February 2001 Voy Posts

Previous February 2001  

March 2001


Speculations on Angel's war -- spotjon, 13:07:52 02/23/01 Fri

I posted this on the "old" board. Thought I'd throw it in here for good
measure.

==
What reasons does Angel have for fighting? Here are a few he might use:

1. For the promised gift of humanity
2. Redemption (closely tied to #1)
3. Because there is still "good" in the world
4. Because it is the right thing to do

Let's take a quick look at these.

#1 - Ultimately a very selfish reason, and definitely the one he was
fighting for at the beginning of the season. Glad to see he's moved on.

#2 - Redemption is a tricky thing. It can be very selfish in some
circumstances, and is often misguided. Angel realizes he can't attain his
own redemption. He's committed too many sins for him to atone for.

#3 - This is debatable. ;-) Perhaps the desire of many to not be bad will be
reason enough for Angel.

#4 - This is the reason that Angel should choose. He shouldn't be fighting
the good fight because of something he will gain, or because he does or
doesn't see good in people. He should fight because it is the right thing to
do. Even if the whole world abandons everything good, and Angel stands
alone, he should still fight. If he fights for people, then people will let
him down. He needs a higher reason for fighting than simply finding good in
people.

-spotjon


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- Rufus, 14:47:54 02/23/01 Fri

We must remember that Angel got a view of the world through the eyes of
evil. To find out that home office was where he started must have been a big
shock. But Holland left out a crutial piece of information. Sure evil is in
the hearts and minds of every living being but it's balanced by good and
only tipped in evils favor by choice. Angel had wasted his time fighting
evil with evil giving Wolfram and Hart exactly what it wanted. They have
been present at every atrocity known to man. They are the guardians of evil
they find out what the person fears and wants and twists it into evil
actions. Now I have to wonder when Angel has his epiphany will it be because
he remembers what it's like to love. Evil only survives and grows if good
ceases to stand up to it. Angel has to realise that his place in the battle
isn't to destroy evil but to help us from destroying ourselves because of
it.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- Lyn, 18:19:11 02/24/01 Sat

I must disagree with the statement that "evil is in every living thing"!
Every Living Thing includes plants, fish, little duckies... you can't just
accept a broad statement like that, especially when it's made by Holland! I
believe the correct statement would be that "evil lurks in the heart and
mind of all humans."


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- Rufus, 19:28:37 02/24/01 Sat

Holland said specifically every living being and that sets up alot of
interesting possabilities......what is considered a living being.....what do
we consider life?

Being: 1:existence also life 2: the qualities or constitution of an existent
thing 3: a living thing esp:person.

If Holland only meant persons it's simple but does he also mean demons? Plus
if there is evil in every living being that also means that there is also
good. That Holland didn't mention at all. So what is a living being in
respect to what Holland said?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- Lyn, 19:39:14 02/24/01 Sat

Is there a moment in a humans life when they "decide" to be good or evil? Is
this decision made in early childhood? Or is this an adult decision? Is it a
concious decision? It all leads me to wondering about Angels decision to
give up the good fight. When a human is turned into a vampire the decision
to be a blood feeding demon (evil) is made for you, right? This come from
not having a soul. We have all seen Spike try to stake himself. This could
be construed as his choice between good and evil. Now Angel has decided that
he can't win in the fight against evil. No matter how many demons he slays
there will always be more. Holland makes it seem like the bad out number the
good 10 to 1. So Angel just gives up the fight and decides to join the bad
guys and be Angelus again. Why didn't he just eat someone? by having sex did
he think the decision between good and evil would be made for him when he
lost his soul? Besides, he already told Darla that having sex with him
wouldn't turn him evil because he never loved her so why sleep with her now?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- Rufus, 19:59:48 02/24/01
Sat

He didn't decide to become one of the bad guys he wanted to stop feeling
human emotions. Being a vampire without conscience was easy no rules just
fun with no pesky emotions stopping you from doing what you want, when you
want. Angel was basically trying to kill the man in the monster, the part of
him that cared and hoped for more. If he lost his soul, that man would be
gone, and he didn't care enough to worry about what was left. If he had just
eaten someone the guilt and shame would still be there. So get rid of the
part of him that made him care. He was committing suicide as surely as Kate
was, just using a very different method.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- Lyn, 20:17:21 02/24/01
Sat

But why didn't he set himself on fire or stake himself? Why let Angelus
loose on the world? (or at least try to let Angelus loose?)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- Rufus, 23:03:17
02/24/01 Sat

It was a crime of opportunity, Darla was there and he was in the right frame
of mind to do something stupid...he wasn't thinking about the consequences
he only wanted to get warm...ironic he chose an undead person to do that
with. Plus she was familiar to him.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- OnM, 23:30:26
02/24/01 Sat

Is it possible that he did what he did because *both* Angelus and Liam
wanted it at that moment? Angelus wants it because he wants to be free of
the human soul, and sees it as his opportunity to take advantage over Liam
while he's weak.

Liam wants it because he 'wants to be free of the cold', because Holland has
put this horrifying 'truth' into his head, and what normal human in despair
doesn't long to lose themselves for even a short while in the arms of a
lover?

The combination of the two is just too much, and he gives in. Who else could
he go to? Cordelia? Kate? Anne? It's perverse, of course, but he also knows
that Darla is unlikely to turn him away. So you're right, Rufus, it is a
'crime of opportunity'.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- Rufus,
01:07:42 02/25/01 Sun

OnM I'm most certainly glad that Wes wasnt't there when Angel got to the
hotel...sorry couldn't help myself with that thought....Gunn would be in
trouble too.....


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- Lyn,
06:44:27 02/25/01 Sun

Rufus, don't go there!


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- Brian, 15:35:58
02/25/01 Sun

Maybe it was all about "getting warm." Angel has had a big shock, "Hell is
other people." Maybe he needs to do something creative, rather than
destructive. Make Love, not War. Of course, rough sex may not be the right
decision, but where (or who)else can he turn (to)? Everyone he knows is
either down for the count or AWOL. Being a brooding vampire would just lead
to more cold.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war -- Aquitaine,
17:01:59 02/25/01 Sun

After reading the shooting script, I am relatively sure that Angel wouldn't
have resorted to violence in 'making love' *cough* to Darla, if she had
responded initially to his advances (the script says he kisses her gently to
begin with) and if she hadn't laughed at him. Neither of these things
excuses his behaviour (it is a near rape after all) or the fact that he
risked unleashing Angelus on the world but they may explain his actions.

I think the time for finger pointing has come or will come to an end on
Angel. Angel now knows for certain that he cannot atone for the things he
has done (both as Angelus and now as Angel). It is a fluke that he was given
a soul but he's just going to have to take it at face value and truly
appreciate how others (in the Reprise sense, Hell itself) have invested
themselves in him (Kate, Wes, Cordy) and how very important that investment
is.

***

BTW. I love the way this board always brings the thread that was last
responded to to the top. Very handy.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war (spoilers for
next episode) -- rowan, 17:56:23 02/25/01 Sun

Is it just me? This whole Angel sleeping with Darla thing just confuses me.
He turns to Angelus if he knows pure happiness. We learned from BtVS that
the definition is sex with true love (sorry to oversimplify!). He must know
when he sleeps with Darla whether he loves her or not right? I mean, he can
at least compare the experience with Buffy.

So he's either knowingly embracing evil, or he's in it for something else.
We know from future events that it's not the first. So the event is without
risk for him. What's the something else he's seeking? To get warm? Does he
really expect that to happen with Darla? Or is it just to get the glove?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war (spoilers
for next episode) -- Isabel, 19:32:22 02/25/01 Sun

I think Angel forgot that Love+Sex=Perfect Happiness, not Lust+Sex. He's
been celibate since his time with Buffy, (he'd probably been celibate since
he got his soul back) so he equated orgasms with losing his soul.

He was in such pain, he wanted it to end any way it took. He didn't care if
it unleashed Angelus. He'd be out of pain then. If Darla wasn't there he
might have staked himself.

Darla didn't have the glove. He took it from her and dropped it in Holland's
elevator when the depression and desolation took him.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war
(spoilers for next episode) -- rowan, 19:50:13 02/25/01 Sun

Thanks...missed that detail about the glove. I was in and out of the room
during the ep.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war
(spoilers for next episode) -- jb, 18:50:23 02/26/01 Mon

I'm a newbie writing to the list. I just think Cordelia hit it on the head
when she said Angel just needed to get laid.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war
(spoilers for next episode) -- rowan, 18:54:42 02/26/01 Mon

Or maybe he thought that was what he needed. We'll have to see after the
next episode...


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Speculations on Angel's war
(spoilers for next episode) -- Aquitaine, 19:20:46 02/26/01 Mon

"I just think Cordelia hit it on the head when she said Angel just needed to
get laid."

jb, obviously you, like OnM, are fond of Ockham's Razor:)

Welcome, btw.



Do the Senior Partners Exist? -- Aquitaine, 10:24:28 02/25/01 Sun

Seeing as posts are mysteriously disappearing in our alternate posting
dimension, I thought I'd post here instead. And seeing as I am still floored
from reading the wildfeed for The Body, I thought I'd tackle Masquerade's
'easy' question (LOL): Do the Senior Partners Exist?

My first reaction to Angel's encounter with the Host this week was one of
scepticism. Why would the Host give Angel *so much* information when Angel
was obviously 'at the end of his tether? I got the impression that the Host
was working for the opposing team on this one or working as a double agent
for TPTB. His demeanour was dark as were his skin and his hair. Was it just
me or were his 'red' horns more prominent than in previous episodes?

If the Host is 'good', why does he stoke Angel's hellfire by mentioning that
this reviewer is an SP? Can he not see what Angel is going to do with that
information? I also found it interesting that the Host said that Angel's
destiny is now murky.

If Angel could be made to believe that the Home Office is hell on earth,
couldn't W&H be under some delusion that the SPs exist as well. What if the
SPs are merely a projection of their own evil?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Do the Senior Partners Exist? -- Masquerade, 11:54:47 02/25/01 Sun

That was my thought as well. I mean, about the senior partners. Angel has
the ring that according to legend will take him to the demon dimensions, W&H
can't control that Magick, I presume. So why doesn't he go there? Because he
wants to go where the senior partners are. And they aren't "down there", so
to speak. They may simply be an allegory for the evil in all human kind.

If they turn out to be just a couple of demons from Hell, I may be *bored*.
My other theory is that they are humans like the Mayor who sold their souls
and are basically immortal.

Of course, this whole senior partners thing is making me think of that
Stones tune "Sympathy for the devil".


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Do the Senior Partners Exist? -- Oh, and..., 11:57:13 02/25/01 Sun

my other thought, on the Host was, if he ISN't a double agent, that boy is
going to end horns-up in an alley somewhere, dead. A bunch of lawyers saw
him giving more info than he should to their enemy.

Of course, maybe he's a dupe like Lindsey. That whole ring=and-glove thing
smacked of just another W&H orchestrated hoop for Angel to jump through.
They wanted him to do it. The host helped make it happen.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Do the Senior Partners Exist? -- Aquitaine, 17:19:28 02/25/01 Sun

"Of course, maybe he's a dupe like Lindsey. That whole ring=and-glove thing
smacked of just another W&H orchestrated hoop for Angel to jump through.
They wanted him to do it. The host helped make it happen."

So, following your logic, W&H had a plan and the Host enabled it knowing
Angel would choose to sleep with Darla... Which means that they know Angel
wouldn't lose his soul on this little excursion because if he did he would
no longer fit the description of 'vampire with a soul'. Sounds diabolical:)
Why do I find myself feeling nostalgic for Cordelia's fuzzy visions?

I am very interested in the glove imagery in Reprise. When Angel puts the
glove on, is he in fact picking up or taking up the gauntlet (i.e. accepting
a challenge)? And when Angel drops it in the elevator, does he subsequently
'run the gauntlet' (flagellating court of judgement) of evil humans at the
Home Office or has he thrown down the gauntlet (issued a challenge in some
way)?

Historically, the gauntlet is an armoured glove and the glove from Reprise
practically had 'I am a symbol' tattooed on its ass:) Also, the juridical
imagery continues to flow on Angel. In the shooting script, Holland says
that Angel would make a good attorney. All season, Angel has been trying to
infiltrate a law firm. He keeps finding new and crazy ways to enter their
midst (ex: Boone, Lilah). And do we even know WHY he is doing this? No.

Makes me think of Angel's line to Denver: "OK, now you're making this up."


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> W&H's plan in Reprise -- Masquerade, 19:00:49 02/25/01 Sun

Oh, I don't think they wanted him to lose his soul with Darla nor did they
factor Darla in in any way. They wanted souled Angel where he was on the
walk home--utterly defeated, ready to give up on the good fight.
DeadHolland's every word contributed to that, and how did souled Angel get
to Holland? Jumping W&H's hoops.

As for the Host, he was fed information from the lawyers in Caritas. Whether
he passed in on to Angel in good faith or as a double-agent, he passed it
on. He gave Angel the clues that set Angel on his zany ring-and-glove
adventure.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: W&H's plan in Reprise -- Rufus, 20:55:34 02/25/01 Sun

Please no more double and triple agents....doesn't make sense when you think
that the host did help Angel with the scientist....I just hope the Host was
used like the last time with the guy he fired.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> The Host with the most -- Masquerade, 22:56:00 02/25/01 Sun

I also hope the The Host is as good-natured and good-intended as he seems to
be. I like him. It occured to me the other day that he is filling a role for
Angel that Doyle once filled. Doyle was always much more of an ear for Angel
than Wesley has been. Not that Wesley doesn't try, but the "demon factor"
makes it either easier for Angel to confide in the Host and Doyle or makes
it easier for the Host and Doyle to tell Angel exactly what he needs to
hear, whether Angel likes it or not. Wesley has always been just a little
afraid of Angel, I think.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Host with the most -- Rufus, 02:15:09 02/26/01 Mon

Face it Angel and the Host also have a very yummy chemistry that I love to
watch. How can Angel get mad at a green faced guy with horns and red eyes,
who, by the way covets his clothes and maybe his body. They are fun to watch
and have more chemistry than Angel and Darla. I would be willing to bribe
the writers with unlimited chocolate and many cats just to keep the Host. In
case you haven't noticed I really like the guy, he better be nice to the
cats. Plus the Host has a moxy that even Doyle never had, at least where it
concerns staring old broody boy down.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Host with the most -- Aquitaine, 05:53:11
02/26/01 Mon

Wait, wait, wait. I love the Host as well - maybe it's because I'm catholic
but I always picture him and his wits as crispy and wafer-like:) - but isn't
he clearly usurping Cordelia's role as vision-girl (and marginally as a love
interest - JK)? Cordelia's always told Angel exactly how she sees things.
She's never minced words.

Perhaps you are right, though, and fear has kept Wes and Cordy from being as
effective interventionists as Doyle and the Host. But then Doyle is dead and
the Host's allegiances have never been made clear. Wes' and Cordy's are
crystal clear.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Host with the most -- Masquerade, 06:43:22
02/26/01 Mon

Cordelia's plug-in to the PTBs has changed her role. She has become less
confrontation girl, partly out of fear, partly out of a new sensitivity that
springs from having other people's pain in your head. Plus, she sees herself
as having a different responsibility now. I think she's growing into her
role as vision-girl.

What Cordy needs is to get back some of that old Cordy chutzpa and learn how
to insist that Angel listen to HER in particular, because she's the one with
the mission info. The Host served a temporary purpose while Angel was
estranged from them but you're right, his history as mission-boy has been
spotty. Angel seems to end up in trouble as often as he save people.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Host with the most -- Rufus, 10:32:45
02/26/01 Mon

Are you saying that Cordy needs to reconnect with her inner bitch? I give
lessons....whip her into shape in no time:):):)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Cordy -- Masquerade, 10:49:01 02/26/01 Mon

Well, I'm not talking about season 1 Cordy, but, yes, Angel needs to be
slapped around a little bit. And not by Darla.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cordy's inner bitch -- Aquitaine,
11:33:34 02/26/01 Mon

Rufus, let me just say that you seem pretty frisky this afternoon;)

I thought that Cordelia was reclaiming some of her 'inner bitch' with an
extra (new) courageous/confrontational streak in the last two episodes. If
Anne hadn't interferred, she would have insisted that the thug get out of
the shelter in The Thin Dead Line and, in Reprise, if Wesley hadn't insisted
she give Angel the book, I'm sure she wouldn't have backed down from the
confrontation and the situation might have turned out differently.
Basically, Cordelia now seems willing to lay it all on the line - not for
Angel - but for what she believes in.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cordy's inner bitch -- Masq,
11:53:17 02/26/01 Mon

And let's hope she stays that way--firm, but understand the situation--when
Angel returns


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cordy's inner bitch -- Rufus,
13:31:27 02/26/01 Mon

There has been talk on the other board about how some feel the fang gang
could have done more for Angel. What I think they fail to see is first of
all he was their employer and he fired them. What were they supposed to do?
Also I can't figure out the double standard there is with Angel. He did a
truly evil thing locking the lawyers in that room knowing they would die.
But I only hear the fact that it was their own fault. I wonder if both Angel
and Spike looked like their true ages if people would feel so kindly about
their actions?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cordy's inner bitch --
Aquitaine, 13:54:59 02/26/01 Mon

Hmmm. There does seems to be a double standard regarding what we will accept
from certain human characters. We are very quick to justify vamp-behaviour.
On the other hand, I would say that, were Buffy a man, we would have less of
a problem with her morally ambiguous slays.

Similarly, I find that Cordelia, in particular, was criticised (on the other
board) for lashing out at Angel. In general, the Bat Pack was criticised for
taking a hands off attitude to Angel's rejection. But, really, what other
option did they have? Angel gave them their walking papers.

So, we seem to be harder on human and women characters. I've noticed that we
do not make as many excuses for Dru or Darla's actions. Could it be our
moral compass is skewed in favour of males and vamps?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cordy's inner bitch --
Traveler, 17:51:27 02/26/01 Mon

Ok, Dru and Darla are fairly unambiguous evils. You can blame the writers
for creating them that way, but I rather like them as they are (interesting
characters). As for the Fang gang... yeah Angel was their employer, but he
was also their friend right? They knew he could go bad, but they did nothing
when he left. This doesn't excuse his actions, but it was their
responsibilty to find out what's going on with him, even if they didn't care
about him personally. Also, if Buffy was a man and Spike was a woman,
Buffy's treatment of Spike would probably recieve even more criticism.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cordy's inner bitch -- Max,
21:25:56 02/26/01 Mon

The Lawyers deserved to die. Angel was under no obigation to save them.

They weren't worth him risking his life so that that in saving them, he
might have been staked, and then they would go off spreading evil in the
world.

He should have killed Darla and Dru when he had the chance though.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Cordy -- Rufus, 13:33:17 02/26/01 Mon

Pretty much what I think if it don't hurt it won't get his attention.:):):)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: The Host with the most -- JeniC, 09:29:04
02/28/01 Wed

The Host even tells Angel (I'm sure it's not verbatim) "I'm not your link to
the PTB, I never has, you severed that link when you fired the gang."
I think Angel realizes that Cordy is the authority in his unlife now and he
has to listen. For example at the end of the show when Cordy gets a vision
Angel catches her so she won't fall to the ground. Gunn and Wes are waiting
for the info while Angel makes sure she doesn't get hurt.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Do the Senior Partners Exist? -- VanMoodySenior, 17:52:37
03/05/01 Mon

I believe Angel dropped the glove because he had lost all hope. He also did
not care about the ring anymore. He bought into Holland's lie that there is
no Home Office. But what happens when Lindsey and Darla are discussing the
ring? He wants to know where she got it and when he realizes it is the
"ring", he gets upset. Darla said the ring didn't work. Lindsey says, "right
after we disenchanted it. It took half the meeting".
I am of the opinion that the ring would have worked and Angel would have
gotten to the home office if they had not countered with a spell. Also I
believe Angel killed one of the Senior Partners because he was to come in
the form of a demon so he could be in our reality. Angel got very close to
bringing down the senior parners. As of now he doesn't even realize it.
Perhaps he will get that ring back???? That would be a great show. VMS


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Do the Senior Partners Exist? -- Rufus, 12:33:00 02/25/01 Sun

I have also considered that as there are the PTBs there are also the Senior
Partners. Maybe they are representatives of the old ones that had to leave
this reality to give way to man. So they would have an adgenda to make sure
that this reality became as much of a hell as could be managed. That would
explain the use of Wolfram and Hart and their presense at any atrocities.
You would have the PTBs on one side and the Senior Partners on the other in
one big chess match attempting to get to checkmate. All the moves from both
sides are an attempt to tip the balance in their favor. It would make sense
that both sides would have to follow certain rules of engagement.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Do the Senior Partners Exist? -- Cleanthes, 06:51:11 03/01/01 Thu

That a Senior Partner might equate to a Power That Be makes for good
philosophy, I think, even if the show doesn't go there.

By always calling them PTB, there's a tendency to leave out the thought that
goes into the "that be" portion of their title. The Judeo-Christian God is
called the great "I am". He doesn't "be" anything. A "that be" exists _in_
time, even if eternally.

So, a Senior Partner would be a Senior Partner _that be_, and, as a powerful
entity, would certainly also be a "power".

Whatever voluminously infinite "I am" entity remains after all
considerations that can be made are made would set the rules of engagement,
or perhaps merely is the rules of engagement. (sorry, a bit of Stoic
religion creeps in at this point, I guess)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Gender roles on A:tS and BtVS -- Aquitaine, 19:18:07 02/26/01 Mon

Traveler, I guess what you are saying is that you don't agree with my
arguments;)

Just moving the thread over to the left...

Do you really think that Wes and Cordy, after months of supporting Angel
through his Darla obsession, should be held accountable for not having
reached out to Angel post-Reunion? For 10 episodes, all they did was talk at
nauseam about what they should do about Angel. They worried and talked and
tried to intervene to no avail. How many times can Cordy witness an Angel
wig out before she can't have faith in him any longer? Wes and Cordy
invested their entire mortal lives in AI. What did Angel invest?

As for Buffy (as a man) and Spike (as a woman)... well, I don't think a
female-Spike would have survived season 2:) Interesting female villain tend
towards the 2-dimensional or, like Faith, end up having to be "handled with
a chain". What I'm saying is that a scenario where the gender roles were
reversed would not be considered entertaining because what is fascinating to
watch between B&S is that she is more powerful physically and detached
emotionally while he is intuitive, moody and emotionally manipulative.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Gender roles on A:tS and BtVS -- Traveler, 13:51:45 02/28/01 Wed

"Do you really think that Wes and Cordy, after months of supporting Angel
through his Darla obsession, should be held accountable for not having
reached out to Angel post-Reunion?"

Supporting? They whined and complained when Angel was having his Darla
dreams, but I didn't see any support. Their attitude all along has been,
"this is YOUR fight. We're just helping." Wesley said that Cordelia's
visions were intended for Angel and she couldn't just walk away from them.
From an outsider's perspective, this seems like a strange accusation. It's
like Wesley is saying, "you're suppose to be the hero, not her." TPB didn't
give Angel the visions; they gave them to Cordelia. Thus they gave him the
ability to choose whether he wants to listen or not. Who is Wesley to say
what Angel's destiny is? It seems like the Fang gang has been trying to
assert their independance while still taking the moral high ground with
Angel and I don't buy it. Either they need him or they don't.

Now that you raise the issue, I can't really disagree with you. Drusilla and
Darla are great female villains and I hope we see more of them in the
future, but otherwise there aren't that many female villains at all (Harmony
and April don't count). I had never really thought about it before.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Gender roles on A:tS and BtVS -- Aquitaine, 15:29:22 02/28/01
Wed

"They whined and complained when Angel was having his Darla dreams, but I
didn't see any support. Their attitude all along has been, "this is YOUR
fight. We're just helping."

Really? They were constantly getting in his face, asking questions and
trying to provoking him into reacting and Angel always keep them at a
distance. A question of perspective, no doubt.

I don't know why, but it always surprises me that so many people defend
Angel's actions and question Wes' and Cordy's choices. I guess I tend to
overcompensate in defence of W/C because at least they tried to intervene
(even though their efforts were ineffectual) while Angel just grew distant.
I identify more with W/C's struggle. In the end, it probably isn't a
question of taking sides or assigning blame.

LOL. I love the part of Wesley that is overbearing and a 'know-it-all' but
I'm VERY partial to Wesley on the whole:) I love Cordy's shrewishness too
because, well, I'm a little like that myself *sheepish grin*.

***
And, yes, the Buffyverse is in dire need of a complex, big bad, villainess.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Cordy and Wes talked and talked about helping Angel, AMONGST
THEMSELVES.... -- Angelus, 21:42:47 03/05/01 Mon

But when it came to actually getting around to it, they tried, but no hard
enough. Both were worried about him, and cared about him, that much was
sure, but they weren't sure how to handle the concern, and as such didn't
very well.
Not that Angel is not responsible for his actions, his self seclusion, his
aiding in the murder of fourteen layers, and his friends' disenchantment.
But not entirely. The blame lies abound, at both his feet and the Fang
Gang's.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Cordy and Wes talked and talked about helping Angel, AMONGST
THEMSELVES.... -- Rufus, 22:36:21 03/05/01 Mon

One person and one person alone closed the doors on those people, that was
Angel. You can't blame others for the choice Angel made. They did what they
could given the fact that they were employees and Angel made it clear that
he was the boss. The made for one unequal friendship where Angel listened to
what he wanted to hear and discarded his friends when they could and would
have helped him. Angel closed those doors and he alone bears the
responsibility for his choice. And he knows it.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
"No one will tell me why" -- Calliope, 15:04:50 03/02/01 Fri

Watching the episode for the second time, I've decided that I was numb with
shock until Anya. I couldn't react, I didn't really feel anything, I was
just mesmerized watching Buffy's absolute grief. When Anya made her
statement I broke down, I related to the child-like being that Anya is and I
too wanted to know why.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: "No one will tell me why" -- rowan, 07:53:39 03/04/01 Sun

I was exactly the same way. I was experiencing Buffy-like numbness until
Anya, then I started crying.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: "No one will tell me why" -- Marya, 20:47:55 03/04/01 Sun

Almost everyone I've talked to about this episode and many posts I've read
say that Anya's speech was the moment they broke down, too. It's just one
example of how remarkbly this piece was constructed. First there is the
anxiety as Buffy tries to do something. Then shock sets in. We remain in
that state through the scene of Xandar and Anya in the car, followed by the
confusion, denial, and fear as experienced by Willow. Then Anya begins to
speak and we are overcome with the reality of death and, like her, begin to
weep.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: "No one will tell me why" -- Diana Michelle, 13:23:07 03/05/01
Mon

Unfortunately, now that I've seen it once, I start crying at the beginning
and don't stop until after it's long over.



RIP - Joyce -- Susan, 23:43:44 02/26/01 Mon

This was a very painful episode for me.

It so often comes unexpected.

Although from a dramatic stand point it was probably necessary, I have
always liked Joyce as a character.

Does anyone feel Joss is trying to do too much this season? Just how much
more heartbreak can Buffy and Dawn take?

I really think Dawn will go off the deep end now. I have my concerns for
Buffy as well, and I don't want to downplay that or the effect that her
mom's death will have on her as it will be tremendous, but Dawn really
needed the stability that her mom provided after finding out that she was
the key.

Dawn really freaked when her Dad left. Cried for a week. And when she found
out she was the key she cut herself up and almost burned down the house.
Buffy will be going through her own pain, and might not be strong enough to
help Dawn through this.

"If I am not real, why does it hurt so much?"


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: RIP - Joyce -- Susan, 23:47:09 02/26/01 Mon

"It so often comes unexpected."

Death I meant. I thought the way the scene was handled was so realistic,
that I found it quite frighting.

Just earlier they were laughing and joking, and now she is dead. Many people
can relate to how death often comes like that.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: RIP - Joyce -- Linda, 00:06:45 02/27/01 Tue

Does this open the door for Glory? (pun intended)

I have always thought that Glory was going to have to seduce Dawn in some
way. Please don't misunderstand, perhaps seduce is the wrong word, as I
don't mean in a sexual sense.

But around this time Dawn and Glory are going to be wanting the same thing.
Glory has always stated that she has wanted to free herself of her human
body. And now Dawn, with all the pain she is feeling, is going to wonder if
she wants to free herself from her humanity as well. It won't take much for
Glory to convince her, or for her to convince herself, that it would be a
release for Dawn. A freedom from all her pain.

Joss is stepping into some very scary teritory here. Suicide isn't an issue
to tread lightly with. With Dawn and with Kate he seems to want to bring the
issue out front and center. I hope he can do it with a degree of
sensitivity. I have confidence that he can, because he has in the past with
Jonathan.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: RIP - Joyce Spoilers for the Body -- Rufus, 01:03:49 02/27/01 Tue

This is a truly brave subject to cover in a show known as a kiddy fantasy.
For the most part on Buffy it's the vampires that die and they go clean just
a dusty trail left. Now we have Joyce. We watched her go through a chronic
illness and breathed a sigh if relief when it looked like she would survive.
We watched Joyce recover and then we were treated to a Mom having as much of
a life to twirl before her date with an unknown man. She was laughing and
like her old self that we really never got to know well. The scene where
Buffy walks into the door and finds her mother and it slowly dawns on her
that her mother is gone is tragic, Buffy went from being the slayer to a
child in one word, Mommy.
To be beside Buffy as she tries to revive her mother will remind anyone how
traumatic sudden death can be. It feels like forever from the snapping of
the ribs in an attempt of CPR to the zipper closing over a lifeless face.
All the reactions were real. It's a slow episode because grief and
realization takes time. Time to register that the one person you could count
on, your Mother, is gone, forever.
Dawns reaction is the most touching. A being only alive for six months
grieved like she had lived every one of her 14 years. In the morgue she has
to see her Mothers face one more time to digest that she is gone. From Buffy
smoothing her Joyces skirt back down to cover the modesty of her mother to
Dawns tears, death took no holiday here...it was real.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: RIP - Joyce Spoilers for the Body -- Marya, 02:23:49 02/27/01
Tue

I promised my daughter-in-law that I would no longer read the wild feed.
Apparently my first foray into that evil habit caused me to display an
unsettling glee at my foreknowledge. But your post makes me almost feel that
I must read it this week just to prepare myself for the anquish that is to
come.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: RIP - Joyce -- rowan, 04:19:47 02/27/01 Tue

I haven't seen the episode yet...just over 12 hours and counting. Of course,
I couldn't resist the wildfeed. It sounds like a powerful and moving
episode. RIP Joyce.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: RIP - Joyce (spoilers) -- Susan, 22:45:23 02/27/01 Tue

I thought later that this was a poor title. The program upset me so much
that I did forget about the spoiler rule.

I don't read the board a couple of days before the program, just so I don't
accidently find out something.

Actually I was talking about last weeks show. The last few moments of that
program, coming so close after April's death. This week's program continued
just as painfully though. It was way too realistic. Not comic book death,
even though they had to throw in a Vamp at the end.

I know that most people in Sunnydale are somehow clueless to the undead, but
you would think the Doctors would somehow know about Vamps and how to
prevent their rising.

They are trying to make us think that Dawn can somehow bring her mom back
from the dead. I really don't think they will go there.

I wonder if Buffy feels guilty about staying to talk to April instead of
coming straight home? She shouldn't of course, but does she?

Here is a question. If Dawn could bring her Mother back, but it would be at
the expense of her own life, would Buffy allow her to do that? I think Dawn
would give up her own life if she was given that opportunity.

Will Dawn somehow attempt to end her existence regardless? Is being human
too painful for her?

I am more concerned about Buffy saving Dawn from herself than Buffy saving
Dawn from Glory. I think the greatest threat to Dawn right now is Dawn.
Buffy might be too much in grief right now to see that. Poor Buffy. Always
having to be the strong one. No one to take care of her.

But Dawn, first she finds out that she "isn't real", and then the Mother who
she was very close to (her memories are very real to her) dies. I think Dawn
will become very suicidal.

"If I am not real, why does it hurt so much?"

I was glad to see them show Dawn's school life. Since Buffy has gone off to
college we haven't had that aspect of the show for a while.

I think that the actor who plays Dawn is one of the best young actors I have
ever seen on television. These scenes they are asking her to play are quite
difficult, but she does them so well.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Why I love Buffy -- Sean, 23:18:19 02/27/01 Tue

We sometimes say that Buffy is self-absorbed, and sometimes she might seem
that way, but she is also one of the most sensitive characters I have ever
seen.

Despite Buffy's pain, when Anya said those awkward words to Buffy, Buffy saw
past the words to the pain Anya was feeling. No other character could do
that (at least not as quickly), not Xander, not even Tara but Buffy was able
to sense what Anya was feeling despite the difficulty Anya was having in
expressing it.

If anyone can save Dawn from herself, it is Buffy. There is a very real
chance that Buffy's pain will blind her to Dawn's needs, but she knew
exactly where Dawn was the moment she realized she was missing.

It could go either way, but I think Buffy will be able to look past her own
grief to that of Dawn. I feel for Buffy as she can never just fall apart.
There is always someone that she must be strong for, as much as Buffy
herself would just want to collapse.

Dawn has lost her identity and that was very difficult for her. But she had
her Mother she could fall back upon. Now all she has left is Buffy. Will she
lose Buffy as well (in the sense of Buffy withdrawing)? Then she would
truely be alone with absolutely nothing for support.

Dawn's whole world is caving in. She can't rely on anything being tangible
anymore. Is anything 'real'? She has been told she isn't? That everything
she ever believed in about herself and her life is a lie. And now her anchor
is gone. Where? Would it be so bad if she when to Glory and let her turn
Dawn into that "glowing green energy thingy" again. At least Dawn will not
feel the pain anymore. Glory and Dawn are both 'energy beings'. Dawn might
wonder if giving up her "curse" of humanity, in a place she doesn't belong,
in a place where things keep dying and disappearing for no good reason. Is
being human worth the pain?

Dawn's biggest threat is Dawn. And only Buffy can save her. But is Buffy
strong enough?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- June, 23:23:57 02/27/01 Tue

I wonder if Buffy and Dawn's father will show for the funeral?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- Jill, 23:32:31 02/27/01 Tue

I believe that Dawn will suffer a total meltdown soon. And without Buffy's
intervention, she will seek Glory out.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- Bill, 23:47:36 02/27/01 Tue

Perhaps Dawn will save Buffy.

Had Buffy still been an only child with no one she needed to be strong for,
what would have happened? Obviously she would have still had Giles and her
other friends, but perhaps the only thing preventing Buffy's total meltdown
is her need to be strong for her sister.

Dawn's greatest threat right now isn't Glory, it is Dawn. It is also quite
possibly Buffy, if Buffy chooses to go the wrong direction. If Buffy
withdraws and Dawn "loses" her, she will be left with an unimaginable sense
of emptiness. Dawn would be very likely to attempt to end her existance. But
by helping Dawn through this, Buffy is also helping herself get through it
as well. Would she be able do get through it without a sister to protect? I
hope so, but it would be much more difficult. Even with the help of her
friends.

From what I saw tonight, I believe Buffy will be strong for Dawn. In turn,
by helping Dawn, Dawn will give Buffy the support she needs to carry on.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- Bill, 06:42:54 02/28/01 Wed

Dawn will be left with an unimaginable sense of emptiness. It will be
overwhelming, driving her to desire to end it all.

I believe despite Buffy's pain, on some level Buffy will realize this and be
strong enough not to emotionally abandon Dawn.

Buffy is a very sensitive person. She will not withdraw and "leave" Dawn at
the time Dawn needs here the most.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- LeeAnn, 17:25:04 02/28/01 Wed

All the things everyone has been writing in this thread are good reasons why
this episode is an important one. "The Body" is not just a break from the
story arc as I've read in several places, but I believe, the pivotal episode
that sets the last preliminary pieces into place so that the major arc of
this season can play itself out. The scene has finally been set, but as I've
posted before, I'm don't think we see exactly what this major arc is yet. It
is a simple case of defeating the undefeatable Glory? Been there, done that
a couple of times; Buffy's always defeating some unbeatable monster even if
she has to die to do it. Is the Spike situation the major thread? It may be
A major one, but probably not the primary one. What about Dawn? Is her story
the major arc? It may be, but I'm inclined to think that all of these story
lines will contribute to an arc that we've been surrounded by for these past
16 episodes, but haven't clearly identified yet.
We've already seen a weakness in Glory that Buffy may be able to exploit. In
IWMTLY, Spike either dooms all his hopes of even a crum from Buffy or
ensures--which may be too strong a word--his acceptance on some level by
Buffy, depending on what his motivation was in having the Buffybot made, if
it ever gets made. Dawn is still an enigma. What we know about her comes
from sources that may or may not be reliable. We don't know if it's even
possible for her to turn or be turned back into an energy thingy. "Thingies"
are the U. S. Bureau of Standards approved unit of measure for amorphous
energy beings. Look it up. However, Glory thinks Dawn can be turned back
into something useful to Her Magnificence or she wouldn't be looking for the
kid, but then Glory is mad as a hatter, most hatters anyway, and that has to
be taken into consideration, too. This is giving me a headach. You, too? JW
has given us a real puzzle that seems to have either simplistic
solutions--something he doesn't go in for that much--or no solution at all,
and he doesn't do that either. What can we do? Wait and watch, what else.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- Bill, 22:36:02 02/28/01 Wed

"but then Glory is mad as a hatter."

I don't find Glory insane. Just very impatient at times. She doesn't suffer
fools gladly, don't tolerate mistakes.

And of course she is evil. But to be a big baddie that kind of goes with the
territory.

Actually she reminds me a lot of the old Cordy, if the old Cordy was a evil
Godness.

Excuse the language, she isn't insane, but she is the _itch from _ell.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- Sue, 06:28:37 02/28/01 Wed

If Buffy becomes emotionally detacted. If Buffy withdraws herself
emotionally from life and from Dawn, Dawn will feel that she has no option
than to seek Glory out.

Buffy is the last thing that Dawn has to hold onto. If she loses that, she
would have lost everything.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- LeeAnn, 17:29:32 02/28/01 Wed

Why would Dawn go to Glory? Why not Spike? She's upset with him over his
putting her little big sister in chains, or whatever she's heard about the
party at his lair, but she could overcome that easily. Glory's scary and
strange and dresses Ben in low cut red dresses. Spike doesn't scare her, and
he's a known, she thinks, quantity whom her sister disapproves of, so why
not Spike. I can just see MT with a bumpy forehead and a horrific overbite.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- Sue, 20:02:44 02/28/01 Wed

"Why would Dawn go to Glory? Why not Spike? "

You missed the point here. Glory can destory her, Spike can't.

Dawn might justify it as just fulifilling her destiny, but in every
practical sense it is suicide.

Joss knows how to blend the fantasy aspects with all too realistic drama
about adolescent life in the most frightening of ways. That is what has
always given the show its edge. That is what has always made Buffy the
Vampire Slayer more than a show about some Valley girl fighting monsters.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- Jill, 21:14:11 02/28/01 Wed

Dawn would go to Glory to shed her human skin (commit suicide).

Being human might be just too painful for her. Especially if Buffy withdraws
herself emotionally from life and Dawn feels like she has nothing left
(everything and everyone abandoning her. Nothing to hold onto. Nothing real,
not even herself).

Spike can't turn people into Vampires anymore. Not with that chip in his
head. Dawn might find it easy to rationalize to herself to just give in.

I really agree with those who believe that the biggest danger to Dawn right
now isn't Glory, but Dawn. But again we are often our own worst enemy.

Will Buffy be able to see through her pain and save Dawn from Dawn? Or will
she withdraw emotionally forcing Dawn to run into the arms of Glory?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- rowan, 19:31:55 02/28/01 Wed

A little of my faith in Buffy has been shaken lately. When she saw through
Anya's clumsy words to the intentions underneath, it restored my faith in
her.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: Why I love Buffy -- Bill, 20:16:33 02/28/01 Wed

I have been thinking today about Buffy and how she has time and and time
again shown great sensitivity to those around her.

There has been times though when she hasn't. Those that come to mind are:

Faith.

Riley.

And also until recently she never truly appreciated Xander's friendship.

But on balance though, I find her a very sensitive person.



Certainty -- Tenebraeli, 17:07:10 02/26/01 Mon

I was talking with a friend yesterday about various religious and spiritual
paths, the advantages of one over another, that sort of thing. I was raised
Catholic, and am now a solitary Wiccan, and the magical path is one that she
is becoming interested in. I was trying to explain that it's not like in the
movies: I can't set things on fire, or make everyone fall in love with me,
or turn myself into a cat. (thou that last one could be fun)

She said that's what she wanted, in essence, she wanted concrete results and
physical manifestations every time. She explained that whichever path she
followed, she wanted certainty. Solid provable answers about the spiritual
world.

I believe from my experience that that's impossible. The very nature of life
precludes us from ever knowing some things. There may be life after death, I
know I for one would like very much to be certain about that. But I also
know that the human mind has an astonishing capacity to be convincing about
things that are not true. (that ice-cream won't make you fat; sleep for five
more minutes, you won't be late to work; sure he loves you, he only hits you
cause you've been bad)

But in the Buffy-verse, there is essentially, proof of life after death.
Perhaps not for the average person, but there are enough groups out there
(like the Watcher's Council) with lots and lots of concrete information.
With reading and study anyone could discover that ghosts are real, that the
dead can be contacted, that this is not all there is.

So my question is this (finally): Would it be better to live in the
Buffy-verse, with all of it's perils, but with the possibility of
*certainty* that there is life after death? Or is it better to be here, with
less perfect knowledge, and also fewer monsters?

As for me? I... don't know which I'd choose.

Tenebraeli


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Certainty -- Traveler, 17:58:08 02/26/01 Mon

I prefer the Buffy-verse, where at least SOME evils are unambiguous and life
is never dull. Where else can a college kid save the world? The life after
death bit--well, that's another subject altogether...


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Certainty -- Aquitaine, 19:07:54 02/26/01 Mon

I've gotta go with the Buffyverse as well. There's much more scope for the
imagination there and the constant threat of death coupled with the
possibility of immortality would just heighten one's life experience...
theoretically in the fictional sense and all..


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Certainty -- LeeAnn, 17:47:38 02/28/01 Wed

Traveler and Aquitaine (love your name, by the way),
There's only one problem about being in the Buffyverse. Remember that job of
saving the world that sounds so glamorous, somebody already has it, a short
blond with a part-time fashion sense. The three of us would be among the
extras who wander through life, never having even read the script, oblivious
to the wonders around us, until someone bites us on the neck, and we die
perplexed about what is happening.

Shaglio,
The only thing about living with the life after death issue: living with it
isn't the problem.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> I'd go with the Buffyverse if.... -- Angelus, 21:29:08 03/05/01 Mon

I were involved in the good fight. Allow me to explain.
A previous post, I believe, was correct in its statement that if we were a
part of the Buffyverse as we are here we'd merely be the extras of life,
oblivious to the epic struggle that goes on.
So, I'd choose the Buffyverse over this one if I were involved in the
struggle between good and evil. For all of its pains and dangers, it seems
that it would be comforting, in that there would not just be that certainty
of life after death, but also the meaning of life itself. You would know
your purpose, as it would be preordained (as with Buffy's being the Slayer
and Angel's PTB calling), and you would be aiding lives and saving them from
a force. The only time that I could see in which uncertainty would present
itself like it does for me constantly in the Realverse, would be when evil
was finally extinguished. I often wonder if Buffy and Angel could be happy
without the purpose of their callings as Warriors of Light.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: I'd go with the Buffyverse if.... -- LoriAnn, 05:01:54
03/06/01 Tue

Angelus, yet Buffy and Angel both have their doubts now and then. Right now,
Angel has had his epiphany, but if you think about it, he had an epiphany at
the end of last season, too: he saw a light at the end of the tunnel. The
light turned out to be a train, and it rolled right over him. To make Buffy
and Angel so confident in their faith in whatever they have faith in is to
diminish their humanity, even Angel's. Faith has been described as the proof
of things unseen. Angel and Buffy have both seen a lot, but still faith
waivers now and then. Buffy ran away, being a waitress was better than what
she had to endure as a slayer. Since I feel long-winded, I'll bring this
letter to a close because I have faith that no one wants be to drone on and
on.
So to conclude, no three dimentional characters, even Angel and Buffy and
particularly you and I, have the whichever-verse figured out and thoroughly
understood. There's always the need for believing, for having faith that
something worthwhile is really out there and cares about us. Where ever you
are, the real problems of the human condition are still the same. To almost
quote someone who must have been a great philosopher, no matter where you
go; there you are.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: I'd go with the Buffyverse if.... -- purplegrrl, 11:09:06
03/08/01 Thu

***To almost quote someone who must have been a great philosopher, no matter
where you go; there you are.***

That great philosopher was Buckaroo Banzai (played by Peter Weller) in the
movie "The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai." (One of my favorite movies!) BTW,
you got the quote exactly right.

Angelus:
Unfortunately, the fight against evil does not end. I don't think Buffy and
Angel need to worry about what they will do in their "retirement years."
Rather, they need to deal with the fact that the fight never truly ends.
Knowing what they know, and having seen what they've seen, would they set
aside the mantle of Warrior of Good? No, because Buffy can't (her destiny,
her duty) and Angel won't (there's still a spark of hope for his redemption
and return to humanity).


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Certainty -- Shaglio, 08:51:32 02/27/01 Tue

That's a tricky little question. I for one would love to be a Buffyverse
witch (wizard, worlock, whatever) and be able to light up rooms with a ball
of energy or hurl a fireball at someone who cut me off on the way to work
(not to kill, more of a warning shot), but on the otherhand there would be a
lot more anarchy in the world if people could learn stereotypical witch
magic. For every white mage out there, there would be a black mage itching
to unleash chaos and destruction on the world. But I guess a bullet to the
head would do as much damage as a bolt of lightning, so I guess I have no
point.

As far as life after death, I don't believe in it anyway. I think the
concept of Heaven/Valhalla/etc is just a way for human beings to be able to
accept their inevitable death. The thought that when we die we just get
placed in a box in the ground to decompose is very depressing. So we create
a beautiful, mystical place that our sould go to after we breathe our last
breath. But that's just my oppinion. I guess the possibility of life after
death would surely beat my current views.

I think in the end I'd rather have a nonmagical, heavenless, monsterless,
demonless, vampireless world than the alternative. A little less danger, a
lot less temptation to do evil with your magical powers, and I can live with
the afterlife issue. I think . . .


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> heaven and the afterlife -- spotjon, 20:35:12 03/02/01 Fri

"As far as life after death, I don't believe in it anyway. I think the
concept of Heaven/Valhalla/etc is just a way for human beings to be able to
accept their inevitable death. The thought that when we die we just get
placed in a box in the ground to decompose is very depressing. So we create
a beautiful, mystical place that our sould go to after we breathe our last
breath."

It makes one wonder, though, why, if there is no heaven, do we long for one
so much? All other creatures on this planet take their deaths in stride
without wishing for anything more (at least as far as we know). If there is
nothing but the cold grave at the end of life, and that is all there has
ever been, then why do we long for anything more? Shouldn't we be content
with our earthly lives if that is all there is? I think that it is strange
to have a longing for something that can never be fulfilled.

-spotjon


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> bump -- spotjon, 14:08:54 03/03/01 Sat


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: heaven and the afterlife -- Shaglio, 12:51:04 03/07/01 Wed

"It makes one wonder, though, why, if there is no heaven, do we long for one
so much? All other creatures on this planet take their deaths in stride
without wishing for anything more (at least as far as we know). If there is
nothing but the cold grave at the end of life, and that is all there has
ever been, then why do we long for anything more? Shouldn't we be content
with our earthly lives if that is all there is? I think that it is strange
to have a longing for something that can never be fulfilled."

I couldn't tell if you were agreeing with me here or debating with me (I'm
not good a philosophizing, but I like to read what everyone else here
writes). But a common response that I get toward my lack of belief in the
afterlife is that not believing in heaven is a depressing way to go about
living life. On the contrary, believing that when I die I just get dumped in
the ground to rot helps me cherish every moment that I'm alive that much
more.

A few years ago my cousin and her friend were out walking her brother's dog.
They were walking around a bend in the road and an 18 wheeler came around
the corner. Apparently the door to the back of the truck wasn't secured
properly and it swung open and hit my cousin and her friend in the back of
their heads killing them instantly. She and her friend were only 19 years
old. This just goes to show that you never know when your number is going to
be called, so you should make the most of every second you are still alive.
Not believing in an afterlife helps me to reinforce that previous statement.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Certainty -- Rendyl, 14:42:25 03/03/01 Sat

Hmmm. I have a 6 year old. There are plenty of human monsters and normal
dangers in this world without adding the supernatural ones of the
Buffyverse. If I lived there my hair would be completely grey.

Like Shaglio I would prefer either nothingness or never knowing than having
proof and living near a hellmouth. My life is exciting enough without
fighting off vampires and demons.

As entertainment I love Buffy. It is a great escape and fantasy trip for me.
But I am always glad when it and Angel are over that I can turn off the TV
and rid 'my' world of all the nasties they (in the series) are stuck with.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Certainty -- IdiotJed, 03:22:44 03/16/01 Fri

Hi. Newbie posting.

The problem with life-after-death in the Buffy-verse is that none of it
looks particularly tempting. There are vampires, zombies, and ghosts, but
the prospects of any one of these fates do not tempt me in the least. We
also know there's a hell, but no proof of heaven/valhalla/etc. There is
always the threat that, through no fault of your own, one of these will be
your fate.

For all it's faults and uncertainties, I prefer this world.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Certainty -- OnM, 23:05:32 03/16/01 Fri

Hello there, newbie! Haven't you posted over at the Cross & Stake? I seem to
recall reading some of your stuff before, in fact I might have even quoted
something you said once in some post I started here.

In any event, welcome! If you have an interest in Buffy, Angel, philosophy,
cats, chocolate, Canadians, movies and/or mildew, you will certainly find a
really good home here!

;)

OnM (one of a number of friendly, albeit slightly deranged, ATPoBtVS
regulars & newbie-greeters)



Epiphanies and Other Topics of Interest (spoilers) -- rowan, 19:28:34
02/27/01 Tue

I have a confession to make. I've never really been able to get into AtS.
I'm not sure why. It could be some character flaw I'm unaware of. Or some
neurosis buried way back in my subconscious, nurtured since childhood. I
liked the character on BtVS, but the show just hasn't hooked me.

Maybe I never got over the whole Angelus thing. Maybe I secretly resent DB
for leaving BtVS. Maybe I secretly look down at the characters, thinking,
'these are people who couldn't really make it on BtVS, and now they're the
main story here; what gives?' Maybe it's because it's darker, more ambiguous
than BtVS and I like the crisper, clearer view of the Buffyverse in BtVS.
Maybe I'm just an insensitive jerk (very possible).

But tonight, they hooked me; this episode grabbed me by the throat and
wouldn't let go. So many things are racing around in my head that I can't
really formulate fully coherent thoughts, but I guess the biggest impact on
me was the conversation between Angel and Kate at the end (forgive the less
than precise quotes): "If nothing matters, there is no master plan, then
everything matters" and "I have faith...I never invited you in."

Talk about blowing us away! First, there's Angel's whole epiphany summed up
neatly into a package for us: personal responsibility; no act of love or
kindness is too small; goodness is its own reward; don't waste time looking
for the master plan, make this life a better one. Then, in one instant,
poof! It's gone with the wind of the whole uninvite issue and who/what
exercised their master plan to influence the fate of two people (I guess the
fate of two people does matter a hill of beans, Casablanca aside!) The mind
reels at the possibilities opened by that one small observation.

Bravo! Back to back with The Body, this was an incredible night.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Epiphanies and Other Topics of Interest (spoilers) -- Isabel,
21:00:28 02/27/01 Tue

That blew me away too. "I never invited you in." Does anybody have any idea
what that means? It can't mean that Joss has negated the whole
vampires-can't-enter-a-home-unless-invited idea. He can't be trying to say
that Angel isn't a vampire anymore. He hasn't shanshu'd, so isn't he still a
vampire?

I thought at first that her 'suicide note' call to Angel was a cry for help,
which may be interpreted as a tacit invitation for him to come in and help
her. But as I was reading this another idea hit me: Was Kate dead and
somehow Angel (or the PTBs) brought her back?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Epiphanies and Other Topics of Interest (spoilers) -- Sean,
22:22:09 02/27/01 Tue

If Buffy was dead and Xander brought her back, then it is possible that Kate
had skipped a heart-beat or two (clinically dead), just enough time for
Angel to get in.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Epiphanies and Other Topics of Interest (spoilers) -- Shaglio,
11:03:13 02/28/01 Wed

Kate WAS drinking, so maybe she mumbled some sort of invite over the phone
and doesn't remember it.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Epiphanies and Other Topics of Interest (spoilers) -- Sean, 22:17:17
02/27/01 Tue

I wonder if her call to Angel (a call for help) served as "inviting him in".
She deep down wanted Angel to save her, otherwise she wouldn't have called.

Ok, I am reaching here.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Epiphanies and Other Topics of Interest (spoilers) -- Masquerade,
22:19:39 02/27/01 Tue

Actually, in contemplating what I was going to put in my metaphysics of this
episode, that was what I was going to say--what you just said. But now I'm
thinking "intervention by a higher power".


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Epiphanies and Other Topics of Interest (spoilers) -- DEN,
00:52:49 02/28/01 Wed

The "invitation" issue here is highlighted by Angel's later frustrated
admonition to Wesley that he can't come in until invited.So what happened
seems to be specific to this situation rather than indicative of a general
change in Angel's "status."


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Maybe, maybe not -- Tim W., 09:28:19 02/28/01 Wed

> The "invitation" issue here is highlighted by Angel's later frustrated
admonition to Wesley that he can't come in until invited.

We know from Kate's comment that Angel was unaware he wasn't invited, he
just acted on instinct. At Wesley he didn't feel as urgent a need, he didn't
try to barge in. We didn't actually see him hit the barrier (and we know
from Spike a few weeks ago that they can't sense the barrier).

> So what happened seems to be specific to this situation rather than
indicative of a general change in Angel's "status."

Not from the evidence we've seen. Until we see him physically hit a barrier,
we can wonder.

That said, I think it was a one-time thing. Either Kate was literally dead,
or she had somehow invited him in previously. If I had my tapes available
(and a few less midterms!) I'd go back through the previous Kate episodes
and see if she ever said something that could be construed as an invitation
(maybe when she was undercover in the bar?).

Or, of course, the PTB's interfered directly.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Maybe, maybe not -- Masquerade, 11:17:31 02/28/01 Wed

Kate's phone call could be seen as an implied invitation, but that's the
only thing that could be taken as an invitation. We've never seen her invite
Angel into her place and I doubt she would have wanted to. I'm thinking Kate
was NOT dead. You don't raise the dead by shoving under a shower stream.
That's how you bring someone out of unconsciousness-sometimes. And Angel
could not have given mouth-to-mouth resusitation (or it would negate all
that stuff he said in Prophecy Girl about it).

So either implicit invitation via the phone call, or PTB intervention


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Maybe, maybe not -- Rufus, 15:02:54 02/28/01 Wed

Kate has made it very clear that Angel wasn't invited into her apartment. So
now we can wonder divine intervention or implied telephone invite. This is
where faith enters the picture. I only know that he shouldn't have been able
to get in there. Is it because for a brief moment Kate died or something
more wonderful than that, this is where personal interpertation comes in.
Kate believes that something more than normal happened to let Angel in the
door and that is good enough for me.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Maybe, maybe not -- VanMoodySenior, 08:59:45
03/05/01 Mon

I think the whole thrust of Angel's and Kate's discussion on providence has
to be looked at. Angel believed what Holland told him about how the fight
does not matter. Kate brings him to the place where it does matter because
there is a reason behind all of this. I believe from the context the PTB
broke the rules and allowed Angel to come in. I am not sure this means that
Kate has a place in the big picture. It could be a message from the powers
to Angel that things really do matter. For Angel needs the faith that Kate
has now. VMS


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Maybe, maybe not -- Terrill, 12:17:34 03/10/01
Sat

Exactly! Let us not forget, Holland is a representative of "The Great
Deceiver". Angel should not believe anything he says, especially when he
goes to such great pains to make his point. What a wonderful way to show him
it was all a lie. Yes, he needed this to restore his faith to continue on.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Maybe, maybe not -- LeeAnn, 16:45:54 02/28/01 Wed

Rufus, (again)
You have a point, a couple in fact. Unless the theories about Angel being
less demon are true and that doesn't seem in keeping with the rest of the
show at this point, Angel's entrance to Kate's apartment has a higher
meaning: 1) it should give Angel some hope that there is someone out there
who cares and 2) it certainly made a difference to Kate, and if she stays on
the show--I hope she does--this will play a major part in her motivation.
So, as you wrote, if it's good enough for Kate, it's good enough for me.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> My strange theory -- Traveler, 14:20:22 02/28/01 Wed

You know, at the end of the last episode and the beginning of the new one we
see Angel rise out of bed gasping. He rushes to the balcony in obvious pain
until it passes and he straightens up. In otherwords, everything happens
exactly as it did when he lost his soul. Except that we know he didn't lose
his soul. Everybody assumed that it was just a red herring and ignored it. I
give the writers more credit than that. SOMETHING was causing Angel pain,
and I don't believe that it was a sword wound or cramps. What was it?

Maybe instead of losing his humanity, he strengthened it. Instead of losing
his soul, he lost his "demon soul." Perhaps the road to humanity is not an
instant reward but a gradual process; as Angel discovers more about himself
and what it is to be human, he recovers more of his humanity and that is
what we saw on the balcony. He was able to enter Kate's room because he is
more human and the restrictions of vampires don't bind him as tightly. As
you mention, he never TRIED to enter Wesley's room. Maybe if he had really
wanted to, he could have.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: My strange theory -- Rufus, 14:58:34 02/28/01 Wed

I kind of compare Angels reaction in Epiphany to Buffys throwing up in The
Body. The characters were having similar reactions to a stressful event in
their lives. Buffy the death of her mother. Angel the Epiphany or
realization that he was being given another chance and no longer was in
despair as Darls no longer had any power over him. You almost have to wonder
if the Demon was a little pissed not to have ridded itself of that pesky old
soul and it was retching in rage.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: My strange theory -- Aquitaine, 15:18:18 02/28/01
Wed

Maybe, instead of a 'moment of pure happiness', Angel had a 'moment of pure
humanity' which allowed him to enter.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: My strange theory -- Laux, 04:29:56 03/10/01 Sat

I doubt that Angels' entrance to Kates' place had anything to do with an
implied invitation (ie. The Yoko Factor: Angels asks if he can come in,
Buffy says 'yeah, i guess' or something to that effect, he tries to enter,
but can't and says 'I'm gonna need a little more than that'.).
And i don't think Kate has a place in the big picture, I also doubt she
died, because although BTVS and AtS deal with death a lot, it's not
something that can be rectified with a cold shower.
So I'm left with two things: Something about Angels growing humanity, or
lessening vampire characteristics
or
Interevntion by TPTB.
The first would explain the crampy things he wakes up with (as in I Will
Remember You -As the touch of life ran through him, it looked kinda
painful), but i still doubt it (but I'm certain there is a reason for that
pain).
And i don't like the idea that Kate is important enough for TPTB to do
anything about her, unless that was part of what helped Angel change his
ways, if she died, he might not have fully regained focus.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: My strange theory -- Elizabeth, 07:47:53
03/10/01 Sat

Only problem is, in the shooting script, it says explicitly Angel can't be
seen in Kate's mirror, that he's just as much a vampire as ever.

And there was an implied invitation in "5x5" by Faith. Oh, and after Buffy
says, "yeah, I guess," Angel did NOT try to come in. He just assumed he
couldn't. Fact is--Sunday's vamp gang needed no invite to enter Buffy's dorm
room after they failed to kill her.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Epiphanies and Other Topics of Interest (spoilers) -- Nina, 20:55:16
02/28/01 Wed

"I have a confession to make. I've never really been able to get into AtS.
I'm not sure why. It could be some character flaw I'm unaware of. Or some
neurosis buried way back in my subconscious, nurtured since childhood. I
liked the character on BtVS, but the show just hasn't hooked me."

Well Rowan... this was the first "Angel" I did tape... and I must confess to
that it got me hooked. At first I didn't even bothered to watch the show at
all. All those threads on Angel got me to think that there was something
there, something I didn't catch. I had an epiphany too tonight while
watching the show. I actually find myself liking the guy and wanting him to
be happy. If only my tv antenna allowed me to have a better picture I could
enjoy it better! :)


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Epiphanies and Other Topics of Interest (spoilers) -- Malandanza,
15:57:02 03/03/01 Sat

"I have a confession to make. I've never really been able to get into AtS.
I'm not sure why. It could be some character flaw I'm unaware of. Or some
neurosis buried way back in my subconscious, nurtured since childhood. I
liked the character on BtVS, but the show just hasn't hooked me.

"Maybe I never got over the whole Angelus thing. Maybe I secretly resent DB
for leaving BtVS. Maybe I secretly look down at the characters, thinking,
'these are people who couldn't really make it on BtVS, and now they're the
main story here; what gives?'"

I remember feeling the same way with the first few episodes of AtS -- and
also thinking that BtVS would be a better show with the departure of the
weak characters. But I continued to watch Angel (partly because the
sci-fi/X-files nature of the Initiative story line left me dissatisfied).
And then the humor got me hooked (quoting from memory):

Wesley: "I'm a rogue demon hunter..."
Cordelia: "What's a 'rogue demon'?"

Cordelia asks Angel to "mush" the coffee beans with his "vampire strength"
-- Angel almost tries, then sets them aside. Later, when alone, he really
does try to crush the coffee beans and spills them all over the floor --
just as Cordelia walks in and comments about how the "mushing them" didn't
work.

Cordelia, in Expecting: "I learned that sex is bad."
Angel: We all knew that.

Also from Expecting -- Wesley and Angel hide Cordelia's visions from her
friends while making excuses not to go out with the women -- afterward, they
discuss what the women thought of them:
Wesley: What about them thinking we're gay?
Angel: Adds a sense of mystery.

Angel comments about his fascination with convents, then mutters to himself
"I thought it was funny." when Cordelia and Wesley ignore him.

Gunn: Have you checked her [Cordeli's} pad?
Angel: I went by there earlier.
then a comment from Gunn about enjoying the trip to 1970 when "pad" meant
house/apartment as he reaches for her message pad.

I know as soon as I post this I'll remember some funnier lines, but the
point is: the humor is what caught me.



Kate -- Shawn, 23:30:50 02/27/01 Tue

It kind of bothered me how they left Kate's attempted suicide.

It was like yes, I tried to off myself, but I am feeling much better now.

I don't know what I expected, but when someone goes to such extreme actions,
they just can't come back from that so quickly.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Kate -- Traveler, 14:32:29 02/28/01 Wed

Well, manic-depressive's certainly can for example. An attempted suicide is
a lot like a good cry. If you fail to kill yourself, you suddenly feel very
happy to be alive. This is the principle behind russian roulette. You pull
the trigger, hear a click, and realize that your brains were almost
splattered over your bed. Suddenly whatever was bothering you doesn't seem
so bad. This is even more true if someone supports you afterwards. After
all, most attempted suicides (especially by women), are really just a
semi-disguised cry for help. By extension, jumping suicide is a bad idea.
It's no fun to realize that you don't want to die at the 2nd story.



The vampire in _The Body_ -- spotjon, 14:05:07 02/28/01 Wed

Was it just me, or was the vampire in this episode the creepiest vampire
ever depicted on the show? It seems that throughout the show's run, vampires
are mostly just taken as commonplace, and they look pretty much like other
people. But when this vamp sat up from his gurney, I just felt like this is
what it would really be like for someone to become undead. He looked so pale
and monstrous, so much like a dead body. I'm not sure that the show has ever
depicted the horror of an undead being like it has in this episode.

Also, it was interesting that they depicted Willow and Tara kissing for the
first time. I wasn't sure that they ever would, since they've gone to such
lengths to avoid it in the past.

-spotjon


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The vampire in _The Body_ -- Sryuei, 15:53:56 02/28/01 Wed

I agree, that vampire was a lot more horrific than the others. I think it
was meant to personify the confrontation with death, and also to show that
confronting the more "real life" death of a loved one is still a more
terrible thing to deal with than even the most horrific vampire.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The vampire in _The Body_ -- Sue, 00:24:22 03/03/01 Sat

Many have seen this scene as inappropriate, but I think the contrast between
the undead Vamp, and the Dead Dead Joyce really brought home the theme of
the episode.

Death in the form of Joyce was way scarier than the Vampire.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The vampire in _The Body_ -- Kat, 15:32:07 03/05/01 Mon

I'm de-lurking here. :)
I just wanted to say that IMO this scene, like the parking ticket was meant
to show that even though a tragedy, like the death of a loved one happens,
life goes on.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: The vampire in _The Body_ -- NightDragon, 19:54:34 02/28/01 Wed

I am not even going to get into all the things this episode... anyway to
comment.

1) Good point about the vampire. I hadn't thought of it that way.

2) I think Willow and Tara kissing was a bold and beautiful moment. It
wasn't played up, wasn't made a big deal of... it was just two people who
love each other, sharing comfort in a moment of total grief. Joss is a
genius.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The vampire in _The Body_ -- Ed, 09:07:42 03/05/01 Mon

I disagree. They kissed because they are lesbians not just because they care
about each other. You didn't see Giles and Xander kiss. They did hug though,
but that is normal. Now don't get upset about me saying that lesbianism
isn't normal. The fact is it is not. I am not placing a moral stance upon
this statement so please do not get upset. What I am saying is there is a
reason why we have not seen these two wiccans kiss before. It is not
accepted by the mainstream of society. We saw Buffy kiss Riley like crazy
and noone gave it a second thought.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The vampire in _The Body_ -- Rendyl, 11:51:32 03/05/01 Mon

People love who they love. There are no two relationships exactly alike. I
am much more comfortable with two people who deeply and genuinely care about
each other and are committed to a relationship than whether the status quo
is boy-girl, boy-girl, etc. Normal has become much more difficult to difine.

My hubby and I have been married/committed/happy for nearly 15 years.
According to statistics fewer than 50% of marriages are this way. That
places us as no longer being what is considered 'normal'.

Willow and Tara kissed because they love each other. Tara was comforting
her. I liked that the kiss was low key. No banners blazing "OH LOOK - GIRLS
KISSING", just two people in love helping each other through a difficult
time.

The mainstream of society is getting less and less mainstream. As for Willow
and Tara not being normal, if you are not taking a moral stance then what is
your rational?


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The vampire in _The Body_ -- Ed, 17:41:24 03/05/01 Mon

Normal in that the majority of people are not like them. Not a moral
statement in my mind.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> [> normal -- spotjon, 06:42:30 03/07/01 Wed

"Normal is what everyone else is, and what you are not."

I love the way that the definition of what "normal" is can change every day.

-spotjon


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: The vampire in _The Body_ -- VanMoodySenior, 17:56:36 03/05/01 Mon

Why is Joss a genius for having them kiss? I am lost here.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: The kiss in _The Body_ -- Xayide, 11:25:55 03/07/01 Wed

It wasn't the having them kiss that was the genius, it was the way it
happened: completely natural, germane to the story, and not done (or hyped
up) as a ratings stunt or for titillation. It was a perfect, comforting kiss
between two people in pain, and it was handled exactly that way. It flowed
so well from the story that you almost don't notice it, because it's what
_should_ happen right there, and it takes a second before you think, "Hey,
they kissed! I thought the WB said they couldn't do that!". So sensible,
it's genius. ^_^


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The kiss in _The Body_ -- NightDragon, 19:08:38 03/07/01 Wed

Thank you. I honestly didn't think anyone would get my point. If you think
on it, anytime in the past decade, when we have seen two women kiss on TV,
there is always some kind of hype. Joss has been trying to avoid any kind of
hype with Willow and Tara's relationship. The kiss here just proves it. The
relationship is being played just as two people in love. It's a great
message.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> [> Re: The kiss in _The Body_ -- VanMoodySenior, 20:25:09 03/07/01
Wed

I have 4 children and I have to admit I was taken back by them kissing. We
watch the show with our kids. I Hope nobody thinks I am a bad father by
letting them see vampires and stuff, but my kids seem to like the show.
Sometimes when there is a cuss word in our house we all say cuss word, so
they know this is not what is to be spoken by them. Are you saying that Joss
did this to get around the rules of the WB? If they did not want the girls
kissing then should they have? I didn't know it was a rule at the WB. This
is news to me. I guess I am still not getting the genuis part. Sorry I am
thick headed at times. VMS



Negative Space in the Body, Spoilers -- fresne, 14:07:17 02/28/01 Wed

I knew what was coming. I read t.v. guide. I saw the previous episode. I and
my housemate prepared. We curled on the couch and clutched our pillows. And
yet, like death itself, nothing could have prepared me for this episode. I
read somewhere, and I would have to agree, that if this episode does not get
an Emmy, then why do Emmys exist.

In an episode where everything struck me, there are a number of things that
I wish to comment on while they are still (ramblingly) fresh.

Negative Space. The art teacher's comment that you don't paint the body
(forgive the paraphrase) but the negative space around it really resonated
with me because this episode was all about the negative space. Negative
sight, negative sound.

Joss took the lessons from Hush and used them beautifully in this episode.
The sound of silence had an almost physical presence. Heavy and inert. It
weighed on characters. Anya and Xander driving in the car, not speaking. All
punctuated with the sounds of the world. Buffy standing looking out on her
back porch with the sound of distant children playing. Life goes on. The
occasional roaring sound in the back of the ear. The sound that you hear
just before you faint. The sound of illness and shock.

Of course negative space is a visual thing, and over and over we see the
body, Joyce's empty eyes open. The soul is gone. Joyce is no longer there.
And kuddos to the props/special effects department for the dummy (I don't
believe a human could be that still) for such incredibly life like, death
like work.

Speaking of gaze... As viewers of television, we gaze upon the story. We
objectify characters. We become emotionally involved through the act of
seeing (and hearing) a story in which we have no part. Joss did a number of
things to pull the viewer into the narrative through gaze. I thought of
this, when I could think again, when contemplating the scene where Buffy
tells Dawn the awful truth. Rather than observe the entire scene with Buffy
and Dawn, Joss pulls us back a step and we see much of the scene through a
window. Dawn's classmates, her teacher, her enemy, her friends are watching
her from a distance. They gaze on her story through the same window. By
pulling us to perceive the scene with the other observers, Joss pulls us
further into the scene. We are all silent observers on the sidelines.

Though out the episode visual perception was distorted. Lengthened or
shortened. There were skips in time. Buffy was constantly seeing things that
weren't there (visions of what might have been) and having a heightened
visual perception of things that were there, the phone, the paper towel
absorbing the stain. Then there is our perception of Buffy's gaze, wide and
unseeing. Dawn's need to see the body to make it all real. And yet seeing
wasn't enough. What an incredibly poignant visual to end upon. Dawn reaching
out to touch the clay that was her mother.

There was an insistence in the text on the physicality of death. "The body
is cold... Is she cold?...Will they cut her open." All of which returns us to
the body at the center of the negative space.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Negative Space in the Body, Spoilers -- JBone, 19:39:44 02/28/01 Wed

I agree with your comments on negative space, especially when Buffy informed
Dawn. And I may be going in over my head, but I think I can add another.

I think that Joss uses Joyce's dead body as the object of the entire
episode, and he just drew around it.

I don't think it would be a stretch to say that everyone of us has negative
space around us in the form of a body. The body isn't what we are, it's what
we occupy in this life. When we die, what we are moves on, and the body
stays behind.

"Is she cold?"

"It's not her. It's not her. She's gone."

"Where'd she go?"


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Negative Space in the Body, Spoilers -- Aquitaine, 07:06:15
03/01/01 Thu

***The body isn't what we are, it's what we occupy in this life. When we
die, what we are moves on, and the body stays behind.

"Is she cold?"

"It's not her. It's not her. She's gone."

"Where'd she go?"***

This is the basic question we have been asking all season long (in relation
to Spike, curiously enough). Where *does* the person's soul go after death?

I think it is great that a show that has revolved around the premise of a
Chosen human slayer ridding the world of demon-souled vamps (essentially,
recycled dead bodies) is finally having its characters speculate about what
a soulless body is. It almost seemed like Buffy was also trying to convince
herself and not just Dawn with her by rote (double) assertion 'it's not
her'.

***

And now for my descent into abstraction... In another post, I mentioned that
I had been feeling a growing detachment from the SG and, while I was moved
by The Body, as a viewer, I feel the show's writing has gradually positioned
me firmly outside the story. In this sense, *I* feel I have become part of
the negative space around the body of BtVS. It's a stark new experience for
me.

***

I loved your analyses of neg. space, btw.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Re: Negative Space in the Body, Spoilers -- Marya, 18:08:10 03/02/01 Fri

In a thread above I opted to just post simply how much I liked this episode,
rather than do any kind of analysis. I'm glad I did because surly any
efforts I would have made would have seemed clumsy compared to the purity of
your post.

You have wonderfully artistic senses.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Negative Space in the Body, Spoilers -- fresne, 13:02:54 03/05/01
Mon

Thank you. What a lovely compliment.

Although, perhaps the better immediate reaction is simple praise for a thing
of visceral beauty.

And I totally agree. I want it on DVD.



Questions -- Sue, 20:53:35 02/28/01 Wed

Is Buffy strong enough? Is the burden of "being strong for Dawn" something
too much to ask from someone who is suffering such pain herself.

I am trying to decide if Dawn's need for Buffy might actually be exactly
what Buffy needs for her own well being. That being needed by another is
what will bring her through this. Or if it would be a burden that will
overwhelm her?

Losing her mother is going be tough on Buffy regardless. But which is
tougher - suffering through it as an only child or as a big sister who must
deal with her sister's needs as well as her own?

I really can't decide myself. I would love to hear other people's opinions
on this.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> Can Buffy 'deal'? -- Aquitaine, 06:27:54 03/01/01 Thu

"Losing her mother is going be tough on Buffy regardless. But which is
tougher - suffering through it as an only child or as a big sister who must
deal with her sister's needs as well as her own?"

I'm not sure one situation is worse than the other. I do think, though, that
Buffy's reaction will be deferred because of 'Dawn issues'. Buffy's
reactions in The Body indicate that she has gone into an uncharacteristic 'I
can't do anything about this' mode. She can't be 'action girl' under these
circumstances - although it was a good idea to empower Buffy as the Slayer,
and to bring home the fact that her calling lives on, in the final scene.

Buffy will not be able to beat the crap out of the demons that her mother's
death will stir up in herself (much in the same way she can't beat the crap
out of Glory or beat Spike into not loving her). She'll have to find another
way to cope. The storyline is being set up so that 'something's got to
give', sooner or later.

***

Isn't it interesting how this time between Sweeps periods functions as a
mourning period? It is very fitting.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> Re: Can Buffy 'deal'? -- Sue, 08:42:26 03/01/01 Thu

Will helping Dawn get over her own grief be cathartic for her,will that
someone needs her be what saves Buffy, or will putting her needs aside for
another "being strong for Dawn" and ignoring her own needs send Buffy over
the edge?

I see arguments both ways. Sometimes I think that having Dawn for Buffy to
focus on (and I am not talking physically here, in the sense of Dawn as key,
but as Dawn as little sister, dealing with her pain and grief) is the best
thing for Buffy. That in helping Dawn it will help Buffy through her own
grief. But then other times I think "how can we expect Buffy to "be strong
for Dawn" when Buffy is in so much pain as well. Isn't the "big sister role"
too hard for her to handle?

Sorry to bring up another show here, but I think of Prue on "Charmed". For
her the need to protect her sisters after losing their mother seemed like it
was emotionally destructive to her. By putting her emotional needs aside for
her sisters she suppressed it all inward, which inevitably led to an
emotional collapse.

But sometimes helping another seems like the best way to help yourself.
Helping another go through their emotional pain, helps you go through your
pain as well.

So I am really torn here.

As "only child" Buffy she would have had her friends to comfort her, but as
"big sister" Buffy she must comfort Dawn as well. For as vulnerable Buffy
is, and that is very vulnerable, Dawn is even more so. Dawn is quite nearly
suicidal after finding out about "being the key" and now losing her mom.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Can Buffy 'deal'? -- Jill, 09:06:56 03/01/01 Thu

I am just wondering if Buffy can see through her own pain to that of Dawn. I
am wondering if Buffy will will emotionally withdraw herself from life and
those around her.

Dawn, after "finding out that she is the key", then losing her mom, then
"losing" Buffy, would feel like there is nothing left to hold onto. She
would feel total emptiness. She would have felt like she had lost
everything. Nothing left. Might as well go to seek her Glory and get it over
with.

"If I am not real, why does it hurt so much."

There is some sign through that Buffy will not allow that to happen. The way
she acted towards Anya could be taken as a sign that Buffy hasn't let her
pain absorb her so much as to become insensitive to the pain of others.

Only Buffy can save Dawn now. Not so much from Glory, but from Dawn.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
[> [> [> Re: Can Buffy 'deal'? -- Bill, 09:30:43 03/01/01 Thu

I believe that "only child" Buffy would as a result of her mother's death
lash out violently. Go on a rampage like we just saw Angel do. She would
probably disassociate herself from her friends like we saw her do at the
beginning of season two. I think her reaction would be very close to what we
saw Angel do.

She would tear up Sunnydale and come very close to becoming "another Faith."
She just wouldn't care anymore. She would become a danger to herself and
those around her. For her it would all become "nothing but the kill" and not
about the people around her.

But "big sister" Buffy will not allow herself to do that for Dawn's sake.
She will understand that she must set an example of stability for Dawn and
that will give her some control she would have otherwise lacked.

All and all, I believe having Dawn around at this difficult time is more of
blessing than a burden for Buffy. It might be the only thing that keeps
Buffy sane and connected.



Current board | March 2001

1