We think back to
Faith in Buffy's body doing the same, 'trying on' the mantle of the woman that everybody seems to love, admire
and respect-- someone not her. The surface attitudes in each case were very different, but the underlying
doubt is exactly the same-- Who am I?

4. Faced with the possibility that she might be 'special' after all, Dawn decides to test her 'potential' mettle by
leading Amanda back to the school building and taking on the vamp holed up in the classroom, rather than going
back to the house and informing Xander or Willow. Foolish? Maybe at one time, but I don't think so in this
instance. Contrast her (reasonably) calm, informed behavior with that of the collective four real
SIT's who are left facing a vamp that Buffy has already beat up on, (and still manage to look pretty frightened)
and you no longer question that Dawn has the right stuff. She may not have fully realized it yet, but she's clearly
on the path.

5. In the big fight with the vamp, and then the Bringers, Dawn looks to protect Amanda above herself.
She only turns the main battle over to Amanda when she finally understands the 'mistake' as to who was
really called, and even then backs her up unflinchingly. This was not only a very selfless thing to do from
a standpoint of personal ego, but her promise to Amanda that 'you can do this' was very reminiscent of the
interchange between Buffy and Lily in Anne. Lily, as we know, went on to become the strong and
self-sufficient young woman who shows up several years later on A:tS, running a shelter for homeless teens.
(BTW, someone who, while certainly not evil, was pretty much as spiritually/emotionally formless and dependent
upon others for validation as Andrew is right now. Will Dawn eventually do for Andrew what Buffy did for Lily?
Hummm...)

Ya know, I think back just a few short years to when Dawnie appeared (like ~poof!~) on the show, and within
mere weeks there were cadres of fans cyber-screaming for ME to "kill her off, please!" (Jeez, some
people... no patience at all. I can only hope they aren't, or never become parents.) And then look at how
magnificent she looked (and behaved) in the end of the 4th act of this episode. Xander is quite right, you know.
It's easy to understand the sacrifice involved when the pain that is suffered in achieving it is physical and
externally evident. It is harder to understand when the pain is internal and of a psychological nature, (such as
with Buffy's ongoing love/hate relationship with Slayerdom), but it is still a concept that most people can grasp
emotionally. But on the other hand, it is easy to dismiss the pain involved for someone who despairs of being
ordinary because being ordinary is so commonplace as to be the human norm. What Xander was trying to
get across to Dawn was the truth that commonplace pain is still pain, and that common people are often
called upon to make sacrifices all the time, not just once in a while as a grand gesture the way heroes often get to
do.

Collectively, the sacrifices of the ordinary are just as necessary for the world to be a better place as the sacrifices
of the extraordinary. James Bond might get all the flashy cars and fast babes, but where would he be if Joe the
Jaguar wheel installer didn't screw on the lugnuts properly, or if Betsy the condom inspector let a few pinholes
slip by undetected? Well, he'd be rolling around in a wheelchair after the Jag landed in a ditch, or paying some
serious child support to a lot of women, now wouldn't he? So when Dawn points out to Xander that 'the
windows needed fixing', she is demonstrating that she understands what he is trying to get across to
her, and that she needs to find solace in that what she does only appears to be of little consequence. Buffy
is a genuine hero, make no mistake about it-- but so are the Zeppos of the world.

***

And so now to the other 'ordinary' Scoobie, good ol' Xander, the opposite/complementary pole of the compass
needle that is made up of he and Buffy. (No, I'm not going to speculate on which of them is 'North' and which is
'South', although I'm reasonably sure that Willow would be West and Giles would be East. Anyway...)

Xander is often deeply flawed, just as Buffy is, and I've always felt that this particular other-self-knowledge is
something they intuitively share but somehow find comforting instead of debilitating. Each of them tends to have
a harder time forgiving themselves for the foolish or thoughtless things that they have done than forgiving the
other. They both have certain blind spots in understanding what the other is thinking or feeling, but those spots
appear to be diminishing as each grows older.

One thing that has really struck me about all of season 7 so far is how much Xander appears to have matured.
Was it the resolution of the situation with Anya that finished what started with the events of Grave? Is his
self-confidence so solid now that he has become truly content in his primary role as 'comfortador'? Whatever the
case, I keep waiting for him to revert to the chronic insecurity of the 'old' Xander, because it has happened time
and again, but not so far this year.

Xander always has been a kind of big brother figure to Buffy, now increasingly he seems to be turning into a
father figure for Dawn. Curiously (or not, this is classic ME writing style, after all), the brother/father figure is
playing what is largely a more traditionally maternal role in the Summers' household. In this episode, it is
'mommy' (Xander) who is trying to regain order among the squabbling 'kids' who've thoughtlessly damaged
some household item when 'daddy' (Buffy) strides in the door, looking very perturbed and very authoritative.
The 'kids' immediately shut up and pay attention. Later on, Xander assures Buffy that he can track down the
'missing sibling' and get her home safely so that 'daddy' can take on a little inconvenient-but-necessary overtime
work at the Slayer Mill.

Still later, after Dawn finds out that she is a 'potential', the two women (Willow and Anya) are the ones getting
overly excited and offering the action-oriented plans (We need to call Buffy! We need to protect Dawn from the
Bringers! We need to get her future all charted out right this minute!) and here is Xander suggesting more
thoughtful, less gung-ho methods. (We need to take this slow, think about it. We shouldn't push her. We
shouldn't tell Buffy until Dawn feels ready to do so).

Is this kind of behavior on Xander's part why the FE hasn't tried to attack him personally so far? Has he really
gone so Zen that he has no real buttons for the FE to push? If so, will this become a clue to Buffy and the others
later on in the season when things get all Firsty again, and the more militant schemes have less positive results?
(This last is only spec, not spoiler foreknowledge. It just seems so likely to me, is all). Let's consider a
progression:

1. It's the end of season 6. Willow has gone Evil and wants to destroy the world (Note: Willow is very bad at
taking pain, decides to dish it out instead. Willow misunderstands the nature of power). Buffy attempts to stop
Willow with same polarity of power, fails. Xander attempts to stop Willow by 'taking it'. Xander understands
true nature of power, succeeds. If the FE witnessed this action, was it happy? Very much not, for the same
reason it wasn't happy about what Buffy had done to Spike to make him believe in her.

2. Anya becomes a vengeance demon again, bad things start to happen. Xander is angry at first, but then wises
up and begins to praise her for putting the welfare of others above her self. She responds, at least temporarily.
Finally she commits an truly heinous act, murdering twelve people. Xander still seeks to protect Anya,
and tries passionately to stop Buffy from slaying her. Anya by now has a death wish, but Xander still tries to save
her, physically stopping Buffy from delivering the death blow. I have wondered all along (since it can't be
confirmed unless Buffy admits it publicly on a later episode) if this wasn't part of Buffy's plan all along-- to get
Anya to admit to herself that she was sorry and then try to atone for real. She knew that Xander would try to
stop her, and hoped whatever spark of humanity left inside Anyanka would see that someone cared
enough to want her to take a better path. After all, it had worked with Willow. (Note that in either case, the
evil/demon portion of Willow or Anya expected and accepted that Buffy would 'dish it out'. The
good/human part was instead impressed by and drawn to Xander's willingness to 'take it'and so resolved that if
he could survive the pain, then they could also.

3. Xander mistrusts Spike, (and for valid reasons) but puts it aside when he sees that Buffy has accepted Spike's
motivations for obtaining a soul. He feels unsure, but above all he trusts Buffy.

4. Xander understands why Buffy must put on the Thunderdome show for the protos, and actively helps set it up.
He accepts that she accepts the pain involved in doing so. In the past I tend to think he would have been so afraid
for her welfare and safety that he would have resisted the plan. Again, more Zen.

5. Xander keeps repairing the house, no matter how many times it gets smashed up. (And you know, Joyce used
to be the one that did this).

6. Xander, like Dawn, is slowly and subtlely cutting back on his abuse of Andrew, recognizing that Andrew is
this pathetic empty vessel who when nearby it 'picks up the taste of evil, like a mushroom' as Buffy so aptly put
it. If this is the case, maybe he actually can pick up the taste of doing good, if he gets to be near that often
enough. Maybe even get to work on that pesky free will thing, ya know?

7. The wonderful moment with Dawn at the end of the show, which I discussed before and so won't here again,
but all in all, has Xander become a hard target for the FE to hit?

***

A few final semi-random thoughts, and then outa here!

~ ~ ~ It's easy to overlook it because of the largely annoying nature of the character that he is playing, but Tom
Lenk is doing some genuinely wonderful acting work as Andrew. It really is becoming a highly nuanced effort,
and the lines drawn between sad, funny and annoying are getting ever more blurry.

~ ~ ~ Not much Spike/Dawn interaction in this ep, or the previous one. Perhaps Spike is taking Dawn at her
word about what she'd do to him if he hurt Buffy again? Will there be any kind of partial renewal of trust
between them in the future, or will Dawn keep a distance indefinitely?

~ ~ ~ If you read the shooting script for Potential, you know that it was originally intended to show that
Buffy and Spike were waiting just outside of the doors to the crypt that they 'locked' the SIT's into with the
vampire. Buffy is portrayed as being nervous and worried that something could go wrong and one of the protos
could be hurt. In most cases when I read a scene in a shooting script that gets deleted during actual shooting, I
agree with the decision for the omission.

This particular deletion I disagree with, and strongly suspect that it was the eternally annoying and
artistically destructive need to squeeze those damn commercials in that cost us this important look at what Buffy
was really thinking when she left her students in this risky situation. I remember watching the scene as it
took place, and immediately thought to myself, "She's right behind the door, waiting. If things would go
badly, she'll jump back into the room and save them". And there it was, in the original script. Do I know my
girl, or what? ;-)

~ ~ ~ Along the lines of the last item, an interesting idea for next week's show. Buffy gives another gung-ho
Patton patter to the troops, pointing out to them (among other things) the merits and benefits of her little 3-D
pop quiz last week. After the SIT's exit stage whatever, one of them, maybe Kennedy, comes over to her and
whispers, "You were behind the door all the time, weren't you?" Buffy looks kind of sheepish and her expression
reveals all.

~ ~ ~ How many more eps do you suppose will pass before we see the SIT's start asking Spike about his (very
strange) relationship with Buffy?

~ ~ ~ Damn, it was great to see Clem again! He did look kinda toned, in a sorta loose-skinned way.

~ ~ ~ Beetlejuice! Beetlejuice! Bee-- (Whoops! Better not tempt fate... ;-)

~ ~ ~ How 'bout that Clem, huh?

~ ~ ~ And manwitch too. How 'bout that manwitch?

~ ~ ~ ( No, he wasn't in the ep, but I don't care. It's my 'Thoughts On' and I'll 'bout who I want to! )

;-)

*******

We are ten years old / We are holding our breath underwater
Eardrums burstin' from the pressure / We can touch the bottom
Won't you come away with me?

Oh, we are flying high / Bare carpet on feet
And we are airplanes today / We can do anything / We can do anything
And I don't ever wanna leave the stage / I am a superhero these days
And I don't ever wanna leave my age / I am a superhero these days

Baby where am I gonna go? / There must be a place for me I know
Try and try as I may / I can't make sense of a word I say
And I don't ever wanna leave the stage / I am a superhero these days
And I don't ever wanna leave my age / I am a superhero these days

Touch my cape -- I'll take you / So, c'mon touch my cape and I'll take you
C'mon touch my cape -- we're gonna make a whole new world
And I don't ever wanna leave the stage / I am a superhero these days
And I don't ever wanna leave my age / I am a superhero these days

............ Garrison Starr

*******

[> [> Contains the usual *** 7.12 Spoilers *** and some minor, fairly insignificant movie ones -- OnM, 06:40:24 02/01/03 Sat

[> [> Thanks OnM...anticipation the best appetizer. -- Angela, 06:48:09 02/01/03 Sat

Do I know my girl, or what? ;-) You do.

[> [> One minor disagreement (now academic) -- KdS, 07:12:05 02/01/03 Sat

I wrote a fairly long post criticising your view of the Cruciamentum when someone else put it forward in AngelVSAngelus's "Low Moments" thread last August - would just link, but the thread seems to be missing from the archives.

The condensed version is that your very hostile view of the Cruciamentum is justified only by the assumption that the Slayer is eventually told the whole truth, which I don't believe is justified. Buffy only found out because of Giles's attack of conscience. My personal belief is that past Slayers who survived the Cruciamentum were never told the real reason for their weakness and remembered the incident as an inexplicable attack of weakness that unluckily coincided with a routine vamp attack. Not knowing how they were manipulated, they proved to themselves and the Watchers that their strength was more than just external superpowers and came from an inner mental and spiritual source - a personal empowerment far from the degradation your view proposes (which Buffy did derive, as seen by the way she goes on to dismiss Quentin and Wes in this and later episodes). Of course, deliberately creating such a situation is utterly repellent to our understanding of the value of human life and self-determination, but possibly tolerable to a mindset formed in an age where early death was far more common and most forms of spirituality saw a righteous demise followed by eternal reward as far from the worst thing that could happen. If Buffy had been killed by Kralik and spent eternity in the heaven she experienced after The Gift (as she probably would have) would this have been a bad thing from her point of view?

[> [> [> Re: One minor disagreement (now academic) -- Arethusa, 12:56:42 02/01/03 Sat

It's very possible that a surviving slayer would be told the truth, for the same reason that the Watcher is told to administer the drug and watch the slayer meet her doom-to break up any close bonds between slayer and watcher, and to remind the slayer of her "place."

[> [> [> [> That's circular thinking... -- KdS, 02:57:39 02/02/03 Sun

You assume that the point of the test is to "break" the Slayer (which would only be true if she was intended to know the whole truth) and then argue that she was intended to know the truth on those grounds.

[> [> [> [> [> I do assume that that's the purpose. -- Arethusa, 06:51:18 02/02/03 Sun

If the point of the exercise is to install self-confidence, why does the Council have the slayer undergo an exercise with such a high mortality rate? That suggests a ruthless fish-or-cut-bait attitude that just (IMO) doesn't go with installing self-confidence. I could be wrong, though-too bad noone can ask the council about their motives anymore.

[> [> A huge disagreement... Just kidding! -- CW, 08:15:30 02/01/03 Sat

Your reviews are usually great. I liked this one better than most. Thanks for your efforts.

I do disagree with you on that scene cut. Do we really need to see it to know what Buffy is thinking? We've known Buffy long enough to know she's not Quentin Travers. At some point it would be nice to have her show some genuine concern for the SIT's. But, by not showing it this time, we get to see Buffy in the adult's correct role in teaching the young. The time comes when the young have to do dangerous things for themselves and have to be trusted. There is no particular reason we need to see Buffy's doubts at this point.

[> [> It's here! -- Deeva, 08:31:21 02/01/03 Sat

Just wanted to say that I always look forward to reading your thoughts on the episodes. I can't really say much about the actual post because I like to print them out. But I thought that you should know that there are far many more people than the "7 or 8" that follow along.

[> [> About the Potential scene cut... -- pellenaka, 12:55:59 02/01/03 Sat

Did you notice that the 'snake scene' with Willow, Dawn and Andrew was not in the script?
As somebody said, this is the second Andrew scene that wasn't in the original shooting script (The first being the Dawn/Andrew talk in Showtime).
I can understand why the first was put in, but there is no explanation for this scene. In 'Showtime', it was probably because they had some time to kill, but when we see all of the (for the Buffy character) important stuff, it seems weird.
Are they planning something with Andrew widdeling out of his skin that they haven't thought of before? And is it so important than Buffy looking out for the SiTs?

Don't get me wrong, I love Andrew, but I also love speculating about him

[> [> [> Shooting Scripts -- Dochawk, 23:37:22 02/02/03 Sun

The "shooting script" that psyche posts seem to be the first draft. usually much of that drafts is changed for many reasons. I will quote the ultimate drew (Drew Goddard) of what you should think about shooting scripts:

"quote:"Okay, with regard to shooting scripts - a
script can vary from the aired version for a variety
of reasons. We're usually revising scripts up until
the day we start shooting. And then we change things
in editing all the time. ... These scripts should not
be treated as canon. There are so many versions and
revisions that take place that you can only go with
what you see on screen."

[> [> [> [> Yeah, but... -- pellenaka, 02:31:02 02/03/03 Mon

Even if it's just a first draft, Buffy standing outside the crypt needed to be in there.
I was just wondering whether they are planning something new for Andrew, with making two new scenes for him.
It's more of a speculating over what was in the original season break.

[> [> Terrific character analysis of Dawn! -- HonorH, 14:58:09 02/01/03 Sat

See why I love the girl so much? She's sixteen, just the right age for starting to figure out who she is. I think that for a while, she was "trying on" Buffy's role, or what she imagined it to be, and that was when we were getting Scary!Dawn. She's now got a different role model: Xander. She's always loved him and looked up to him, and I'd say it's a no-brainer that she sees his worth. Thus, his speech to her at the end that clearly identified the two of them had to be an eye-opener to her. She's still got a place, just as he has a place, though the two of them may not have the obvious power. They've shown how much they can take, and without the advantages the others have.

[> [> Re: Andrew -- Rob, 17:28:14 02/01/03 Sat

2. Dawn's relationship with Andrew is very telling, when you consider that she is several years younger than him. I find it very interesting that her initial distaste for him now seems to be increasingly tempered by feeling a certain sympathy for someone who really doesn't 'exist' in a conventional way-- Andrew exists only as an extension of others, not really as just himself. When Andrew first came to stay at the Summers' house, she openly intimidated him and even abused him when she could get away with it. Now, it is growing increasingly clear that Andrew latches on to associations with people he sees as powerful because he knows no other way to validate his existence. Just a few short years ago, Dawn literally didn't exist as a corporeal being, yet she now has far more collective 'substance' than this shell of a being. Watch her face when he sadly asks her if she'd 'like to play some Dragonball Z', and you realize that Dawn has made the connection that 'there but for the grace of...' goes she...

Tom Lenk is doing some genuinely wonderful acting work as Andrew. It really is becoming a highly nuanced effort,
and the lines drawn between sad, funny and annoying are getting ever more blurry.

You brought up some great points about Andrew. Personally, I have really grown to like him a lot, and I think, as you seem to also, that there's a lot more to him than meets the eye, especially when you realize that he really is a very sad character. I love the detail put into his pop culture references. For example, from "Showtime," comparing the movie, "Misery" to the book, he says, "the book was scarier 'cause instead of crushing his foot with a sledgehammer, Kathy Bates chopped it off with--" and then he breaks off with a small gulp when he sees the look on Buffy's face. The use of the name "Kathy Bates" is a very cool and subtle detail. The character in the book is, of course, Annie Wilkes. Kathy Bates played her in the movie. But in Andrew's pop culture/movie-addled mind, the actor in the film is more important. Yes, the book came first, but to him it is secondary to the film experience. Not only does he have trouble separating movies from the real world; he has difficulty separating realities in different works of fiction!

Rob

[> [> Great analysis, just a few quibbles...(spoilers 7.12 Btvs, minor Ats 4.10) -- shadowkat, 20:15:33 02/01/03 Sat

I debated about whether to post on this because this is more of a gut level hunch than anything else. But it is the same gut level hunch I had in Restless and the beginning of Season 6 that Tara was going to die and Willow would turn and it is the same gut level hunch I had in Season 5 that Buffy would die. So I tend to go with these hunches, 9 times out of 10 they are right.

So here it goes:

While there's nothing necessarily wrong with Buffy's speechifying or her actions regarding the protoslayers - the writers have gone out of their way to contrast this with the counselor aspects and since the season began, we've been seeing the schism. (Selfless, STSP, HIM, HELP, Sleeper, BoTN, Showtime, Potential) Oh and another very interesting thing has been going on the FE has been playing Buffy both as slayer!Buffy and counselor!Buffy to Spike, switching as warranted. Why? (Besides the obvious reasons).
We see it does this in Selfless - counselor Buffy in white, in Lessons - slayer Buffy, in Sleeper - slayerBuffy from Season 6, in NLM - slayerBuffy, in Showtime - Slayer and Counselor Buffy - attempting to tell him he needs to move on as the real thing did in Season 6. I'm wondering what ME is really up to here?

Another very odd thing about this episode - Dawn in her fight scene with Amanda and the harbringers and the vampire is doing the exact opposite of many of the things Buffy mentions in the crypt and the writers are emphasizing this by flipping between the two, literally even using Buffy's speech as voice over for the Dawn sections and showing Dawn proving Buffy wrong. Buffy says only slayers or potentials can do this - Dawn does it. Buffy says you need to not think or plan, Dawn plans, Buffy says you must know your environment, Dawn doesn't really and throws everything she can think of...

Buffy's attention is completely on the "ones with potential" she tends to ignore Andrew and Dawn to some degree - as lacking in it. Of course you could argue she is letting Dawn be normal girl and adult. But Dawn notice is not invited on the patrols any more like she was in the beginning of the year, neither is Xander - both were on Buffy's patrols in the first three episodes - the writers made a point of showing us this, repeatedly (Lessons, STSP, HELP) Also Buffy is literally tongue-tied when Amanda screams at her for not counseling her and not helping and instead throwing her into a world she has no clue about. Just as Buffy is tongue-tied when she tries to identify with and counsel Amanda on boys - she can't quite.
Why? Because up until fairly recently Buffy has been treating boys she's attracted to as Amanda is...picking on them. (She even says as much).

So Buffy is incredibly comfortable as slayer now but not so comfortable as normal working girl and single mom. Big switch from high school Buffy who in some ways was the reverse - wanted normal girl didn't want slayer. She's in a role where she's supposed to be mentoring and identifying with these teens, yet she's struggling, almost tongue tied.
It's easier to give speeches, to teach them how to fight, to kill the big beastie. It's easier to put a little emotional distance. Don't get me wrong - there is NOTHING wrong with this - NOTHING on the surface. Just as to be perfectly honest there was NOTHING wrong with Angel's champion's speech or his happy dream in Awakenings. But...when you begin to depend more and more on this ideal, and move further and further from the other...something starts to schism. Buffy was ironically a better counselor in HELP than she has been in the last few episodes.
In the beginning of the year - she was doing a better job of listening, lending strength...as we progress, she falls more and more into "fighter/slayer" mode, which to her credit makes sense - who wouldn't. But I'm wondering if that may be part of what the FE wants??

Going back to Amends...it's not Buffy the Vampire Slayer that defeats the First Evil - it's Buffy the Counselor, the girl with heart who does. How? She gets across to Angel that there's a reason to go on, to live - to fight - and he adopts this motto, even repeats part of it later. And in NLM she defeats the FE's influence over Spike with compassion.
In Same Time Same Place - she helps Willow more with compassion than with slaying.

So I'm wondering...maybe just maybe what we are seeing is the beginning of a dangerous behavior pattern for Buffy?
She's not so bad now. Actually sort of inspiring depending on your pov. But my gut tells me...if it keeps up...will she seep into the FE's image of Buffy? Will there come a time that we can't tell the difference?

It's not "power" in of itself that is necessarily bad as you point out with The Story of O, it is our feelings regarding it and how we use it that can be bad. If we use our "power" in the way that the man who enters O's office tries to - than that is a corruption of power and it weakens us. If we use it the way Willow uses it in Season 6 - same thing. But if we use power in the way that Tara and Giles do in Season 6 - it is not such a bad thing, it can be a beautiful thing. Power to protect, to nourish, to
strengthen, to enrich, to grow - as opposed to power to torture, destroy, rip, eradicate, exterminate, to kill.
Buffy has used power both ways in the series, but the way that has served her the best - has been the former not the latter - it's the one that brought her Willow, Xander, Dawn, Spike, Angel, Giles, Anya, Cordelia, OZ, Riley, the SITs, Wood, Andrew....all to her side at one point or another. It's why Buffy is still standing and the Watcher's Council is dust. The question we're all asking is which power will she lean to? Right now...it still seems to be a little of both - but as move forward...more and more of her power seems to be directed towards hurting, maiming and teaching others to do so and less and less seems to be directed towards counseling, compassion, and strengthening.

My other little quibble...not sure how great Xander is right now, I see a few cracks in the man's armor appearing here and there - the biggest is his inability to really deal with Anya or Andrew at the moment. Also he tends to spend a lot of time compartmentalizing as well. Methinks Xander's one achilles heel is the one he's always had - his fear of being his father and his attraction to demonic or strong women. He tried on that jacket in HIM - it didn't fit. And he mentions to Andrew in NLM that there's a hole in his chest left there by Anya. He also appears to closely identify with Dawn both in a good way and in a way that suggests - he still wonders if he's just the Zeppo. So I wouldn't write old Xander off as safe yet.

Final point - your analysis of Andrew is one of the best I've read. I agree...I think in some ways he is very much like early Dawn. Hmmm...maybe I'll like him yet.

Good review. Agree on most points.

SK

[> [> [> The fight scene(s) -- Sophist, 21:30:33 02/01/03 Sat

Another very odd thing about this episode - Dawn in her fight scene with Amanda and the harbringers and the vampire is doing the exact opposite of many of the things Buffy mentions in the crypt and the writers are emphasizing this by flipping between the two, literally even using Buffy's speech as voice over for the Dawn sections and showing Dawn proving Buffy wrong.

Hmm. I came to the opposite conclusion. Dawn clearly lost the fight -- she was about to be eaten when the Bringers broke through the windows. I think her failure to do naturally any of the things Buffy recommended was intended as a clue that she was not a Potential.

[> [> [> Re: Great analysis, just a few quibbles...(spoilers 7.12 Btvs, minor Ats 4.10) -- Peggin, 05:38:11 02/02/03 Sun

Dawn in her fight scene with Amanda and the harbringers and the vampire is doing the exact opposite of many of the things Buffy mentions in the crypt and the writers are emphasizing this by flipping between the two, literally even using Buffy's speech as voice over for the Dawn sections and showing Dawn proving Buffy wrong. Buffy says only slayers or potentials can do this - Dawn does it. Buffy says you need to not think or plan, Dawn plans, Buffy says you must know your environment, Dawn doesn't really and throws everything she can think of...

Right. Dawn did everything wrong, and Dawn would have been killed if it wasn't for the sheer luck of the fact that the Bringers showed up when they did. I didn't even need the Bringers to go for Amanda to figure out that Dawn was not the Potential. I also don't think there is anything wrong with Buffy focusing her energies right now on training the Potentials, since they're the ones with the big honkin' targets on their backs.

Going back to Amends...it's not Buffy the Vampire Slayer that defeats the First Evil - it's Buffy the Counselor, the girl with heart who does. How? She gets across to Angel that there's a reason to go on, to live - to fight - and he adopts this motto, even repeats part of it later.

I completely disagree that "Buffy the Counselor" got anything across to Angel. She was begging and crying and trying to convince him to go on living, and he didn't budge. Nothing Buffy said changed Angel's mind -- that didn't happen until it started to snow. We are left with the impression that the snow is a sign from some higher power that Angel should listen to Buffy, and that could very well be the case, but it was the snow, and not anything Buffy said, that convinced Angel to keep on living.

[> [> [> [> I agree -- Dochawk, 07:51:43 02/02/03 Sun

I agree with both of your sentiments.

Actually I thought Dawn was both pretty industrious and fought much better than the Potentials did. She would have died though. It still brings up some questions: Why did Dawn think she could handle a vamp, since she was a Potential, not a slayer? And even if she did, attacking it without a weapon? Even Buffy usually has a stake. And finally, she brought an innocent with her who she needed to protect.

Finally nothing guarantees that the potential locator spell didn't find two slayers at the door, not one. I doubt it, but not out of ME's realm of possibility.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: I agree -- Peggin, 08:19:19 02/02/03 Sun

Actually I thought Dawn was both pretty industrious and fought much better than the Potentials did. She would have died though.

I think part of it is that, while the Potentials have the instincts, instinct alone is not enough. You still need training. We've seen plenty of normal humans who, after a lot of training and actually being out in the world fighting, have learned to be effective fighters. I would say Gunn or Wesley, for example, are, at this point in time, probably much more effective in a fight than any untrained Potential.

The difference is that the Potentials have the, well, potential to be much better fighters than any trained non-Potential could ever hope to be. Dawn has some training, but at best a few months worth. That training may make her a more effective fighter right now than anyone who hasn't had any training, and with more training she could possibly become as good a fighter as Wesley or Gunn, but no amount of training will ever make her as good as the Potentials are capable of becoming.

As for how good the Potential were, I can't comment on the fighting ability of Kennedy or Molly, because we didn't actually see them try to fight. I'm not sure how long Vi has known what she is other than the fact that it was long enough for her Watcher to show her a blurry picture of a vampire. We do know that Rona only found out about being a Potential a short while ago, so I would assume that means she has never had any training. And Amanda (once she got over being terrified) with no training at all, did exactly what Buffy had told the other Potentials they were supposed to do -- she stopped thinking, let her instincts take over, and killed the vampire relatively easily.

Finally nothing guarantees that the potential locator spell didn't find two slayers at the door, not one. I doubt it, but not out of ME's realm of possibility.

I suspect that we still don't know all there is to know about Dawn, but I'm hoping that she doesn't turn out to be a Potential. I think Dawn should be special in a completely different way, rather than just being Buffy Mark 2.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Willow's spell found two "Potentials" -- cjl, 08:24:27 02/02/03 Sun

It's just that one Potential was a proto-slayer (Amanda) and the other was the Key (Dawn). Dawn's powers are always inside her, waiting to emerge--so she still fits the definition of "Potential."

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Willow's spell found two "Potentials" -- Peggin, 08:33:20 02/02/03 Sun

Willow's spell was kind of ambiguous, and the word "Slayer" was not a part of the spell. So, I guess even though Willow intended for the spell to locate Potential Slayers, the spell could have located anyone who has the potential to be more than just an ordinary human. Maybe Willow's spell really did identify Dawn as having some kind of potential, it just wasn't all that specific as to what kind of potential she has.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Willow's spell found two "Potentials" -- Angela, 09:50:01 02/02/03 Sun

I think so too. The spell was hanging about the room in a confused and (noxious manner.) If Amanda was the only "Potential" it should have gone straight to her.

[> [> [> [> On the fight scene -- shadowkat, 09:33:00 02/02/03 Sun

Right. Dawn did everything wrong, and Dawn would have been killed if it wasn't for the sheer luck of the fact that the Bringers showed up when they did. I didn't even need the Bringers to go for Amanda to figure out that Dawn was not the Potential. I also don't think there is anything wrong with Buffy focusing her energies right now on training the Potentials, since they're the ones with the big honkin' targets on their backs.

If this is true, why didn't the Bringers kill Amanda and Dawn in the lab and why didn't the vampire do as well?
I find that interesting. Nor do we know if Dawn would have died or not if the Bringers didn't come in.

The four potentials against one vampire. Dawn and Amanda against one vampire and several Harbringers - did anyone count them?( can't remember how many). I knew Dawn wasn't the potential actually when the Harbringer's grabbed Amanda, who btw knew less and was less able to defend herself. Actually what's interesting about the scene is for the first time when Bringers come after a potential and Buffy isn't immediately there to stop them, they don't kill it. They killed all the others. Granted Buffy, Spike and Xander show up when they are battling them on the stairs, but if Buffy was nearly as "right" as everyone believes, Dawn and Amanda would have been dead in that classroom.

Just something to consider in the months ahead.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: On the fight scene -- Angela, 10:03:11 02/02/03 Sun

I think there were three but don't quote me on that.

I find that interesting. Nor do we know if Dawn would have died or not if the Bringers didn't come in.

That's right. I'm remembering the flashback of Buffy's first fight with a vamp (s2?). She didn't come off looking too much better through most of the fight. Of course, that's not what mattered in the end. The vamp was dust and she walked away to fight another day. ;-)

When Buffy does the lectures, Dawn's the one who knows the answers. Kennedy is being shown as the one with the instincts. I think she's had to be restrained twice from a fight already. But at least for now, I tend more towards thinking Dawnie's different than and, at least potentially, more than a slayer.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: On the fight scene -- Peggin, 10:25:48 02/02/03 Sun

If this is true, why didn't the Bringers kill Amanda and Dawn in the lab and why didn't the vampire do as well?
I find that interesting. Nor do we know if Dawn would have died or not if the Bringers didn't come in.

I didn't see the Bringers hesitate in trying to kill Amanda or anything. Dawn used the burners in the chemistry lab to distract them and she and Amanda managed to get away, but I think the Bringers fully intended to kill Amanda.

I agree that it's possible that Dawn might have gotten away from the vampire -- there have been plenty of times when I've seen Buffy in a situation that I didn't know how she could get out of it, and she did. It was just my initial impression that, if the vampire hadn't been distracted by the Bringers, Dawn would have been dead.

I think the Bringers didn't kill Dawn because she is not a Potential Slayer. I think there are still a lot of unanswered questions regarding what it means that she is the Key, and that Dawn still has the potential to be more than an ordinary human, but I don't think she's a Slayer. (Of course, I'm willing to admit that this could be me just reading my own desires into the show -- I want to find out that Dawn's Key-ness makes her more than just an ordinary human, but if she turns out to be just like Buffy, well, how special is that? If there is a story to tell regarding Dawn's powers, then I want it to be something new and different.)

Another theory I've been playing with that would explain both why the Bringers showed up just in time to save Dawn and why they didn't want to kill Dawn is that maybe The First wants Dawn alive for the time being. When The First told its Ubervamp to kill everyone "except her" maybe "her" was Dawn. The First said it wanted to quit the mortal coil, so maybe it knows something about how to access Dawn's Key powers, and it plans to try to use her to destroy everything. Or, since The First seems to like to work by convincing others to do its work for it, maybe it plans to try to get someone else to use Dawn to end the universe.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: the key to dawn and viewer POV -- Angela, 11:39:58 02/02/03 Sun

I LIKE this.

Another theory I've been playing with that would explain both why the Bringers showed up just in time to save Dawn and why they didn't want to kill Dawn is that maybe The First wants Dawn alive for the time being. When The First told its Ubervamp to kill everyone "except her" maybe "her" was Dawn.

Re: Showtime. I thought this at the time too (or Willow).

Re: Potential. I don't know if it was intentional; but you do have to wonder why they sought the other potentials (that we saw) when they were alone and not Amanda. They would have had time to get to Amanda on her own. They were pretty on the ball with Rona. The other thing though is in the school they rushed for Amanda and there was a vamp loose. If they were protecting Dawn, I would have expected two on the vamp (the main threat) and one by Dawn to protect. Amanda wouldn't have seemed like a threat I don't think.

And regarding Dawn's survival chances? Get 50 people together and you're bound to get 50 (sometimes only slightly) different POV. LOL. Buffy just came to mind for me because of the first slay scene. But I can probably thing of other examples for Xander or Willow too. Luck or wits or rescue by the calvalry! :-)

[> [> [> [> [> [> But in NLM -- HonorH, 12:37:03 02/02/03 Sun

one of them nearly *did* kill Dawn. She was one of only two people in the house the Bringers brought the knives out for (the other being Andrew). Seems very suspicious to me.

[> [> [> Agree completely, shadowkat... -- cjl, 08:42:48 02/02/03 Sun

But I don't know...is it just me? Am I the only one bothered by Field Marshall von Buffy? I could be making a whole lot of fuss over nothing. (After all, I thought there was something weird was going on with Xander, and that doesn't seem to have panned out.)

And yet, I keep coming back to what lunasea said about "Amends" and how the First Evil operated, even back then. If you look at how it worked on Angel, how it tried to manipulate him, you had to realize Angel wasn't the actual target--Buffy was. It was trying to force Buffy to either kill Angel (in self-defense), or watch him die (either way was OK with the FE). It was trying to fill Buffy with hatred and despair, turn her away from her true path--and this is what seems to be happening again in S7. The pattern is the same, right down to the Vampire with a Soul (but I'll be darned if I can nail down why a souled vamp is so important to the equation).

I think Buffy is trapped on the bad end of Xander's Zen Carpentry analogy: the more force she tries to apply to the problem, the less control she has over the situation.

[> [> [> [> Question for you, cjl... -- imp, 10:28:37 02/02/03 Sun

How much "force" has Buffy been applying? I'm not trying to nitpick, but I don't have the best memory and eye for detail. I am one of those that, as yet, does not have a problem with Buffy's speechifying (or actions)--not the content, not the tone, not the delivery.

What force has Buffy applied recently? It took her three rounds to get the better of Chaka Khan. She made a statement in Showtime that she wanted to hurt the FE. I think Ubee's dusting hurt. I think her rescue of Spike hurt it also. Obviously, she and the Scoobies have offed a number of Harbingers--this has to hurt, too.

Teaching the potentials how to defend themselves, as well as assume an attack posture, is reasonable to me. Also, she's letting others into the act (i.e., sharing responsibility)--it does not bother me in the slightest that Xander, Dawn, and Willow are not getting the physical workout that Buffy and the ZITs are getting. Everyone (well, maybe except Andrew) is providing a positive contribution to the cause, in their own way.

I like that Buffy does not appear to be coddling any of the Scoobies now--not asking them to be fray-adjacent. I can see where viewers (particularly some on other posting boards) think Buffy is being cold and neglectful but that is not the feeling I get when watching BOTN, Showtime, or Potential.

Another thing, while Buffy's words may sound harsh or cold, what have her actions shown? A good example I can think of is in Showtime. Willow's magical barrier has fallen and everyone is running away from the Turok-Han. As they burst out the back door of chez Summers, several Bringers attack.

One gets the upper hand against Xander. Buffy stakes this Bringer in the back and saves Xander's life (again). He does not thank her, on screen anyway. She, of course, does not expect or seek a thank you. I had no problems with this sequence in terms of Buffy and Xander's friendship dynamic. Buffy may appear to be saying one thing but actually does something else.

Of course, I will probably be proven wrong. This could be ME's way of vaguing it up and increasing dramatic tension. Her character may yet get dark, cold, and distant. But I, like OnM, also believe I know "my girl" quite well after 6 plus years and think she will find her own way out of all this--and be true to herself in the process.

However, I am intrigued by the idea that Buffy's Slayer side may be on the verge of overwhelming her being. But I also think that after everything she has been through, her non-Slayer side will not allow it to happen.

[> [> [> [> [> Perhaps "force" is not the appropriate term here. How about "projection of power"? -- cjl, 19:45:43 02/02/03 Sun

After all, it's all about the Power this year.

Quoting from Shadowkat, above:

"Buffy is incredibly comfortable as Slayer now, but not so comfortable as normal working girl and single mom. Big switch from high school Buffy who in some ways was the reverse - wanted normal girl, [but] didn't want [to be the] Slayer. She's in a role where she's supposed to be mentoring and identifying with these teens, yet she's struggling, almost tongue tied."

Note how Buffy stammers on about Spike to a justifiably confused Amanda. She's great at rallying the troops and commanding the SITs, but when it comes to sorting out her emotions, she's got no clue. Back to SK:

"It's easier to give speeches, to teach them how to fight, to kill the big beastie. It's easier to put a little emotional distance. Don't get me wrong - there is NOTHING wrong with this - NOTHING on the surface. Just as to be perfectly honest there was NOTHING wrong with Angel's champion's speech or his happy dream in Awakenings. But...when you begin to depend more and more on this ideal, and move further and further from the other...something starts to schism. Buffy was ironically a better counselor in "Help" than she has been in the last few episodes.

"In the beginning of the year - she was doing a better job of listening, lending strength...as we progress, she falls more and more into "fighter/slayer" mode, which, to her credit makes sense - who wouldn't. But I'm wondering if that may be part of what the FE wants?

"Going back to Amends...it's not Buffy the Vampire Slayer that defeats the First Evil - it's Buffy the Counselor, the girl with heart who does. How? She gets across to Angel that there's a reason to go on, to live - to fight - and he adopts this motto, even repeats part of it later. And in NLM she defeats the FE's influence over Spike with compassion. In Same Time Same Place - she helps Willow more with compassion than with slaying.

"So I'm wondering...maybe just maybe what we are seeing is the beginning of a dangerous behavior pattern for Buffy? She's not so bad now. Actually sort of inspiring depending on your POV. But my gut tells me...if it keeps up...will she seep into the FE's image of Buffy? Will there come a time that we can't tell the difference? It's not "power" in of itself that is necessarily bad...if we use power in the way that Tara and Giles do in Season 6 - it is not such a bad thing, it can be a beautiful thing. Power to protect, to nourish, to strengthen, to enrich, to grow - as opposed to power to torture, destroy, rip, eradicate, exterminate, to kill."

Many people on the board say that Buffy's strategy for taking out the ubervamp--defeating it mano a mano--was great for pumping up the troops. But many others note that the one-dimensionality of her strategy--the Thunderdome gambit--could have easily been a disaster.

Most, if not all, of Buffy's greatest successes have come through higher brain functions and the nobler aspects of the soul. Smarts. Cleverness. Compassion. Heart. Faking out Luke in The Harvest. Her self-sacrifice in The Gift. The Scooby Gestalt in Primevil. Yes, it was clever the way Buffy lured Noodles to the site--but when it came to the battle itself, Buffy was determined to kill the Turok-Han with RAW POWER. That was the difference...and that's what has me worried.

I'll let SK wrap it up:

"Buffy has used power both ways in the series, but the way that has served her the best - has been the former not the latter - it's the one that brought her Willow, Xander, Dawn, Spike, Angel, Giles, Anya, Cordelia, OZ, Riley, the SITs, Wood, Andrew....all to her side at one point or another. It's why Buffy is still standing and the Watcher's Council is dust. The question we're all asking is which power will she lean to? Right now...it still seems to be a little of both - but as move forward...more and more of her power seems to be directed towards hurting, maiming and teaching others to do so and less and less seems to be directed towards counseling, compassion, and strengthening."

[> [> Some responses to a few of the comments above -- OnM, 22:42:42 02/02/03 Sun

KdS--

Do you still have a copy of the post that is missing from the archives? I'd like to read it if you do. If the
length is less than about a page, I'd suggest simply reposting it here, but if it's really long you could e-mail
it to me at objectsinmirror@mindspring.com.

*** My personal belief is that past Slayers who survived the Cruciamentum were never told the real
reason for their weakness and remembered the incident as an inexplicable attack of weakness that unluckily
coincided with a routine vamp attack. Not knowing how they were manipulated, they proved to themselves
and the Watchers that their strength was more than just external superpowers and came from an inner
mental and spiritual source - a personal empowerment far from the degradation your view proposes. ***

While technically there is no way to either prove or disprove your theory based on what we've heard on
the show to date, I would think that and reasonably intelligent Slayer would seriously wonder at the
'coincidence' of being locked in a house (or some other venue) with a vampire right around the
time she mysteriously lost her strength. I agree that the Watcher might have kept silent about the drugging
aspect, but even that I find to be a bit of a stretch.

I suppose that I am just assuming the 'walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...' line of reasoning when I
assert that the Council is trying to 'put the Slayer in her place', but the conversation between Quentin and
Giles seems to clearly state to me that the Council considers the Slayer to be a 'tool' which they are...
what, tempering? Giles takes the view that the practice is barbaric because he (correctly) sees Buffy
as a human being, not an object. I maintain that if the practice of the Cruciamentum were a true rite of
passage, the test would not be secret-- at some prior point the Slayer would have been at least
generally informed of what she was about to face.

You should know that I personally consider any form of military conscription to be a violation of basic
human rights, no matter whether the cause is a 'righteous' one or not-- it's still coercion. The
intended cannot freely choose to serve. Buffy has already been drafted against her will when she was
'called'. The Cruciamentum simply adds (potentially lethal) injury to insult.

As to Buffy being killed by Kralik and going to heaven afterward, maybe that would have been fine with
her, but only if she never found out why she died-- killed (indirectly) by the very people she is supposed to
trust. If that happened, I think she'd be plenty pissed.

Not to mention, if Buffy had been killed by Kralik, the world likely would have ended sometime later that
year, so the Council would have, ironically, destroyed itself by clinging to 'tradition'.

Anyway, sorry, but I pretty much agree big-time with what Rufus commented on this subject.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

CW--

Thanks, glad you liked the review!

*** I do disagree with you on that scene cut. Do we really need to see it to know what Buffy is
thinking? We've known Buffy long enough to know she's not Quentin Travers. At some point it would be
nice to have her show some genuine concern for the SIT's. But, by not showing it this time, we get to see
Buffy in the adult's correct role in teaching the young. The time comes when the young have to do
dangerous things for themselves and have to be trusted. There is no particular reason we need to see
Buffy's doubts at this point. ***

It's a judgement call, I grant you, but I brought it up because I was reading quite a number of comments
regarding Buffy seeming to be 'turning cold' by excessively embracing her Slayer-side. This scene served
as a balance to that viewpoint-- I think it clearly was there originally to show that Buffy has not
surrendered to her harsher, more militant side-- at least not yet. The deleted scene outside the door of the
crypt also would have reflected with 'Bitty Buffy' looking after Amanda's welfare-- even after she turns
the main fight over to Amanda, Dawn still says-- "I've got your back". By showing Buffy outside the door,
waiting, we see her caring for her students in the same way.

Of course, it is possible that Joss wanted more ambiguity in this regard, and deleted the scene for
that reason.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

pellenaka--

Yes, I noticed that the scene was missing. Everyone is assuming that it wasn't there, but is it possible the
person who typed up the script just forget to transcribe it or some other simple error? Dunno, but it
certainly could be the case.

I thought the snakeskin bit was an example of Andrew once again being clueless-- Willow immediately gets
the metaphorical connection to Warren, but Andrew wasn't intending that meaning, he was just clowning
around-- there was no deeper metaphor, just surface lameness. I think this explains Dawn's very odd
(almost puzzled) look when he makes the comment-- she gets that he doesn't get it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Rufus--

A response to KdS is above.

*** I felt that because Buffy is unlike the Council, she doesn't see the Potentials as things, tools,
instruments...she has them living in her house, she is feeding and training them......she cares..and she is
giving them experience by example. I never got the idea that the bureaucratic (...) Council cared about the
Slayer as anything but a number to be added or erased. Buffy wants these girls to live. ***

Right on! And as usual, thanks very much for the Trollup Board reposting efforts! :-) :-) :-)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

shadowkat--

*** The other thing...wish you'd do reviews of Angel. But I understand...there's only so many hours in
the day. ***

(~sigh~) All too true, 'kat. Maybe someday, but I already gave up the weekly CMotW just to get the time
needed to do this, and while I like A:tS, it's surely pretty obvious that it's BtVS that drives my own
particular Jossverse passion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

gds, Dochawk, HonorH--

*** Furthermore, she included a hint about knowledge which was probably denied to every slayer other
than herself: the slayer's death wish. ***

*** I am somewhat reluctant to start a conversation I will be overwhelmed in, but the "slayer's death
wish" is a figment of Spike's imagination uttered to wound Buffy when the only weapon Spike had was
words. We have no corraboration that Buffy or any other slayer really had a "death wish" and in fact there
could be nothing worse for a slayer. She would die far too easily far too often if it existed. Wondering
when she will die is a different point. ***

*** How accurate Spike's analysis of Slayers is is up for debate. However, I don't think Buffy's attitude
toward death is that ambiguous. Note the terms she uses while discussing death with the protos: it's "the
reward for being human," "the big dessert at the end of the meal." She almost speaks of death as a friend.
The ostensible purpose of the speech, to grab the protos' attention and spur them into realizing the reality
of the situation so they *won't* die, doesn't resonate well with Buffy's words. Death no longer holds any
fear for her. ***

I can see this either way, and I think that Joss has intended exactly that-- does Buffy have a death wish?
Yes and no, and that's the point. If we live long enough, there are times in most of our lives when for
whatever reason, death might seem to be an attractive solution. Most of us get past these moments. True
or not, Spike forced Buffy to consider the possibility, and make a decision.

Remember that later on in Fool for Love, Spike himself utters the words, "Doesn't have a death
wish? Bitch won't need one!" as he loads the shotgun, intending to kill her. Of course, he doesn't. A death
wish, by its very nature, is a very self-involved mental adjustment. When Spike sees Buffy sitting on the
back porch, weeping, he somehow intuits that she isn't crying for herself, and of course he's
correct. I have always seen this sequence as a religious allegory, where Buffy is a Christ figure and Joyce
stands in for humanity. Buffy doesn't understand why she has been granted all this power, and yet seems so
helpless to do anything with it when things really count, when someone dear to her is suffering and needs
to be healed. This spiritual vibe is so powerful that it reaches through and beyond Spike's demon and
touches the man buried underneath. This was the beginning of the journey that culminated in Spike
regaining his soul. Prior to this point, Spike's 'love' for Buffy was all about carnality and power. It
remained largely that way for quite some time after, but the seed had been planted.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tchaikovsky, Deeva and others--

*** OnM- you have millions of fans! ***

*** ...I thought that you should know that there are far many more people than the "7 or 8" that follow
along.

Thank you all, as always!

I would like to mention just for the benefit of some of the newer folks hanging out at ATPo that my 'all 7
or 8 of them' riff is an old CMotW in-joke directed mainly at the board 'regulars', and is not even remotely
intended as any kind of snippy or ungrateful comment as to whatever my readership might number.

Frankly, even if there were only 7 or 8 people who read and like my stuff, that is still 7 or 8 more than I
would have ever had, had I not wandered into this wonderful place over two years ago and
found a happy home for my Buffy obsession.

To paraphrase the great Neil Young,

"This word's for you!"

--OnM

*******

Bye for now-- new ep next Tuesday, yay!

*******

[> [> [> On the Cruciamentum issue -- KdS, 06:35:50 02/03/03 Mon

Unfortunately, when I wrote the post in question I didn't have my own computer and wasn't saving my posts - still don't unless I've put a great deal of work into them. Everything seriously germane was in my previous post, but I'd like to respond to your and Rufus's arguments.

Firstly, my post was not intended as a defense of what happened in Helpless. Even if you accept the broad concept as justifiable, common humanity would have required Quentin to abort the test as soon as Kralik escaped and innocent bystanders were put at risk. Similarly, I don't disagree with your attitude to conscription or valuation of human life. The key thing that drove me to form this position was a belief that the Watchers' Council has not, for the larger part of its history, as consciously brutal an organisation as your opinion implies. I accept the possibility that now in the 20th century the Council could have come subconsciously or even consciously to view the Cruciamentum as a means of breaking the Slayer's spirit as you suggest or a means of disposing of threateningly experienced Slayers as Isabel suggests below. My starting point was to consider how such a rite might originally have been developed by people who believed that they were doing the right thing. Moreover, the survivial of Faith after S4/S1 suggests that even Quentin's conscious attitude to Slayers is not as bad as you argue - Faith could have been killed in prison with the greatest of ease, or even snuffed out while she lay in a coma - and I would suggests that such an act would have been far more defensible than what was done to Buffy in Helpless.

I'd like to run with the possibilities brought up by Rufus's "1200 years" quotation. If we assume even moderate accuracy on Quentin and Giles's part that would place the inception of the tradition at some point in the first millenium AD (or CE if you're trying not to be Eurocentric). It has been suggested in the course of the series that the WC has always been a Eurocentric organisation, so we need to consider the philosophical and religious climate in Western Europe at that time. In that era we need to remember that vampires and demons aside, human society was marked by very high infant mortality, a high level of both formal and informal social violence, and constant dangers of death through illness and injury that we in the early 21st century have the greatest difficulty in comprehending. Moreover, we also need to understand that society was dominated by a conception of Christianity that saw Fallen human life as a period of inevitable suffering which was of very limited importance compared to ensuring that you ended up in the right place after your death. The trappings of wordly success were seen as a snare to divide the human soul from God, and many religious people actually practiced forms of religious observance amounting to virtual self-torture in order to ensure that their view of salvation as the only true objective was not clouded by wordly desires. One thing which we find particularly hard to accept was the internally reasonable and consistent belief that the infliction of, to modern views, truly horrific acts of cruelty was justified if the effect was to save a person from far worse eternal suffering if they died in the wrong spiritual state and to bring them to eternal bliss if they died in the right one.

Therefore, let us consider the possible effects of the Cruciamentum from this frame of reference. If the Slayer survives, then she has killed a vampire with her own inner strength, courage and intelligence alone, with nothing beyond training to distinguish her from an ordinary human being. If, as my opinion suggests, she never realises how she came to be in that situation, then she has won a victory that proves that her powers are her own and transcend any status as chosen one, instilling her with a confidence that can't be taken away, and could never be as effectively instilled by mere vocal affirmation. If she fights and dies, then her heroic death will probably bring her to eternal reward, as well as letting her off a period of earthly suffering of uncertain length. The only poor outcome is if she dies in a state of despair, but one suspects that the Watchers of the time believed that such a response would prove that she was unfitted for Slayerhood. Now let us consider whether this is invalidated of she is told or guesses the full truth. Remember that this was a society where the social elite were considered to be entirely justified in forcing large numbers of conscripted labourers into hand-to-hand combat on relatively minor points of personal pride or power. There was even a belief (seen even in the modern age in the quotations from members of the schism-afflicted Worldwide Church of God in David V Barrett's The New Believers) that submission to an unsympathetic or "froward" leader was a sign of Christian humility. Acceptance even of having her own life put at risk might be seen as a point in the Slayer's spiritual development. (I know I'm on shaky ground here, but I do believe that in most cases the Slayer wouldn't have worked it out and wasn't intended to.) And as far as the preparation issue goes, I can see a belief that to tell the Slayer what would happen in advance would be likely to throw her into a state of despair that might doom her, while to be suddenly thrust into the situation might cause survival instincts to take over before her conscious mind could despair. I think that your "tempering" metaphor is exactly what I'm trying to get at, although I think quench hardening (a procedure in which metal is violently cooled from a high heat the improve surface hardness) is a more appropriate metaphor, as a hardened blade is more effective even if the odd one shatters after the shock.

Of course, none of this is dispensible from a 20th or 21st century view of human rights and the sanctity of human life. Nevertheless, I hope that I've convinced you of how such a rite could have been conceived by people who, even from a philosophy utterly alien to our own, believed that they were doing the right thing. Buffy's and Spike's actions in Potential are calculated to produce the same result with a 21st-century level of respect for humanity, but if Buffy and Spike had had to intervene, the effect would arguably have been demoralising to the SITs. Of course, nowadays, we don't see demoralisation as less preferable than death, but if you believe that a good afterlife is a thousand times more important than a good earthly one the decision might be different.

PS: Incidentally, I'm even not entirely convinced that the selection of Kralik proves the Council's malignity. Remember that however horrendous his mental pathology may have been, he was also in an unusually poor state of physical health, which gave Buffy the opportunity to kill him.

[> [> [> That cut scene, again (not exactly a reply to OnM) -- CW, 07:20:56 02/03/03 Mon

I'm going out on a limb here, and will say that the reason the scene should be left out is that the episode really wasn't about Buffy. It was about the potentials including Dawn. It's tough to present things from the point of view of a group of people of varying personalities who we don't know very well. But, that's where the point of view was. It's especially difficult when your best actresses aren't part of that group. Part of the story is that Dawn was excluded, felt depressed about it, and wished she could take part. Dawn was listening to Buffy's lessons just as hard as the rest. Some people have said that Dawn fought the vampire all wrong. I didn't see it that way at all. In fact to me she seemed to be following Buffy's instructions to the letter. What she did wrong was to go there to take on the vampire by herself. I doubt any of the potentials were ready for that. The fear, frustration and awkwardness that Dawn experienced was felt by all of them. Folks need to remember none of them is the Chosen One. The fact that Dawn failed in fighting the vampire isn't that significant. How many times has Buffy been on the verge of failing, and she is the Slayer. How many of the potentials could have saved Amanda from the Bringers, until Buffy arrived? That was all Dawn. So what was the lesson for Dawn? That she's incompetent, or just in the way in a fight? Hardly. The lesson was, to paraphrase Dirty Harry, a girl's got to know her limitations. The potentials have to learn that, as much as how to use their abillities. Buffy is far past that point. We can't learn what it's like to be a potential from her. And we'd learn nothing new by watching her fretting outside the crypt door. If we need to be reassured everytime Buffy might feel an emotion that she isn't Robo-Buffy, I have to say the problem is in us.

Buffy's lectures. It's clear a lot of people hate to be lectured to. When I was in college I couldn't understand why people cut classes (at my high school cutting just a few classes during the day was virtually impossible). Nine times out of ten if you just sat there and listened, you could get a 'B' whether you bothered to do the reading or not. Cramming for tests seemed insane in most cases. If you knew how the professor thought, and had a decent set of notes, not to study, but to remind you of the flow of his arguments and the most important points, what was the point of spending hours memorizing a few stray facts at the last minute? The only thing different for more techincal courses was that you had to do the homeowrk (and labs if there were any) all along. Once in awhile you'd run into a bird-brained professor who never asked anything from the lectures on tests. Talk about begging for people not to show up! But they were pretty rare.

I understand that a lot of people hate to listen to lectures. (That more than anything makes shows about college difficult to sell.) But, at this point in the series it's important to hear what Buffy has to say. The Council has been jabbering for centuries. But, now we have a Slayer who is mature enough to pass on what she knows. We viewers don't need to listen to her lectures every week, but I hope the potentials do.

[> Re: Touch My Cape / Save Me - Thoughts on *Potential* - Part I -- Rufus, 08:36:42 02/01/03 Sat

Third, the deck is stacked as unfairly as it can be. There is no one watching to offer any last second assistance
should the vampire gain the upper hand and the Slayer about to be killed. The vampire chosen is no ordinary
vampire, but a particularly violent and sadistic one. The Watcher is branded a failure if he or she offers the
slightest sign of caring for the one enduring the trial. This isn't an honorable coming of age rite whereby an
adolescent gains entry to the rights and privileges of adulthood-- it's a degnerative exercise in pointless sadism
(or pointless other then the possible desire to keep the Slayer from getting too old and perhaps too 'uppity' with
the Council). OnM

There is a big difference between what the Council does with their Cruciamentum and Buffy and Spike locking the Potentials in the room with a vampire. The Council isn't all that interested in the obvious talents of a Slayer as much as they are using "tradition" to excuse barbaric practices. What does a Slayer learn in the Cruciametum that they can't in training with their Watcher? So, I feel that the whole thing is there to remind all that the Council is the boss and the Slayer is an instrument, period. From Helpless......

Quentin: Cruciamentum is not easy... for Slayer or Watcher. But it's been done this way for a dozen centuries. Whenever a Slayer turns eighteen. It's a time-honored rite of passage.

What a load of crap.....the bloody rite of passage is a fairly recent development of the Council if you compare it to how long there have been vampires and Slayers on the planet. What Buffy did with the Potentials was honest training....the Potentials weren't drugged, they weren't left without help....they were shown for the first time the nature of what they will have to survive and fight..for as long as they live as a Slayer. I felt that Buffy was outside worried about her charges, I felt that because Buffy is unlike the Council, she doesn't see the Potentials as things, tools, instruments...she has them living in her house, she is feeding and training them......she cares..and she is giving them experience by example. I never got the idea that the bureaucratic wing the Council cared about the Slayer as anything but a number to be added or erased. Buffy wants these girls to live.

Great review OnM and it's on the Trollop Board as usual..:):):):)

[> [> I agree that the Cruciamentum's likely purpose -- Isabel, 20:55:31 02/02/03 Sun

was to weed out the aging slayer. The tool is getting a bit worn around the edges, maybe starting to not work the way it's supposed to, (thinking for herself, questioning orders, actually thinking that she knows better than they how to do her job?) Let's get a new one. Even if she survives, the rift likely to occur between the slayer and her watcher would be huge and more likely, IMHO, to get her killed shortly.

What Buffy and Spike did reminds me of something the Army does to its recruits in boot camp. I've never been in the military but a friend of mine was. Maybe I'm remembering what she said wrong, but at one point the recruits have to go into the NBC hut. (Nuclear, Biological, Chemical) The recruits have to sit there for 15 minutes or so wearing air masks as the drill sargeants flood the room with a lethal gas. It's to teach them that if they follow directions and use their equipment they can survive deadly environments. It's a confidence builder.

Like leaving four teenage girls with a little training and stakes in a room with a vampire.

[> Re: Touch My Cape / Save Me - Thoughts on *Potential* - Part I -- Dochawk, 09:33:26 02/01/03 Sat

As usual I'm blown away and truly love this episode even more because of this. I want your knowledge of obscure music as well (I've picked up quite a few ideas just from your musical reference intros). I actually have no criticisms whatsover, you seem to have loved this as much as I did.

[> Awesome Review... -- Peggin, 10:24:47 02/01/03 Sat

I completely agree with your take on why Buffy's test for the Potentials was nothing like the Cruciamentum. The Watchers' test was about taking away power, and Buffy's test was about giving power and about teaching the Potentials how to use their own power.

I really love your comments on the real measure of power. I've never thought about it that way before, but I think you are absolutely right. Many times, going right back to when she fought Luke in Welcome to the Hellmouth and The Harvest, Buffy has fought many opponents who were physically stronger. What makes Buffy more powerful is that she can take what they dish out and stay in the fight long enough to find some way to defeat them. Buffy's power is definitely much more a measure of how much she can withstand than it is a measure of her physical strength.

[> OnM- you have millions of fans! -- Tchaikovsky, 11:06:23 02/01/03 Sat

Well, maybe not quite, but certainly more than 8. And what was that thing Joss Whedon said about fans:

I'd rather have fifty devoted fans than a million who thought it was OK.

As has been noted this week- when you keep us on tenterhooks for longer than usual, we go as cold turkey as Willow after 'Wrecked'.

Super review as ever.

TCH

[> [> We just don't always have a chance to respond -- s'kat, 11:52:52 02/01/03 Sat

But just so you know...I was wondering the same thing Doc
was - has he posted the review yet, did I miss it?
And I always print them off even if they cost me printer fluid and paper. ;-)

The other thing...wish you'd do reviews of Angel. But I understand...there's only so many hours in the day.

[> [> [> I´ll second that -- grifter, 18:22:32 02/01/03 Sat

Angel reviews would be fantastomatic! But as long as you keep writing them darn nifty Buffy reviews I´ll be a good doggy and shut up.
;)

[> [> [> [> And third! -- ponygirl, 13:24:02 02/02/03 Sun

I love your reviews OnM! And I like that you take some time with them, they often come after the discussion on the most recent ep. has died down a bit and we've had some time to process, so they make for a refreshing and insightful take on things.

Great song choices this week btw.

[> Re: Touch My Cape / Save Me - Thoughts on *Potential* - Part I -- gds, 12:29:22 02/01/03 Sat

She states, seemingly coldly, that "some of us will die" in the battle to come, but immediately follows
that remark with "decide right now it isn't going to be you". Tough love, yes, but it is love. There really isn't the luxury of time for anything else right now, and once again the weight is on Buffy's shoulders. If the protos
manage to survive the coming apocalyptic battle, there will be time enough to start teaching them the
discriminating nuances and subtleties of existence in a grey world when demons can be forces for good and
humans can become the most horrific of enemies.

I never understoood the criticisms some had for Buffy's speech, it always seemed highly appropriate. Furthermore, she included a hint about knowledge which was probably denied to every slayer other than herself: the slayer's death wish. She is probably the first slayer to train slayers. If I were a potential, I trust her training more than any watcher. Not just beacuse of her superior experience, but the fact that she would know, understand and care about the problems that a slayer would face.

[> [> Re: Touch My Cape / Save Me - Thoughts on *Potential* - Part I -- Dochawk, 13:25:40 02/01/03 Sat

I am somewhat reluctant to start a conversation I will be overwhelmed in, but the "slayer's death wish" is a figment of Spike's imagination uttered to wound Buffy when the only weapon Spike had was words. We have no corraboration that Buffy or any other slayer really had a "death wish" and in fact there could be nothing worse for a slayer. She would die far too easily far too often if it existed. Wondering when she will die is a different point

[> [> [> Buffy on death -- HonorH, 14:52:09 02/01/03 Sat

How accurate Spike's analysis of Slayers is is up for debate. However, I don't think Buffy's attitude toward death is that ambiguous. Note the terms she uses while discussing death with the protos: it's "the reward for being human," "the big dessert at the end of the meal." She almost speaks of death as a friend. The ostensible purpose of the speech, to grab the protos' attention and spur them into realizing the reality of the situation so they *won't* die, doesn't resonate well with Buffy's words. Death no longer holds any fear for her. She knows it too well, and she loves it too well. The big difference from last season is that she feels purpose in her life again, and is thus willing to stay alive a bit longer.

[> [> [> [> Buffy on death (spoilers for S5-S7) -- Fred the obvious pseudonym, 18:33:58 02/02/03 Sun

All of us seem to be forgetting a key aspect of Buffy's experience -- SHE KNOWS. What is a major part of terrifying people about death is it's uncertainty. We don't know if our existence simply ends or if there's some kind of after life. (We would like to believe the latter, but it's likely to be wishful thinking.)

Buffy doesn't have this problem. Like Lazarus and Christ, she's been dead and gotten better. She knows -- and for her death is not a bad place to be. She is, sensibly, not telling the SITs about it, as that might damage her credibility as a guide & mentor ("You've been dead and come back? Right.") It does not sound as if she would have any concerns for herself being dead -- only for those left behind and her mission. If the latter are taken care of she would have no real problems about being dead.

Of course, this adds a certain edge to her fighting ability. She can fight and not be afraid. Like Doc Holliday and Johnny Ringo proved, there's no opponent more fearsome than one who does not care whether he (or she) lives or dies. Buffy now has joined this category.

Thoughts?

[> Good work, OnM. Well worth the wait. -- Rattletrap, 13:46:52 02/01/03 Sat

More re Spike as Trickster: Precedents for Change -- luna (in time for Lunar New Year), 10:51:37 02/02/03 Sun

Because it looks as if that fascinating thread below on Spike and Redemption is about ready to flip over into archives and I was away while it was going on, I'd like to add a few comments on Spike as trickster compared to Sun Wu Kong, the Monkey King in the Chinese story, Journey to the West. This is also in honor of the Lunar New Year now being celebrated in China and other East Asian countries (and elsewhere!), dear to my moon heart.

Like Spike, in the first part of the story, Sun Wu Kong is completely amoral, concerned only with his own gain and ego. Like Spike before the soul, he's capable of some feeling--but it's still ultimately self-interest.

Sun Wu Kong is finally imprisoned in a rock for 500 years for creating chaos in the Taoist heaven, and finally is released by the Bodhisattva Kuan Yin. Like Spike going off to his ordeal, Sun Wu Kong is promised redemption and liberation if he assists in the long ordeal of going to India for some Buddhist scripture.

In Journey to the West, the ordeal is the story, or at least the last half of it, unlike Spike's tale, where the ordeal seems fairly short. There are various other parallels (many of Sun Wu Kong's battles are based on the illusion of appearance, much like what we see in the dealings with the shape-shifting FE on Buffy), but the one that struck me as relevant here is the fact that Sun Wu Kong is an archtypal trickster, but is also capable of a deep remorse and desire for change, and after completing his ordeal does achieve liberation. So there's at least one precedent for the possibility of Spike's change.

It seems to me that it's the DESIRE for change and the willingness to suffer in order to reach it that set the Spike of the end of S6 and beginning of S7 apart from any of his earlier variations.

[> Spoilers for season 7 in post above -- luna, 12:38:55 02/02/03 Sun

[> very vague spoilers for Season 7 and only first episodes in above post -- shadowkat, 16:31:44 02/02/03 Sun

It's safe guys - I saw nothing that would let you know what's going on with Spike past Lessons.

And it's a great post.

OT: Which ME actors would you cast in new, JW-led non-Buffyverse series? -- cjl, 11:12:49 02/01/03 Sat

Shadowkat and I were discussing a distressing possibility--the cancellation of all three Joss Whedon series by the end of the season--and we started to wonder what we would do in his place if Joss were forced to start from scratch. (If UPN doesn't pick up ANGEL, or go for a Faith or a Spike spinoff, Joss might have to create a new universe for us to play with.) Who would Joss pick from the ruins of the Buffyverse to populate his new playground? We worked it down to a core cast of six actors and actresses (with some slight disagreements):

My choices:

James Marsters (Spike)
Alexis Denisof (Wesley)
Gina Torres (Zoe from Firefly)
Summer Glau (River from Firefly)
Harry Groener (Mayor Wilkins)
Stephanie Romanov (Lilah)

Possible back-ups (male):

Nicholas Brendon
Andy Hallett
Jeff Kober (Kralik, Rack)
The guy who played Forrest (blanking on his name!)
Danny Strong, Tom Lenk, and Adam Busch

Possible back-ups (female):

Azura Skye
Bonnie Bartlett (from the Firefly pilot)
Eliza Dushku (if available)

You've probably noticed some glaring omissions. What about SMG? (Nope, too expensive. She wants a film career, anyway.) Alyson Hannigan is going to be the STAR of "American Pie 3: American Wedding" with Jason Biggs, so I consider her a movie star in the making. She's out. David Boreanaz? Might be typecast as Angel, and he'd probably be too expensive. (JMO.) ASH? Won't leave England, and already scheduled for Ripper. I would have put Eliza Dushku up front, but I'm afraid she might bust the budget. If Joss could come up with some sort of arrangement (a small piece of syndication rights?), she'd be bumped up to "lead," with GT or SR shifted to back-up.

This is the cast I'd present to a network or cable or one of the net-lets: extraordinary actors all, sexy and/or appealing all, and not too much of a strain on the wallet. With Joss' brain power behind the camera, and these actors in front, it can't miss. (We hope.)

What would be your dream cast? Keep in mind the restrictions I've laid out above. (Yes, I suppose this is a poll...)

[> Re: OT: Which ME actors would you cast in new, JW-led non-Buffyverse series? -- shadowkat, 11:49:34 02/01/03 Sat

Considering my name's mentioned, here were my picks:

James Marsters (Spike)
Alexis Denisof (Wesley)
Gina Torres (Zoe from Firefly)--- don't know, on the fence here, might prefer Julie Benze or Dusku
Summer Glau (River from Firefly)(Also if can't get Dusku)
Harry Groener (Mayor Wilkins)
Stephanie Romanov (Lilah)

Oh if can do a 7th player = I'd grab the guy who played Forrest.

Possible back-ups (male):

Alan Tudyke (Wash on Firefly)
Nicholas Brendon
Andy Hallett (Lorne)
Jeff Kober (Kralik, Rack)
The guy who played Forrest (blanking on his name!)
Guy who played Trick
Guy who played Holden Webster, and maybe Adam Bush

Possible back-ups (female):

Eliza Dusku (if available)
Amber Benson (if available, she could be difficult to get)
Elizabeth Allen (who played Amy)
Julie Benze (who played Darla) and possibly Juliet Landu
Michelle Tractenberg
Lindsey Crouse (Prof Walsh - if available)

Can't do Emma Caulfield, DB, SMG, Aly, or ASH = pretty clear from interviews that they'd be impossible to get.

[> [> Re: OT: Which ME actors would you cast in new, JW-led non-Buffyverse series? -- Dochawk, 13:39:56 02/01/03 Sat

Here's a suprise, i'm goign to be the outlier.

I fear that James in a Joss show would have a difficult time if he is not Spike. Of course, I would include Spike if I could.

As for the rest of the cast. I would start with Michelle Trachtenberg because (as OnM has mentioned below) she is becoming a fabulous actress. So is Gina Torres. But obviously it matters what the show is and what its about. As for actors how about Seth Green (he was just on a failed series, so obviously he'd do one). And I would probably include Azure Skye and of course Amber.

[> [> [> Re: OT: Which ME actors would you cast in new, JW-led non-Buffyverse series? -- Peggin, 14:55:46 02/01/03 Sat

I fear that James in a Joss show would have a difficult time if he is not Spike.

I don't think so. I mean, I watch JM interviews, even with the bleached hair, and I'm pretty amazed that it's the same person. If he let his hair go back to its natural color and spoke in his own accent, you would hardly recognize him as Spike.

[> [> [> Re: OT: Which ME actors would you cast in new, JW-led non-Buffyverse series? -- shadowkat, 15:38:21 02/01/03 Sat

Not necessarily - according to some people the role
James played in Millenium as an agent orange solider was very unspikelike and amazing. But I wouldn't know, having only seen him as Spike.

Same goes for Amber - no clue what she can do outside of Tara, never seen anything she's done.

[> [> [> [> Re: OT: Which ME actors would you cast in new, JW-led non-Buffyverse series? -- Dochawk, 17:05:07 02/01/03 Sat

I'm sorry I think I said it badly. James is a wonderful actor and I am sure would be wonderful in other roles. I would be concerned about James in another part on a Joss product immediately after Buffy. "Why isnt he like Spike?" Thats all. Sorry, if that didn't come through.

[> [> Re: OT: Which ME actors would you cast in new, JW-led non-Buffyverse series? -- leslie, 13:54:47 02/01/03 Sat

The question is, what would one do with all these lovely people? I think one of the problems with Firefly was that the travelling spaceship conceit was problematic--you had to both create the world that these people lived in on the ship, and all the worlds they visited on their journeys. Not that it hasn't been done before, I know, I know, I know, and successfully, too (though Star Trek did take time to catch on and in an era when shows were given more time to prove themselves). It's just that by the time I was settled into Firefly and caring about the characters, Fox was ready to cancel, and I had been holding on just through Jossian Faith. BtVS and AtS both succeed, I think, on at least one level, because the main characters are fixed in one place and the monsters come and go. That is why there have been so many opportunities to create a really full Buffyverse, where Jonathan can pop up anywhere from background to center stage over the course of seven years, giving this sense that the world goes on outside of what the Scoobies are experiencing.

So, what have we got? If Joss is starting from scratch, i.e., not repeating himself, he's already done suburban horror, big city horror, and deep space horror. High school horror, college horror, and workplace horror. Well, let's face it, between BtVS and AtS, they've hit just about every kind of horror there is, so I guess the question is, what aspect has been most under-utilized? My vote is for the whole college scene. Good point in life--people just learning to be on their own, leaving the nest, learning new things. Like how to deal with monsters. Easy to get people in and out of the scene--visiting professors, transfer students, changing one's schedule every 3 months so you meet new people in class, a new class of freshmen coming in every year, people drop out, people stay around for grad school. Tenured professors have been around forever, students come and go. Plus, you have a built-in villain in the form of the administration, and as a general rule, campuses are a law unto themselves in terms of policing, so you don't have to posit that the Sunnydale police are deeply stupid, you just have to make campus security part of the problem.

[> [> [> Maybe not horror? -- luna, 14:26:33 02/01/03 Sat

Well, it looked as if in Firefly that he was getting away from just horror pure and simple. Maybe he should have gone with a straight Western (maybe Sci-Fi-western was too complex for most viewers!) In that case, I could see JM, NB, Eliza Dushku, and various of the cast mentioned above! Or maybe some other Sci-Fi scenario that's not a space ship--some future world? But what's really great about BtVS from the start was the new twist on an old cliche. Maybe they could do a family--nah, Addams Family already took that.

The only thing I can see is a lawyer show--or maybe police.

[> [> [> Hmmm...perhaps should start with idea then the cast -- shadowkat, 16:01:35 02/01/03 Sat

Most writers/directors/creators start with an idea or story first then figure out who to cast in it instead of starting with a cast and figuring out what story to put them all in.

I like the college idea - it's the one thing no one has really pulled off. They've tried but no one quite makes it more than one season.

1. Felicity barely more than two seasons.
2. Paper Chase - horrors of law school - ended up on PBS
3. Beverly Hills 90210 - doesn't qualify since we were never really focused on the college and more on the soap operish romantic entangelments of the kids.
4. Dawson's Creek - better than Beverly Hills but not by much and not more than 2 seasons in College, ending this year.

Joss tried to do it with Buffy and Willow but dropped it.
Not sure why this is.

Other series? There's the short lived Richard Dreyfuss one where he's a professor at a Women's College - got a bit preachy and smulchy for my tastes and died quickly.
Educating Rita was a short lived situation comedy and there was Boston Public.

But nothing horror related.

What we don't need is another law, mobster, or police or medical show, that's for sure - the networks are plagued with them.
With Firefly - Whedon was attempting a sort of Hill street
blues/St. Elsewhere in space. It didn't work and I agree, I too had been watching out of Jossian Faith and of all the episodes the best ones were the latter ones and the pilot.
It couldn't quite make up its mind between three genres: sci-fi, horror, and western. In some ways I liked it better than Trek but I can see why it didn't get an audience.

Hmmm...not sure what I would do with them.
I do know from the interviews I've read with writers, actors and the stuff I know about their talents? Marsters, Denisof, Busch, Romanof, and Glau are probably capable of doing close to anything Whedon threw at them without too much arguement and aren't into movies enough to ask for astronomical salaries. All four would be willing to do musicals, comedy, etc. That's to die for if you are a creator. Add to that Brendon who play any small part you give him and Danny Strong.

[> [> [> [> OK, here's some possible concepts to pitch... -- OnM, 19:54:10 02/01/03 Sat

1. Space Ghost Coast to Coast with Spike and Clem

Will have a description available as soon as the writing team gets out of the group therapy session.

2. Mystery Science Theater: The Next Generation

Jay, Silent Bob and Duckshoot* critique bad movies with the help of the Buffybot, Adam and The First Slayer. May take place somewhere in outer space or else New Jersey.

3. Slower Than Light

Update of Waiting for Godot, but in Outer Space

4. The Look, The Grief, The Life, and No Cover

Elaborately staged episodic tableaux at a seedy but romantic downtown bistro frequented by existential Shakespearian actors who are down on their luck and looking for love. Don't ask what's on the menu. Special musical guest Aimee Mann.

5. Incident at Fox Street Bridge

New reality show where camera crews follow the creative staff of TV production companies to see who gets cancelled the first. On the final episode, it is revealed that all of television exists only in the mind of a single autistic teenager and the world has never actually moved beyond radio.

_________________________________________

* OK, bonus point for any ATPo-er who knows who 'Duckshoot' is, and who coined the nick.

_________________________________________

[> [> [> [> [> Re: OK, here's some possible concepts to pitch... -- Cheryl, 20:12:22 02/01/03 Sat

5. Incident at Fox Street Bridge

New reality show where camera crews follow the creative staff of TV production companies to see who gets cancelled the first. On the final episode, it is revealed that all of television exists only in the mind of a single autistic teenager and the world has never actually moved beyond radio.

ROFLOL! You've got my vote on this one. It has everything going for it - reality tv, horror, angst, comedy. Genius!

[> [> [> [> [> Re: OK, here's some possible concepts to pitch... -- shadowkat, 20:23:06 02/01/03 Sat

4. The Look, The Grief, The Life, and No Cover

Elaborately staged episodic tableaux at a seedy but romantic downtown bistro frequented by existential Shakespearian actors who are down on their luck and looking for love. Don't ask what's on the menu. Special musical guest Aimee Mann.

LOL! This is so close to an idea I thought up. Where Whedon does an anthology series, but serial style. And he does updated versions of all the Shakespeare Plays. Macbeth - but Macbeth as a mayor. Midsummer Night's Dream - but at a college campus. etc. And each play is it's own four week separate entity. The cast is the same, their characters change. You could do this with my dream cast - believe me, I've heard Marsters do an audio tape - the man can change his voice and I've seen old pictures of him and parts he's done, he's almost unrecognizable (a true character actor), same with Andy Hallet, Alexis Denisof, Richard Leary, and the others.

And best yet? It would parallel Whedon's favorite movie Illuminati - no not the book by Robert Anton Wilson - the movie with John Turturo and Susan Sarandon about a struggling theater company putting on the plays it wishes to show against the popular demand. ;-)

[> [> [> [> [> Duckshoot = Eliza Dushku, courtesy of Kevin Smith -- Apophis, 07:20:29 02/02/03 Sun

[> [> [> [> [> [> Right you are! Bonus point awarded! :-) -- OnM, 13:04:22 02/02/03 Sun

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Just curious... -- Rob, 15:00:02 02/02/03 Sun

What did he mean by "Duckshoot"? Am I just being incredibly dense?

Rob

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Just curious... -- Apophis, 15:21:29 02/02/03 Sun

It's 'cause her name is hard for some to pronounce. Smith thought it sounded like "duckshoot," and a nickname was born.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> WEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!! -- Apophis, 15:23:34 02/02/03 Sun

I take irrational joy in being rewarded for my almost stalker-like knowledge of both Eliza and Kevin.

[> [> [> [> More possible concepts for our talented cast.... -- cjl, 20:48:58 02/01/03 Sat

1. "All the World's a Stage" (Think: Gilmore Girls x OMWF)

James Marsters and Alexis Denisof play the owners and lead actors in the local community theater of a not-so-sleepy midwestern town. The interpersonal conflicts of the repertory company (Gina Torres, Nic Brendon, Summer Glau, Harry Groener, Adam Busch) and the surrounding town are often meta-narrated by the events on stage. Seasons could be broken down into three separate "arcs," conforming to the run of a particular play/musical.

Season 1: Arc 1 - "Taming of the Shrew"; Arc 2 - "The Crucible"; Arc 3 - "The Music Man"

2. Red Dwarf (Think: well...Red Dwarf)

Third attempt to translate the quirky and often hysterically funny British science fiction comedy/existential meditation to American television. James Marsters stars as David Lister, a lazy, booze-swilling reprobate, who--due to a series of coincidences far too bizarre to detail here--winds up as the last human being in the universe three million years into the future. Trapped on the starship Red Dwarf with only his computer (Harry Groener) for company, he's accompanied on some truly strange adventures by a holographic representation of an old "friend"--the pathetic, weaselly Arnold Rimmer (Tom Lenk), a super-evolved feline (Stephanie Romanov), and a persnickety android (Alexis Denisof). Occasional guest stars: Christine Kolchanski (Juliet Landau); Captain Hollister (Anthony Stewart Head).

3. Army Town (JAG + Hill Street Blues)

Hard-hitting one-hour drama about a U.S. Army base and how its young soliders relate to each other and the surrounding community in the shadow of war. James Marsters gives an Emmy-worthy portrayal (nothing new there) as Sgt. Randolph Williams, a career army man who's been traumatized by the loss of his younger brother in combat. Stephanie Romanov plays his long-time girlfriend, trying desperately to keep their lives together while he's falling apart...

4. For Hire (Think: "Alias" x The Sopranos)

Comedy/adventure/thriller: James Marsters, Eliza Dushku, Alexis Denisof, and Stephanie Romanov play The Mechanics, an elite crew of superspies who take on jobs too dirty for even the Sydney Bristows of the world. Loyal only to the almighty dollar (or Euro), constantly checking their backs for stab wounds from their "allies" and even each other, The Mechanics are arrogant, cynical, and probably do more damage than they "repair." (Graphic violence and sexual situations; U.S. cable TV ONLY.)

[> [> [> [> [> Re: More possible concepts for our talented cast.... -- CW, 06:47:02 02/02/03 Sun

How about "Highway to Heck" (think Highway to Heaven or Touched by an Angel)

Spike loses that darn chip, and discovers he had a pretty rotten soul to begin with. In the pilot, he teams up with Dru again. After a miraclous escape from vampire hunters, the EPTDDfED (Evil Powers That Draft Demons for Evil Deeds) select them to ride around the country giving comfort, advise and moral support to evil people everywhere. Unfortunately our heroes discover evil people don't generally listen to platitudes and advise. Instead of the evil folks causing hell, everything always just goes to heck. Each episode ends with everyone fleeing enraged mobs. Given a chance to rescue the bad guy of the week at some risk to himself, Spike intones the weekly refrain, "Bugger that!" and the credits come up as he and Dru escape. In place of previews after the show, there are babbling insane 'visions' discribed by Dru, which may or may not have anything to do with the next episode.

[> [> [> [> The college issue... -- KdS, 03:35:01 02/02/03 Sun

As far as I can see, there are two reasons why there have never really been successful university TV shows.

i) The college experience is so multi-faceted - some into socialising, some into the academic stuff, some having major lifestyle or philosophical changes - hard to get it all to work.

ii) Hostility of a large percentage of the viewing public who never went to college - "What are those self-indulgent students moaning about when they're living off their parents'/the taxpayers' money in a fantasy world?"

NB: There was the excellent British TV show A Very Peculiar Practice, but that was more surreal social satire than realistic drama - also only lasted two seasons and was a viewing figure failure despite critical praise.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: The college issue... -- Arethusa, 06:44:07 02/02/03 Sun

ii) Hostility of a large percentage of the viewing public who never went to college - "What are those self-indulgent students moaning about when they're living off their parents'/the taxpayers' money in a fantasy world?"

Have them be older students, paying for their own educations. Almost all the actors are too old to be supported by parents anyway. They can be people who've lived their lives a little and for various reasons want to go back to school.

[> [> [> [> [> I remember that one! -- Isabel, 18:43:56 02/02/03 Sun

Vaguely. And I saw it on PBS in the US, but it starred Peter Davison and he was a Doctor in a college health center, right? I was going to say vet, but I realized that was "All Creatures Great and Small."

All I remember was he was having an affair with someone he shouldn't.

Does 'vaguely' even cover it?

[> [> [> [> You forgot the best college show ever -- Dochawk, 07:46:49 02/02/03 Sun

Undeclared was fabulous, funny and sweet. Judd Apatow is a genius who approaches Jossdom in his writing. So of course on Fox it was put up against Buffy and Gilmore Girls (exactly the same demographic!) and was cancelled in a single season. If you have a chance to see these 20 episodes they are brilliant.

[> [> [> [> Well, Joss's trademark is using genres in inventive new ways. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 10:48:47 02/02/03 Sun

And I think using the Legal Show genre could work. How? Well, I would love to watch a show featuring Wolfram & Hart or an equally evil law firm as the focus. For one thing, it would make a wonderful way to poke fun at Law Shows, as well as leaving a LOT of opportunities for moral ambiguity.

[> [> [> [> [> I believe... -- KdS, 11:26:45 02/02/03 Sun

David Greenwalt already tried that with a show called Profit and it tanked. However, I'm told by people who saw it that W&H is almost identical to the firm in that show, just with, you know, demons.

[> [> Leonard Roberts played Forrest -- Cheryl, 15:00:43 02/01/03 Sat

Interesting idea to pick a dream cast from previous ME shows.

Of the ones mentioned already, here's my dreamteam:

James Marsters (Spike) - Definitely. I'll watch anything he does because he brings so much to a role. Watched House on Haunted Hill this morning just to see him and the movie sucked, but his short time on screen was fun.

Alexis Denisof (Wesley) - yes, but if he plays more of a rogue character, not a nerd.

Gina Torres (Zoe from Firefly)--- loved her in Hercules & Firefly - only reason I watched Cleopatra 2525, so yes I'd like to see her in another series.

Harry Groener (Mayor Wilkins) - would love to see him in a series, but don't see him tying himself down like that.

Stephanie Romanov (Lilah) - Hmm, let's see - liked her and AD together and can picture her with JM, so YES!

Someone I haven't seen mentioned yet, and probably not a likely candidate since he's doing movies, but I would love to see Marc Blucas in another series.

Possible back-ups (male):

Nicholas Brendon - He has great comedic timing and I think he's really grown over time on the dramatic side so I'd like to see him in another series.

Guy who played Holden Webster - absolutely! What an impact he made in such a short time!

Danny Strong - I miss him!!

Possible back-ups (female):

Elizabeth Allen (who played Amy) - I hope they bring her back at some point this season cuz I miss her too.

Julie Benze (who played Darla) and possibly Juliet Landu - I'd rather see Julie than Juliet, but maybe that's because I can only picture Drusilla.

Michelle Tractenberg - yes, but I see her doing more movies in the future.

[> [> Re: OT: Which ME actors would you cast in new, JW-led non-Buffyverse series? -- CW, 15:19:55 02/01/03 Sat

Since we're speculating. I'd start with stars

Adam Baldwin (Jayne in Firefly) who people loved in a really despicable role, a real sign of a fine actor.

and

Alyson Hannigan who might just do it if she were the star.

for backups I'd think about
Marina Baccarin (Inara from Firefly)
Gina Torres (Zoe from Firefly)
Danny Strong
James Leary (Clem)

and as far as story I'd go for something a little lighter, an adventure-comedy perhaps.

[> [> [> Re: OT: Which ME actors would you cast in new, JW-led non-Buffyverse series? -- leslie, 15:51:19 02/01/03 Sat

"and as far as story I'd go for something a little lighter, an adventure-comedy perhaps."

The Spike and Clem Show? It would certainly solve that pesky "can you see them arguing over what to watch on television" problem. Plus snacks!

Ah, here we go--Demon Food Channel: Clem taste tests snacks, Spike figures out how to, um, spike them.

Demon Home and Garden Television: Spike and Clem redesign crypts to solve the interior decorating dilemmas of demons cohabiting with different demon species. With snacks.

Demon Travel Channel: Spike and Clem roam the country in Spike's Cadillac with the painted-over windows (what ever happened to that anyway? Did Dru get it in the split?), searching for snacks.

Unlive! With Spike and Clem!: demon chat show. With snacks.

[> [> [> [> Spike and Clem Show? I'd watch that. ;-) -- s'kat, 16:03:01 02/01/03 Sat

[> Makes me realize why I still watch -- luna, 15:25:29 02/01/03 Sat

Everytime there's an episode that I write off as uninteresting, someon like OnM writes something brilliant like this to show me all I didn't see. Thanks to all for mental growth (if this keeps up, I will need to buy new hats).

[> [> Oops! Intended this for thread below (Touch My Cape) -- luna (but this one's great, too), 10:53:06 02/02/03 Sun

[> Re: OT: Which ME actors would you cast in new, JW-led non-Buffyverse series? -- grifter, 18:08:47 02/01/03 Sat

Hmm, difficult question, of course I´d like to see all of the main character´s actors in a new show, so I´ll try to put together a cast from the sidekicks and gueststars section.

Christian Kane ("Lindsey", AtS) or Jonathan M. Woodward ("Holden Webster", BtVS) or DB Woodside ("Principle Wood", BtVS) - hero

Alexa Davalos ("Gwen", AtS)or Iyari Limon ("Kennedy", BtVS) - heroine

Adam Busch ("Warren", BtVS) or "guy who played Bagder" ("Badger", FF) - creepy comic relief

Keith Szarabajka ("Holtz", AtS) or Armin Shimerman ("Principal Snyder", BtVS) or Steve Rankin ("Mr. McClay", BtVS) - creepy mentor-guy

Stephanie Romanov ("Lilah", AtS) or Claire Kramer ("Glory", BtVS) or "gal who played Mrs. Reynolds" ("Mrs. Reynolds", FF) - femme fatale

Melissa Marsala ("Judy" from "Are You Now Or Have You Ever Been", AtS)or Daisy McCrackin ("Bethany" from "Untouched", AtS)or Erika Thormahlen ("Sunny" from "A New World", AtS) - damsel in distress with untapped potential

Jeremy Foley ("Billy Palmer" from "Nightmares" - btw, Palmer is the last name of the murder victim in "Twin Peaks" - coincidence??, BtVS) - strange kid

"guy who played Early" ("Early" from "Objects in Space", FF)

David Wells ("Cheese Man", BtVS) - well, it is my firm beliefe that there should always, always, always be a cheeseman

[> [> forgot something... -- grifter, 18:19:45 02/01/03 Sat

"guy who played Early" ("Early" from "Objects in Space", FF) - villain (he was brilliant)

[> [> Re: OT: Which ME actors would you cast in new, JW-led non-Buffyverse series? -- skpe, 07:25:52 02/02/03 Sun

I like all the above casting choices but you still need a concept so here are some I would like to see
1. A show built around the "Blade Runner' universe (with James masters in the Harrison Ford role)
2. Use the universe created in the "Borderland" books, (elves and rock and roll,). Aimee Mann could do a guest shot at the Dancing ferret.
3. The Asimov foundation series (James masters as a young Hari Seldon)

Who are you? -- Wisewoman, 14:27:45 02/02/03 Sun

No, not the Buffy ep! A former member of this forum sent me a link to what I think is an hilarious site today. Check it out for yourself.

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html

I'm still going through them all, but I swear I'll post which one I think I am, if the rest of you will...

;o) dub

[> Re: Who are you? -- Earl Allison, 14:51:16 02/02/03 Sun

Sadly, I'd probably be 'Issues,' with that issue being claims that Spike is an all-around wonderful guy.

Maybe 'Lonely Guy,' but I think 'Issues' is more honest.

If anyone has a better label, let me know :(

Take it and run.

[> [> Awwww! -- Rahael, 20:22:40 02/02/03 Sun

Well, the label I'd use for you is "awwwwww".

But then I agree with your issue! hehehe.

[> Re: Who are you? -- dub ;o), 15:10:37 02/02/03 Sun

Okay, I think I might be a combo-- Bliss Ninny, because I do tend to discuss cats indiscriminately at times, Coffee Klatch, because I often depart from the main topic and go off on an "off topic" tangent, and maybe Diplomat, 'cause I've been know to stick my nose in where it doesn't belong in an attempt to smooth things over.

As Earl mentions above, others may have differing opinions!

;o) dub

[> Re: Who are you? -- Whipwoman, 15:22:18 02/02/03 Sun

Dahlings, of course I'm the Netiquette Nazi! Why, I even posed for the picture!

[> Re: Who are you? -- slain, 16:45:33 02/02/03 Sun

I think probably the best way to judge which type we all fit would be to ask other people - which would be hard for the other person, as all of them are fairly non-complimentary! I personally consider myself to fit into several of them (though I've got the benefit, some would say curse, of knowing what I think rather than just what I type), but from talking to others I know I'm somewhere between Weenie and Eagle Scout... with a tendency towards Jekyl and Hyde, so watch it!

[> Who *are* these people?!? -- Random, 16:49:03 02/02/03 Sun

Uggh! Are these real types that people on this board have encountered? I must be a "newbie" because I've never participated in any other forum but this one and -- with a couple troller exceptions and a couple bong/garble mixed breeds -- have never encountered most of these types. I even learned my limited html the old-fashioned way: viewing the source and working out what does what. Sure, I've heard rumors about these sorts from my more cyberspatially-inclined friends, but this board has always been extraordinarily intelligent and civilized. Sort of like the kinds of people I like in real life. Hell, I've already decided that a few of you would be really great people to hang out with and talk to over a pint -- or a few pitchers -- of lager. *sigh* Such is the tragedy of modern times: instantaneous and prolix communication but forever denied physical presence. Of course, I wouldn't want to meet most of the types listed on the site, but somehow this forum strikes me as being a few steps and an ascent up Jacob's Ladder above that sort of thing. Just wanted to note that.

(Incidentally, I guess I'd be -- if I had to pick, and had to be honest -- an almagation of Philosopher and Bong, with the exoskeleton of a Lurker and the inpenetrable naivete of a Newbie...gosh, I hope I don't have to pick or be honest!)

[> [> Physical presence??? -- Wisewoman, 17:03:20 02/02/03 Sun

Hey, Random, you can be in the physical presence of many of us at the Buffy Bash 2003 in Vancouver in June. There's a link at the top of the page.

And believe me, we're all a lot nicer than those nasty "Flame Warriors."

dub ;o)

[> [> AtpoAtpoBtVS -- Rahael, 20:49:43 02/02/03 Sun

A while ago, as a joke, there was a forum called "All things philosophical about AtpoBtVS"

(It's still there, but it kind of petered out - http://www.voy.com/90815/)

The link to the Meet The Posters there takes you to this Netwarriors guide.

As for any similarity here on this board to those in the rather unflattering guide, I have to admit that we can sometimes descend to that level, but frequently, and gratifiyingly rise above it.

I'd want a whole new category: "Permanent Malcontent". No one can see my moody attitude, surly manner or my disposition to be displeased but I think it kind of slips out. Plus I think it sounds a little more flattering than the ones that really describe me!

I've been pretty lucky with the people I've got to meet up with. Many a happy hour has been spent with AtPOers. Time always passes way too swiftly.

[> Re: Who are you? -- Dead Soul, 17:02:57 02/02/03 Sun

I'd have to say I'm primarily a Lurker with more than a touch of Ennui and the knee-jerk impulses, usually successfully repressed, of a Grammarian.

Dead (and, la la la, resolutely ignoring any resemblance to Acne) Soul

[> Re: Who are you? -- Cactus Watcher, 17:24:46 02/02/03 Sun

Wish I could say I was Big Dog or Kung Fu Master, but no luck on either of those. Other's may think of me as Profundus Maximus, but most of us here really do know too much to fall in that category. I guess that makes me the more annoying Tireless Rebutter. The illustration at that site explains a lot. With all those fingers on the keyboard, no wonder I can't type anything right!

[> Re: Who are you? -- Majin Gojira, 18:07:47 02/02/03 Sun

I think I'm a Hybrid Android/All Caps/lonelyguy/Tireless Rubbtle Flamewarrior. Having participated in prescious few debates over the years (mostly stupid people and fundementalists). Though I do have a tendancy to be a Lurker, I hang around until winning or defeated.

Oh, How I wish I could be labeled a Godzilla...just for the name alone.

And, I've actually met a forum God. Darth Wong. :)

[> I think I'm a bit of a bunch of the types -- Rufus, 19:10:29 02/02/03 Sun

Where do I start because I feel I have a bit of each of these......admin, archivist, Bliss Ninny, Coffee Klatch, Eagle Scout, Kung fu master (yeah, right...thought I'd just throw that one in), Peacemaker (if I'm in the mood), Philosopher (ha ha ha ha ha), Royals, Therapist, and Toxic Granny.

[> What? No "Obsessed Cheerleader" on the list?!? ;o) -- Rob, 21:09:03 02/02/03 Sun

[> [> Nope. You're an original, Roberino! -- HonorH (The Snarky MPD), 23:40:44 02/02/03 Sun

[> Re: Who are you? -- shadowkat, 21:17:28 02/02/03 Sun

Didn't have time to make through all of them..but I did see aspects of Jekyll and Hyde, Ego, Philospher, and well
Peacemaker and Miss Bliss (my recent chat about Kitty Cats with Rufus probably puts us both there;-))...but would agree with Random outside of a few trolls here and there we seem pretty well-behaved.

[> I got this, too, dub, and I hate to say it, but... -- Marie, 01:24:50 02/03/03 Mon

...I think I'm a 'closet' Grammarian! I don't contribute much, and I always correct spelling and grammar in my head as I read posts. How sad is that?!

Marie

[> Preserving thread--remember the voynok demon has nine lives! -- Masq, 09:23:34 02/03/03 Mon

[> My Name Is Legion -- cjl, 10:12:42 02/03/03 Mon

Like most of us on the board, I'm probably an Eagle Scout, with a touch of Philosopher and disturbing tendencies towards Ennui, Diplomat, and Lonely Guy.

Of course, being one of the big Xander fans/apologists on this board, I'm also a Duelist. (Hi, Sophist! *Waves*)

[> [> Would that be "C.J. Legion?" -- dub ;o), 11:13:18 02/03/03 Mon

[> [> [> Uh, no. -- cjl (I Am Multitudes), 12:31:58 02/03/03 Mon

[> Hmm... can't find myself -- Masquerade, 11:21:06 02/03/03 Mon

All the Admin categories seem to depict such people as power hungry. That, of course, could never describe me. *g*

Guess they need a category for the lurking admin who occassionally posts on topic when someone on AtS does something that fits my speculative theories, but usually just does janitorial duties in the background and some occassional peace-making via email.

Maybe I could be "voyuer". I create a board and sit back. I like to watch.

But of course a certain little Rebel without a Clue who used to grace this board had to send that email to me, too!

[> [> You can have traces of a type..... -- Rufus, 13:55:39 02/03/03 Mon

I just picked the ones I felt at any given time applied to me and made a casserole...;)

[> [> Yep, that's the guy... -- dub ;o), 17:30:43 02/03/03 Mon

...but he used to bug me more when he occasionally turned into "Compost" in chat...

;o)
The Beast & the Sword (spoiler "Awakening") -- lunasea, 18:34:01 02/02/03 Sun

On "Awakening" we got to see Angel's idea of a perfect day that would lead to his perfect moment of happiness. It was a fantasy and contained things that he wanted to see, not things that he necessarily believed would happen. In "Deep Down" we saw Angel's harsh, cruel world. In "Awakening" we saw his perfect world.

But even in a perfect world fantasy, our world view intrudes. It is just disguised, usually really well. It is in those disguises that we are revealed. The fantasy is used to bring out Angelus. Angelus is on Angel's mind, but seems to be distinctly missing from the fantasy. Our minds just don't work that way. Angelus is going to figure heavily into that fantasy. So is the soul that he is about to loose. The fantasy is going to be built around those two things, since those are what occupy his thoughts. Everything Angel wants to happen (his perfect day) will revolve around them.

In Angel's fantasy, not only do Angelus and his soul manifest themselves symbolically, but through how they are used in the fantasy, we can see how Angel views them. That is the important part of "Awakening." This view is what drives the arc. It is what informs Angelus. When Angel does get his soul back, he will have to reevaluate his view of it and Angelus. That is what this entire season is about, how Angel views things and what this causes. The dream says a lot about how Angel sees himself and his troubles, but the core of Angel is the demon and soul that make him up.

Angel's perfect day wasn't just centered around reconciliation with Wesley, Cordy and Connor. They weren't just working together. From the beginning of the fantasy, they were working together to a specific end, the defeat of The Beast. Even the desouling was towards this particular end. The bulk of the fantasy was an Indiana Jones style adventure to get the sword, the only known thing that could defeat The Beast. The fantasy revolved around the defeat of The Beast and obtaining the sword.

The Beast is Angelus. That is how Angelus was manifested unconsciously. The Beast has been trying to set up an alliance with Angel. Angelus has been trying to get Angel to do bad things, since Angel got a soul. The Beast wants to know why Angel won't join him. Angelus probably feels the same way. Angel believes that when he kills The Beast, it will destroy him. In Angel's fantasy, Angel survives. It is interesting that when The Beast is destroyed it becomes a pile of ashes, the fate that awaits vampires upon their demise. How many demons does that happen to?

The entire season takes on a new level when viewed from this perspective, especially things like where The Beast rose, why Angel can't remember meeting The Beast and the conversation Cordy has with Angel in "Apocalypse Nowish" that is interrupted by a vision of The Beast, not giving Angel a chance to defend himself.

The Beast is missing from most of Angel's fantasy, because Angel only sees Angelus as something to conquer. It is something that motivates him, not something he is. His identity is formed in relationship to Angelus not as something he is, but as something he is not. This is why the Beast only makes a brief appearance towards the end. It is his defeat that is Angel's perfect day. The bulk of the fantasy is about the sword.

There is one thing that can beat The Beast, "The Tooth of Light." The only known thing to keep Angelus in check/defeat him is Angel's soul. Angel's soul is strong enough (as he learned in Pylea) to keep Angelus in check, even when the demon is in pure form. They find out about the sword from writing on the Shaman's body. The body holds this information, much as Angel's body houses his soul.

The sword is described as "The Tooth of Light." This shows what an incredibly positive view Angel has of his soul. His soul is the goodness that keeps his demon in check and makes him the Champion. They go through an adventure to get the sword. This shows all the fun things that will happen from when Angelus escapes to when they get his soul back, which will inevitably be stolen.

Where is that sword? Behind a wall that is guarded by the symbols of the Hebrew Patriarchs. Angel's identity rests mainly in two things, being Champion and being a good Father, not only of Connor, but also of AI. As he tells Connor before the fantasy, Angelus is not his father. Angel views his soul as what makes him Connor's dad. Interesting view considering why Connor was conceived.

Angel reaches into an orb of light to pull out the sword. Angel's soul is housed in pure bright white light. This light didn't harm him. What beautiful imagery. We can see how Angel views his soul. Cordy couldn't see where the sword was. Angel did. He had no problem finding the sword in the orb and it was completely natural for him to retrieve it. It was Angel that caused the orb of light to even manifest so Cordy could see it.

Everything is fine for a while, then this orb turns fiery red and all hell breaks loose. Angel isn't only thinking about loosing his soul, but what it will be like to get it again. As Wesley told him, the Shaman not only can extract his soul, but more importantly, he can restore it. That has to be playing on Angel's mind as he has his fantasy. It manifests itself when we see what happens when Angel first is in possession of the sword. Angel isn't just worried about Angelus getting loose or not being able to come back, but seeing all those faces again.

Angel knows that getting his soul isn't all good. He has been through this before and even though he sees the soul as good, it doesn't mean that things will be easy. It is a curse for a reason. Still the chaos was only from obtaining the soul. It is that initial acquisition that is hard. That is how he sees things now. He remembers what it was like in Romania when he got the soul the first time, but now that he has been through all that, after the initial shock has worn off, he will be fine. In his fantasy, he is able to handle things. It is chaos, but it subsides and he does get himself and the girl out of there unharmed. That is what he thinks, any way.

From there a series of things happen with that sword, from Angel almost falling on it to Gunn playing with it. Just as with the adventure to get the sword itself, this is foreshadowing for the fun wacky hijinks that will ensue around Angel's actual soul.

Angel brings the sword to the hotel and The Beast shows up. It is interesting how the Beast interacts with the sword. When he first sees it, he says "Is that what I think it is," but doesn't show extreme fear. This is the one thing that can do him in. He obviously knows that, if he knows what it is. The swords slashes The Beast. So far, nothing has touched him. Still The Beast isn't really phased, even with the cuts.

Why isn't The Beast concerned? Because a sword is only a weapon. It has to be wielded by someone. That someone is Angel. The Beast is still trying to get his alliance with Angel. When Angel refuses, The Beast shatters the sword with one hand. In Angel's view, Angelus temporarily wins. The soul is shattered.

In some ways, Angel's soul is shattered because of Angelus, just like that sword. Wesley stole Connor because Wesley didn't think that Angel had enough of a handle on his demon not to devour his son. For that reason, Connor went to Hell with Holtz. Connor has some serious problems with Angel because he was raised by Holtz who hated Angel because of Angelus. Connor at the beginning even says there is no difference between Angelus and Angel. Cordy has major problems with what she experienced of Angelus while she was up in the Higher Realms. The fantasy is about reconnecting with these three, but he has to reconnect because of Angelus.

Angel tries so hard to be loving and forgiving. In his fantasy, he is incredibly magnanimous. In real life, he tried to kill Wesley, threw his son out, smashed things, kicked out Cordy and won't talk to her. Even in his perfect day, these things manifested themselves symbolically, through that broken sword.

Angel picks up that broken sword and it was able to pierce The head of The Beast. In his fantasy, even Angel's broken compassion and forgiveness is able to kill The Beast. Angel does have total faith in his abilities to keep Angelus in check. Even if he does get upset occasionally, smashes things, and tried to kill Wesley, he isn't going to go evil and start feeding again. He won't block out the sun.

That is how Angel views the demon and the soul. That is what is key about that episode/fantasy. We get a lot of foreshadowing about what will follow it, but the key is how Angel views his demon and his soul, The Beast and the sword. Now we get to see what they really are and how that affects Angel and Angelus.

[> Great post! -- Masq, 09:39:57 02/03/03 Mon

[> You are very smart -- Mackenzie, 11:40:07 02/03/03 Mon

I love to read your posts! They have such insite and interesting points of view. I wish words and ideas would come together for me like that!
What do you do for a living? Are you a writer?

[> Second that -- slain, 11:43:07 02/03/03 Mon

There're definitely a lot of parallels with 'Restless' in Angel's fantasy. They're less obvious, because whereas 'Restless' highlights its dreamstate, we only find out It Was All a Dream at the end of the episode. Restless used a lot of physical metaphors - the one I remember best was the mud as a symbol of Buffy going in search of her primitive Slayer essence, though (as Joss says in the DVD commentary) it did look more like she was giving herself a facial.

I like the idea of the sword as a metaphor for the soul. Look at how it appears and how it's used - Angel and Cordy find it together: the soul being given purpose through love. Angel gives it to Wesley to look after, symbolising perhaps Angel's desire to include him in the group and to trust him. His soul is shattered, metaphorically damaged by his past deeds, but with the help of his son he can used it to banish his inner Beast. This is how Angel feels - that if he's good enough, he can exercise Angelus from him. He seems to view himself as an independent entity, with two factions (sword and beast, soul and demon, good and evil) warring inside him - he thinks that if he sides with the soul in a battle, then he can win against the beast. The question is whether or not it would be possible for Angel to 'win' his inner battle; I don't think it is, as Angel and Angelus, in real life, don't seem as separate as Angel would like. Perhaps he knows he can't; in the dream it's his soul, his love, with makes him lose that soul, and let the beast win. Life isn't quite as clear cut, even in his fantasy.

[> [> Then there's the Freudian interpretation... -- Wisewoman, 12:01:50 02/03/03 Mon

slain wrote:
I like the idea of the sword as a metaphor for the soul. Look at how it appears and how it's used - Angel and Cordy find it together: the soul being given purpose through love.

In Angel's "dream," he needs a big, magic sword to defeat the Beast, while what's really happening is that he's being desouled and turned back into Angelus to defeat the Beast. And how do we get him back to Angelus? Well, it seems that the sex act, or even a fantasy about the sex act, does the trick. Makes that big ol' sword seem pretty phallic...

;o)

[> [> [> Re: Then there's the Freudian interpretation... -- Anne, 12:17:18 02/03/03 Mon

But his sword gets broken, in fact it doesn't last longer than a minute or so...what does that tell you? (Ok, I'll be quiet now)

[> [> [> Perfect happiness -- Masq, 12:46:51 02/03/03 Mon

In my observation of the dream, the roll in the hay with Cordelia was icing on the cake. Angel could never have gotten to the soul-losing without making peace with his friends and defeating the beast.

The other time I think Angel got dangerously close to losing his soul was in last year's finale, when he thought Connor's attentive-son ruse was real, and Holtz had seemed to hand Connor over to him no strings attached, and Cordelia had indicated she returned his feelings. Angel headed up to the ocean bluffs to meet her, hoping to hear her say so directly. I suspect that if she had, and then they'd kissed, his heart would have been so full at that moment, he'd have lost it right there. His soul, that is, no getting groiny needed.

Luckily Connor showed up and zapped him with a dose of reality.

[> [> [> [> Re: Perfect happiness -- dub ;o), 13:13:48 02/03/03 Mon

Oh, I agree completely. I think there are probably a number of ways that Angel could experience perfect happiness, and reconciliation with Connor might well be one of the them. His fantasy set that up along with a whole lot of other Angel-warm-fuzzies.

It's just that the two times we've observed it, the actual moment of soul removal has been intrinsically linked to groininess...is that a word?

;o)

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Perfect happiness -- lunasea, 13:33:49 02/03/03 Mon

Connor being born didn't do it. Holding his infant son didn't do it. Connor's first smile didn't do it.

It isn't just happy. It is loosing himself. He has to be able to get beyond the guilt he feels that is always with him.

Certain chemicals cause certain reactions in our brain. Orgasm is next to godliness for a reason.

I don't think Angel could do it now that he knows about the curse, unless he was under a spell.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Maybe not next to godliness, but... -- Masq, 14:03:36 02/03/03 Mon

Some people refer to orgasm as "a little death". I've never gotten that analogy. The way I think of it, is as close as we humans get to a pure animal mind, wiped clean of higher reasoning for a few brief seconds, an altered state of consciousness, if you will.

Which may be why ME seems stuck on this sex leads to perfect happiness thing. It's not the sex, per se, but the fact that during those few seconds, all the crap goes away. That, along with Angel's life is going pretty swell, and he has a beautiful woman he cares about in his arms, and well,

Helllooo Angelus!

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Maybe not next to godliness, but... -- lunasea, 09:01:00 02/04/03 Tue

One thing I found interesting is when Angel lost it with Buffy, they knew the Judge was assembled and they were hiding. He also knew all the vampire/Slayer stuff, as he admitted that "I try not to" and "maybe we shouldn't." None of that mattered. He loved Buffy so much that everything fell away when he was with her, basking in the after glow. THAT is true love.

With Cordy it required him cleaning up his life first. He never actually says I love you, either.

What is important is all the crap falling away part. With Buffy that happened because he was with Buffy. He had to manufacture it with Cordy.

[> [> [> [> Re: Perfect happiness -- lunasea, 13:29:52 02/03/03 Mon

I don't think so, because in the back of his mind would be "this is never going to work because of the curse (or I am a vampire or not good enough or any number of things)." As long as that is playing, he can't be perfectly happy.

[> [> Re: Second that -- lunasea, 13:16:29 02/03/03 Mon

Thanks for all the comments. They make me blush.

Angel and Cordy find it together: the soul being given purpose through love.

But they don't find it together. They find the room it is in, but Cordy doesn't even see the orb of light without Angel's help. Right now Cordy can't see Angel's soul. More reality intruding on the fantasy. When Angel took out the soul, he displayed it for Cordy. He wants to show Cordy his soul. Once she sees it, everything will be alright and he won't be hurt. He didn't fall on the pointy end.

When Angel gives it to Wesley, that to me symbolized the incredible trust that he is giving Wesley by allowing the desouling to even take place. Angel's soul is literally in Wes' hands. He sure isn't going to trust Connor with it.

However, when the desouling actually takes place, it isn't Wes' name he cries. It is the one person that Angel actually trusts and can turn to, Buffy. Who saved him last time? Buffy!!

I had an entire part about how I think reality is, but I am going to stick to analyzing what has been shown with a few predictions rather than heap my own world view on top of the show. I understand the dissociation that Angel is displaying (which will probably account for his memory lapse). I also know what it took for me to heal. So far Angel's recovery has been built on the same realizations mine has, but I won't take it for granted that this will continue.

[> [> [> Soul/Sword? -- Wisewoman, 13:44:25 02/03/03 Mon

But they don't find it together. They find the room it is in, but Cordy doesn't even see the orb of light without Angel's help. Right now Cordy can't see Angel's soul. More reality intruding on the fantasy. When Angel took out the soul, he displayed it for Cordy. He wants to show Cordy his soul. Once she sees it, everything will be alright and he won't be hurt. He didn't fall on the pointy end.

When Angel gives it to Wesley, that to me symbolized the incredible trust that he is giving Wesley by allowing the desouling to even take place. Angel's soul is literally in Wes' hands. He sure isn't going to trust Connor with it.

Okay, I'm getting a little lost here. I understand that you earlier equated Angel's soul with the sword, but when you speak of him giving it to Wesley, are you talking about the actual sword? Because in that case, isn't that the same sword that he let Gunn play with, and break the coffee table with? He wasn't thinking of it as his soul at that point...

;o)

[> [> [> Ok, I'm dense -- Vickie, 13:46:19 02/03/03 Mon

Fun post, interesting thoughts. One thing caught my attention. Luna said: " However, when the desouling actually takes place, it isn't Wes' name he cries. It is the one person that Angel actually trusts and can turn to, Buffy. Who saved him last time? Buffy!!"

Uh, when did Buffy save Angel from Angelus? Willow did the resouling, pretty much on her own hook (the second time, the one that worked). Buffy sent souled Angel to Acathla's hell. How was that saving?

She certainly helped him recover when he miraculously returned. But she didn't save him from soul loss that I can see.

[> [> [> [> Re: Ok, I'm dense -- lunasea, 08:46:24 02/04/03 Tue

1. Willow does the spell because Buffy wants it. It is Buffy's choice. Willow wasn't acting on her own "A big no to danger."

2. Buffy was trying to stall Angelus before Giles was taken. Angel knows this, since he noticed her heart wasn't in it. Why was she stalling? Angel is a bright boy and probably figured it out afterwards.

3. Buffy hid Angel from everyone when he came back from Hell and helped him get better. Everyone pretty much would have had him staked for Angelus' crimes.

4. It was even Buffy who figured out that something was seriously wrong with Angel, rather than just dismiss it as him going back to his nature or being an ass.

Buffy is the only one in the entire Buffyverse who has complete faith in Angel. When Angel acts out of character, Buffy is the one that realizes this and takes steps to help him.

That is what makes them so special. They see each other like no 2 other characters do and when they aren't acting right, they help each other. They protect and warm each others' hearts.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Ok, I'm dense -- Arethusa, 12:20:49 02/04/03 Tue

Buffy and Angel were intensely romantic, but they also broke each other's heart (to be melodramatic about it). The frustration of their situation led them to frequent fighting and mutual misery.

Amends

Buffy: (tearfully) What about me? I love you so much... And I tried to
make you go away... I killed you and it didn't help.

She shoves him off of her and gets up.

Buffy: (crying) And I hate it! I hate that it's *so* hard... and that
you can hurt me *so* much. (sobs, then harshly) I know everything that
you did, because you did it to me. Oh, God! I wish that I wished you
dead. I don't. (whispers) I can't.

Quotes on why their relationship wouldn't work. (O/T, but I just thought I'd throw these in.)

The Prom
Joyce: I'm here because I'm worried about you two. In general.
Angel: What happened before, when I changed, it won't happen again.
Joyce: That's not all I'm concerned about. I don't have to tell you that you and Buffy are from different worlds.
Angel: No, you don't.
Joyce: She's had to deal with a lot. Grew up fast. Sometimes even I forget that she's still just a girl.
Angel: I'm old enough to be her ancestor.
Joyce: She's just starting out in life.
Angel: I know. I think about it more now that she's staying in Sunnydale.
Joyce: Good. Because when it comes to you, Angel, she's just like any other young woman in love. You're all she can see of tomorrow. But I think we both know that there are some hard choices ahead. If she can't make them, you're gonna have to. I know you care about her. I just hope you care enough.

Choices
Mayor: Yeah, and that's just one of the things you're going to have to deal with. You're immortal, she's not. It's not. I married my Edna May in ought-three and I was with her right until the end. Not a pretty picture. Wrinkled and senile and cursing me for my youth. Wasn't our happiest time. And let's not forget the fact that any moment of true happiness will turn you evil. I mean, come on. What kind of a life can you offer her? I don't see a lot of Sunday picnics in the offing. I see skulking in the shadows, hiding from the sun. She's a blossoming young girl and you want to keep her from the life she should have until it has passed her by. My God! I think that's a little selfish. Is that what you came back from Hell for? Is that your greater purpose? (he stares at Angel for a moment and then shakes his head in disgust) Make the trade.

Lovers Walk

Spike: (faces them) You're *not* friends. You'll never be friends.
You'll be in love till it kills you both. You'll fight, and you'll shag,
and you'll hate each other till it makes you quiver, but you'll never be
friends. (points at his temple) Love isn't brains, children, it's
blood... (clasps his chest) blood screaming inside you to work its will.

Neither Buffy nor Angel want to hear this.

Quotes by psyche.

[> [> [> [> [> [> But that is why it has to work out in the end -- lunasea, 12:47:26 02/04/03 Tue

It is the evil creatures S3 that are the ones against Buffy/Angel and don't think they can work things out. Evil, including Spike, doesn't have a clue about what exists between Buffy and Angel. Companionship, affection, jealousy. That is all they see.

Buffy/Angel's biggest problem was in not trusting that love could conquer all things. They didn't break each other's heart. This lack of faith did. All their misery stems from it.

Take what Buffy said in Amends and combine that with what the Spirit Guide said in Intervention. What better way to show Buffy turning love/pain into strength? Love, give, forgive, it is her nature. Running away isn't.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Perhaps not. -- Arethusa, 14:49:15 02/04/03 Tue

Buffy, Angel and Joyce aren't evil, and they said the same thing. From an existential viewpoint, I agree that the only thing stopping Buffy and Angel from being together was Buffy and Angel. If they could have lived with the pain of being together but not together, their relationship could have continued. They decided they had to be apart. Love can't conquer everything-there is no question that Buffy and Angel loved each other very much. But as Joyce pointed out to Angel, sometimes loving means letting go. Buffy can also love Angel, forgive him for hurting her, and let herself love someone who can give her what she needs. Which is more loving-to let someone go so they can have a fulfilling relationship, or selfishly try to keep them in a relationship that will only frustrate them?

Angel would have to shanshu and fall out of love with Cordelia to be with Buffy. (If Angel doesn't love Cordelia, then he's either a fool for convincing himself he is, or a liar for telling her he loves her.) Buffy would have to simply ignore her feelings for Spike. They would have to get to know each other all over again-both have changed since they were together, especially Buffy, who was about Dawn's age when they were together. Either Buffy or Angel or both would have to move, leaving their friends behind, and bring their "kids" with them. Angel would still have his hostile son to deal with, whom he needs to protect and wants to guide. They would also both have to adjust to no longer having superpowers, and living regular lives.

Current board | More February 2003