January 2003 posts


Previous December 2002  

More January 2003


Any further Spec since watching last night's preview for next week? (Showtime trailer spoils) -- neaux, 13:21:59 01/01/03 Wed

I always feel icky being the first to post about potential spoils. But I was dying to talk to someone about the trailer last night and CHAT was down and it was New Year's Eve so I figure most people were out and about anyhoo.

Well anyway I saw the trailer and I am Verrrrrry Interested with the pairing of (Spoils start here people)




Giles and Anya???!! Not that I'm shipping or anything but you get the two of them together and they have the best scenes together!!

that's all I'm mentioning about the trailer.
Anyone else wish to carry on with speculation then I'm very excited to read about.

[> Just got back from Spoiler Sluts.... (spoilers natch.*L) -- Briar Rose, 21:33:13 01/01/03 Wed

Okay according to the postings there - Giles isn't dead, nor is he being impersonated! But I think we aren't supposed to know that until the third new ep. That was the best post I read there and I'm hoping they're right.

There is supposedly another break between the next ep on the 7th and the following on the 21st! What's up with that????? Like I need to see some "Funky Flubs" show when BtVS is just starting to heat up again???? Hating UPN more and more each day!

The next ep is being touted as a major story line mover. Action and suspense be thy name. That the information Giles and Anya turn out is going to play a major role in the rest of the season. And there was also a tidbit about Willow channeling Warren that would be interesting if done right.... But I actually read it as more of someone's idea of fan-fic and less as an actual spoiler. Too much Shipping type stuff all around to actually sound like insider info, IMO.

And for those that want an insider's spec on the future of Willow from a relationship angle, from a stunt man (name withheld so he can keep his job) who worked on BtVS for the last three seasons?:

**Warning - this isn't going to be popular with those who are very much counting on Willow being in another lesbian relationship soon**

Start insider gossip:

Allyson Haniggan was never very happy with the decision to make Willow completely lesbian. In her opinion, it was not true to the character because Willow had been in love with Xander all her life, loved Oz BEYOND her own life and would have been reconciled with Oz if contracts with Seth Green would have been worked out (hence Veruca and that whole "Something Blue" storyline...)the idea of Willow suddenly "becoming gay" was just not believable from an actor's perspective. Especially with the reaction Willow had to Dopplegang Willow's bi-sexuality. Anyone remember, "....And I think I'm kinda..... gay."

AH discussed the decision with Whedon and Noxon ad nauseum and my source says they came to an agreement in Season 6 negotiations that she wouldn't be playing anything more than still greiving for lost loves bi Willow from now on (as evidence in The Jacket story line,IMO) and mostly the character of Willow will be a-sexual for the remainder of the show's run. This would also make the various spoilers about Willow becoming an item with a SIT truly more fan-fic than reality. Now if AH changed her mind once the audience bought the change in character so well? That I don't know. I only know that it was a problem for her up until the end of season 6. This season, the talks about characters are being done away from the set so the info is harder to come by.


End insider gossip.

[> [> That is all that information is.....Gossip -- Rufus, 23:10:28 01/01/03 Wed

There is lots of Gossip out there and some of it just plain ridiculous....like what you just posted.

[> [> [> Re: That is all that information is.....Gossip --
monsieurxander, 00:52:04 01/02/03 Thu

Alyson Hannigan was recently quoted in "The Advocate" as saying

"Let's get one thing straight. Willow's gay."

Also, Joss has been quoted several times saying that Willow will not become a "nun".

[> [> [> [> Also... -- monsieurxander, 01:00:15 01/02/03 Thu

In the wake of the controversy surrounding Tara's death, Joss has also been quoted as saying that he did not and still does not want to offend the gay community. Emphatically so.

A character that has identified herself as gay for three years suddenly turning straight... or even "asexual"... would be offensive to said community. I'm betting Joss knows that.

Even if Alyson Hannigan didn't like the way her character was developing, I seriously doubt Joss would change Willow's sexuality based only on her input... A huge backlash would ensue. I doubt any actress or actor on the show has that kind of input.

Just putting in my two cents.

[> [> [> [> [> Correct.... -- Briar Rose, 13:56:22 01/02/03 Thu

Sometimes an actor's input does and sometimes it doesn't.*s*

What I've been watching with the Willow character in the story line of the show recently does tend to point to the fact that the outcome of that gossip has a base in reality though..... That is the only reason why I posted the info. When you mix the two components of the character and the actress who plays her (One greiving the loss of her soul mate, the other contemplating the change in direction her character has taken) it would appear that a happy medium would be reached in a way that would carry along with the story line for this year: Getting down to business and growing into your own power.

In the real world - people don't come off a three year relationship unaffected by the loss of someone they loved so much, lost so tragically and just hop into another relationship immediatly. So Shipping between Willow and anyone , or any characters but Buffy and Spike,is really beyond the scope of spec, IMO. One thing that ME has always done is keep it real under all the fantasy horror. Every story line is a mythological turn on what people face in real life.

I agree with the many people who have posted in the past year that NONE of the Scoobies need romantic relationships at this point. They need to figure out how to love themselves and function independantly above all else.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Correct.... -- Juliet, 19:14:50 01/02/03 Thu

what might be an interesting and still-real approach to the shippiness might be the good ol' rebound, which wouldn't end well for either party.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Or -- Rufus, 19:59:19 01/02/03 Thu

We see the slow evolution of what could eventually become a ship proving that lesbians like anyone else can become healthy after losing a loving partner such as Tara. I have a problem with Willow becoming just stuck in a grieving phase unable to interact with another partner again, cause in the real world people go through grief which is an experience that is individual. To impose a timeframe on the experience makes no sense to me, as does expecting a specific time frame for Willow to be alone before reaching out to others. It's clear at the moment that she was shocked at Kennedy's flirting, but that shouldn't mean that it would be wrong for Willow to eventually become interested in an eventual relationship (whatever form that may take). I don't see that as disrespecting Tara, I see that as proof that Tara's loving nature lives on.

Worlds in and out of balance...Buffy's practical conundrum (spoilerish for Season 7) -- Random, 15:28:28 01/01/03 Wed

Just a thought on this New Year's day (happy New Year's, ya'll) that I'm not certain has been addressed as such. Ever since watching Bring on the Night, a slight nettling problem has been stuck at the back of my mind. So far, we've seen the FE declaring all-out war on the whole Slayer-Watcher organization (and on Good itself? are there other forces for "Good" in the world? One assumes, but we've seen precious little of them on BtVS; indeed, the show often emphasizes the essential solitude of the Slayer and her central role in the battle. The only major exception I can think of are the Knights of Byzantium, and their more utilitarian ethos wasn't exactly free from moral ambiguity, being that they were gonna kill Dawn by hook or crook.) Anyway, digression aside, we find Buffy declaring war right back, and promising to kill, spindle and mutilate every single evil creature standing between her and the FE, and then killing the FE for good measure. What fascinated -- and bothered me -- was the way the conflict paradigm shaped up there. She declares (rather egocentrically) that the only thing more powerful than evil was them. Not "good" or "love" or "morality" or even "humanity." Where most would cast the moral and physical high ground in at least semi-abstract terms, Buffy goes straight for the gut. Whether she is directly equating the Scooby Gang and the potential slayers with the concept of "good" is unclear -- though likely the case. Of course, she's also making a practical, commonsense observation that the FE has chosen to attack them and has, for some reason, failed to capitalize, thus implying that it isn't ready to go all-out against them. But what she says is emblematic of one of the central philosophical dilemmas of BtVS -- the character of the conflict between good and evil. It is a war. Neither side seems to dispute that. But is it a war Buffy should win?
Back in the olden days ("Gingerbread"), Angel assures Buffy that the fact that they "never win" isn't in any way contrary to a sense of fulfillment. That's not why they fight. The goal of the Big Bads has always been a disruption of the balance, a chance for evil to triumph over good, while the more humanistic ethos of the "good" characters of BtVS has primarily focused of maintaining the status quo (which is more meaningful than it appears -- saving the lives of innocents is a maintenance of the status quo because premature and ugly death tends to throw their existences sharply out of balance, so to speak.) The FE declares that it wants to end this perpetual teeter-totter once and for all and do away with the whole angst in favor of a clear-cut goal of pure power unadulterated by mere ethos. Giles, ever the wise Watcher, observes that what the FE is attempting is extraordinarily dangerous because the balance will be destroyed. So here's my question: wouldn't the balance be as effectively destroyed if Buffy and her cohorts destroy the FE? It's not an idle question. For the first time, we are dealing with a Big Bad that transcends mere (Platonically speaking)incarnation of evil. It is the essence of evil. (Which is not to say that it is integral, necessarily. It is clearly an antecedent to evil, but nothing has been said about its role in the growth and propogation of evil in subsequent times. It may, in fact, be merely another incarnation of evil in practical terms, no longer the First but merely the "oldest.") Even so, the destruction of the FE (and the Hellmouth?) seems to fall into the category of "throwing the balance out-of-whack" more so than any other Big Bad. While it's difficult for us in the real world to find that a particularly disheartening prospect, in the Buffyverse, it's more problematic if one assumes that the balance is necessary. And there are indications that it is. Whistler, for instance, gave us a glimpse of a greater metaphysical cause than mere victory. (It would be interesting to see Whistler come down to help the FE stop the Scoobies from destroying the balance.) So -- peripherization and rambling prolixity aside -- what do ya'll think? Is ME shaping things up to be even more complicated than they already are? Should -- cosmically speaking -- there be a clearcut winner here? Or does it all come down to Buffy vs the FE in terms of power rather than "good" vs "evil" in terms of ethos?

[> Re: balance -- Robert, 19:20:14 01/01/03 Wed

>>> wouldn't the balance be as effectively destroyed if Buffy and her cohorts destroy the FE?

Your question seems to assume that destruction of balance is a bad thing, and I think it probably is. It turns out that we have a view of the distant future (ie. Fray) and it isn't pretty. Maybe this is the consequence of Buffy's victory over the First Evil (assuming that Buffy is the victor).

The message here could be that (in a sense) Buffy cannot win. In other words, any outcome to the coming battle will result in unpleasant consequences. The best that Buffy can hope for is to pick the best from a selection of bad choices.

[> Here's the thing: Buffy's never tried to keep the balance. -- Finn Mac Cool, 04:38:39 01/02/03 Thu

The forces of evil on Buffy are constantly trying to destroy the world and kill as much of humanity as possible. Buffy saves the world and kills as many of the murderous forces in the supernatural world as she can. But she's never been all about maintaining the status quo. She fights evil and desperately tries to win, even though she knows the odds of a final victory are slim to nil. So, yes, what she ends up doing is maintaining things at a balanced level, but that's never been her goal. Her goal has always been to stop the damage evil is doing and then remove the source of the evil.

To draw a parallel: police know that they'll never be able to put an end to crime, but they go out, do their best job, and manage to nail a great deal of the perpetrators, but never end crime once and for all. Does this mean the police are just trying to "maintain the status quo"? No! If they could end all crime, they would, but it's just not within their power to do.

The reason there is balance in the Buffyverse is that the two sides of good and evil both try to win, but are so equally matched that neither can gain much ground over the other. Yes, Buffy has resigned herself to the fact that a final victory over the forces of darkness is virtually impossible, but that doesn't mean she stop TRYING to attain that goal.

[> [> But this always begs the question: what if you COULD achieve final victory? -- cjl, 07:48:28 01/02/03 Thu

What if you could eliminate "evil"? Would it make the world a better place? Or would the absence of a choice between good and evil render the universe a static, sterile wasteland? Is Buffy-as-avatar-of-Order the hero in this scenario, or the greatest threat to the universe we've ever seen on this series?

[> [> [> Re: But this always begs the question: what if you COULD achieve final victory? -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:04:25 01/02/03 Thu

Well, when Buffy died, from what she's told us, that was a pretty much evil free place. Yet she was incredibly happy there. So I think ME has said that, in their universe, a utopia can potentially exist.

Of course, it might end up like Cordelia stuck on the higher plane, but that may have come from being a physical creature sucked into a non-physical dimension.

[> Re: Worlds in and out of balance (spoilers) -- Silky, 08:58:35 01/02/03 Thu

But if it is a metaphor, then couldn't it be about balance within (as opposed to outside of) Buffy and the Scoobies - about finding balance within themselves for their own powers/abilites.

I keep thinking that the final 'battle' won't be about physical power - but mental and emotional, and possibly spiritual, power. Understanding it, containing it, using it wisely, etc.

[Well-known casting spoiler in next paragraph.]


Maybe Faith has some insight into that that she can/will provide.

[> [> And yet...(spoilers in general up to present day and time. Plus, rather rambling) -- Random, 16:45:13 01/02/03 Thu

Okay, I didn't get into the metaphorical level...stupidly enough, since it's one of the primary engines of BtVS's brilliancy. And Joyce, much like the lamented Mr. Manners of AtS, emphasizes the internal conflict of good vs evil within both then human psyche and the human collective. What interests me is the terribly Nietzschean character of this season's conflict. Think "Genealogy of Morals" or "Ecce Homo" or -- especially -- "Beyond Good and Evil." We have an argument for the ubermensch as defined by a humanistic (more as opposed to "Christian" than as a traditional philosophical label) mode of thought and society. Though Nietzsche has unfairly (if understandably)been labelled a precursor to Nazism, the thrust of his argument lies not in the famous "will to power" but in a more prosaic and more profound theory of eschewing moral "authority" in favor of individualism -- almost but not quite the same thing as the "will to power."
The reason Joyce throws us for a loop, as several people have pointed out, is the fact that what she says makes frightening sense. Evil exists in all of us. Without that evil, as Holland Manners noted, we'd all be angels. So humanity cannot destroy evil without destroying "humanity" as a practical concept. However, the FE appears to be hardcore on destroying "good" -- one notices that it isn't trying to destroy the balance by waging all-out war on "evil", after all. At first blush, this seems like a reasonable plan. Unlike humanity, the FE doesn't have much need for the balance -- it's pure evil and damned proud of it. But...(checking Masq's discussion of the nature of evil) how can the FE be "evil" without hapless humanity and goodness to prey upon? Isn't this the essence of what its will to power is, after all? Destroy the good fairy, unleash evil to subsume all and the concepts of good and evil become meaningless. I need not repeat the traditional wisdom concerning joy/sadness, night/day, polarities of all sorts, et cetera. The FE will cease to be "evil" in the aftermath of victory. Of course, it could achieve the same goal by wiping out all evil instead of good, but being that it's still the FE right now, the FE is unlikely to survive that sort of purgation.
So how does this relate to the internal metaphor of the season? One suspects ME will address the issue directly before the season is over (nice point about Faith, incidentally) But for now, we're confronted not with a battle revolving not so much around evil's attempt to eliminate good (and itself, in a manner of speaking) but good's attempt to retain the distinctions of a greater moral system. If Buffy truly means to destroy the FE -- which she explicitly equates with the universal concept of "evil" in her speechat the end of TBtN -- then she (unwittingly?) is about to go against everything the Scoobies have fought for lo these past six years. Every one of the Scoobies has had moments of questionable moral behaviour (Willow most of all), but this is a matter of choice. They know the difference between good and evil, and choose to support their conception of "good" rather than, ala Nietzsche, eschew morality altogether. The spirit of the Slayer is no less a throwback than the FE, and from the perspective of the Scooby gang, any attempt to destroy evil, and moral systems altogether by default, would be an unacceptable regression. The conflict is a subtle one indeed. No matter how you cut it, the presence of evil defines humanity, and the drive to destroy either evil or good in the Buffyvers is not -- Nietzsche notwithstanding -- progress but regress. It's no coincidence that the ubervamp is the FE weapon of choice right now. It represents a purer ferocity unhindered by the ethos of evil or good. Or so Giles implies, though one wonders about the nature of the demon that possesses it. I suspect that the key to this season will be the ability of the characters to realize and come to terms with their own ambiguous natures. Willow's been sending up big honkin' signs that she's struggling with this all season, as has Spike, and the other characters have faced similar problems to a lesser degree.
A final note: the FE has been striking out at the system -- the hallmark of civilization and codes -- of the forces of good. However much we like to malign the Watcher's Council, they clearly have an agenda and a plan for combatting evil. The First Slayer fought and reacted and eschewed distinctions to such a degree that she was more than willing to attack Buffy. Thus the evolution of both humanity as a whole and individual ethics in particular seems to be key here.
Must go back and re-watch "Restless." This is all very fascinating. The "will to power" trumping the traditional codes as a form of regression and loss rather than progression and growth...hmmm...

[> [> [> True, without evil, humanity as we know it would be gone. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 17:56:48 01/02/03 Thu

But why can't humanity become something better? Fact of the matter is, all humans will always have evil within them. But in many traditions around the world, the ultimate goal is to transcend humanity. See Nirvana in the Hindu tradition, or the Judeo/Christian/Islamic view of becoming angelic beings after leading a good life, or the Mormon view of becoming a god after death. In fact, if you want examples within the Buffyverse, what about how Cordelia seemed to develop a much closer link to the Powers That Be once she became part demon (and she seems to have been spliced with one of the good varieties of demons that exist on "Angel", since there's been no sign of evil urges since the transformation happened)?

As for moral codes being destroyed, you're right that moral codes are needed, but only in a world where both good and evil exist. If there was no evil we wouldn't need moral codes because nothing we could do would be evil. You have to admit it would be nice not to NEED moral codes anymore. To relax in the knowledge that you could do no wrong.

Finally, there also arises the issue of whether the First Evil is the sum of all evil, or just what its name implies: the first of the many evil things, thoughts, and creatures that would come to exist. And, here's a thought: Giles said it was the thing that created evil, but, if the FE is evil personified, how could it create itself? I'm personally leaning towards the theory that the metaphor of the First Evil has shifted, similar to what ME has done with vampires and magic. In "Amends" it was about the evil in all of us. But now, in Season Seven, I see it as being more the origin and uniter of all evil, but capable of existing independently of evil.

[> [> [> [> Re: True, without evil, humanity as we know it would be gone. . . -- Random, 19:38:18 01/02/03 Thu

Which was sort of my point. In the absence of moral codes, there can be no morality -- no guilt or regrets or artificially imposed consequences for our actions. Yet what does this state of affairs actually denote? Anarchy, to be sure, but there's something more fundamental at work here. Can you imagine -- in this world, with our species -- a higher intelligence than animals that impose no moral code? As I see it -- being neither religious nor particularly inclined to non-humanist codes of belief -- morale codes are implicit in the human psyche. We feel the need to rationalize our behaviour, both on sheerly solispistic terms and in our relation with others. Granted, our moral codes are to some extent arbitrary. One could easily -- if not happily -- imagine a moral code centered around the virtues of murder or pillage. Many barbarian tribes created precisely that sort of ethos. But more important than the conjectural aspect is the reality of our world, and the Buffyverse. To the extent that the Buffyverse is fundamentally about the conflict between good and evil, one cannot abolish them without abolishing the rationale for the conflict.
Insofar as the eschatological conceptualizations of transcendence go, they're appealing, no question about it. The question is, as I suspect any agnostic or atheist (say, Joss for instance) would observe, are they in keeping with the essence of being human? Can you imagine yourself as becoming perfectly good without sacrificing some major aspect of your humanity?
In any event, the problem we're looking at here is the idea of worlds being thrown out of balance. It's very true that there's some question as to what the FE represents. I tend to agree that it isn't so much integral as merely powerful (as I noted in my original post) so my point may be tenuous at best. But as long as the FE intends to destroy the balance, and is capable of it, one must assume that the stakes are high no matter what the outcome of the conflict might be. How, indeed, does one confront evil if it's implicit in everyone? Destroying the FE won't automatically raise the world to a state of grace (unless ME has something bizarre up its storytelling sleeve) but obviously the FE exists on a level that is qualitatively rather than quantitatively different from the other Big Bads.
Oh, and that's an interesting point about the FE creating itself. Of course, theologians have asked the same question about God for centuries, so.... Perhaps we could legitimately ask whether the FE is actually evil rather than merely the amoral source of things that would later come to be classified as "evil." And, even more interesting, if the FE created evil, did something create "good?" This question is all the more fascinating because we tend to normalize "good" and exclude "evil" as the Other, an aberration. So we -- I posit -- would have more difficulty thinking of "good" as having a single, gestative origin because "good" seems more abstract, more integral to our nature. We have infamous crimes, we rarely have famour acts of altruism. The child saved from drowning by a passerby attracts less attention than the child murdered by a serial killer.

[> [> [> [> [> Anarchy without evil wouldn't be a problem -- Finn Mac Cool, 20:17:19 01/02/03 Thu

Anarchy is a bad thing most of the time in our world, because there is evil everywhere and in everyone. But in a world without evil, anarchy wouldn't be bad because nothing bad would happen to anybody no matter what.

I guess the way I think of it isn't just evil being expelled, but also good taking over the world. Since good would never wish anyone any harm, a world ruled by a force of good would be perfect. Even if people tried to hurt someone, the person would be incapable of being hurt.

As for myself, I believe that good and evil are human constructs, like pretty and ugly; there's no such thing as forces of good or evil, or even a definate standard of right and wrong. It's all opinion. However, if you look at many ancient mythologies, even before there were the gods, there were the forces of chaos and disorder.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: True, without evil, humanity as we know it would be gone. . . -- Arethusa, 21:31:45 01/02/03 Thu

It seems that the First Evil might function somewhat like Wolfram and Hart. It didn't create evil, which is part of humanity, but it exists to exploit it, and uses it to create chaos. Evil can't be eliminated, but its agents can and should be. I think eradicating evil in people would be eradicating free will, since people would no longer be free to choose how to act.

How do you confront evil? Expose it for what it is, since nothing else is so deeply hidden or disguised by us, in our attempts to justify our actions. The FE works through deceit and disguise, and cannot commit overt actions. It teaches people to rationalize, justify and disguise their evil actions, so the good side is subduded or tricked into acquiesence. That's why Andrew is its perfect patsy, and why our Scoobies had to go through so much misery in Season Six. Their rationalizations for their actions grew so unwieldy that they became crushed under the weight of their self-deceit. This season has seen a change in these behaviors, most obviously for Spike, whose veneer of gentlemanly behavior was stripped away last year, and who is finally able to see himself as he really is. All the others, though, underwent the same experience of watching their dark side exposed publically. It greatly increased their self-knowledge, which made them stronger, since they are now less likely to fall for the FE's lies and manipulations, as we have seen this year.

Gentlemen vs Sweet -- JBone, 19:52:04 01/01/03 Wed

All those secrets you've been concealing; Say you're happy now, Once more with feeling.

http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/road2sunnydale/exhibit.html

[> Rallying for His Sweetness. Seven Points to Sleep on. -- HarryParachute, 01:23:48 01/02/03 Thu

Y'know, it's a good thing these two groups didn't pop up in Sunnydale at the same time.

A city desperately wanting to sing is inable to even talk.

I'm thinking if it's a clear night...you could probably see the fiery results from Japan.

Anyway...while many would argue in the opposite direction, Sweet would win this one, for a number of reasons.

1. The Gentlemen need and seek out hearts, but the heart is at Sweet's beck and call. It's his domain, not his mission, y'dig? If the Gentlemen silence the town to get the goods, Sweet would burn the stockpile to a cinder in a well-choreographed second act without the slightest intermission. What would the Gentlemen do to get their precious hearts then, eh? Frantically grab some Dirt Devils before the Santa Anas pick up? If they want what they come for, then they're at Sweet's Tender Mercy.

2. Sweet doesn't just sing and dance, he inspires it, creates it, he's OF song and dance, it's in his very soul...if he has one at any rate. Point is, Sweet's song comes from a place that's much harder to uproot. That little Hoover Box the Gentlemen drag in might be able to work its magic on the common-folk, but Master Sweet is of a Higher Order.

3. The box is a time-sensitive one shot deal. So, if Sweet makes his entrance after the devoicing of the town he's still got all his guns loaded. I'm sure you can all appreciate that with Sweet ruling over a Kingdom, his lordship knows something of etiquette...like when to be oh-so-fashionably late.

4. Now if, and this for me is still a pretty big if, Sweet is silenced by the box...he's gonna channel all that juice into his dancing-shoes. When it's time to rumble at main street...amidst the mysteriously manifesting firedrums (I mean really, what was up with that?)...Sweet and the Henchpuppets would lay down some funky Fossi-jujitsu stylings and send those creepy freaks floating back to the bell-tower. In the tales, no sword can kill them...but they don't say anything about a spit-shined tap-shoe, do they? Thassright.

5. What about the Gentlemen's straightjacket posse, you ask? Glad you did. You can see they're not happy in their current occupation. There's distant relations with upper-management, there's not much room for upward mobility...or much of any mobility cuz'...y'know...straightjackets, and they don't have any medium to voice their complaints what with the "No Utterances Whatsoever" policy and the mandatory mouth-removal. But most importantly...They want to dance! Can't everyone see that? You can practically hear the internal dialogue:

"Okay, okay, chase the girl, chase the girl, oh, OH, but I want to dance in a circle and flail wildly! Ack! Sorry! Sorry boss. Chasing the girl. Right. Focus. Focus...on...hey! Look at the shiny gum wrapper! Time to Dance!"

They must be sick and tired of being cast, uh, relatively disapproving fixed-smiles from their oppressors. If Sweet were to give the underlings an offer, they'd turn on the Gentlemen faster than you can say Footloose. There goes their only muscle.

6. People are gonna talk about the effect the Gentlemen have on Sweet, what with the voice thing, but what about the effect Sweet has on them, hmmmmmm? Sweet's spell doesn't work it's magic exclusively on humans. Vampires, 600 lbs. Chirago Demons, weird lookin' horned monsters who hang out in graveyards tying Romance Book Cover type men with open shirts to trees, everyone's fair game. So are the Gentlemen. What are they going to do when they feel the fire? Sing? Uh, no. Obvious reasons. Dance? As...interesting as that would be, no. No rhythm with those guys. They're so removed from bass that they don't even touch the ground. Way too uptight. And that's the penalty of being so proper and creepy. The stiff and rigid will be broken, the soft and supple will survive. When the Gentlemen finally are forced to face their inner funk, all those seams in them well-tailored suits are gonna come undone. That energy has got nowhere to go, turns to heat, burns them up like Roman Candles.

Seventh and final reason. The one which outweighs all the others and secures the Eternal Victory of All That Which is Sweet against the Dark Horde of Creepiness.

7. Sweet made Dawn do that thing with her hips.

*long pause*

I think it's important, anyway, for the development of the Pushy Queen of Slut Town.

And her pants.

And I ask you this: Could a disgusting, old, veiny, green Gentlmen make Dawn do the thing with her hips?

...Well...uh...maybe...but that belongs in very obscure fanfic.

...

I just made myself queezy. Think I'll go outside.

[> [> Well argued! That should convince some people, queeziness aside. -- Rochefort, 01:41:49 01/02/03 Thu


[> [> You convinced me. My money's on Sweet. -- Dead (but still got) Soul, 02:01:44 01/02/03 Thu


[> [> Still wanna see Lorne vs. Sweet. -- HonorH, 07:19:27 01/02/03 Thu

A Singing Smackdown would be just the thing to liven up ol' LA, wouldn't it? No way would Lorne ever burn himself out on singing and dancing--though if AI started singing, his head might just explode. But hey, that's no big for a member of the Deathwok clan. And then they could just portal Sweet to Pylea and watch the fireworks (visible from our dimension). Yeah!

[> [> [> Sweet vs. Lorne--the Singing Smackdown in Pylea! -- cjl, 09:20:16 01/02/03 Thu

Scene: an amphitheater about 20 km from Lorne's home village. 100,000 humans/demons/hybrids from about 50 different dimensions in attendance. (Event, marketing and ticket sales arranged by Wolfram and Hart.)

Round 1 - Lorne starts off with "I Will Survive," backed by a 50-piece orchestra and a full complement of Lornettes. Two-thirds of the way through the song, Lorne's mother (along with most of his family) summons a portal and bails out to Quar-toth--which begins to look really good after the second chorus...

Sweet, backed by a Fosse-sized batallion of dancing minions, counters with "All that Jazz." During the finale, the former royal palace explodes.

Next round, anybody?

[> [> [> [> R2: Sweet vs. Lorne--the Singing Smackdown in Pylea! -- ponygirl, 10:40:52 01/02/03 Thu

Round 2

In a desperate attempt to counter Sweet's devastating jazz hands, Lorne decides to Send In The Clowns by bringing out the Sondheim. The newly liberated cows of Pylea poignantly join in on the final note as they realize the damn clowns are already here.

Unfortunately Lorne's Broadway bound move backfires when Sweet decides to Bring in da Noise, along with his associate da Funk. The duo, Noise and Funk, make short work of the cows and the Lornettes, tapping them into the pavement of Pylea Stadium. Lorne stands alone as the bell rings down on Round 2!

[> [> [> [> [> R8: Sweet vs. Lorne--the Kid Gloves Come Off -- cjl, 11:19:50 01/02/03 Thu

After feeling out his opponent for the first seven rounds, Sweet decides to assert his mastery and stages a spectacular, unprecedented "medley of evil," combining the "Good Old Bad Old Days" from "Damn Yankees" with "Springtime for Hitler" from "The Producers." He's backed by dozens of swastika-adorned back-up singers, a goose-stepping line of Rockettes and an actual German tank rolling across the stage during the final chorus. The applause is tumultuous. The line for D'Hoffryn's Vengeance Demon Recruitment booth triples right after the curtain drops...

Lorne, desperate, backed into a corner, decides to go for broke. He banishes the orchestra, back-up singers, and his remaining Lornettes from the stage and does "You'll Never Walk Alone" from "Carousel"--a cappella. It pays off. The M'Fashnik demons working security blubber shamelessly; in the audience, Willow and Andrew, Xander and Spike, Angel and Connor, and Buffy and Faith exchange warm, tearful hugs; Lorne hits his Patented High Note, and six of Sweet's dancing minions melt into a pool of brown ooze. After Lorne dramatically clips off that final note, the audience sits in stunned silence. There is only the sound of one set of hands clapping--Sweet's. He smiles at Lorne, nodding his head, acknowledging a fellow Master. The battle is truly on.

Next round?

[> [> [> [> [> [> Battle Royale: Sweet vs. Lorne--To The Pain! -- HonorH (really getting into this), 13:15:19 01/02/03 Thu

Sweet responds to Lorne's audience-coup by getting up and singing his own signature song--"How You Feel"--with lyrics geared directly to the audience. It's a show-stopper. Literally. By the time he's done, the audience is at each others' throats yet again. Sweet gives a smug grin to Lorne, who decides to pick up the gauntlet.

Lorne responds with his own signature song, "Lady Marmalade." Only he's recruited new Lornettes while Sweet was singing: Dawn and a bunch of her teenage girlfriends. The sight of all those underage honeys gyrating and singing, "Voulez-vous couchez avec moi ce soir?" causes Sweet to slip in a puddle of his own drool and fall face-down on stage. Can he recover in time for the next round?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> R10: Sweet vs. Lorne--Krevlornswath in Command -- cjl, 14:07:14 01/02/03 Thu

Thrown by Lorne's cheap, shameless (and highly successful) display of underage pulchritude, Sweet tries his own audience pandering--and makes two critical errors. First error: three little words...Andrew. Lloyd. Webber.

Eschewing the show-stopping mentality and shooting for dark seduction, he dims the lights, and with his own 30-piece orchestra behind him, goes into "Music of the Night" from "Phantom of the Opera." He's doing great, has most of the female audience members under his spell--until he reaches out his hand to bring one of them up on stage to be his "Christine."

Error no. 2: he chooses Buffy.

At first glance, it's a smart move. Everybody in the crowd knows about the Slayer, and if Sweet can get her hypnotized by dark romance, he racks up big points. But Buffy is not as enthralled as he thinks (in fact, she looks a little bored), and Sweet is scared he's losing the crowd. While the orchestra vamps, Sweet improvises(!) a seductive rap, and again, he's got most of the audience right with him--but Buffy kind of sniffs and says: "The whole 'seduced by darkness' thing? REALLY getting old." And goes back to her seat. Sweet finishes the number flawlessly (hey, he is a pro), but he's been badly damaged.

Lorne, wasting no time in capitalizing on an opportunity, promptly pulls out his Mission Statement number: out-Broadway-ing Sweet with a razzle-dazzle rendition of "Brotherhood of Man" (from "How to Succeed in Business without Really Trying"), then bringing it down and segue-ing into the Hollies' "He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother" with back-up singers from over 50 demonic species joining him on the chorus.

It's a crusher. But Sweet's not done yet.

Next round?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> R11: Sweet vs. Lorne - a Close Escape -- KdS, 14:43:05 01/02/03 Thu

The shameless appeal to interspecies brotherhood and the strain of the battle drives Sweet over the edge. To a minion's tinkling on the grand piano, he dispels all the good feeling in the arena with a high-speed run-through of Tom Lehrer's National Brotherhood Week. Even the Scooby Gang find themselves succumbing to the lure of chill misanthropy sweetened by intellectual self-satisfaction. Lorne's move countered, he moves on to his master stroke. The awesome romantic grimness of a solo piano rendition of Radiohead's Exit Music has Dawn leading the entire audience onto the pitch for an attempt on the Multiverse record for synchronised spontaneous combustion.

As the first whisps of smoke begin to rise, a curtain rises at the back of the stage to reveal a massed orchestra of Mahleresque dimensions, backing Lorne in a heartbreakingly imperfect version of the Flaming Lips' Race for the Prize. By the time the final chords ring out, all present have cheerfully accepted that while the world may be a place of tribulation, true humanity lies in confronting rather than escaping that.

Sweet quells the orchestra with a shockingly unhinged snarl and opens his mouth for a final push...

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> R12: Sweet vs. Lorne -- Sweet('s) Revenge -- cjl, 16:28:24 01/02/03 Thu

After Lorne's brilliant countermove in Round 11, he's got the audience eating out of the palm of his hand. So he decides to consolidate his gains and take the contest into familiar, more intimate territory: he brings out his favorite pianist from Caritas, orders a single spotlight, and solos on "Bein' Green," one of his favorite numbers from the old nightclub act.

Willow melts into a puddle of goo, of course, but nobody else in the audience shares the childhood nostalgia. Lorne has miscalculated: singing a Joe Raposo song outdoors, in front of 100,000 sentient beings, has a lot less impact than singing it inside, in front of 50. Sweet has an opening-- and he takes full advantage.

To the astonishment of the West Coast U.S. humans and demonspawn, Sweet comes out after the break with the remaining members of Soundgarden: Kim Thayil on guitar, Ben Shepherd on bass, and Matt Cameron on drums, with Sweet replacing Chris Cornell on lead vocals. They launch into "Mailman," Cornell and Cameron's epic ode to self-loathing and revenge. Over Thayil's crunching guitar riff, Sweet coos the chorus: "I know I'm headed for the bottom," he whispers to the rapt audience, "but I'm riding you all the way." Sweet and the band then turn that last, obsessive phrase into a howling, adrenaline-fueled rave-up, Sweet taking the crowd on a ride to hell and inviting them to sing along. Led by Xander and Buffy--reigning King and Queen of Self-Hatred in the Whedonverse, a good chunk of the audience does sing along, and the wave of bad vibes hits Lorne like a tsunami.

Lorne crumples to the ground in a heap--and even after the feedback from Thayil's guitar fades into the cool night air, he doesn't get up, despite Fred's frantic efforts to revive him. Looks like this contest is all over...

Or is it?

Next round?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> R13: Not Dead Yet -- HonorH (humming to herself), 19:18:05 01/02/03 Thu

Sweet, seeing Lorne on the floor, launches into a rocking, mocking rendition of "Satisfaction" with his band. The demons are moshing, AI and the Scoobies are frantically trying to revive Lorne, and it looks like all is lost. As the last chords of "Satisfaction" die out, lost in the roar of the crowd, Lorne finally gets to his feet and slowly, painfully, makes his way to the stage. The audience falls silent as he takes the microphone.

"Not bad, Peach Pie," he says to Sweet. "Not bad at all. But how about let's separate the men from the imps now?"

With that, he launches into the Beatles' "Revolution". The demon audience is just happy to have something else to mosh to, and they get into it. Just as Lorne's got them in the palm of his hand, he silences the band with a gesture. In the resultant silence, he begins to sing John Lennon's "Imagine." He sings a capella through the first stanza before being softly joined by an orchestra. The music grows and swells, Lorne throws his whole body and soul into the song, and before long, the audience is openly weeping and swaying, hands locked and held high.

The song finishes. Silence reigns until a single voice is heard from the audience.

"All you need is love," sings Rupert Giles.

"All you need is love," sing the Scoobies.

"All you need is love, love," sings Angel Investigations along with the Scoobies.

"Love is all you need," sings the entire audience.

The entire audience continues to vamp on the chorus, encouraged by Lorne. Demon clans reconcile millennia-old feuds, Xander and Anya get married on the spot, Wesley is taken none-too-figuratively into the arms of his former teammates, and Angel and Spike cling to each other and cry. It's beautiful.

Finally, the music ends, and Sweet claps his hands.

"Well done, Krevlorneswath," he says. "Very well done. I'd say this is our best event yet." With a flourish, he pulls a hat out of thin air as his music starts.

"Now I gotta go
This thing has been real fun.
I could stay and mope
But I gotta cut and run

"Lorne and I have gone and competed
I lost this round but I ain't defeated
See you all real soon
I hope you like bein'

"WELL DOOOOONNNNE!"

Sweet zips out of there as Lorne's friends rush to congratulate him.

"Anybody got a Seabreeze?" asks our favorite green guy, and the curtain falls.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> except for one final tragic coda -- ponygirl, 19:43:46 01/02/03 Thu

The victors have long ago taken themselves off to the local tiki lounge, the dead bodies have all been looted, and the Pylean Stadium is seemingly empty.

Except a single spotlight appears on the battered stage, and a few strains of familiar music can be heard. Into the light steps Connor, and he begins to sing, revealing a pure voice and a surprising appreciation for Streisand.

Papa, can you hear me?
Papa, can you see me?
Papa, can you find me in the night?

He's really belting it out now, giving it all he has.

Papa, please forgive me.
Try to understand me.
Papa, don't you know I had no choice?

It's the big finish, and Connor spreads his arms, singing straight into the light.

Papa, how I love you.
Papa, how I need you.
Papa, how I miss you
Kissing me goodnight.

He looks out hopefully into the darkened stadium, but it is empty. He is alone. The spotlight dims and the rest is silence.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Now that's what I call collaborative fiction. -- cjl, 21:58:12 01/02/03 Thu

Sigh. Why did I jump ahead to Round 8? We could have done this all night! Oh well.

Loved the endings, ladies. I had one of my own, but I like yours better. If anybody's interested, though:



Lorne, mere moments before disqualification and disgrace, slowly rises to his feet, and--refusing the aide of Fred and Cordelia, plods toward the microphone set up at center stage. He looks out at a hazy sea of faces, human and demon alike, all silently observing him, unreadable, futures unknown--much like his own future at the moment. He grabs the microphone stand (more for support than dramatic effect) and opens his mouth, unsure of what to sing or whether anything will come out.

With all eyes on him, his own eyes catch a glint of light behind the amphitheater, coming over the horizon. He takes a deep breath, and cries out:

"Holy crap."

The audience, 100,000 strong, turns around as one. It seems Dawn's near-self-immolation in round 11 also activated her Keyness and weakened the barriers between Pylea and the home dimension of everybody's favorite skank goddess. The brothers of Glorificus, demons who make even demons tremble, glide toward the amphitheater on the backs of metal-silver phoenixes, winged creatures of such beauty that you almost don't mind the sulfurous fire breath until it's burned you to a crisp.

Glory's brothers like what they see in Pylea. They intend to destroy all life (demon and human) within a thousand-square-kilometer area around the stadium and use it as base of operations (and maybe a summer resort). The Scoobies, the Fang Gang and thousands of the hardier demons in the audience take the battle to the hellgods, knocking them off their magnificent winged steeds, then battle them hand-to-hand on the steps of the stadium. 10,000 to 1...and our heroes are badly outmatched.

Meanwhile, Lorne is still at the microphone, watching the carnage in the stands. Reluctantly, Sweet approaches him and whispers into his ear. Lorne nods. The two lean into the microphone, and hit a sustained note inaudible to the combatants. Almost instantaneously, a classic, 1950s-style disc-shaped flying saucer descends from the sky and lands on the left side of the stage. Out of the Mothership pours the combined musical might of Parliament-Funkadelic and James Brown and the original JBs.

There's no time for rehearsal. The fate of the universe is at stake. The Funk Army plugs in and blasts the airwaves with a titanic medley of "Make It Funky" (James at the mike, of course), followed by "Tear the Roof of the Sucker" (lead vocals shared by Sweet and George Clinton), and concluding with a 22-minute rampage through "Disco Inferno" (led by our very own Lorne). The pounding yet irresistable catchy bass line of "Disco Inferno" drives the hellgods insane, and they grab their skittish steeds and bail out through the hole in the interdimensional ether. With one final saxophone blast, Maceo Parker seals the rift, and the menace is defeated.

The crowd cheers wildly as Lorne and Sweet share a bow at center stage. The contest is a draw, which doesn't disappoint anyone. ("Hey, we're ALIVE, right?" says Lorne.) Besides, says the concert promoter, it'll just bring the suckers back for next year's contest.

"As long as you're bringing that up, Sweetcheeks," says Lorne, "let's talk about percentages."

"Yes, lets," says Sweet, elbowing his way into the conversation. "These suits don't come cheap, you know."

"Gentlemen," says Lilah Morgan, with a smile like a freshly-fed barracuda, "I'm sure we can work out a new contract in no time." She opens up a portal. "Just step into my office."

Lorne, Lilah, and Sweet step through the portal, the sounds of the cheering crowd ringing in their ears.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Well, we *can* fill in the other rounds, you know. -- HonorH (still humming), 22:57:29 01/02/03 Thu

Just give the word, dear, and I'm sure we could come up with Rounds 3-7.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Word given. Please do. Place in appropriate spot in the thread. -- cjl, 07:31:19 01/03/03 Fri

Maybe after the whole thing is finished, one of us can polish it up and hand it over the archives for enshrinement in the Apocrypha?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> James Brown *and* George Clinton? -- Rahael, 06:49:52 01/03/03 Fri

Now d'Herblay is going to be really sorry to have missed this!!!

I shall just have to cut this out and keep it for him.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Let me guess... -- KdS, 10:10:02 01/03/03 Fri

Hown many of us here read Alan Dean Foster's Spellsinger series? ;-)

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> yeah! never mind the stage show, i'm lovin' the mano-a-mano here on the board! keep it going! -- anom, 22:39:07 01/05/03 Sun


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I'm throwin' punches like crazy here. HonorH? PG? KdS? Rounds 5-7? (Where is everybody?) -- cjl, 11:56:00 01/06/03 Mon


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Post-R11 Fallout: And now, a word from our sponsor... -- cjl, 16:44:04 01/06/03 Mon

[Sweet quells the orchestra with a shockingly unhinged snarl and opens his mouth for a final push. But just as Sweet is about to sing the first note, Skip materializes to stop the music...]

SKIP: Nuh-uh, Sparky. Already done enough this round.
SWEET (irritated): This is none of your business, Errand Boy.
SKIP: Actually, it's exactly my business. In my job description. I show up when demonic types step outside the boundaries of their agreements. It's what I do.
SWEET (turning on the charm): "Outside the--"? Oh, please. You're exaggerating. I may have been a little...well, over-enthusiastic, but--
SKIP: Save it. Two hundred thousand burnt earlobes have a very distinct aroma. I thought we had a deal that you'd hold the spontaneous combustion outbreaks to...uh, zero?
SWEET: You have to understand. I have a particular way of operating--a certain flair, you might say--and it's not my fault if spectators find my style...combustible.
SKIP: Sure, I understand. The rules of this little contest are cramping your style, am I right?
SWEET: If you want to put it that way...
SKIP: You need room to move, spread your wings, stretch out on the dance floor...
SWEET: Now you're getting it.
SKIP: And if the audience gets toasted, that's just the natural flow of the dance...
SWEET: Exactly.

(Pause.)

SKIP: OK. No problem. Forget the rules. You have carte blanche.
SWEET (delighted, but suspicious): Really?
SKIP: Sure. Consider all of your agreements with the Powers null and void.

(Sweet looks as if someone ate his best pair of tap shoes.)

SWEET: Uh--"all" of my agreements?
SKIP: Null and void. Don't want to hold back an artist of your caliber.
SWEET: Wait. Let's not be hasty.
SKIP: Hm?
SWEET: I guess it's not much of a musical extravaganza if there's nobody here to see it, is there?
SKIP: No, I guess not.
SWEET: Much more satisfying to win their hearts in the spirit of fair competition.
SKIP: Couldn't have said it better myself. So...are we good?
SWEET (choking on it): Yes, we're...good.

(SKIP vanishes. SWEET stalks past Lorne--who's grinning like a cheshire cat--on the way back to the dressing room.)

SWEET: Not a word, green boy. NOT A WORD.

[> [> [> [> [> R3: Sweet vs. Lorne--The Stakes Get Higher -- HonorH, 19:23:52 01/03/03 Fri

Lorne, having taken a hit, tips his hat (hot pink with a white feather) to Sweet and decides to go for the power-ballad. He sings "Without You" with full orchestral backing, sending a wave of romantic longing over the audience. Fred begins working on equations in her head, trying to figure out if there's any way she can have *both* Gunn and Wesley. Angel gets a little dizzy looking at Buffy, sighing, looking at Cordy, sighing, looking back at Buffy, sighing, ad infinitum, while Buffy keeps stealing glances at Spike and Faith in between returning Angel's sighs. Lindsey McDonald, meanwhile, is burning a hole in Angel's back with his eyes. Even Sweet is affected and unable to take his eyes off his formerly betrothed, Dawn.

However, he recovers just in time to take it back to Broadway. He sings "Summertime" from Porgy and Bess so sexually that the romantic longing turns into some very convoluted make-out sessions. Trust me, you don't want the details. As he finishes, just to solidify his lead, he segues into "It Ain't Necessarily So," and the audience is putty.

Can Lorne come back and take the lead?

[> [> [> [> [> [> R3 Intermission: Backstage with Lorne (remake/remodel) -- cjl, 06:55:52 01/04/03 Sat

[Scene: Backstage at Pylea Stadium. Lorne is checking a million details for his next number: the Lornettes' costumes and choreography, talking with the orchestra about last-minute changes in the charts, yelling at his roadie about the set-up of the megalithic speakers...it's all too much. He lands hard in a chair near the left entrance to the stage, and takes a squirt from his water bottle (which doesn't contain water). The Scoobies and the Fang Gang pick that moment to visit.]

FRED: Lorne? Is this a bad time?
LORNE: Hm? Oh. Oh no, peach pie, it's just--I'm the backstage producer AND the onstage talent around here...so it's a little hectic.
WESLEY: We wanted you to meet a few of our friends.

(Lorne perks up.)

LORNE: Well, now! Is this the famous Sunnydale crew I've heard so much about?
ANYA: Don't believe half the stories you hear about us.
FRED: That's Buffy, Xander, Willow, Anya, Spike...
LORNE (all but climbs on the chair in terror): Spike?! As in "William the Bloody"?! Are you people out of your ever-lovin' m--oh, wait. (Looks carefully at Spike, then Angel, then back to Spike.) Holy moley. ANOTHER one.
ANGEL (glares at Spike): Yeah, we're all doing cartwheels.
FRED: Wait a minute. Where's Giles?
XANDER: Couldn't find him. I think he went to see if there was something edible in this place.
LORNE: Plenty of food at the concession stands.
XANDER: Edible for our species.
LORNE: Well, he might have a problem, then. (Sees Dawn standing quietly in the back.) And who is this tempting slice of apple cobbler?
BUFFY: Uh, this is my sister, Dawn.
DAWN (waves): Hey, how you doin'.
LORNE: I'm fine, sweetie, but-- (Stares, open-mouthed.) Is it me, or does anybody else see this blinding nimbus of green energy around her pretty little head?
XANDER: Do you want the short version or the long version?
LORNE: Never mind. Maybe later. (Slumps a little.)
FRED: Lorne?
LORNE: Sorry. I guess this is taking a little more out of me than I thought. Maybe this whole exhibition thing wasn't a good idea. I mean, it's fantastic entertainment, and it's a thrill to have this kind of an audience...
ANGEL: But...
LORNE: But even though we have all kinds of rules about this gig--no two-legged weenie roastings--Sweet usually makes up his own rules. He can get kind of scary, and you shouldn't bring him out to play unless you really have to, if you know what I mean.

(Pause.)

XANDER: What's everybody looking at me for?
LORNE: It's more than an exhibition for him. It's the whole "hearts and minds" thing. There are a lot of demons here who know about what I do, preaching a peaceful co-existence with humans, and they're wondering if I can hold up against somebody who's...
WESLEY: Your opposite in virtually every way.
LORNE: That about sums it up, Binky. There's a whole lot more at stake here than a slice of the box office.
WESLEY: In that case, I think we should let you prepare for your next number.

(The Scoobs and the Fang Gang walk off into the distance.)

LORNE: All clear!

(Giles emerges from the wings.)

LORNE: You know, I don't see why you're keeping this a big secret from the kids. So we go back a ways. Does it ruin that crustier-than-crust image of yours?
GILES: It's rather complicated.
LORNE: If there's one thing I've learned about you Watchers, it's that you MAKE things complicated.
GILES: Be that as it may, I'd appreciate it if you kept things quiet for now.
LORNE: OK, Rupes. Your neurosis.
GILES (more serious): Lorne--I trust you realize that this little exhibition could turn into a cataclysmic disaster.
LORNE: The thought did occur to me.
GILES: I-if you need me...I've kept in practice. (Lorne smiles.) If you need me to help out on one of the old numbers, I can--
LORNE: No, no, pumpkin, go back with the kids. But if you see me in trouble...
GILES: Understood.

(Exits. Lorne springs out of his chair, and claps twice to get the attention of his crew.)

LORNE: OK, everybody--SHOWTIME!

[End intermission.]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> R4: Sweet vs. Lorne -- Uh oh, it's getting personal. -- cjl, 21:02:39 01/04/03 Sat

Tired of playing move and countermove with the affections of the audience, Sweet switches tactics and fires at Lorne himself. With the aid of a lone minion on acoustic guitar, Sweet brings out a Kinks klassic, "Dedicated Follower of Fashion," and dedicates it to "one of the beautiful people."

(Words and music by Ray Davies)

They seek him here
They seek him there
His clothes are loud
But never square
It will make or break him
So he's got to buy the best
'Cause he's a dedicated follower of fashion.

The number is crisp, jaunty, invites an audience singalong with the "oh yes he is!" chorus, and takes direct aim at Lorne's...idiosyncratic fashion sense. There's a big laugh when Sweet gets to the title character's "frilly nylon panties"--and an even bigger one when poor Lorne, squirming uncomfortably in the wings, instinctively reaches behind to unclog a wedgie. Ouch.

Lorne, fuming, comes out after the break with a horde of veteran L.A. session musicians, including the Tower of Power horn section, and snaps off a killer rendition of Don Henley's "All She Wants to Do Is Dance"--a slap at his quick-footed opponent, but also a reminder to his audience not to get too blinded by the razzle dazzle.

The Tower of Power horns close out with a blast loud enough to shake the walls of Jericho, but Lorne has already left the stage. He got a good chunk of respectability back, but he realizes Sweet definitely drew blood.

Round 4 to the hoofer.

Next?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> You asked for it cjl! R5: 80's power ballads! -- ponygirl, 13:52:14 01/06/03 Mon

Sweet, still smarting from the Don Henley crack retaliates by starting out with the Flashdance classic "What a Feeling". From the wings of the stage Lorne smiles confidently, sure the faux breakdancing moves are impressive, but no one ever won anything with Irene Cara. But wait- the music shifts, segues -- Sweet was just toying with him! It's a medley, some of the most soulful, powerful guitar chords of the 80s ring out across the stadium and the crowd goes wild. By the time Sweet is leading the crowd through a recreation of Pat Benatar's classic video of redemption, Love Is A Battlefield, Lorne is sweating big green gobs. What can Lorne do? He calls for a towel, and steps onto the stage.

He waves away the attentions of the remaining Lornettes, and shushes the band, if he's going down he'll go alone. He takes a deep breath and summoning all of his vocal powers launches into Whitney Houston's I Will Always Love You. Sure it's from a 1992 movie, but it had the spirit of the 80s.

As Lorne sings all memories of Kevin Costner are swept away. The crowd forgets Whitney's recent albums, they forget the drug problem, the Diane Sawyer interview, and as Lorne holds that "I-I-I-I" lyric, seemingly forever, the audience even forgets Bobby Brown. Sweet folds his arms over the torn sweatshirt he had donned for his number and scowls.

Lorne bows to thunderous applause, but when he gets backstage he grabs the nearest Lornette and croaks out, "Hot water, quick, and a lozenge!"

Has Lorne pushed himself too far?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> R6: Sweet vs. Lorne: Ringo and the Unexpected Songbird -- cjl, 17:59:36 01/06/03 Mon

Finding limited success in the era of Big Hair and Skinny Ties, Sweet sets the Musical Wayback Machine to 1970, hoping to capitalize on Beatles nostalgia and win the audience over with his personal charm and unbeatable dancing skill. He takes the stage isolated in a single spotlight, and with only piano and the soft whisper of brushes on drumskin as accompaniment, he sings John Lennon's post-breakup gift to
his buddy Ringo, "I'm the Greatest":

When I was a little boy
Back home in Liverpool
My mama told me...I was great

Then when I was a teenager
I knew I had something going
All my friends told me...I was great

And now I'm a man
A woman took me by the hand
And you know what she told me...I was great

[Sweet slightly alters the lyrics...]

I am the greatest show on earth
For what it's worth
And what I want to do for you (tap, tap)
Is boogaloo

From there, he launches into a spectacular display of solo tap dancing--Savion Glover plus Bill "Bojangles" Robinson mutliplied by Fred Astaire--starting with a slow shuffle, accelerating to speeds unknown to human dancers, then bringing it back down to finish the song: "I'm the greatest, and you'd better believe it, baby." The audience goes wild.

Lorne is screwed. He doesn't want to pull out his showstopper this early, and his voice hasn't recovered enough from the last round to pull it off, anyway. He needs something to bring the audience together as a community, distract it from Sweet's charming egotism, and it's got to be mid-tempo and not too much of a strain. As a last resort, he falls back on Bill Withers' "Lean on Me"--but even as he's heading into the second verse, he knows he's made a mistake. He sees the crowd file out to the concession stands, and after the last piano chord hits, and the polite applause filters down, he wonders if he reached anybody at all...

Then, miraculously, he hears a tiny voice from the front row spontaneously break out in song, as if his own singing activated a long-dormant gene:

"What can't we face if we're together..."

It's Willow.

Lorne seizes this chance for a reprieve, and brings the mike down to the front row, so she can keep going. Unfortunately, the sight of the microphone sends Willow into a blind panic, and she squirms frantically in her seat. On either side, Buffy and Xander take her hand. They give her a look that says--"You can do anything."

B/X/W: What can't we face if we're together
What's in this place that we can't weather
Apocalypse--we've all been there
The same old trips--why should we care

Giles, Anya, Dawn and Spike join in. The crowd isn't paying much attention, but Lorne is almost in tears, seeing how his friends respond to his singing...

SCOOBIES: What can't we do if we get in it
We'll work it through within a minute
We have to try
We'll pay the price
It's do or die

BUFFY: Hey, I've died twice. (Confused murmuring from the crowd. Buffy turns around in her seat.) Well, I have. Hey, it's not like I'm bragging or anything...

GILES (rolling his eyes): ....2, 3, 4....

SCOOBIES and A.I.: What can't we face if we're together--
GILES: --what can't we face...
SCOOBIES and A.I.: What's in this place that we can't weather--
GILES: --if we're together...
SCOOBIES and A.I.: There's nothing we can't face...
ANYA: Except for bunnies... (More puzzled murmurs from the crowd.) Did I say that out loud? Again?

Dawn gives Anya an affectionate pat on the knee. Lorne places the mike back on its stand and walks happily back to his dressing room--he lost the round, but he doesn't care in the slightest.

Next?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> R7: Sweet vs. Lorne: Torch Song . . . uh, Duology -- HonorH, 19:52:46 01/06/03 Mon

Sweet would be more enthusiastic about Lorne losing that last round if he hadn't come down with a sudden case of dancer's knee. His trademark sashay is a little clumsy as he returns to the stage, prompting a murmur to run through the audience, knock a member of the Ghrithnar clan into a Terl demon, and set off a small riot. Buffy and Security quell it, the survivors are taken to the Interdimensional Red Key (in deference to the demons, who don't always react well to a cross) center set up for just such emergencies, and it's Sweet's turn to sing.

By this time, his knee is really hurting. Thus, he decides to shift into low gear and whip out a torch song. "'Round Midnight" fits the bill perfectly. "Trouble always starts 'round midnight," he sings, and it looks like he's going to win this round, too. Unfortunately, in the heat of the song, Sweet just can't stop himself from steppin' out. His knee gives way mid-prance and he falls flat on his reddish behind, totally ruining the mood. But hey, he's a professional, and the Show Must Go On. He finishes, the audience claps appreciatively, if not as enthusiastically as he'd hoped, and Sweet signals to his minions for an ice bag.

Lorne sees his opening and runs for it. His voice is recovered, and the first few notes of "Georgia" wind the audience tightly around his green little finger. By the time the last note floats over the audience, scattering a few Harpies, they're begging for more.

And Sweet, watching from the wings, thinks: "Showtime!"

[> [> [> [> Intermission after R2: Backstage with Lorne -- cjl, 10:52:55 01/03/03 Fri

(Backstage at Pylea Stadium. Lorne is checking a million details for his next number: the Lornettes' costumes and choreography, talking with the orchestra about last-minute changes in the charts, yelling with his roadie about the set-up of the megalithic speakers...it's all too much. He lands hard in a chair near the left entrance to the stage, and takes a squirt from his water bottle--which doesn't contain water. The Scoobies and the Fang Gang pick that moment to visit.)

FRED: Lorne? Is this a bad time?
LORNE: Hm? Oh. Oh no, peach pie, it's just--I'm the backstage producer AND the onstage talent around here...so it's a little hectic.
WESLEY: We wanted you to meet a few of our friends.

(Lorne perks up.)

LORNE: Well, now! Is this the famous Sunnydale crew I've heard so much about?
ANYA: Don't believe half the stories you hear about us.
FRED: That's Buffy, Xander, Willow, Anya, Spike...
LORNE: Spike?! As in "William the Bloody"?! Are you people out of your ever-lovin' m--oh, wait. (Looks at Angel.) Holy moley. ANOTHER one.
ANGEL: Yeah, we're all doing cartwheels.
FRED: And this is...
LORNE: Ripper? Is that you?
BUFFY: You KNOW each other?
GUNN: Why am I not surprised?
LORNE: London, 1967. You were singing with your cousins, Peter and Michael...
GILES (smiling at the memory): That's right.
LORNE: Whatever happened to them?
GILES: Actually, they went on to form the original King Crimson.
LORNE: Always loved to watch you boys. You know kids, always knew your buddy Rupert was going to do big things. Got the voice of an angel.
WILLOW (gushing): Believe me, we know.
XANDER: Will, please--
LORNE: And who is this tempting little slice of apple cobbler?
BUFFY: Uh, this is my sister, Dawn.
DAWN (waves): Hey, how you doin'.
LORNE: I'm fine, sweetie, but-- (Stares, open-mouthed.) Does anybody else see this blinding nimbus of green energy around her pretty little head?
XANDER: Do you want the short version or the long version?
LORNE: Never mind. Maybe later. (Slumps a little.)
FRED: Lorne?
LORNE: Sorry, Sweetie. I guess this is taking a little more out of me than I thought. Maybe this whole exhibition thing wasn't a good idea. I mean, it's fantastic entertainment, and it's a thrill to have this kind of an audience...
ANGEL: But.
LORNE: But even though we have all kinds of rules about this gig--no two-legged weenie roastings--Sweet usually makes up his own rules. He can get kind of scary, and you shouldn't bring him out to play unless you really have to, if you know what I mean.

(Pause.)

XANDER: What's everybody looking at me for?
LORNE: It's more than an exhibition for him. It's the whole "hearts and minds" thing. There are a lot of demons here who know about what I do, preaching a peaceful co-existence between demons and humans, and they're wondering if I can hold up against somebody who's...
WESLEY: Your opposite in virtually every way.
LORNE: That about sums it up, Binky. There's a whole lot more here at stake than a slice of the box office.
WESLEY: In that case, I think we should let you prepare for your next number.

(The Scoobs and the Fang Gang turn around, and start to walk away. Lorne catches Giles' attention, and he turns back.)

LORNE: Rupert?
GILES: I've kept in practice. (Lorne smiles.) If you want to do one of the old numbers, I can--
LORNE: No, no, pumpkin, go back with the kids. But if you see me in trouble...
GILES: Understood. (Exits.)

[End intermission.]

[> [> [> [> [> Masq, please delete the above post. My reputation is at stake. -- cjl, 15:33:41 01/03/03 Fri

What was I thinking?

Lorne meeting Giles in 1967?! Lorne came to Earth in 1997!

A disgraceful continuity blunder. (cjl bows his head after saying all those nasty things about David Fury and rewriting continuity for "The House Always Wins.")

Seriously, wipe it out. I can always rewrite and resubmit.

Thanks.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Don't worry cjl, it just makes you more human to us! -- Sara,saying we all still love you,with or without continuity, 16:17:40 01/03/03 Fri


[> [> [> [> [> [> No way! It just adds a little mystery! -- ponygirl, 19:49:21 01/03/03 Fri

You can always explain it at a later date, possibly working in how both Lorne and Giles know Halfrek (rumours of them performing a triple bill at a smoky disco in the late '70s abound).

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> And all for a joke that nobody gets about a sixties rock band that nobody listens to... -- cjl, 21:47:13 01/03/03 Fri

Ever since I found out about Giles' bad boy past, then his taste in rock music, his singing career, and then the joke with Olivia about being an original member of Pink Floyd, I became absolutely convinced that our Giles and the Giles brothers (who, along with guitarist Robert Fripp, really were two of the founding members of art-rock progenitor King Crimson) were cousins, and a teenaged Rupert G. was part of that late sixties British rock scene, with Crimson, Led Zep, the Kinks, etc., etc.

But (sob) nobody ever appreciates the joke. Aren't there any Crimson fans on this board?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I've listened to King Crimson -- shadowkat, 16:44:15 01/04/03 Sat

Granted it's been a while. But my bro had the records and I had cassettes (tapes) of their music in college. Great band. Can totally see it.

And whose to say Lorne didn't go through a portal at some point in the past than get whisked back again? Pesky portals.

[> [> [> [> [> [> To delete or not to delete... that is the question -- Masq, 19:31:09 01/04/03 Sat

Whether 'tis nobler to let cjl live with the replies s/he will get to this post or save him/her the embarrassment.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Never mind. Keep it where it is. I rewrote/reposted it elsewhere on the thread. -- cjl, 20:23:22 01/04/03 Sat

Let it stand as a testament to my fallibility. Humiliation is good for the soul.

[> Ladies and gentlemen, thank you one and all! You've been a lovely audience! AND... -- cjl, 06:52:18 01/07/03 Tue

As soon as this goes to archives, I'm compiling the entire thread--all thirteen rounds and intermissions, alternative ending and coda--into a gigantic 15-round extravaganza to be posted (probably) on Thursday.

[> [> Woohoo! Thanks cjl, you're the coolest! Rawk on! -- ponygirl (giving the devil sign salute), 13:55:35 01/07/03 Tue


Sophist's Believe it or not TRUE vacation story -- Sophist, 09:38:53 01/02/03 Thu

Ok, I just got back and I haven't even had time to read the board, much less any archives I missed, but I had to share this.

I left for vacation on Dec. 25. The plane left at 11:00 a.m., not the most popular flying time as you can imagine. Nevertheless, our flight was full. Included in that full flight was a recently wed couple, perhaps taking a belated honeymoon: Sarah Michelle Gellar and Freddie Prinze, Jr.

I was in coach. They were not.

[> Oooooooh! & Welcome back! -- Rahael, 10:06:23 01/02/03 Thu


[> Were you able to catch a glimpse? -- Rob, 10:11:33 01/02/03 Thu


[> Welcome back, Soph. But come on--you're not just going to leave it at that, are you? -- cjl, 10:14:38 01/02/03 Thu


[> I once saw a Hootie at RDU airport but no Blowfish -- neaux, 10:14:57 01/02/03 Thu


[> Were you burning psychic eye-holes in the class-boundary curtain? -- pr10n, 10:18:44 01/02/03 Thu

I don't have much experience with Celebrity, so I like to imagine I'd be all cool and aloofy, but maybe I'd morph into stalker mode. I don't know if I possess such a thing. In high school I used to drive by a girl's house and honk -- does that count?

[And now, for the fashion-y demon types...]

What were they wearing? What were they reading? Did Freddy have any comic books?

[> Oh. My. God. Details! Any details? -- ponygirl, 10:43:35 01/02/03 Thu


[> [> Re: Oh. My. God. Details! Any details? -- Sophist, 13:39:21 01/02/03 Thu

Not many details. We actually missed them until we got off the plane. The jetway broke, and everyone had to walk down a stairway (very primitive -- actual stairs, and they didn't even move). They used a different exit door, so our section came down before First Class. I was waiting at the bottom with my older daughter, and she says,

"Did you see that guy with the Freddie Prinze look?"

No. I'm oblivious to the world.

"He had the whole look going."

Then we went to get our bags. While waiting for the bags, she grabs my arm and says "Hey, there's that guy that looks like Freddie Prinze." We all look around and realize that Sarah is walking near him. That IS Freddie Prinze, Jr. Way to go with the keen observieness, Jessica Fletcher.

Sarah was clearly trying not to be noticed, so I repressed my instinct to yell "Oh my god, that's Sarah Micelle Gellar" or something even more tasteless. She had on sunglasses, a white top and beige (?) pants, and some kind of low platform shoes. She is very small, about the same size as my younger daughter (about 152-155cm, 46kg). Anyway, they walked quickly out of the airport to a waiting limo or whatever, and that's the last we saw of them.

[> [> [> Good form, Sophist. Thumbs up. Very cool celeb sighting. -- Briar Rose, 14:00:39 01/02/03 Thu


[> [> [> One with the Buffyverse -- cougar, 14:06:01 01/02/03 Thu

I was just reading a Nick Bantock quote,

"Synchronicity is a way of confirming the rightness of action"

Way to go Sophist, looks like your contributions to this board are a true use of your soul's energies!

[> [> [> [> Definitely! This is like a visitation! -- ponygirl (saying kewl), 19:25:30 01/02/03 Thu


[> [> [> My nowhere-near-as-cool Sarah spotting -- dream, 10:16:21 01/03/03 Fri

I live in Cambridge, MA, and was in Harvard Square (in the pit, for those of you in the know. It's the center of the square, for everyone else, and a big gathering spot). There was a film crew at work and a crowd had gathered to watch. A lot of people were asking what the movie was, and no one in the crowd seemed to know. Then they started filming, and an actress came down the side street walking a dog. Someone in the crowd screamed (and I do mean SCREAMED) "OHMYGODIT'SBUFFFYYY!" It would not be inaccurate to say the crowd went wild. Or, at the very least, made enough noise to require a retake. I very rarely feel such a connection to a crowd.

[> [> [> [> Sounds like Harvard Man -- Sophist, 12:58:39 01/03/03 Fri

Now if you had been there for the sex scene which opened the movie, the crowd would really have gone wild.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Sounds like Harvard Man -- Purple Tulip, 23:50:29 01/03/03 Fri

Speaking of which, I just saw the movie tonight and I was really dissapointed in it. It was not one of the best movies that I have seen, and with the top notch cast (SMG, Joey Lauren Adams, Rebecca Gayheart, Adrien Grenier, Eric Stolz), I thought that it might be worth my while. It wasn't. Two thumbs down.

[> [> I just gotta ask for some more details... -- Jay, 21:02:47 01/02/03 Thu

My brother and niece were flying the same day out of LAX. Who told me nothing of this tale. When and where were you flying out of and what airport did you specifically see SMG and Freddie in? It wasn't Minneapolis was it? I can't possibly imagine why it would be...

[> [> [> Re: I just gotta ask for some more details... -- Sophist, 10:06:04 01/03/03 Fri

Flew from LAX to Maui. Saw them in the Maui airport.

[> Jeepers! -- LittleBit, 11:18:06 01/03/03 Fri

You definitely made up for missing David Boreanaz and Christian Kane at the Viper Club! Lucky you! [On the other hand, of course ... Lindsey :)]

Quantification of character involvement in s7-Reposted from BC&S. -- diamond in the rough, 12:34:04 01/02/03 Thu

Thought this might be of interest...

This was originally posted by denmaroca over at the Cross & Stake; it analysizes how often the characters on BtVS talk about each other so far on s7.

I've used transcripts posted on a well-known board in the world of Buffy. These go all the way up to BoTN. I've not counted anything said in the 'Previously on...' bits. I've simply counted sentences, regardless of length. A sentence can be about two characters at once. For example when Buffy says to Giles "I've missed you", this is both about Buffy (she misses him) and about Giles (he is missed). Each gets one line for this. Characters can talk about themselves. I've not included questions asked of a character, unless the question is about them. I have included instructions given to characters. I've included oblique references - for example Buffy's "And, no offence, but they were hotties." is credited to Spike. A line isn't credited to a character just because it's addressed to them. I have also given the figures for how many lines each character has about another.

The initials A, B, D, G, S, W, X should be obvious. O is 'Other' and refers to lines about a main character spoken by some minor character on the show.

Lessons
1. B 136 (by B 70, O 48, D 10, S 4, X 4)
2. D 135 (by B 60, D 47, O 27, X 1)
3. S 39 (by S 15, O 15, B 9)
4. W 30 (by G 15, W 15)
5. X 20 (by B 10, X 8, D 1, O 1)
6. A 19 (by O14, A 5)
7. G 8 (by G 5, W 3)

Not a surprising result, as the ep is principally about Dawn going to the new Sunnydale High, what happens to her there, and Buffy's involvement in both. The 'other' characters talking about Spike and Anya are principally the First and Halfrek.

Beneath You
1. S 175 (S 90, B57, A 11, D 9, X 5, O 3)
2. B 172 (S 64, B 52, D 20, O 20, X 13, G 2, A 1)
3. A 77 (A 32, X 17, S 12, B 8, O7, D 1)
4. X 75 (X 28, B 16, A 8, D 8, O 8, S 5, G 2)
5. D 31 (B 13, D 10, S 3, X 2, G 2, O 1)
6. W 26 (W 16, G 10)
7. G 6 (W 4, G 2)

The Ep is principally about Spike and his relationship to Buffy, with a B story relating to Anya and Xander.

Cumulative totals after 2 eps.
1. B 308 (B 122, S68, O68, D 30, X 17, G 2, A 1)
2. S 214 (S 105, B 66, O 18, A 11, D 9, X 5)
3. D 166 (B 73, D 57, O 28, S 3, X 3, G 2)
4. A 96 (A 37, O 21, X 17, S 12, B 8, D 1)
5. X 95 (X 36, B 26, D 9, A 8, S 5, G 2)
6. W 56 (W 31, G 25)
7. G 14 (G 7, W 7)

Same Time, Same Place
1. W 199 (W 66, B 41, A 37, S 17, O 16, X 15, D 7)
2. B 179 (B 62, W 32, A 29, X 20, S 17, D 14, O 5)
3. X 167 (X 63, W 27, B 26, A 25, D 12, S 9, O 5)
4. D 90 (B 23, D 21, X 15, A 13, W 13, O 5)
5. A 71 (A 43, W 18, B 8, X 2)
6. S 46 (S 24, B 7, X 7, W 5, A 3)
7. G 16 (B 7, W 3, X 3, D 2, A 1)

A Willow-centric ep - principally her relationships to Buffy, Xander and Dawn, the first two of whom do most of the investigation.

Cumulative totals after 3 eps.
1. B 487 (B 184, S 85, O 73, D 44, X 37, W 32, A 30, G 2)
2. X 262 (X 99, B 52, A 33, W 27, D 21, S 14, O 14, G 2)
3. S 260 (S 129, B 73, O 18, A 14, X 12, D 9, W 5)
4. D 256 (B 96, D 78, O 33, X 18, A 13, W 13, S 3, G 2)
5. W 255 (W 97, B 41, A 37, G 25, S 17, O 16, X 15, D 7)
6. A 167 (A 80, O 21, X 19, W 18, B 16, S 12, D 1)
7. G 30 (W 10, B 7, G 7, X 3, D 2, A 1)

Help
1. B 163 (B 68, O 51, D 21, X 10, W 7, S 6)
2. D 59 (D 33, O 18, B 7, X 1)
3. X 40 (X 19, B 10, D 5, O 4, W 2)
4. S 26 (S 13, B 10, O 3)
5. W 25 (X 15, D 6, B 4)

The ep was principally about Cassie. And Buffy's counselling job - hence the high 'others' talking about her.

Cumulative totals after 4 eps.
1. B 650 (B 252, O 124, S 91, D 65, X 47, W 39, A 30, G 2)
2. D 315 (D 111, B 103, O 51, X 19, A 13, W 13, S 3, G 2)
3. X 302 (X 118, B 62, A 33, W 29, D 26, O 18, S 14, G 2)
4. S 286 (S 142, B 83, O 21, A 14, X 12, D 9, W 5)
5. W 280 (W 97, B 45, A 37, X 30, G 25, S 17, O 16, D 13)
6. A 167 (A 80, O 21, X 19, W 18, B 16, S 12, D 1)
7. G 30 (W 10, B 7, G 7, X 3, D 2, A 1)

Selfless
1. A 190 (A 80, O 53, X 33, W 12, B 11, D 1)
2. X 95 (X 37, B 29, A 22, O 6, W 1)
3. B 87 (B 37, X 27, A 11, O 8, S 3, W 1)
4. W 87 (W 25, B 20, O 17, X 11, A 9, D 5)
5. S 28 (S 13, B 7, O 6, X 2)
6. D 2 (D 1, W 1)

Obviously an Anya-centric ep.

Cumulative totals after 5 eps.
1. B 737 (B 289, O 132, S 94, X 74, D 65, A 41, W 40, G 2)
2. X 397 (X 155, B 91, A 55, W 30, D 26, O 24, S 14, G 2)
3. W 367 (W 122, B 65, A 46, X 41, O 33, G 25, D 18, S 17)
4. A 357 (A 160, O 74, X 52, W 30, B 27, S 12, D 2)
5. D 317 (D 112, B 103, O 51, X 19, W 14, A 13, S 3, G 2)
6. S 314 (S 155, B 90, O 27, A 14, X 14, D 9, W 5)
7. G 30 (W 10, B 7, G 7, X 3, D 2, A 1)

Him
1. D 181 (D 70, B 69, O 23, X 9, A 6, W 4)
2. B 162 (B 80, D 42, X 13, A 11, W 8, O 6, S 2)
3. X 47 (X 29, B 7, W 4, O 4, D 2, S 1)
4. A 45 (A 16, B 13, W 8, D 5, X 3)
5. S 43 (X 17, B 12, D 9, S 4, O 1)
6. W 42 (W 20, B 10, A 6, X 3, D 2, O 1)

A Dawn-centric ep. She did a lot of talking to Buffy.

Cumulative totals after 6 eps.
1. B 899 (B 369, O 138, D 107, S 96, X 87, A 52, W 48, G 2)
2. D 498 (D 182, B 172, O 74, X 28, A 19, W 18, S 3, G 2)
3. X 444 (X 184, B 98, A 55, W 34, D 28, O 28, S 15, G 2)
4. W 409 (W 142, B 75, A 52, X 44, O 34, G 25, D 20, S 17)
5. A 402 (A 176, O 74, X 55, B 40, W 38, S 12, D 7)
6. S 357 (S 159, B 102, X 31, O 28, D 18, A 14, W 5)
7. G 30 (W 10, B 7, G 7, X 3, D 2, A 1)

Conversations with Dead People
1. B 144 (O 75, B 67, D 2)
2. W 80 (O 41, W 39)
3. D 29 (D 25, O 4)
4. S 9 (B 6, O 3)
5. G 3 (W 3)

Buffy, Dawn and Willow were the only regulars in this ep, and Dawn was basically by herself.

Cumulative totals after 7 eps.
1. B 1,043 (B 436, O 213, D 109, S 96, X 87, A 52, W 48, G 2)
2. D 527 (D 207, B 172, O 78, X 28, A 19, W 18, S 3, G 2)
3. W 489 (W 142, B 75, O 75, A 52, X 44, G 25, D 20, S 17)
4. X 444 (X 184, B 98, A 55, W 34, D 28, O 28, S 15, G 2)
5. A 402 (A 181, O 74, X 55, B 40, W 38, S 12, D 7)
6. S 366 (S 159, B 108, X 31, O 31, D 18, A 14, W 5)
7. G33 (W 13, B 7, G 7, X 3, D 2, A 1)

Sleeper
1. S 199 (S 66, B 61, O 31, X 19, A 17, W 3, D 2)
2. B 115 (B 52, S 32, X 13, O 7, W6, D 3, A 2)
3. A 48 (A 27, S 10, X 8, B 3)
4. X 31 (X 15, B 8, A 6, S 2)
5. D 25 (W 12, D 8, B 5)
6. W 16 (W 11, A 2, B 2, D 1)
7. G 3 (G 2, O 1)

A Spike-centric ep.

Cumulative totals after 8 eps
1. B 1,158 (B 488, O 220, S 128, D 112, X 100, A 54, W 54, G 2)
2. S 565 (S 225, B 169, O 62, X 50, A 31, D 20, W 8)
3. D 552 (D 215, B 177, O 78, W 30, X 28, A 19, S 3, G 2)
4. W 505 (W 192, B 77, O 75, A 54, X 44, G 25, D 21, S 17)
5. X 475 (X 199, B 106, A 61, W 34, D 28, O 28, S 17, G 2)
6. A 450 (A 208, O 74, X 63, B 43, W 38, S 22, D 7)
7. G 36 (W 13, B 7, G 9, X 3, D 2, A 1, O 1)

Never Leave Me
1. S 146 (B 79, S 44, O 10, A 4, W 4, D 3, X 2)
2. B 92 (B 41, S 25, D 7, O 7, W 5, X 4, A 3)
3. A 45 (X 25, A 10, O 6, B 2, D 1, W 1)
4. W 41 (W 15, O 11, B 6, A 4, X 4, D 1)
5. X 32 (X 14, A 10, O 4, B 2, D 1, W 1)
6. D 19 (B 5, X 5, A 4, O 3, D 2)
7. G 4 (B 2, O 2)

Another Spike-centric ep.

Cumulative totals after 9 eps.
1. B 1,250 (B 529, O 234, S 153, D 119, X 104, W 59, A 57, G 2)
2. S 711 (S 269, B 248, O 72, X 52, A 35, D 23, W 12)
3. D 571 (D 217, B 182, O 81, X 33, W 30, A 23, S 3, G 2)
4. W 546 (W 207, O 86, B 83, A 58, X 48, D 22, G 25, S 17)
5. X 507 (X 213, B 108, A 71, W 35, O 32, D 29, S 17, G 2)
6. A 495 (A 213, X 88, O 80, B 45, W 39, S 22, D 8)
7. G 40 (W 13, B 9, G 9, X 3, O 3, D 2, A 1)

Bring on the Night
1. B 187 (B 90, O 44, G 21, X 17, W 7, D 6, S 2)
2. G 50 (G 28, B 14, A 3, O 3, D 1, W 1, X 1)
3. S 40 (O 28, B 4, A 3, S 2, D 1, W 1, X 1)
4. W 26 (W 16, B 5, X 3, O 2)
5. X 25 (X 12, B 6, O 4, W 2, D 1)
6. D 23 (B 8, D 5, W 4, O 3, X 2, A 1)
7. A 7 (D 3, X 2, A 1, W 1)

A Buffy and plot-centric ep

Cumulative totals after 10 eps

1. B 1,437 (B 619, O 271, S 155, D 125, X 121, W 66, A 57, G 23)
2. S 751 (S 271, B 252, O 100, X 53, A 38, D 24, W 13)
3. D 594 (D 222, B 190, O 84, X 35, W 34, A 24, S 3, G 2)
4. W 572 (W 223, B 88, O 88, A 58, X 51, G 25, D 22, S 17)
5. X 532 (X 225, B 114, A 71, W 37, O 36, D 30, S 17, G 2)
6. A 502 (A 214, X 90, O 80, B 45, W 40, S 22, D 11)
7. G 90 (G 37, B 23, W 14, O 6, X 4, A 4, D 2)

It's also interesting to reverse the table:

B talks about B 619, S 252, D 190, X 114, W 88, A 45, G 23
S talks about S 271, B 155, A 22, W 17, X 17, D 3, G 0
D talks about D 222, B 125, X 30, S 24, W 22, A 11, G 2
W talks about W 223, B 66, A 40, X 37, D 34, G 14, S 13
X talks about X 225, B 121, A 90, S 53, W 51, D 35, G 4)
A talks about A 214, X 71, B 57, W 58, S 38, D 24, G 4)
G talks about G 37, B 23, W 25, D 2, X 2, A 0, S 0)

O talk about B 271, S 100, W 88, D 84, A 80, X 36, G 6)

Well it's certainly Buffy's show, principally because she talks about herself so much. 'Other' characters, as you'd expect, also talk about her most frequently. Spike is the second most referenced character, principally because virtually all he does is talk about himself and Buffy. He is also her second favourite character to talk about. As he is for the 'other' characters (principally the First).


Hee's the link back to the original post:
http://www.voy.com/13746/2042000.html

[> So basically this is saying that all the characters are self absorbed?:) -- Briar Rose, 14:23:06 01/02/03 Thu

I agree that the one thing ME has always tended to do throughout the show is show self absorb characters. And it's true to life. However, they do so on a much less aggravating level than say.... Seinfeld!

Don't most people tend to worry more about themselves than others? Even if it's how their actions affect others?

Humans are self absorbed. This is one reason why I have always philosophized that the concept of World Peace is unattainable. It is practically impossible for the human being to consider someone else's situation as being much more important than their own in all ways. There are some exceptions that take place in times of active heroism, but over all it becomes the same.

Just as after 9/11 I heard so many considering themselves active "victims" of the attack, when they weren't touched in any way personally, except maybe to watch what they pack when traveling and accepting alerts as the new norm.

[> That's like.... mad. Holy number numbness batman. -- Rochefort, 00:33:42 01/03/03 Fri


[> And I thought I was Buffyholic -- skpe, 06:26:32 01/03/03 Fri


[> Huh ... -- LittleBite, 11:14:10 01/03/03 Fri

Sounds as though the characters finally got the message from Buffy's intervention way back in Revelations: "Remember, everyone, 'I' statements."

I wonder [oops, self-involved here]... It could make a person wonder what the results would be if the 'I' statements from double-referential sentences were removed. This would remove the 'I' reference from a line like "I missed you," but leave it in for one such as "I think we should do this..."

It would be interesting to see the changed results, but not interesting enough to go to the effort :)

thoughts on Tabula Rasa -- Clen, 12:50:11 01/02/03 Thu

I was watching Tabula Rasa a few weeks ago (which, by the way, has some fairly cringe-inducing dialogue, I don't know why but it's not my favorite), and was wondering about what it all says about everyone's core personality. I mean, they keep all their skills and reflexes (presumably such things that they have repeated enough times that they become instinctive, I remember hearing that it takes a couple of thousand times), but lose their memory of their identity and those around them. Of course, they remember what vampires are, and it's likely not the most scientific rendering of memory-loss ever, but the real point of the forgetting spell is that all the relationships have been dissolved, including self-image (which your relationships with others presumably play a part in).
I was wondering if the way the characters acted after being affected says something about their "core" personality, at least the core of the way that the writers see them. In case this was already debated last year (I wasn't around), please disregard this thread of mine, or add to it from what was concluded last year, which I would find interesting at at any rate.

Here are my thoughts, based on my own hazy memory (should have scribbled down stuff right away, I feel dumb):

Willow: seems to gravitate towards Xander, through a process of thinking it just seems to make sense, much like she did in high school, since he was her best friend. By the end though, she liked the girls.

Tara: shy, and liked Willow from the start, with her droopy bassethound expression and all.

Buffy: gravitated towards (and fought with) Dawn from the start. Then she just seemed to rise to the occasion as the most bossy, the one that formed the plans and the one who put herself on the line.

Spike: slid right into hanging out with Buffy and helping her out with her plans. It was interesting though how he didn't have the instinctual urge to feed on them, or act nasty or anything. To me this says a lot about Spike's innate goodness (or tribalism, I suppose). Wouldn't he feel Web's "connection with Evil" flowing through his veins? He wouldn't even have noticed he was a vampire if someone hadn't smacked him first. And did he gravitate towards Giles for some reason, or was it just the British thing? I'm not sure with that.

Dawn: didn't do all that much, to my memory.

Giles: logical and doubting of the whole magic thing at first. He seems to have thoughts on Spike...disappointment? Does he really mean hate? Those two feelings don't seem all that close to me. Or does he mean disappointment that Spike seems to have joined "the gang"? Anyways, he is courageous and defends the shop with Anya. I noted that he stated his intention to leave Anya, but eventually "returned" to her, much like he has in the show with the SG (we hope).

Xander: the most aggressive at the start. Or is it a front? He fainted towards the start of the hostilities I believe. So, is Xander's assertiveness really just a front for his own inadequacy? Or are the two sides warring for control? He wasn't all that drawn to Anya, nor Willow for that matter really. Interesting though how he ended up defeating the magical troubles that Willow started (like he did at the end of Season 6).

Anya: there was the bunnies thing of course, and not being drawn to Xander. I don't think the Giles connection was anything but a poor deduction. But it was interesting how initially she threw away the ring and hated Giles, then reconciled with him at the end. Is this in the future for Xander?


I wonder, if this show does hint at the core of their characters, are there elements in the show that point the way towards their future in the series?

[> I have always believed so.... -- Briar Rose, 14:08:18 01/02/03 Thu

That it was a chance to examine the inner character's personality and that it was also a spring board to what happened in the following shows of that season and into the next.

It was almost a recap of the core beliefs and change that each character had gone through up to that point. And I tend to think that some foreshadowing also took place. Especially in the Xander, Spike and Buffy characters.

[> [> Re: I found it interesting... -- Purple Tulip, 23:44:39 01/03/03 Fri

...that only Buffy and Spike didn't know their real names. Everyone else had some sort of identification on them telling them who they were, but Buffy and Spike had nothing and had to come up with their own identities, giving themselves false names. I don't know just what this means, but I think it's got to mean something. It seemed to put Buffy and Spike more on the same level, perhaps predicting what was to come for them? That they would be down on the same level later on? I don't know, just thought I'd throw that out there.

[> [> [> Re: I found it interesting... -- Flo, 03:01:24 01/04/03 Sat

Could be that this connection is due to the fact that Buffy and Spike each live partly in and partly out of this world -- or partly in and partly out of human experience. Buffy's end of this may be due to the fact that she has danced between life and death more than once. Or, as alluded to often, because as the Slayer she is connected to something deeper, darker, and beyond human experience.

Giving names to individuals is something uniquely human. Animals, as far as I know, don't do it. In the Buffyverse, only creatures that have been human (vamps) or who interact with humans as individual personalities (Lorne and Clem, for example) have individual names. It seems that the average demon is Borg-like in its identification with its species but not as an individual.

I wonder if Anya had been a vengeance demon at the time of TR, whether ME would have had her forget her name as well?

[> Be careful with the Spike speculation -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:30:03 01/02/03 Thu

While Joss is very much in control of his show, his iron fist wasn't quite as strong in Season 6, and the individual writers always have had a great deal of control over their own episodes. I mention this because Rebecca Rand Krischner, the writer of "Tabula Rasa", seems to be very much an S/B shipper and Spike Redemptionist. She wrote Spike's first dream of kissing Buffy (Out Of My Mind), Spike's refusal to give up Dawn under torture and getting a kiss from Buffy (Intervention), his speech about being a noble, "vampire with a soul" (Tabula Rasa), and the bits about Spike helping to save Buffy and the prophecy that "someday she'll tell you" (Help). Granted, the first and last points were undoubtedly not planned by her (most likely by Joss), but I can fully imagine her going "I'll do it!" when it came up in writer's discussions.

Now, I'm not saying that because Rebecca Rand Krischner is an S/B shipper/Spike Redemptionist means that what she writes about Spike is invalid. However, one must take into account that while some of the writers (such as Marti Noxon) might agree with some of her points about Spike, others (such as Jane Espenson and David Fury) are on the opposite side of the spectrum (and we can't yet be sure what exactly the Grand Master of All Things Buffy feels on the issue of S/B and Spike Redemption, yet). Thus, we must be cautious about accepting Spike/Randy in "Tabula Rasa" as the core of Spike's character, since the writer is pretty far into the Spike Redemptionist field, while others are in the middle or in the Evilist/Snarkist field. So we can't be sure whether the Randy side of Spike is something ME agreed upon for being at the core of his character, or whether it is just Rebecca Rand Krischner's preference, which means it might very well be dropped in episodes by other writers.

(And just so I don't have to post a reply to a dissagreeing Spike Redemptionist, I would also advise exercising the same caution with Spike's portrayal in a David Fury episode. Both have very clear, definite, and opposing views on what Spike (while he was soulless, at any rate) was like on the inside, so it is best to speculate with caution when the Spike issue comes up in their episodes).

[> [> the writing of Spike -- Clen, 15:19:22 01/02/03 Thu

I can certainly agree with all of that. What one writer writes (with a likely notable exception) is not necessarily gospel. And yet, when a project is your baby and you take care of it, you will make sure you know what each writer is up to and try to know where their strengths lie. The HWiC on this show (if it were me, I would) will gladly accept the challenge of many iron chefs within the kitchen stadium. It means on one hand that you might see a little see-sawing of a character, but it also means that characters get to experience a range of fortunes and forms of self-expression. The HWiC must make sure to not only ensure that the range is a tolerable one that won't screw up the character (unlike some of the scripts for the newest Superman movie), and occasionally take an active hand to shift the range to what will be a more interesting expanse of character development. It may be frustrating to see other people unravel your vision, but if facilitated well, you will see a path of character development that acknowledges all of the events of the past, incorporates them, inspires some of the other writers in their own visions, and ultimately keeps the viewers guessing, since they can't just lock in to one writer's steam of thought. Not to mention divides the work up nicely.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that at some point, Joss would notice what Spike was written to be like when "erased", with a curious dearth of predatory qualities. And, he approved of it. That would be a major enough twist that if I were him, I would want final say on it. Furthermore, this is now a facet that all other writers should incorporate from now on; merely disregarding it or even negating it is cheap and cheats the viewers, which ME KNOWS rabidly pay attention to these sorts of things.

So, ok, Krischner is not laying down the essential core of the characters, but I still think it's fair to say that what we saw is in their core, somewhere, even if she made it so rather than passed on the consensus. so, Anya might NOT forgive Xander and reconcile, but I believe TR is proof that it's within her to do so. I mean, if we're smart enough to wonder about the core exposed theory, then surely ME was smart enough to consider it as well a long time before. Fury and Krischner might have opposing views, but for them and for us, the task is to reconcile them together within the character's development. Just to say, oh, he's only being that way because so and so is writing is like an accusation that noone is at the reins and the characters could drift wherever the wind carries them. Keep that up for too long and you are forced to messily tie it all back in together, a la Crisis on Infinite Earths (gee, how much of a geek am I?)

[> [> [> Of course, now speaking as an Evilist. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 16:33:56 01/02/03 Thu

A person could say that Krischner's presentation of Spike's core character is in conflict with David Fury's exploration of the same issue in the Season 5 episode "Crush", which also had to have the Whedon Seal of Approval.

It becomes tricky which has more precedence. Fury's exploration of Spike's core character (with the message that deep down he was still evil) came first, so one can say that Krischner had an obligation to be faithful to it. However, Krischner's presentation of the issue addressed Spike's core self on a much more literal level than Fury's, so it is possible to stretch your mind around Randy/Spike being inside Spike as shown in "Crush".

Let me put it this way: Krischner is likely to make Spike's heroic/romantic side front and center, while Fury is likely to do the opposite. The other aspects of their character still exist, but both writers often try very hard not to put those aspects on display.

Also, as for core character matters, both "Crush" and "Tabula Rasa" leave room for fans to work around them. While "Crush" says that Spike is evil at the core, many Redemptionists have gone the route of saying that it was just the pressure Drusilla exerted on him, and some even say Buffy shouldn't have rejected him, despite being chained up at the time. As for Evilists (like myself), if asked to explain Spike in "Tabula Rasa" as something besides a slight continuity flub, we go the route that if he isn't hungry or itching for violence at the moment, Spike doesn't have any motivation to act evil, given he's been primarily amoral since the beginning. Also, he was lost and confused at the moment, which would make killing off the people he was with a fairly stupid thing to do. And, if Tara can be attracted to Willow even with no memory of her, the same goes for Spike towards Buffy.

[> [> [> [> Re: Of course, now speaking as an Evilist. . . -- Dochawk, 20:44:10 01/02/03 Thu

I posted this once before, but noone commented on it, but its quite appropriate for this conversation.

At Worldcon this summer I went to a panel (Buffy/Spike: Consensual Sexual Violence. Is it ever okay?). One of the panelists was Rebecca Moesta. She has written one Buffy novel ("Little Things", which is very Spike-centric). She said that before writing the novel, she was given a "book" from ME with instructions about the characters. Spike, very specifically was allowed to do good things only when they somehow were done for any of the Summers women, and at NO other times. After it was done, the novel was then reviewed by ME to make sure the characterizations were true to form and she said (if I remember correctly)that even one ambigious event was altered to make sure Spike did not appear good. The timing of the book was after Joyce's death, but before Glory discovered Dawn was the Key. From this information, we deduce that ME's corporate line was that presoul Spike was evil, but his love of Buffy (and Dawn and Joyce) allowed him to do good things for them. Would love to see those instructions (and if anyone intends to write the definitive mythology of the Buffyverse I would think they are necessary).

[> [> [> [> [> A Great Evilist Victory! Bwah ha ha ha! -- Finn Mac Cool, 20:48:06 01/02/03 Thu

Too bad the fellow went and got a soul, cause this would really turn the Redemptionist vs. Evilist tide. Of course, no one would change their opinion any, but we could always end arguments with "Joss says so!"

[> [> [> [> [> [> The Spike armistice... (Spoilers for untransmitted S6 eps in this whole thread, for BBC viewers) -- KdS, 06:36:58 01/03/03 Fri

I must admit, I see the decision to have Spike go and get a soul at the end of S6 as an attempt on ME's part to split the difference between the Redemptionist/Evilist positions without alienating either fan faction. The Evilists can relax and accept that vampires can't be truly redeemed without a soul, while the Redemptionists can console themselves with the thought that Spike recognised himself that something was missing (even if there's an argument that he was merely looking for something to make Buffy love him and wasn't aware of the full consequences and significance).

(Of course, it would have been less confusing if they'd made that explicit from the start instead of going for the shock ending, but that's academic.)

[> [> [> [> [> Ya know... I always assumed there WAS such and I thank you for the confirmation! -- Briar Rose, 01:02:23 01/03/03 Fri


[> [> [> [> [> Re: Of course, now speaking as an Evilist. . . -- shadowkat, 07:50:37 01/03/03 Fri

From this information, we deduce that ME's corporate line was that presoul Spike was evil, but his love of Buffy (and Dawn and Joyce) allowed him to do good things for them. Would love to see those instructions (and if anyone intends to write the definitive mythology of the Buffyverse I would think they are necessary).

Rufus has posted numerous times a comment of Whedon's from playfair...everyone ignores it for some reason and it is I admit, annoyingly vague. I can't remember the exact wording but if you go into the archives - specifically May, July and hunt souls you'll find it.

A paraphrase is: The soul is a moral compass - it pushs people towards good. Of course with a soul you can choose to do evil things but your prime directive (borrowing star trek lingo here) is to do good. IT's what makes you happy.
Motivates you. There's a scale of course - and most people fall in between - also there's the difficulty that some evil acts on the surface can appear to be good. So you may be meaning to do good and end up doing evil. (Willow is an example. So is some of the things Angel does in Season 2 of his series). Or for some reason you've gone against your natural tendency - say anger at society, need to rebel? (Warren, Jonathan and Andrew are examples) Without a soul and a demonic energy - you're natural inclination is create chaos, to do evil. It's what makes you happy. Makes you glowy inside. It's what makes you like yourself. Remember Webs? I feel connected to evil. Jesse says the same thing. Angelus - same thing. Same with Darla.
Harmony.

So where's Spike fit in? Well, first off, he can't physically hurt humans - he's being conditioned by a chip not too. Doesn't stop him from hunting other ways - a writer's challenge if there ever was one. (Also the problem of creating a reluctant helper who isn't a puppy dog or retread of Angel, they kept him strict villain? The show would have gotten redundant quickly.) Then he falls in love with a good person. Not just a normal good person btw. But a hero. A person who strives to save the world and others without anything in return because it makes her happy.
Now when you fall in love with someone - you want to make them happy - because when they are happy - you're happy. You want them to like you. You want them to kiss you. You want them to see you in a positive light. So you go out of your way to accomplish that. (Angel actually did this in the first three years of Btvs and really didn't help that much if Buffy wasn't involved and that was with a soul. So - they can't let Spike help others without it involving Buffy, make things sort of confusing. Problem is - it's Buffy's show, so it's a tad difficult to show anyone doing anything without it directly affecting Buffy. They had to give Angel his own show to do that. So don't get all huffy if you don't see ensouled Spike doing good things not directly involving Buffy - since it is STILL buffy's show and they have a limited amount of time to tell the story.
And remember Angel didn't until he got his own show.) Examples of demons trying to be good to make others happy - includes Harmony and possibly Lorne.

At any rate - Joss says, Spike (without a soul) is naturally inclined to do evil things, but loves Buffy, so tries to do good things for her, going against his natural inclination to do so. Buffy for Spike had become more important that his natural inclination as a demon. But that
inclination is always at war with his heart and he eventually has to resolve that conflict - hence the soul.
The heart won. (Same thing happened with Willow last year - Xander stops Willow with a plea to her heart - heart won over spiritual inclination.)

Souled Spike is a different character.

People keep misinterpreting the soul thing - I think that's the problem everyone has with it. It's really not the judeo/Christian concept of a soul. I find this a bit odd since the writers keep hammering what it means. CONSCIENCE!
REMORSE! See Angel (Season 1), Consequences (Season 3),
Sancturary (Ats 1), Innocence (Season 2) Sleeper (Season 7)
Never Leave Me (Season 7). The soul makes us feel others pain. What we decide to do with that feeling is of course up to us. (When Willow is made to feel others pain again in Grave, she was somewhat disconnected from it by the dark magic and her own grief - she goes wacky and tries to end all pain). But the soul is also a metaphor for maturity.

Without a soul - Angel acts like a 17 year old hood, like the kid who left Daddy in a rebellious huff. Without a soul - Darla acts the same way. One view of immaturity or childishness is not feeling others pain. To grow up - you need a soul.

I don't see Btvs as focusing on redemption so much as the horrors of growing up, maturity. That difficult passage between adolescence and adulthood. The mythology is just metaphor for all of that. The writers have always said that. Angel is actually more about the "mythos". Part of the reason they created Angel was so they could focus on the mythos more and get away from the boundaries of the "growing up" theme. (I got this impression from two interviews Joss Whedon did at the beginning of this year when he was promoting Firefly.)

Current board | More January 2003