January 2003 posts


Previous January 2003  

More January 2003



Spoilery questions about Connections. -- Rufus, 02:17:30 01/03/03 Fri

I've thrown together a few quotes from either Psyche's transcripts or a Shooting Script. Remember it's all connected.........



From Buffy 6.20 Two to Go



ANYA: (annoyed) Warren shot Buffy. Warren shot Tara. Buffy's alive. Tara's dead. Willow found out, and being the most powerful Wicca in the western hemisphere, decided to get the payback. With interest.

***********************************



From Buffy 6.22 Grave

GILES: The Council haven't a clue. About much of anything, really. (walking toward Buffy, leaning on the horse) No, there's an ... an extremely powerful coven in Devon. They sensed the rise of a dangerous magical force here in Sunnydale. A dark force, fueled by grief.


BUFFY: Willow.


GILES: I'd so hoped it wasn't her. (pauses) And then a seer in the coven told me about Tara. That's when the coven ... imbued me with their powers.



ANYA: Oh. (getting it) You dosed her.


GILES: Yes.


ANYA: You knew she'd going to take your powers all along.


GILES: The gift I was given by the coven was the true essence of magic. Willow's magic came from a ... place of rage and power.


ANYA: And vengeance. Don't forget vengeance.


GILES: Oh. How could I? In any case, the magic she took from me tapped into ... the spark of humanity she had left. Helped her to feel again. Gave Xander the opportunity to ... reach her.


ANYA: Xander?


GILES: Yes. It was he who got to her in time. (smiling) He saved us all.

***************************************

From Buffy 7.1 Lessons

Shot of the grassy ground where Willow is looking. A green stem appears out of the ground, rises up and blooms into a pink flower. Willow watches calmly.

GILES: That doesn't belong there.


WILLOW: No, it doesn't.


GILES: That's the flora kua ulaya. Native of Paraguay if my botany serves.


WILLOW: (smiles) Is there anything you don't know everything about?


GILES: Synchronized swimming. Complete mystery to me.

Giles climbs the last bit and crouches beside Willow, both looking at the flower.

GILES: Yep, Paraguay. Where's it come from?


WILLOW: Paraguay.


GILES: You brought it through the earth.


WILLOW: It's all connected. The root system, the molecules ... the energy ... everything's connected.


GILES: You sound like Miss Harkness.


WILLOW: (smiles) She's taught me a lot.


GILES: Then why aren't you in your lesson?


WILLOW: (stops smiling) Sorry.


GILES: It's all right. I think she was just-


WILLOW: Afraid. (Giles looking concerned) Yeah. They all are. The coven is ... they're the most amazing women I've ever met. But there's this, this look that they get. Like I'm gonna turn them all into bangers and mash, or something. (Giles smiling) Which I'm not even really sure what that is.


GILES: They're cautious. I trust you understand that.


WILLOW: I don't have that much power, I don't think.


GILES: Everything is connected. You're connected to a great power, whether you feel it or not.


WILLOW: Well, you should just take it from me.

Willow gets up. The flower closes up and sinks back into the ground.

GILES: You know we can't.

Willow walks away from the tree with Giles following.

GILES: This isn't a, a hobby or an addiction. It's inside you now, this magic. You're responsible for it.

Giles catches up with Willow and they walk side-by-side.

WILLOW: Will they always be afraid of me?


GILES: Maybe. Can you handle it?


WILLOW: I deserve a lot worse. (they stop walking) I killed people, Giles.


GILES: I've not forgotten.


WILLOW: When you brought me here, I thought it was to kill me. Or to lock me in some mystical dungeon for all eternity, or ... with the torture. (frowns) Instead, you ... go all Dumbledore on me. (Giles smiling a little) I'm learning about magic, all about energy and Gaia and root systems...


GILES: Do you want to be punished?


WILLOW: (softly) I wanna be Willow.


GILES: You are. In the end, we all are who we are ... no matter how much we may appear to have changed.

**********************************

Shooting Script for Buffy 7.10 "Bring on the Night"



There is AN EXPLOSION from the area where the spell is being done. It sends ANYA flying. WIND FILLS THE ROOM and things SCATTER EVERYWHERE.

CLOSE ON WILLOW

Who holds onto the table as the smoke from the spell TWISTS INTO HER NOSTRILS. Will rears back and SCREAMS as her EYES AND HAIR GO BLACK. She EXHALES and the GIANT FORM OF THE FIRST, in it's true appearance (the form it took in AMENDS) emerges from her mouth. Then immediately gets sucked back.

BUFFY (cont'd)
Will!

Willow whips around and BLASTS BUFFY ACROSS THE ROOM with MAGIC. Speaks in a demonic voice (the voice of The First.}

WILLOW/ FIRST
You only make me stronger.

CRASH! Xander, unnoticed by Willow/First, has snatched the bowl that held the spell ingredients and SMASHED IT against the wall. Just as suddenly as everything started - it all GOES BACK TO NORMAL. Will's eyes and hair - everything.

******************************

It started with a little comment from Anya in Two to Go.....I've never forgotten it. If Willow is the most powerful Wicca in the Western hemisphere then who is the other most powerful Wicca?

What is it about Xanders normality that seems to have a magic of it's own?

I'd be remembering everything that Willow says about it all being connected....that means good/evil.

Does Giles belong in the here and now?

The last....."YOU only make ME stronger"....that goes back to Willows insecurity and how she gets her magic to work in the most powerful way....and that is rage....can she reverse that, meaning how can she make IT weak?

[> The above contains spoilers up to Bring on the Night -- Rufus, 02:18:35 01/03/03 Fri


[> Re: Spoilery questions about Connections. -- slain, 09:30:27 01/03/03 Fri

Xander's normality strikes me as being relevant to connexions; or, rather the connexions he doesn't have. He isn't connected to any kind of magical force, as far as we know, in the way that Willow is connected to the demon dimensions (where she got her evil magic from, in part), Buffy and presumably Dawn (and Joyce?) are connected to the Slayer lineage of power, Spike is/was connected to the great vampire evil, Anya is connected to the demon realms and Giles is connected to the way of Watchers and the occult.

Xander isn't connecty in this way; he doesn't really see the occult world, but rather he's concerned with the physical, tangible world - hence his occupation, bashing things against wood. However I think his lack of connexion with this world emphasises his connexion with the other big force - humanity. When his own problems aren't getting in the way, Xander's role is often to see the human dimension, to empathise with other humans; which is probably why he's not always that good at seeing the demon perspective (Anya being the exception, but she has a soul), and seeing beyond humanity. Xander is the Heart of the group, and seeing as the soul was thought to reside there, I think it's not unjust to think of him as the Soul of the Scoobies, its essential connectedness with humanity, and all of its strengths and frailties.

And this only makes M.E. stronger, you know. ;)

[> [> Re: Spoilery questions about Connections. -- gds, 17:11:38 01/03/03 Fri

As I said a couple of years ago Xander is Buffy's secret weapon. He is the "X" factor, that unexpected thing which messes up best laid plans. He either comes up with an unexpected observation (e.g. that the 3 demons are the 3 sacrifices), or is at the right place at the right time (e.g. the high school kitchen when poison is being used there). He is underestimated even by his friends, and the enemies totally overlook him.

[> Re: Spoilery questions about Connections. -- luvthistle1, 04:00:14 01/04/03 Sat

...maybe Amy. where did she go? or The Ripper". he seem s like he was pretty powerful , when Ethan was talking about Giles's Ripper days in "a new man" he said Giles knew very did very powerful magic.

Sports Teams/Coaches/Winning Losing and Buffy season 7 -- neaux, 06:39:29 01/03/03 Fri

Well at morning break everyday at work, I go into the break room and watch ESPN's sportscenter for 15 minutes.

This past week due to College bowls and NFL seasons ending, there have been a lot of firing and hiring of coaches for the upcoming year. You hear terms such as "rebuilding" "recruits" and dammit if that didnt make me think of Buffy this year.

Is season 7 a "rebuilding" year for Buffy? I would say yes. Why is Xander always rebuilding the house? I believe this is acting as a metophor for the "rebuilding" year of the Scoobie team. We already had 3 new recruits to the team and 1 didnt (or did) make the first round cuts (depending on which pun you like).

You have Andrew and Spike sidelined for now. If Spike gets off the injured list, he could make a powerful hit for the scoobie team. Andrew is physically tied down do to his actions on the court. The team tied him up because he was poorly coached. Well he was manipulated by the Big Bad.. but that doesnt mean that Andrew wont be back in the second half for the scoobie team.

As with most "rebuilding" seasons, it has started as a losing year for the scoobie team. The team's coach (Giles) had presumably lost his head for most of the season and only now does it look like he's having it reattached. But if the coach gets his head on right and lets assume he passes the torch to Buffy (the star player) to lead the team as seems evident in bring on the night. Where will this all go??

well I do think this is a rebuilding year and with rebuilding years its going to end badly. Not horribly, it wont be a winning season. But the strengths and weaknesses will be evident by the end of the year and NEXT Year's team will be quite powerful.

so this is my speculation that the scoobies will lose the BIG GAME this year but it wont be devistating. By the end of the year they will have shaped up their team for the next go-round. There will be quite a few new faces and some of the seniors will leave the team to retire and others for more money. And as we all know now, Players and teams can be divided by CONTRACTS.


so what do you all think? I really want to hear from you guys about this.

[> btw i think this is the most insightful thing I've ever written. -- neaux (who took one for the team), 06:40:59 01/03/03 Fri


[> Re: Sports Teams/Coaches/Winning Losing and Buffy season 7 -- LittleBit (goes for the sports analogy, what the hey), 09:18:53 01/03/03 Fri

Interesting slant on the season. One thing we do know ... the Head Coach [pun intended on both levels] won't be replaced because there's no one left to replace him within the league and we all know they can't go outside the UPN league to recruit.

The star player will be having a difficult year, facing the strongest oppostition the team has seen while at the same time being recruited and distracted by the pros. Can she keep her focus and go out at the head of a winning season? It remains to be seen.

We are seeing an unusual influx of freshman players, presumably from some of the best coaches available. Whether or not their training was enough, and they can adapt to the type of offense and defense the Scooby Gang uses still remains to be seen. As we all know, they follow a very different game plan.

The veterans on the team seem to be having a few difficulties as well --- Willow being afraid to fully urilize her abilities because of the possibility of an interception will be forcing the team to go to a ground game and Buffy unsure if the Slayer abilities are enough against the uber-vamp. The sophomore on the team hasn't had much playing time, but has held her own in a few skirmishes although Dawn is showing a tendency for unnecessary roughness.

Xander is the workhorse of the team, keeping the basics supplied, the equipment in working order, and trying to shore up the foundations of the team.

There remains, as you said, not only Spike and Andrew but Anya as well. Spike is not only currently on the injured list, but he's in the clutches of the opposing teams Head (as in plays with others') coach who will attempt to put him on the red-shirt list for the rest of the season. We don't know if Spike has the strength to recover, but can be certain that the team will make the effort to get him back to their side of the field. Andrew is a player from the other team who doesn't have a very strong conviction in any direction. Having lost his mentor and hero, he wavers in every direction, but may come through in the end for the Scooby team. Anya is firmly on the team but has the added handicap of not only having transferred to another team and then back again, but has the coach of the other team looking for vengeance for her desertion. She can be a real asset to the Scooby Gang if she can stay alive and well.

The Scooby Gang is in a period of transformation ... the veterans are still there but the team has moved up to face much tougher opposition and has had to recruit and expand to meet that opposition. What remains to be seen is whether or not the new recruits and the team members who have been warming the bench can bring their game up to the level needed in the time available, and merge their abilities with the veterans to have a awesome comeback.

Up to now we've just seen summer practices, with the veterans returning, and try-outs. The first game went badly for the team. Can they regroup, rebuild and come back with a winning season? We've heard the rhetoric ... now can they rise to occasion? We certainly hope so. [Trying very hard, after Churchill and St. Crispin to resist "Win one for the Gipper!"]




Go Scoobies!! [waving Scooby pennant, suddenly wondering what the dog has to do with anything).

[> [> LOL.. the redshirt line is priceless!! -- neaux, 10:10:19 01/03/03 Fri


[> Re: Sports Teams/Coaches/Winning Losing and Buffy season 7 -- Cactus Watcher, 12:58:20 01/03/03 Fri

Personally, I'm impressed with the team's new offensive coordinator, B. A. Summers. They got pretty chewed up last game, trying to make end runs and screen passes work against a really mobile and unpredictable defense. In fact it's the best all-around defenses we've seen in years. Is it any wonder that one of the younger recruits just plain lost her nerve when faced with that kind of opposition. I'm glad to hear that "Slayer" Summers is now determined to cut down team Evil's advantage by running right at them up the middle. That ought to make for some openings in the secondary, and allow somebody to go deep for a score when they need it most.

[> sports analogies? *shudder* Run away! run away! -- ZachsMind, 13:51:08 01/03/03 Fri

I hate this time of year. The superbowl causes me to break out in hives. Especially when the Dallas Cowboys win. It's a madhouse in Big D.

Uhm.. Nice comparisons. Personally I think Buffy's got more to do with Nietzsche than Jerry Jones. But your mileage may vary.

[> [> Especially when the Dallas Cowboys win. -- Vickie, 15:24:54 01/03/03 Fri

Relax, Zach. No fear this season.

Of course, after Sunday my football season is likely to be over as well.

V. (49er faithful forever)

Is Willow as nearly powerful as D'Hoffryn? -- Angel324, 10:05:04 01/03/03 Fri

Willow powers are acceptly more powerful than Anyanka and near her bosses.

[> Re: Willow vs. D'Hoffryn -- Robert, 10:45:51 01/03/03 Fri

>>> Willow powers are acceptly more powerful than Anyanka and near her bosses.

What is your evidence?

Who has accepted this?

[> [> Based on evidence... -- ZachsMind, 12:41:14 01/03/03 Fri

The following is based on observations from "Seeing Red," "Two To Go/Grave," "Bring On the Night" and other recent episodes.

Willow is simultaneously more powerful than D'Hoffryn and completely powerless. At present she has access to great powers but is unable to consistently control it. It's like she's a cave man who can set something on fire but doesn't know how to keep the blaze under control. We learned through Halfrek's discussion with Anyanka that even D'Hoffryn was uncomfortable right now, with the First mixing things up. "This is a bad time to be a good guy." Giles has said the UberVamp which The First summoned is the kind of vampire that vampires fear. It wouldn't be much of a stretch to say the evil which summoned it is the kind of evil that demons fear.

Willow's tapped into the darkest of the dark magicks: The First Evil. Something D'Hoffryn serves. D'Hoffryn does The First's bidding. It's not the other way around. Willow has been toying dangerously with evil magicks for years now, but she does so in an attempt to perform good deeds. This upsets the balance of reality. Perhaps one of the reasons why the First is upset. Its power has been used by Willow in the past to perform good deeds. This is like getting a member of a football team to betray his team and run for the other team's goal with the ball. If Willow accesses her magic abilities just a crack like a door in order to perform a simple locator spell, it's allowing The First to get it's foot in the door and try to take her over. If The First was ever able to fully take Willow over indefinitely, it would then be able to affect reality directly, using Willow as its puppet. Willow is taking greater risk now every time she ventures into dark magicks. However, she's also like a spy behind enemy lines. She's connected to the very evil that the Scoobies are facing now, and this can either be a detriment or a benefit. Depends on how the cards get played.

Another important thing to notice is that The First has approached Willow, Dawn & Spike. It has used Andrew because Andrew was such an easy mark. For the majority of the first ten episodes this evening, The First Evil has largely ignored Buffy & Xander. It's like The First is more afraid of Willow than Buffy. More concerned about torturing Spike than Xander. More interested in manipulating Dawn than Anya (provided CwDP was The First and not something else facing Dawn). Most recently it appears The First has begun invading Buffy's dreams and posing as her Mom, but it's been left too vague to be sure. That could be her Mom, the First, or something else. Very little is at it seems right now.

There. I just made a bunch of absurd statements but based on evidence. Howzzat? =)

What's your favorite monster of the season? (spoilers through 7.10 and Angel 4.7) -- Finn Mac Cool, 14:37:20 01/03/03 Fri

I've decided that it would be fun to see what everybody thinks of the monsters that have appeared on BtVS this season, and which have been their favorites. Now, first let me state that this does not include: human villains, main characters doing villainous things, or monsters who only appeared briefly and didn't really do anything of note. So, without futher ado, here is the list of candidates:

1) Vamp-with-foot-caught-in-the-ground. This is kinda stretching the last of my rules up there, but since he had a few lines and some humor, I feel he can count on the list.

2) Ronnie the Worm Demon.

3) Gnarl.

4) Avilas (you know, lame demon summoned by slacker students).

5) Anya's Spider Demon.

6) Halfrek

7) D'Hoffryn

8) Olaf the Troll

9) Weird-thing-smothering-the-Joyce-Apparation-and-cast-out-by-Dawn.

10) Holden Webbster

11) The First Evil

12) Femme-Vampire-that-Spike-sired-and-met-in-the-Bronze.

13) The Vampires Spike sired that rose from the basement floor (again, it kind of stretches one of my rules, but I think they count since they did seriously affect the plot).

14) The Harbingers

15) The Uber-Vamp

I was going to do a similar polling thing for Angel, but the only monsters I could come up with for this season are the Punk Vampires, Marrissa the Vampire, Dinza the Demi-Goddess, Demon-with-nine-lives-that-Professor-Seidel-summoned, Lorne's human eating friend, and, of course, THE BEAST! All in all, that's only six candidates, so I've decided to limit it to Buffy, but you can vote on them if you wish.

(Oh, and feel free to leave fun and funny comments with your responses, because otherwise I'd feel like an English teacher)

[> My favorite monster this season ain't on your list... -- ZachsMind, 15:39:26 01/03/03 Fri

You wanna monster? I got a monster for ya: BUFFY.

I think Buffy's a monster for how she treats others. She's selfish and she's whiny. PLUS she can bench press several football quarterbacks with one arm tied behind her back, and she's so scary there's a lot of things that go bump in the night which shut the hell up when she walks by. If something is so scary it scares other monsters? It too constitutes as a monster. Just as Wazowski & Sully.

Buffy's got a job to do and should just do it and quit being so reactionary. Superiority/Inferiority Complex indeed. She uses her position as "Slayer" as an excuse to be able to use and abuse others carte blanche. She treats Dawn like a baby when she's proven time and again she can more than take care of herself. She strung Xander along back in season two (When She Was Bad), and this season she called him an idiot to his face (okay. so Xander was to stupid to realize she insulted him.)

What Buffy's put Spike through is sad. If she loves the big lumox she should just come out and say it. But she's a whiny pansy who can't admit her own feelings to herself much less a guy who's already dead.

If Willow goes and kills someone, Buffy tries to talk her down and knock some sense into her but death is just not an option. If Anya goes and kills someone, Buffy puts a hole in her chest, THEN Buffy has the balls the go on a long tirade speech about how she's the Slayer and she has to put Anya in the ground cuz it's all might makes right and blah blah blah. Double standards. Buffy should have shown Anya the same patience and understanding she showed Willow.

"When She Was Bad" ??? When has she not been bad?

And don't even git me started on how she treated Angel near the end, or Riley from day one. You want a monster? Pick Buffy. She's your monster.

[> [> This could be a pleasant dish if it could be taken with a grain of salt. -- Finn Mac Cool, 16:07:08 01/03/03 Fri

Is this meant to be entirely serious? And, at any rate, I said I wasn't counting human villains or main characters, so Buffy doesn't fall into the monster list even if you believe all of those things.

[> [> [> What do you mean 'believe'? -- ZachsMind, 16:37:44 01/03/03 Fri

It's called "Devil's Advocate." You listed all those other monsters and I think Buffy outmonsters them all. She's the scariest thing going. After seven years of outscaring monsters, one would kinda have to be.

I didn't make up any of that stuff. Those are actions Buffy has committed. She uses a great deal of power in an inconsistent and sometimes even selfish manner. What? Monsters have to wear prosthetic ears and false pointy teeth? They can't be human? The worst monsters in history were human.

Buffy is so scary, she scares other monsters. I don't see how she had the right to do what she did to Spike. Her treatment of him the past two years has been quite literally monstrous.

Norman of Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho was a monster too. He just didn't wear a mask and makeup.

Buffy's powers stem from The First Slayer. According to the legend, the priests who made the first slayer took a slice of evil from their enemy, and harnessed it by putting it into the body, psyche and soul of a young woman. Buffy's powers come from evil just as Willow's powers do. The only difference is Willow knows it. Buffy doesn't. Dracula tried to tell her where her powers came from but she wouldn't hear it. She has the pride and false bravado of Doctor Frankenstein & Dr. Jeckyl combined.

Buffy's a powder keg. It really wouldn't take very much to turn Buffy and make her join the other side. She's almost there now. I don't see my argument being proven wrong here. I see it being dismissed on a technicality.

[> [> [> [> 'Kay, honey, let's talk. -- HonorH, 18:01:16 01/03/03 Fri

1. Regarding Dawn: what season are you watching? I'm watching a season that started out with Buffy training Dawn and features Dawn as a fully-integrated member of the Scooby Gang. She researches, she goes along even on dangerous missions, she wields weapons, she kicks ass. Buffy's still protective of her, yes, but in addition to being her sister and the Slayer (and thus equipped to save Dawn's life), Buffy's Dawn's legal guardian. She's responsible for Dawn--responsible for raising her, giving her a house and a sense of security, forming Dawn's character for the next few years. Last year, I'd have agreed with you. This year, not so much.

2. Xander: okay, you're talking about an incident that happened when Buffy was sixteen. Unless you're willing to have your character judged on how you behaved when you were sixteen, I think you'd best back off this one. As for the, "Or we could be smart . . . sorry, Xander," statement, let he or she who's never had an, "Oops, that didn't sound good, did it?" moment throw the first stone.

3. Anya vs. Willow: this has been discussed ad infinitum, but it really was a judgment call. Willow went bad in a moment of passion and remained human. Anya went back to being a demon and appeared to be unrepentant. Buffy had to do something in each case, and she judged Willow to be salvagable and Anya a greater threat. It's defensible reasoning. She could've been wrong in each case, but then again, she could've been right. Buffy's called on to make these decisions every day and every night. Sometimes, things are murky. She's still got to act, though. She's always got to act.

4. Spike: yes, she did act like a monster to him. She admits as much. But she's helping him now, encouraging him in his quest for redemption. A true monster either can't see that she's a monster, or just doesn't care. Buffy saw, and she's trying to make up for her actions. I don't see a monster in that.

5. Superiority/inferiority complex: I'm sorry, Zach, but your reasoning here totally escapes me. Until you've been through what she has, making the world-changing decisions every day for the past six-seven years, dying and living again twice, fighting day in, day out, saving lives for no monetary reward and little thanks, I don't see that you can judge what her state of mind should be.

[> [> [> [> [> Also, while Buffy has the potential to go dark. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 18:10:50 01/03/03 Fri

. . . so does everyone. And, while the Slayer's power may come from demonic sources, each individual Slayer controls how to use it. If Buffy were as easy to draw over to the dark side as Zachsmind says, it would have happened already. Despite all the temptations, hard times, and influences from the dark side side of the force, Buffy is still slaying evil, saving lives, and fighting the good fight. We've seen her go through a lot that would make a lot of us go to the dark side for comfort, but she has resisted and pulled through. So, if there ever is a "Buffy goes evil" thing, it would take a whole HELL of a lot to accomplish the job.

P.S. Zachsmind, given that I made it pretty clear humans and main characters wouldn't count for the monster list, you still made a post raising Buffy up as your example of a monster. I can only conclude that you were yearning for some attention, even if it meant a thread hijack. Tsk, tsk, bad form.

[> [> [> [> [> 'Until you've been through what she has...' -- ZachsMind, 19:02:01 01/03/03 Fri

Regarding point five, then somebody go stop the judicial system of America right now, cuz that's what they do every day. They judge people without having walked in their shoes. It's not a prerequisite for judging someone.

All your other points are valid though. I still say Buffy's my favorite monster. That's my opinion. We can agree to disagree.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Allow me to clarify: -- HonorH, 19:13:01 01/03/03 Fri

What I heard you saying was that she shouldn't have a complex after all she's been through. Had you said she shouldn't act the way she does, you'd have had a valid point. However, no one is qualified to judge another's emotions and mental state. When those emotions and mental state drive them to commit crimes, then the judicial system steps in, as it should. Even then, though, allowances are made--such as the case being re-tried in California in which a woman killed her abusive husband. But that's really beside the point, in any case.

What I'm saying is that Buffy's superiority/inferiority complex is perfectly valid. She has great power, was given that power at a young age. I don't think anyone but a saint wouldn't feel that, because they were selected to be the one who stands in the gap against all evil, they weren't superior in some way--at least on an unconscious level. At the same time, Buffy carries a lot of guilt over things she's done (like Spike, for instance), lives she's been unable to save, mishandled situations, and also for that feeling of superiority. Thus, she feels inferior at the same time that she feels superior. She feels set apart from those she loves. To say she should "get over it" is to say she shouldn't have these feelings--in other words, to be less human.

As for her being a monster, if she is, she's a monster who's saved a heck of a lot of lives and sacrificed a great deal to do so. I'll take a monster like that.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> I see your side but it does not invalidate my opinion. -- ZachsMind, 22:22:33 01/03/03 Fri

"What I'm saying is that Buffy's superiority/inferiority complex is perfectly valid."

Perfectly valid. I absolutely agree. We understand exactly why she's become what she's become.

The same can be said for Norman Bates. One can say his fall into madness was perfectly valid, considering what his mother put him through. It's possible any human put through what that character went through would have gone over the edge. That may explain his actions, but it doesn't make his actions okay.

Here's another example. Doctor Frankenstein wanted to prove his findings valid. He wanted to prove he could bring the dead back to life. Originally his intentions were truly noble. What doctor wouldn't want to save his patients? However, his peers in the medical industry could see what he couldn't. What he was proposing would lead to experimentation on human tissue. He'd be playing God, making mistakes along the way, at the cost of other human beings. They laughed him out of their conference. He became a recluse because none of his peers would take him seriously. He became obsessed with proving them wrong. One can understand where he went wrong and why, but it doesn't excuse the creation of his ..well, 'monster.' Actually the humanoid freak who Dr. Frankenstein brought back to life looked like a monster, but he was really a sweetheart. The REAL monster was the doctor who created him. People always seem to forget that. People call the big guy with the neck plugs "Frankenstein" but he really never had a real name.

The events that have led to now in the life of the character of Buffy do explain with total validity why she's done what she's done, but let's just look at a few examples of what she's done.

She stabbed her boyfriend Angel and sent him to hell.

She nearly drove Riley mad playing with his mind and his emotions, which eventually drove him into the arms of a vampire prostitute.

She led Spike on, used him for her own selfish sexual desires, and then dropped him like a rock when he fell in love with her. It just got too creepy and she couldn't hang. This led him to go get his soul to try and become what he thought she might love, and now look at him. He's gettin' the crap beat out of him every episode now. Does he deserve it? Maybe. Spike's been a monster a lot over the years too.

We understand WHY all this has happened, but when guys talk with their buddies about the girls that have wronged them, they usually describe their girls as monsters. And I just don't see how Buffy's any different.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I see your side but it does not invalidate my opinion. -- HonorH, 23:58:36 01/03/03 Fri

Having a few logical problems here:

She stabbed her boyfriend Angel and sent him to hell.

I don't suppose she gets off the hook on account of it being the only way to save the world?

She nearly drove Riley mad playing with his mind and his emotions, which eventually drove him into the arms of a vampire prostitute.

First of all, what happened between Buffy and Riley was *not* all her fault. She didn't play with his mind or emotions; she was very fond of him, cared about him, perhaps even thought she loved him. She just didn't love him in the way he needed to be loved, which is not her fault. He wanted to take care of her; she couldn't be taken care of because she's Buffy. At any point, he could've spoken to her, asked her point-blank if she loved him. He could've broken up with her. Instead of dealing with his heart and emotions in a mature way, he went to vampire trulls. She no more "drove" him to it than any woman "drives" her man into the arms of another woman. He went there himself.

She led Spike on, used him for her own selfish sexual desires, and then dropped him like a rock when he fell in love with her.

First, Spike was already in love with her. She knew that going in. Yes, she did use him. She admitted that--several times, in fact. She felt bad about it, and broke it off because of that. She did a bad thing, and then she did what she could to make it right. This is what she's continuing to do. Since her catharsis with Holden, she's treated him well. When she saw how agonized he was over what he was doing, she refused to stake him, agreed to help him, and has communicated honestly and openly with him. I ask you point-blank: where's the monstrosity in Buffy as she is?

We understand WHY all this has happened, but when guys talk with their buddies about the girls that have wronged them, they usually describe their girls as monsters. And I just don't see how Buffy's any different.

And this proves what? That guys who feel their girls done them wrong have a tendency to exaggerate?

Okay, let's take this from a slightly less irritated-HonorH angle: say a girl, any girl, does a guy wrong. Cheats on him or something. They break up, the guy bad-mouths her, and things go downhill for a bit. Later, though, she goes to him, admits what she did wrong, apologizes sincerely, and wants to make pax. She says she knows they can't get back together after what she did, but she wants to get along with him because she genuinely respects him. She's a changed woman.

I'd say that after that, if the guy went on bad-mouthing her without bothering to notice that she'd changed, he'd be the "monster". Also, that scenario is ignoring the fact that Buffy and Spike's relationship wasn't just bad from her end of things. He was bad for her, period. They've both changed, though; they're not being monsters to each other any more, and they seem to be on the road to reconciliation and respect.

I say, if they can let it go, so can we.

[> [> Please tell me this is a joke. -- HonorH, 16:20:08 01/03/03 Fri

If it isn't, sorry to say it, Zach, but your mind ain't so hot today.

[> [> OK, I'm getting geared up now. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 17:51:11 01/03/03 Fri

I'll do this in a paragraph by paragraph reply:

#1: OK, this depends on the definition of monster. To some, this means a horrifying, non-human creature. To others, it means any horrifying creature, human or not. There is also another definition whereby a monster is a supernatural, inhuman creature, regardless of whether they are horrifying or not. This last definition uses monster as a morally and emotionally neutral term, though over many years fear of the supernatural has given the word "monster" a negative light. Also, I think the word "whiny" is far overrused, I have never found any of the characters to be whiny for more than three or four episodes across the series.

#2: About how she treats Dawn: she is over protective. But then, Joyce was sometimes over protective of Buffy, yet she is not called a monster. Besides, Dawn does seem to have the Summers instinct for getting herself into dangerous situations, so the over protectiveness is somewhat warranted. As for stringing along Xander, that was for one episode, and the whole point was that Buffy was acting abnormally.

#3: You're assuming that Buffy loves Spike here. I tend to think otherwise, and the writers seem to agree. As for "what she put Spike through", I assume you're talking about Season Six. Yeah, she did a lot of horrible things during that time, mainly directed at Spike. But, like "When She Was Bad", this was presented as a temporary state that Buffy had to work her way through (albeit it was a much longer state than previously). And, given that every single cast member did horrible things during the course of Season Six, I find it odd that you single out Buffy.

#4: Their situations aren't the same. Anya was a demon, while Willow was human. A point made clear in the Buffyverse is that killing human beings is deeply immoral. Even in self-defense or defense of others, it's to be avoided like the plague. Sparing Anya after the massacre of frat boys would be a double standard, since slaying murderous demons is the point of the job Buffy's upheld for the past seven years. Granted, we, as the omniscient audience, know that Anya was suffering from guilt and wanted to turn things around, but she never showed that side to Buffy. What Buffy got to see was a man killed by the demon Anya created, she got to hear Willow recount Anya saying "they deserved it", and she even allowed Xander to reach Anya first, to talk some sense into her, but Anya was acting exactly as if she didn't care even a tiny bit about the deaths she had caused (she may have cared deeply in her heart, but she hid that secret deep). After all this, Anya comes off as a murderous demon who feels no remorse. Buffy was taking a great leap of faith by leaving Anya un-molested over the course of the summer, despite knowing that, as a vengeance demon, killing and maiming was part of her job description. She waited until Anya did something so evil that action had to be taken. If killing a killer demon, who shows no signs of repenting, is wrong, than you are getting a totally different vibe off the show.

#5: Um, most of her life.

#6: Without more information, I can't be really clear what you're getting at here.

[> [> On second thought, I'm on board. -- HonorH (putting on a Buffy Basher hat), 18:11:06 01/03/03 Fri

Buffy's a total selfish bitch. I mean, she should just forget about trying to have a life and just be a slaying machine. Who's she to try and decide what she should slay and what she shouldn't? If it doesn't breathe or looks funny, I say it's either dust or in pieces. Angel and Spike should've gone long ago, but she was just too stupid to see it.

Speaking of which, what's she doing with Spike? Can't she see what a saint he is? He's only wanted her happiness, ever. He's really not a bad guy. Why doesn't she admit she loves him and marry him? Honestly, he's a far better man than she.

And her friends? She doesn't appreciate their contributions. Sure, she saves their asses on a regular basis, but that's only because she'd be heartbroken if they died. Just thinking of herself, yet again.

And why does she even have friends in the first place? See above re: being a slaying machine. She should've just sent them home like good little boys and girls and done her job.

As for Dawn, that's the worst. Why didn't she let Dawn die in "The Gift"? I mean, sure, "Greater love hath no one" yada, yada, yada, but Buffy's life is way more important than Dawn's. Who cares if she loved her? Buffy should've given Little Sis the heave-ho herself.

For that matter, Buffy's so selfish she risks her life night after night for totally useless people. What she should do is decide who's worth saving and who's not and only save the really good people. Otherwise, she should protect her own life. After all, she is the Slayer; they don't grow on trees. Holy Hera, doesn't the girl ever think of anyone but herself?

[> [> [> ROFLMAO, HonorH! :o) -- Rob, 09:02:34 01/04/03 Sat


[> [> [> Heh - sarcasm is our greatest weapon against trolling ;) -- slain, 09:20:39 01/04/03 Sat


[> [> [> [> It was most definitely not my intent to troll. I answered the question. -- ZachsMind, 10:40:38 01/04/03 Sat


[> [> [> [> [> Trolling? -- LittleBit, 12:31:22 01/04/03 Sat

Perhaps I have completely misunderstood the nature of trolling, but I don't consider someone who has been an active member of this board, with some very interesting posts, to be a troll because he happens to espress an opinion that is not popular with the board.

ZachsMind expressed his opinion regarding what makes a monster, and yes, in the original post humans and main characters doing villainous things were specifically excluded so perhaps this was not the thread for this discussion, but to call it trolling goes a bit too far.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Thank you. -- ZachsMind, 21:06:24 01/04/03 Sat


[> [> [> [> [> Re: It was most definitely not my intent to troll. I answered the question. -- slain, 13:15:02 01/04/03 Sat

Well, you did divert the topic into an area which I expect you knew would get an angry reaction from some posters who are wont to defend characters against 'bashing'. However I conceed that nothing you said could really be considered trolling, so think of what I wrote as an ill-thought out comment which I'll apologise for.

[> [> [> [> [> [> To be honest, no. -- ZachsMind, 21:04:57 01/04/03 Sat

I don't recall seeing the part where humans were ruled out. I must have skimmed the message. I recall scanning it up and down and NOT seeing Buffy, and I was like, "waitatick where is she?" Some of the best monsters in history AND fiction have been normal human beings with sick, twisted minds. People who took a road less travelled in their life experiences but forgot that left turn at Albequerque.

Saying you can't include humans in the monster category is like asking, "what's your favorite music but don't mention anything heavy metal," or "what's your favorite actor on the show, but don't include women in your answer." It's prejudicial.

I could argue just as easily that the original post was inciteful, for being so exclusive. I expressed my opinion. Others' reactions to my opinion are beyond my control and I will not accept responsibility for them.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> A non-human who does evil is a monster; a human who does evil is a villain. -- Finn Mac Cool, 22:02:28 01/04/03 Sat

Though the two words seem interchangeable in the case of vampires and creatures like them, who are non-human but look and act very human most of the time.

Also, you'll note I was only doing Season Seven monsters, and Buffy really hasn't done anything this season to be worthy of "villainous" or "monstrous", unless you count actions done in "Him", which were out of her control due to the jacket spell.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> I accept that, then -- slain, 09:08:32 01/05/03 Sun

Objection: If an original post has the capacity to be incite, then a reply to such possible incitefulness has a capacity to incite, according to the rules of divine providence; therefore any reponsibilty for being inciteful rests on the capicity of the writer to use logic to confuse and muddy the argument until the original disagreement is forgotten? Thomas Aquinas, you have taught me well.

Anyway... I forget that you're new to the board (not that I've been here since the stone age, but anyway) - so I suppose we have to look at things differently. But your reaction to my criticism stands you in better stead, at least for me, than your original post did. So good show, there.

As for the monster thing, the term can refer to literal (fangs etc) monsters as well as to human monsters who are monstrous 'inside'; humans, in other words, though Finn did mean literal monsters. But of course on BtVS we have characters like Spike or Angel who are literal monsters, but who we wouldn't normally consider to be 'monsters' so much as 'characters'. However the issue for me isn't whether or not humans can be called monsters, because clearly they can. Even the most famous literal monsters (Frankenstein's monster, Dracula, the Mummy, the Werewolf, Jekyl and Hyde) are in some way human.

[> [> [> [> I didn't consider ZachsMind to be trolling. -- HonorH, 17:20:32 01/04/03 Sat

I did, however, consider him to be engaging in character bashing. That tends to bring out my sarcasm (no matter what character is being bashed, btw). See above for my serious response.

[> [> [> [> [> Character bashing? I'm talking about the Monster Inside. -- ZachsMind, 13:15:32 01/05/03 Sun

Recently I've been revisiting the amazing folk/blues/rock artistry of a local Dallas musician named Rick Yost. He has a song called "Monster Inside" which I highly recommend to any fan of Buffy. I've often believed it to be the unofficial anthem of Oz. However, recently it could also describe to a lesser extent the battle waging within Buffy herself.

"I'll soon become the beast
That hides inside of me
Its had a taste of blood
And it must never be free.."


Buffy's power stems from evil. She knows this. We've known this since at least "Restless" and "Before Dawn." She's tried to rise above it. Dracula tried to tell her this.

BUFFY: What are you-
DRACULA: All those years fighting us. Your power so near to our own... (Cuts his arm with a fingernail till blood wells up) ...and you've never once wanted to know what it is that we fight for? (Holds his arm out to Buffy) Never even a taste?
BUFFY: (looks conflicted) If I drink that-
DRACULA: I have not drunk enough for you to change. You must be near death to become one of us. And that comes only when you plead for it.
BUFFY: (staring at his wrist) I'm not hungry.
DRACULA: No. Your craving goes deeper than that.
Buffy stares at him.
DRACULA: (whispering) You think you know ... what you are ... what's to come. You haven't even begun.
Buffy looks at his arm, at his face. Takes his hand in both of hers and puts her mouth on the bloody wrist.
DRACULA: Find it. The darkness. Find your true nature.
Buffy's eyes are wide.
A very quick series of shots flashing by. Most are shots of Buffy fighting, but a few are shots of the First Slayer from episode "Restless." There's also a shot of a vein with blood corpuscles rushing through it.
Buffy lifts her head.
BUFFY: (softly) Wow.
She suddenly shoves out her hand and pushes Dracula away. He lands on the table and slides across it on his back.
BUFFY: (normal voice) That was gross.
She walks forward as Dracula gets to his feet.
DRACULA: You are resisting.
BUFFY: Looks like.
DRACULA: Come here. Come to me. (holds out hand)
BUFFY: You know, I really think the thrall has gone out of our relationship. But I want to thank you for opening up my eyes a little.
DRACULA: What is this?
BUFFY: My true nature. You want a taste?


Buffy IS a monster. She HAS to be. The priests who made the First Slayer believed it the only way to combat the monsters that threatened humanity: fight fire with fire. Fight monsters with monsters. It was a desperate act which created the Slayer line, much as it was a desperate act which created Dawn The Key.

I wasn't bashing Buffy. Joss Whedon devised Buffy as a monster from day one. He wanted a character that could stand in and pinch hit for all those helpless blondes in the horror movies who would walk down a dark alley or abandoned hallway and be attacked by evil. How better to fight monsters than to take an innocent little girl and turn her into one? NOT calling Buffy a monster is being untrue to her character and to Whedon's message.

I was criticizing Buffy's actions. It's something Buffy has been known to do to herself. It's why she has a superiority/inferiority complex. She knows that what makes her a Slayer is potentially evil. She tries to take responsibility for that. Is she deserving of this power and if so, what does that mean? The power's great and has saved the world, but it also stems from evil. If she does deserve it does that make her a hero or a monster? Does it make her both simultaneously?

Buffy's not a villian. Villians commit selfish acts of evil knowing they are evil and selfish. She does walk a fine line there however. Some villians commit selfish evil believing it to be for the purposes of a greater good. The line that Buffy cannot cross is in using her strength to kill a normal human. She knows as a vampire slayer she's got carte blanche on vampires and demons - even witches that go over the edge, but when it comes to people like Warren, she TRIES to leave that up to the police and the courts. As Willow pointed out though, sometimes those avenues of justice fail.

Even so, many choices Buffy has made over the years, including some this season, have been monstrous. Though she is trying to overcome them. She knows she's done Spike wrong in the past and she's trying to make up for it. The scene where she held the blood bag for a delirious Spike was quite a message. The emotionless look on her face. The searching eyes. The feeling of loss and uncertainty. Again from Mr. Yost:

"Beware of the Monster
Dont look into his eyes
Beware of the Monster
The Monster from inside
It feeds on the truth
And it will kill all your lies
You can't escape the beast
It will haunt you til you die."


She knows Spike is a monster, but he's also done some good. Is helping him now a monstrous or a noble act? She's gotten to the point where she almost can't tell the difference. She does love him, but to express that love, to give into it, she fears that would put her over the edge. Make her a monster too. However, she already is one. It's the beast inside her - the evil from where her Slayer powers stem. She's the living embodiment of fighting fire with fire. She has a piece of that evil that the first Slayer received from those priests eons ago. They took the power of their enemy, magically filtered it and channelled it into the First Slayer. Buffy's a recipient of that age-old prophecy but it's not a blessing. The Slayer line is a cursed line.

Her staking Anya was another monstrous act. We know the events leading up to it and we understand why, but she didn't stake Willow. Willow was hunting out of vengeance. Anya was a vengeance demon. Buffy's actions between the two ladies were inconsistent, yet their crimes against humanity were almost identical. Killing men who had wronged women. Did Anya and Willow not deserve identical punishments? (well okay it can be argued whether either of them deserve punishment at all, I mean both Warren and those college frat brats were meanies)

Buffy remained friends with Willow but treated Anya as an enemy when what Anya really needed was a friend. When Buffy put a hole through Anya's chest, who was the monster there?

Character bashing? I don't bash Whedon's creations but I do argue the moral ambiguities of all the characters. It's one of the many things that makes this series so fascinating. Buffy is the lead role in the series. The series is named after her. However, she doesn't run around wearing the white hat. She's not 100% good and she knows this. Sometimes she falls on the wrong side of what's just and right. She does the best she can, but ultimately she's just a simple human mind given great power. With great power comes great responsibility. A tip of the hat to Uncle Ben.

This argument in this thread has gone quite silly. We're getting lost in minutiae and semantics. The truth is, if you caught Buffy at a particularly low moment, she'd agree with me. She has been, sometimes is, and can become a greater monster. She's got within her the eternal struggle that to one degree or another every living being fights. The struggle between the angel & demon within. The monster inside.

I'm not bashing Buffy when I say this. I'm reinforcing what she is. I'm acknowledging and accepting the message that Whedon is expressing. Sometimes the only way to take back the night is to become it.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Understood. However-- -- HonorH, 17:47:06 01/05/03 Sun

I don't agree. To me, being a monster means more than just having monstrous moments. Given Buffy's entire life, I certainly wouldn't describe her as a monster. Furthermore, you'll have to excuse me for saying this, but to the uneducated eye, your original post certainly *looks* like a rather fine vintage of Buffy-bashing. You took her worst moments, many of which she learned from and grew beyond, and created an unjust character portrait from them.

One last thing regarding Anya--yes, Buffy did stick a sword through her chest. But she knew that wouldn't do any permanent harm. She *had* to know that, given what she saw with Halfrek a year ago. Did it occur to you that perhaps she was giving Anya one last chance to turn from her demon ways, stop fighting, and rejoin the good guys?

[> [> [> [> [> [> The word 'monster' seems to be a main source of agitation in this debate. -- Finn Mac Cool, 17:49:39 01/05/03 Sun

OK, you're definitely using a definition of monster I'm not familiar with. You seem to use it in different scenarios to define either a) someone with powers honed to fighting abilities, or b) any person who happens to be behaving immorally at the moment. I have problems with both of these: first, in definition "a", using monster seems like the wrong words since from the beginning Buffy has both been human and fought for the side of good, which really eliminates most standard definitions of monster. As for definition "b", I do concede that a "human monster" is a term that is often used, but usually in relation to serial killers or terrorists and the like. There's a difference between saying that someone did something monstrous (and I don't deny there have been a few occasions when this has been true for Buffy) and saying they are a monster. Just as there's a difference between saying someone did something evil and saying that the person is evil. Being monstrous is something to do and is usually an isolated action, being a monster is a state of being. I think you will find it hard to argue that Buffy's nature is to do the wrong thing and behave monstrously, thus she falls out of being in the category of a monster. For every bad thing she's done, there are at least a hundred good things.

Now, you may be trying to classify Buffy as a monster because of all the talk about "a Slayer's power is rooted in darkness", and the "Fray" flashback I've been hearing so much about. But here's the thing: there's a difference between being rooted in darkness and rooted in evil. Buffy's power may originally have come from a demonic force, but the demon's evil intentions are no longer part of the package. There has never been any indication given that having the Slayer powers has a metaphysical influence on the Slayer; Buffy has total free will when it comes with what to do with it. If Buffy's powers came from a force for good rather than a force for evil, it wouldn't make a difference, because Buffy merely gets the POWER of the original, demonic force. And power is morally neutral by nature; it all matters in how Buffy uses it.

Now, rooted in darkness means two things, and neither means the same thing as rooted in evil.

The first is that, since Buffy's powers originally belonged to a demonic force, that means that there might not be a force for good backing her up and giving her the strength she uses.

The second bears some harking back to Star Wars, which Whedon has claimed to have influenced him in several ways. There, the Force, as used by the Jedi, is dispassionate, focused on doing the right thing at the expense of human experience. Meanwhile, the dark side of the Force is fuelled by emotions such as hate, anger, love, passion. Buffy's greatest strength has arisen from moments of passion and emotion, thus it is rooted in the dark side. Though, I don't Whedon holding the same view as Lucas did, that the dark side is evil, since BtVS has often praised passion and emotion, so just because something's rooted in the dark side of the Force in the Buffyverse doesn't mean it's evil.

Now, three more things:

1) "Did Anya and Willow not deserve identical punishments?" No, at least, not from the information given to Buffy. I again go back up to what I said above about monsters and being monstrous: for humans, like Willow, evil is something you do, but they can come back for it. For demons, evil is a state of being. We know that Anya's humanity survived the re-demonization process, but Anya kept that a secret from all. Because of this difference between human evil and demon evil, Buffy has a responsibility as the Slayer to not kill humans because they are capable of redeeming themselves, but demons aren't, unless they're vengeance demons, apparently, but Buffy couldn't know that.

2) You seem to be assuming that Buffy loves Spike, which is a rather dangerous thing to assume, given the messages given off in the show and said by writers to the audience.

3) This goes back to the starting thing about how you use the word monster. I don't deny that Buffy isn't perfect, that she sometimes does the wrong thing, and that she has the potential to become a monster inside her. All that is true about Buffy - and everyone to ever live, whether in the Buffyverse or in the Realverse. I agree that her enormous power gives a lot of temptation to use it for selfish and evil purposes, and would make her more dangerous if she ever did become a monster, but so far that hasn't happened, and she's been through a lot of temptation, so I think it's fair to say that Buffy's moral character counterbalances the greater temptation put on her. If you call her a monster because she has the potential to be a monster, then I must ask if you go walking down the street and think "MONSTER!" whenever you see someone.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Great Post -- Dan The Man, 19:38:32 01/05/03 Sun


[> [> [> [> [> [> [> One of your main assumptions is false in the Buffyverse... -- KdS, 05:20:42 01/06/03 Mon

If Buffy's powers came from a force for good rather than a force for evil, it wouldn't make a difference, because Buffy merely gets the POWER of the original, demonic force. And power is morally neutral by nature; it all matters in how Buffy uses it.

Sorry, that's obviously wrong in the Buffyverse. The key factor that sent Willow down her dark path was her materialist belief that power is morally neutral by nature. Dead wrong, we saw evidence all through S6 that black magic in the Buffyverse has a mystical morally corrosive element on the caster beyond mundane considerations of cause and effect.

There have been several indications that Slayer powers aren't just morally neutral superpowers - that they come with an added predatory drive that goes beyond normal human aggression. Buffy herself admitted in early S5 that her "patrolling" had turned into "hunting". I got a strong impression from S3 that we were intended to believe that Faith's relish for violence wasn't just from her personal hang-ups, but something inherent to Slayerness that Buffy shared.


This doesn't mean that Buffy doesn't have free will. It does mean that she has more inner darkness to deal with and control than the average human being, and that isn't intended to "bash" her, but if anything to give her due credit for the way she's resisted it.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Hmmm. -- Sophist, 09:39:40 01/06/03 Mon

I don't think the issue is quite so clear as you suggest. I do agree that there are times when the show suggests that "all power corrupts". But I also think that there are at least as many other occasions when it appears that power can be and is a force for good when used with proper intent. In fact, I think the most important lesson on the show -- one which would be diminished if your point were as strong as you suggest -- is that human weakness is the source of our woes.

The example of Willow demonstrates both aspects. I agree with you that we were supposed to draw a lesson about the corrupting effect of magic in S6. However, Willow's spells in S1-5 were overwhelmingly successful and without consequences (as were Giles'). From this, I think it fair to conclude that the lesson from those seasons was that magic was useful, indeed essential, in the struggle for good.

Even if there were an exception for magic, I wouldn't necessarily agree that Buffy's slayer power is inherently corrupting. If it were, we'd no doubt have many past examples of slayers turned to the dark side, yet these have never been mentioned. In the broadest sense, the temptation to use power for ill may always exist, but that doesn't make the power itself corrupting.

Nor did I see Faith as an example of corruption caused by her slayer power. I thought the lesson there was that her human weaknesses led to her downfall. That, to me, is a much more compelling story than one involving corruption by a mystical super power. A story of human weakness is universal; corruption by a mystical force imparts no lesson to anyone.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> She was corrupted by her Slayer power. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 09:51:11 01/06/03 Mon

In the sense that it was what made the dark side too tempting for her to resist. But I do agree her corruption wasn't a metaphysical thing with the possible exception of added predatory instincts. If she had been given any sort of great power, I think she still would have been corrupted.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> No, she was corrupted by her lonliness -- Sara, 18:12:19 01/06/03 Mon

Faith could have been trouble with or without slayer power. I think it was very clear she was looking for a place to belong, and when she felt rejected by Buffy and her group, found herself a place on the other side. It wasn't the slayer thing, it was the "where do I fit in?" thing. And as a regular non-slayer, if she didn't find a place with nice people she would look for one with very unnice people. She may very well be the most vulnerable character they've developed on the show.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> On the magic issue -- KdS, 05:35:39 01/07/03 Tue

Note that my argument here is significantly inspired by Slain's essay The Demon Vs. the Rose which was written mid-S6 but fits in sufficiently well with subsequent developments to suggest that his interpretation is fairly close to ME's intent.

Willow's spells up to Tough Love and Giles's and Tara's in general seemed to be of the form Masq refers to as invocations or supplications - channelling the power of some enchanted object or benevolent entity. The black magic we see in Tough Love and coming from Rack in Wrecked seems to come from a much rawer and significantly evil source which is more easily bent to the will of the caster but carries an effect of mystical corruption. It's that type which I see as not morally neutral. As I see it, this is the best way not to retcon S6 completely, but to tone down its more obnoxious and puritanical implications about Things (Wo)Man Was Not Meant To Know. In particular, Willow's behaviour in Two to Go after killing Rack but before draining Giles seems to me to imply some degree of possession.

(Difficult to explain here because I'm not an expert on mystical traditions, but the Exorcist model of possession as black-and-white spiritual rape is a lot cruder than earlier traditions. There's a stress in a lot of Christian thought on demonic possession that there is always a degree of invitation and two-way mingling of personality. It isn't a black and white dichotomy between "Oh, Willow was always that way, now she's letting it out" and "Poor Willow, taken over by black magic". It doesn't seem to me that I'm letting Willow off the hook because she made the choice to kill Rack and knew to a considerable degree what the power she drained from him might do to her - like the guy who knows that he gets violent when he drinks but still goes out and gets tanked up).

The problem at the moment seems to be that Willow opened a door that she has trouble closing - similarly to a souled vampire vamping out, when she's under threat or stress she reaches straight for the black magic to protect herself, and like a souled vampire she'll carry on being a danger to herself and others for as long as she thinks she can just split off what she's picked up. Choosing my words carefully here - I don't think Willow's inner demon is simply an expression of human stuff that was always there - she invited it in and now it's part of her.

So human weakness and mystical corruption are not dichotomous choices - rather, in the Buffyverse, the use of dark power can mystically corrupt you but you have to be open to that corruption first.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: On the magic issue -- Sophist, 09:18:03 01/07/03 Tue

I see the distinction you're making, and I agree with it up to a point. I particularly like your suggestion of dating the corrupting influence of magic on Willow to Tough Love. I think that does solve many of the retcon problems raised by S6.

The real problem I have is not with your argument, per se, but with ME's treatment of magic prior to S6 (or at least Tough Love). I felt they never gave us a hint that magic came in 2 flavors, "good" and "bad". It seemed to be more a question of intent or purpose. Given the number of times Willow's magic use was essential to the plot, and her high percentage of success with spells, many of the statements about magic in S6 made little sense.

Malandanza has suggested that all magic carries an inherent risk; the more you use it, the greater the risk. I think this makes sense also, but, again, never saw it suggested until S6.

I'm rambling a bit here, so I'll just say that I'm very malleable on this subject and happy to accept your take on it in order to avoid most of the retcon problems.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I always assumed the predatory thing was because. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 09:46:15 01/06/03 Mon

Being the Slayer forced them to use the predatory instincts latent in humanity that very few ever have reason to let loose. However, I do agree I had forgot to consider Slayer instincts as part of the package. Even so, being predatory isn't the same as being evil when your only prey consists of monsters. I think the predatory instinct is another temptation to the dark side, but not necessarily rooted in being evil, as predatory instincts can be used for good.

As for Willow and Dark Magic in Season Six, well, that's highly confusing. There are many schools of thought. Some say that the dark magic affected Willow's mind and brought her more towards the dark side. Others say it was merely the temptation of power. Others say that magic gave Willow full expression of her emotions, including her mostly repressed dark side. I'm not sure which one I fall into, personally.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> The Moral Nature of Everything in the Buffyverse -- slain, 13:25:12 01/06/03 Mon

I definitely agree that power in the Buffyverse is not morally neutral - which doesn't mean that humans are necessarily absolved from blame at being corrupted by an evil power, but rather that they can't be blamed in the same way that someone corrupted by non-supernatural power would be*. To my mind it oversimplfies the issue to say that power itself is morally neutral, and it's human weakness which is the flaw; that's clearly the case in a 'real world', but BtVS doesn't exist there.

It's true the message of the show is often that humanity corrupts itself (rather than any outside Devil-like influence), but equally it can't have main characters who are completely blamed for their actions under influence of a power. That's how it relates to Willow (and arguably also Ethan Rayne, though I doubt that was taken into consideration at the Initiative's 'Camp X-ray') specifically; while she blames herself completely, she was influenced by the power itself to a degree; that's why the First Evil/Cassie is so seductive, because what it says has truth to it.

But I don't think magic is quite a special case; I think clear parallels have been drawn between Buffy, Faith and Willow's power, and the power of vampires; not just in 'Buffy vs. Dracula', FFL and parts of Season 6. The idea that power comes from inner darkness which, while not necessarily evil, is not morally neutral, has been around since the beginning. Buffy and Faith's power comes from a specific source, the First Slayer (or whatever that first drew her power from), and while the First Slayer isn't either evil or good, that doesn't mean it lacks a moral nature.

The First Slayer's reminds me of a classical goddess; capable of imbuing her followers with power, often by divine genetics; but still behaving much like a human, with the same foibles. Which sounds like it goes round in circles; Buffy, Faith and other Slayers are humans with human weakness, and so is the source of their power. But I think the crucial point is that the First Slayer is not them; it's an external force which is violent, primal and not bound by modern morality.

I don't see it as a case of Buffy or Faith being corrupted by this power, however; they have been influenced by it, but I don't think the Slayer power is itself corrupting. It's capable of stripping away some of the modern distinctions Buffy makes between slayable and unslayable demons (though Faith never made any distinctions). The reason why Faith went bad was herself; she didn't immerse herself in the Slayer power, after all, she turned away from it, involving herself with the Mayor. She used her Slayer power in much the same way that Angel uses his vampire power; for something it wasn't intended for.

That's not to say that Slayer power is good, and that she used it for evil; I think Slayer power doesn't conform to the idea of 'good' in the sense Buffy, and we, understand it. We'd consider killing, say, Clem to be an evil act, but the First Slayer (or Faith, for that matter) wouldn't consider it so, I think.

I think when it's concerned with main characters, the idea that power is not morally neutral is more explicit, because it allows the show to explore areas it wouldn't normally be able to, without making it a show about a load of crazed mass murderers. We can see that clearly in Season 7, looking at how Spike has made the transition from someone not entirely sympathetic, to someone who we're expected to be sympathetic to, if not exactly trusting of. In the past his motives haven't been linked to any force outside of himself; but, in a literal way, he's now connected to an evil which has him in its control. Look at Webster in CwDP, too, the first morally absolved vampire without a soul; that is, we can like him and excuse him being evil because he's in the thrall of his own power, a power which is evil. It's not his fault that he's evil; he's a vampire.

But that's only main or sympathetic characters; when the show it making a specific allegorical point about humanity, when it's doing the metanarrative thing, character definitely aren't 'let off the hook'. Warren is the supreme example of this; it really is his fault that he's evil. The same can be said of any villain in the show, Angel being the notable exception (unless, that is, we think of Angelus and Angel as being effectively separate entities). Even Drusilla, who we've seen mentally tortured before she was turned, isn't sympathetic exactly; that is, as a vampire we aren't encouraged to feel that she's in the grip of forces outside of her control; rather she's evil because she enjoys being evil.

When a character is intended to be sympathetic, the idea that they've been influenced by their own power is more explicit. But when they're not, the power itself is a side issue compared to the point which is made about human weakness and the abuse of power; rather than power abusing the human.

[> [> Oh yes, totally evil...we should slay her now.....;) -- Rufus, 22:34:10 01/03/03 Fri

Just one thing I have a list...you know of a few characters I'd like to do a practice run on first before I take out any slayers.....:):):)

[> [> Was I the only one who found this hilarous? -- shadowkat, 18:38:00 01/04/03 Sat

I know Zachsmind was playing Devil's Advocate but even if it was unintentional, this is the best sardonic/satirical takeoff of the Buffy Bashing posts that I've seen. Go back to the archives - pick the Beneath You buffy rants and compare what Zach says to those. LOL! The fact that there is an element of truth in it makes it even more hilarous. That's satire - you add a little truth to the mix. Zach managed to do a better Buffy as Monster analysis than the Buffy bashers have. Good job.

The wonderful thing about Btvs is every character on the show has a dark and a light side. They all have monsters inside and behave like ones at times. As do we all.

Xander, Willow, Spike (okay Spike is a monster but you know what I mean), Dawn, Giles, Anya, Angel....(well Anya and Angel are too...but whatever)

It's what makes the show fun. Buffy is guilty of being a monster but no more so than any other character on the show. Heck she admits it to Webs - "I behaved like a monster last year...the things I did...to my friends, you'd be shocked.." "I'm not here to judge you, I'm here to kill you." replies Webs.

Like Webs (whose my pick for favorite monster and one of my all time fav characters and where the heck have I seen that actor before? he seems oddly familar) I find it difficult to judge the Buffster too harshly since I'm not sure I could do much better in her place.

Xander and Riley on the other hand, now that's another story....:-)

Oh on the whole Spike issue? Watch the rest of this season before you make any judgements. Methinks that the writers are resolving that issue rather well. In fact in BY through NLM - we saw Spike and Buffy come to grips with the negative repercussions of their relationship and what that relationship involved. (A relationship that brought out the worst and best in both of them and brought up all sorts of controversial issues). It's a fascinating journey - if you are paying attention. And it's far from over. Actually the S/B story arc is turning out to be my favorite television character story arc of all time. It's complex, ambiguous, suspensful, and impossible to predict and filled with difficult and complex ethical and emotional issues. The twists and turns in their story alone is keeping me riveted and very happy.

[> [> [> No, seriously: is Buffy Summers a (potential) monster? -- cjl, 06:26:14 01/05/03 Sun

Personally, I stil think Buffy is the heroine of this piece, but ZM rightly points out that certain aspects of Buffy's personality make her a prime candidate for monsterhood: a slight push in a certain direction at a certain time, and she could be the Biggest Bad we've ever seen. Her superiority/inferiority complex, her "I am the Law" pronouncements, her Declaration of War against a defining aspect of the human condition (i.e., Evil), indicates a growing sense of hubris that could easily lead her down the garden path to true monsterhood.

As for the definitions of "villain" and "monster": when it comes to BtVS, those can be verrrry hazy. Was Dark Willow a villain or a monster? Who out there thinks Warren Mears was a villain? Who thinks he was a monster? There are a number of definitions of "monster" in Webster's; let's check it out:

Monster (n.): (1a) an animal or plant of abnormal form or structure; (1b) one who deviates from the normal or acceptable behavior or character; (2) a threatening force; (3a) an animal of strange or terrifying shape; (3b) one unusually large of its kind; (4) something monstrous, esp. a person of unnatural or extremem ugliness, deformity, wickedness or cruelty.

Creatures like the Gnarl fit under 3a/b, as do most of the standard oogly booglies of BtVS. But definitions 1b, 2, and 4 are certainly Warren Mears territory--behavioral deviancy to such an extreme that he's barely recognizable as human. And for all you born-again literalists out there, let's remember Joss is King of Metaphor--the monsters in this series are representations of humanity, after all...

So--is Buffy Summers our Monster of the Year?

No, of course not, silly.

But she could be.

[> [> [> [> One Big Reason Not -- Finn Mac Cool, 07:34:14 01/05/03 Sun

A theme of BtVS since the very beginning has been female power. While other themes (like "high school is hell" or the "old boyfriend back with a sadistic streak") have been disposed as the characters have grown beyond them, Joss seems to be constant in the theme of Buffy being a heroic, empowered female. Thus I would be very surprised and displeased if he prsented Buffy being corrupted by her own power and becoming a villain, because a phobia of women getting too much power and using it unwisely is a great chauvanistic curse in our society, and it would be quite unpleasant if Buffy, who will always be partly that girl who turned around and kicked the monster's ass, confirmed these fears.

[> [> [> [> [> Speculation that MIGHT lead to S7 finale spoilage. Please exercise caution... -- ZachsMind, 13:55:01 01/05/03 Sun

This is more a prediction than a spoilage. However, based on the direction that this series has gone in season seven, and based on my observations of Whedon's writing style over the years and where I think he's going with all this, I hypothesize the following. This is also based on some spoilage I've picked up along the way, although the direction I'm going with this is speculation, if you don't wanna know anything past "Bring On The Night" please exercise caution in reading the following. Also understand though that I can be completely wrong and the following may not in any way actually take place.

Whedon's a lovable ass when it comes to surprises.

I do still believe Buffy has been and sometimes is a monster. Her powers stem from a monstrous source. Her actions have been uniquely human, and at times she's not been 100% idealic and heroic. She's human. She's gonna make mistakes. That's to be expected.

However, I think Joss Whedon's going to devise a plot line that will almost put Buffy over the edge and make her turn completely monster, though there will still be room for redemption. She'll be like Indiana Jones in the last scene of "The Last Crusade" where the Holy Grail is in his grasp but he's precariously near falling into a great chasm. Buffy will see the dark side of her character, and have great incentive to give into it, but at the last possible moment she'll let it go. She'll look at The First Evil and she'll tell it NO.

And as any red blooded American gentleman can tell ya: there's a lot of power in a woman's no. THERE's your female empowerment!

Buffy doesn't have to give into The Monster Inside for us to see it. Whedon's message will be expressed, without dismissing the female empowerment aspects of that message, which are VERY strong in his work with Buffy. It won't look like a chauvinistic statement about women and power. It's more a statement about humanity and power and how it CAN corrupt but only if we let it. I like to think women are better when it comes to power than men are.

However, he'll also need to show what happens IF that power is allowed to corrupt. He can't do this with Buffy. The audience would be in an uproar against it. Still, he does need to show the error of that corruption. He'll need to illustrate it somehow.

I know from spoilage that the last five episodes will most probably include our favorite Bad Girl. Faith returns for the latter part of the season. The First Evil can't turn Buffy to its side. However, Faith has already crossed that line that slayers cannot cross. Faith's taken the blood of an innocent human. She's seen the error of her ways thanks to Angel. Faith's attempted redemption. She's turned herself in to the police. She's accepted punishment for that crime and others. Still, sometimes you just can't fight fate.

If I'm right, and Buffy is a monster, that means, Faith is one too. I anticipate a showdown between the slayers in the season seven finale that is going to make all Buffy's previous battles combined pale in comparison. Because Faith is going to do what Buffy cannot. Faith's gonna look at The First Evil and where Buffy says no, Faith's gonna say yes. Then Buffy's gonna have to put Faith down but for good.

Set your VCRs. Nuke your popcorn. It's gonna be the best finale ever.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Good post - FUTURE casting spoiler only in the above, but not in my post. -- shadowkat, 14:51:53 01/05/03 Sun

And it's pretty well-known.

Here's the gist of Zach's post without the future casting spoiler:

"do still believe Buffy has been and sometimes is a monster. Her powers stem from a monstrous source. Her actions have been uniquely human, and at times she's not been 100% idealic and heroic. She's human. She's gonna make mistakes. That's to be expected.

However, I think Joss Whedon's going to devise a plot line that will almost put Buffy over the edge and make her turn completely monster, though there will still be room for redemption. She'll be like Indiana Jones in the last scene of "The Last Crusade" where the Holy Grail is in his grasp but he's precariously near falling into a great chasm. Buffy will see the dark side of her character, and have great incentive to give into it, but at the last possible moment she'll let it go. She'll look at The First Evil and she'll tell it NO.

And as any red blooded American gentleman can tell ya: there's a lot of power in a woman's no. THERE's your female empowerment!

Buffy doesn't have to give into The Monster Inside for us to see it. Whedon's message will be expressed, without dismissing the female empowerment aspects of that message, which are VERY strong in his work with Buffy. It won't look like a chauvinistic statement about women and power. It's more a statement about humanity and power and how it CAN corrupt but only if we let it. I like to think women are better when it comes to power than men are. "

This I agree with. I think, as I've said before, that Buffy has darkness in her, her power comes from a dark source - the same source as the monsters she fights. They hint at this several times in the series - with Faith in Bad Girls and later in Graduation Day. In Restless - in Buffy's dream sequence where she tells the First Slayer that she is not a killer that is NOT all she is. Then again with Dracula - who tempts her with his blood and she resists (very similar scene to the scene with Spike in Sleeper, which I think is intentional). Then again in Dead Things and Normal Again.
Buffy knows it's there. She fights against it. Always has.
As do we all! (Let's face it we all have a monster inside us, so why is it so amazing to see one in our heroine?)

But up until this year - Buffy's monster side has been represented by another character or shadow: Angel in Seasons 1-2, Faith in Seasons 3-4, Spike in Seasons 5-6.
Now finally Buffy is without that shadow self...she must face it in herself - it may be the first evil this round.
Because I think Spike is being taken out of that role.

I think in this respect - Buffy's journey this year may have some correlation to Frodo's in Lord of the Rings. Or
Dorothy's in Wizard of Oz, or any number of fantasy characters of myth and legend. It's not so much about right and wrong as it is power and fighting against the temptation to take it and use it to make the world better.
Gandalf and Gladerial say it best in Lord of the Rings - Fellowship of the Ring - when they state they'd take the ring with the best of intentions to turn the world into a better place and through that action alone, that arrogance, the ring would bend them to its will, and they would commit acts of great evil in the attempt to do good. Willow did that last year when she went after Warren then attempted to end the World's pain. You can argue she did it when she brought Buffy back to life. Often the most monsterous/villainous acts are committed with the best of intentions. What is that old saying? The road to hell is paved with the best of intentions? Look at our current political climate? Do any of those world leaders see themselves as doing something evil? No. They believe that it is for the greater good. Buffy's statement at the end of BoTN is in some respects an ironic and chilling one - one made with little sleep and pain and desperation. It is as chilling as her statement in Selfless when she goes to kill Anya.

Remember what Willow said last year when Buffy said she didn't know what a slayer is? "I get it now! It's not about the strength or the killing - it's about the power."


The same statement is echoed by the First in Lessons.

Just as Dracula echoes Tara's words from Restless in the first episode of Season 5. "You think you know what you are..where you're going...you've barely even begun."

The test regarding "power" is taking it and giving it up.
Letting it go. Not giving into the temptation to use it to make the world a better place - because who are you or we or I to judge what that is? It's the temptation Frodo fights every day he carries the ring of power. The temptation Willow fights every day she practices magic and it is the temptation Buffy must fight...when she says she does NOT have a license to kill. Just because she has "super-strength" and "agility" does not mean she can take want have or abuse people or things. But it is a hard temptation to fight. The suspense is partly whether she can suceed. And with the First Evil egging her on...

[> [> [> [> [> [> Oh God, I hope not Zach... -- KdS, 15:11:03 01/05/03 Sun

I'd like to see a certain person get some kind of redemption...

[> Holden Webster! Absolutely!!! -- Sara, who likes to play by the rules, 21:25:59 01/03/03 Fri

How cool is it that pure evil would make such a good psycho-analyst? Let's face it, he's even better than Lorraine Braco on The Sopranos. And he was so very, very happy - really made me want to go and find someone to bite my own little neck.

[> [> I'm with her. -- HonorH, 21:53:02 01/03/03 Fri

Loved Holden. Am writing up his last night alive currently. Hopefully, my muse won't abandon me, as they've been doing lately.

[> [> [> I'm with the ladies. Holden is (MotY) Monster of the Year thus far. -- cjl, 21:57:41 01/03/03 Fri

Too bad Buffy dusted him. I would have loved to see Holden and Spike have a snarkoff. They'd spend so much time trying to psych each other out, we'd need a 2-hour special...

[> [> [> [> Re: I'm with the ladies. Holden is (MotY) Monster of the Year thus far. (spoilers to 7.10 BotN) -- slain, 09:38:38 01/04/03 Sat

Holden is definitely up there with Spike, Angel, Dru and Harmony, as trully great vampires we've seen on the show. However I don't think of him as a monster so much as a character - literally, he is a monster, but only by an accident of (un)birth. The way he fits into the story makes him seem less monsterlike.

I think Gnarl is my favourite MotW-type thing, because he's more interesting in a psychological way, rather than in "ooh, look how many horns and fangs it's got!" way. I'm not sure about the Uber-Vamp as yet, as it seemed a little like a cop-out when the big bad was so far seeming interestingly non tangible. Buffy getting beat up by something, while not common, is not entirely new. However I have a feeling the Uber-Vamp will prove more important to the story, and might even be a misdirect (we're thinking the monsters in the story are back to being physical, but really they're not)

[> [> [> [> [> I'm torn three ways. . . -- Finn Mac Cool, 09:46:35 01/04/03 Sat

Gnarl was a seriously cool and downright creepy monster. Plus skin-eating is a definite plus.

Holden Webbster was charming, helpful, insightful, and still managed to be evil. Gotta love that.

Then there comes the First Evil. Granted, it has an unfair advantage since it's capable of being several different people/monsters. Though, it's hard to top the creepiness it gives off as Buffy or Warren. Plus it delivered the truly awesome last scene of "Lessons".

I'm torn between these three monsters, and they're loving it as my legs and arms are torn off my body from the strain. Such lovely blokes.

[> [> [> *Sigh* Poor Holden, only got to flap his gums, he didn't even get to try his teeth out....:):):):) -- Rufus, 22:31:39 01/03/03 Fri


[> [> Would agree. My favorite for two seasons running. -- shadowkat, 18:09:36 01/04/03 Sat

Actually I'd go so far to say Webs is my favorite monster for Seasons 5-7 so far. And for this year's Ats. Would like to see more of Webs. The most attractive monster that Buffy has staked since she sent Angel to hell.

And his psyche help on the Buffster helped clear up soo many questions.

[> [> [> Holden Holden he's so fine -- ponygirl, 10:43:48 01/06/03 Mon

The great thing about Holden, besides being pretty cute, was that he was the most well-adjusted character I can recall on either BtVS or Ats. We've had a lot of interesting villians, but most of them are so consumed with, well, evil. They let their passions and obsessions completely overwhelm them. They have weaknesses and petty concerns that undermine all their grand schemes. The good guys have their issues too, emotional problems, communication failures. They can repress their dark sides, and fail to see the shades of grey around them.

Holden on the other hand springs from grave fully engaged with the world. He's connected to a larger power, but not so preoccupied with the big picture that he doesn't stop to try and reconnect with an old acquaintance. He's not bitter about the past, he wants to look up and kill old friends but doesn't seem to have any elaborate revenge fantasies. He's not upset about the twists his life has taken, merely curious and eager to see what the future will bring. He makes no apologies for the whole evil thing, but at the same time isn't judgemental of Buffy's opposing position. Holden's able to connect emotionally with Buffy but understands that this connection won't prevent either of them from trying their hardest to kill the other. He isn't afraid to take advantage of Buffy's vulnerability, and he admits that as an evil being he enjoys her pain, but I strongly suspect that he was offering his honest opinion on her situation and if not trying to help, at least offering her understanding.

Give that vamp another few decades of unlife, an evil scheme or two, and I'd bet Holden would have been a force to be reckoned with.

[> [> Re: Holden Webster, with Gnarl a close 2nd -- pr10n, 13:08:30 01/06/03 Mon

Aside from his monstery goodness, Holden was a masterful vehicle for the ME writer-voice without the intrusion of the Espenson/Goddard boom-shadow. Imagine another show handling seasons of back-story and exposition with so much panache: "There's nothing wrong with you... everyone has issues. Grrrr!"

For sheer ugly-nasty, Gnarl wins a powerful 2nd place for eating poor Willow's tummy. Irk! Great, now I have to do a spell by myself.

Bring on the Night revisited (spoilers, of course) -- Darby, 22:49:09 01/03/03 Fri

Some more thoughts, from beginning to end...

The first dream visit - Xander not only isn't sweeping right, he's not even touching the floor.

Joyce: "You can't win against this thing...if you don't rest." I tend to remember Joyce just saying they couldn't win, but this puts a bit of a spin on it... But is it really rest as in sleep? Almost immediately she's telling Buffy to wake up.

Drusilla - she's a bit off. Is this to give us a clue that Giles, although a bit pessimistic, is too Gilesish to be the First? And is she wearing an outfit we've ever seen the real Dru in? I found the bare arms somewhat wrong.

The seal is...resealed. What's the point? What else might be in there? And why are there four shovels there? And why is Wood also there with a shovel - after two months of burying Jonathan, was he going back to cover the seal?

The locator spell - it did find the First in and beyond the whole map. There may be evil in Willow, but the magic whatever jumped into her from the map. But she still felt it inside after - of course, evil is in everybody. And after the trauma, wouldn't she go to Giles about it later? Maybe that's a scene that happened that we weren't shown...

In Giles' exposition scene, it's Buffy that decides that the First intends to end the Slayer line - Giles looks like he doesn't entirely agree, but says nothing. He might be uncomfortable that Buffy figured it out, but that makes no sense since it's all based on the information he gave her.

Giles says that there is little in the records about the First because it's too old and "rarely shows its true face." But a concept equivalent to the First exists in many religious stories - how could he not suspect that events ascribed to Satan or others wouldn't be the "true face" of the First, with just a name change?

Giles' reaction to Anya's accusation that he blew up the Council is too Gilesish to be pseudo-Giles.

Giles: "the First is unlike anything we've faced before" is very nearly a word-for-word match for how he described the First Slayer in his Restless song (sorry, OnM, I've been seeing links too). Buffy knew instinctively that fighting the First Slayer directly was pointless - when will she get that clue about this First?

Spike in the pool: yeah, dumb. Drusilla lifting her skirt - just weird.

Kennedy playing innuendo with Willow - yeah, we scriptreading geeks know she's nineteen (so how could she still be a proto-Slayer?), but it's creepy jailbait time to the other 99.99% of the viewers.

The kitchen scene - is that Anya's voice in the background, totally unintelligible behind the girls? And why? Maybe it's a sound-mixing mistake.

The Christmas tree lot - are we supposed to accept that it took Giles and Buffy almost the entire night (minus a fight scene) to walk there? Cause it's gonna be dawn when she climbs back out. They later walked back after dawn in time for Buffy to get ready for work. Also, Giles, out of sight of anyone but tv viewers, continues to act like Giles (even putting his glasses on) after Buffy falls into the cave.

The Uber-Vamp - this is apparently not where Spike is, so what's he doing there? Did he know that Buffy was going to drop in the way he knew Annabelle was going to be running around that corner? This is seeming sloppy...

It's been established that vamps get less stakeable with age (see Kakistos), but why is everyone assuming he'll be able to come into Buffy's house after them? And wouldn't the Slayers-in-Training know that they were safe, at least from uninvited vamps?

Buffy to proto-Slayers: "Be back before sunset." More echoes of Restless?

Buffy's cubicle - in addition to the little tree, what are all the pictures? Is that Dawn as a toddler? Who's the boy on the cube on her desk?

More Spike and "Dru" - interesting that her game has no "bothersome winning part." How similar is Spike's condition to when Buffy beat him in Dead Things? How similar is this to Spike's sacrifice under Glory's attention? And how could all the geek writers have had Dru call him "Daddy" when they and we know she called Angel that? And what's that weird device with the keypad appearance in the cave?

Next Joyce appearance - How do we get from the school bathroom (and Buffy's there, they used a school hallway establishing shot) to the Summer's house bathroom? Did she not go to the bathroom except in her dream at her desk (don't think about that too much...) Does she really have a coat with velcro sleeve slits? Joyce talks about Buffy needing to heal, but Buff's wounds are pretty healed - is this another sort of healing? It also looks like the "sun comes up - except lately in L.A." line may have been filmed - the cut is there if you look for it. The rest of Joyce's speech is reminiscent of her lines from Gingerbread, when Buffy realized that maybe she couldn't win the war, that doing her job was more about the ever-ongoing fight, little victories. "No one can stop Nature, not even -" Was she going to say "You," or something less obvious?

Night falls at the Summers house - the over-under changes of Buffy's scarf drive me nuts. Why is no one trying to figure out why it seems so important for the First to neutralize Willow - at least Giles should be addressing that part of the situation, although you'd think Will and Buffy would consider it too. And there's yet another reference to how Buffy's friends are pressuring her, like that's the only reason she does things - what's up with that?

The whole Annabelle thing works worse every time I see it. No set-up for her running, no explanation for why she's suddenly in the warehouse district, or how the Uber-Vamp is waiting for her, or how Buffy finds her, or why after a discussion about the need for weapons Buffy doesn't bring any. And how do the other Scoobs find her later in the rubble (after abandoning Dawn and the others at the house??).

The second Big Fight - anyone else referencing The Thing (original) when U-V walked into the building along the long metal grate? Hmmm, just me. And the Big Question - why's the U-V / FE want Buffy broken but not dead? So that she can't see the futility of the course she's choosing?

The last Spike - "Dru" scene - "Because she does." This is All About Buffy and her effect on the Cosmos: Angel, then Spike.

Buffy's raise-the-rabble speech. "Can't pretend it's not the end 'cause it is." Why? Because Slayers are dying and nasty vamps are risen? As apocalypses go, this one is pretty focused, and yet Buffy is more hopeless than almost any other time. So how long before she wises up, and how frustrated are we going to be watching it?

Anyway, thought I'd trot out some of these possible clues and inconsistencies for discussion before we get another episode.

- Darby, typing from under a snowbank.

[> Re: Dru's wardrobe (costuming spoilers for Ss2 of both BtVS & AtS) -- Dead Soul, 01:26:21 01/04/03 Sat

And is she wearing an outfit we've ever seen the real Dru in? I found the bare arms somewhat wrong.

Not that this means anything, but she wore sleeveless dresses/tops quite a bit in the latter half of Season 2 after she was healed. Perhaps in AtS, too; I'd have to go back and check. Although I do wish she wouldn't wear them - they're not very becoming on her.

But much in your post to think about and check the next time I rewatch BotN. Thank you.

This pointless aside brought to your courtesty of:

Dead (but still the consumate fashion victim) Soul

[> [> More on 'Dru' (BotN spoilers) -- Doriander, 10:05:29 01/04/03 Sat

Agree, she looks different. Her arms look more muscular now (JL is a work out freak turns out).

Spike in the pool: yeah, dumb. Drusilla lifting her skirt - just weird.

ROTFLMAO on the skirt lifting. Reminded me so much of Wes is StB.

The whole "daddy" thing. Perhaps it's my fanged four drenched brain, but it made perfect sense to me.

shooting script excerpt:

SPIKE
You're not Drusilla.

DRUSILLA/FIRST
(giggles)
I'm really not.

SPIKE
She was crazier 'n you.

DRUSILLA/FIRST
(hurt)
Dad-dy. No kicking.
It's almost Christmas Day today
and you've gone spoiling it.
I've been so very good all year...

She leans in, lips close to his.

DRUSILLA/FIRST
(cont'd)
But I'll be bad if you like.


The SS doesn't say much so I would have to credit the actors for my interpretation. JL played "hurt" as if she's play-acting hurt, akin to Xander's "::Gasp!:: You slash me with your words!" and more currently, Fake Cassie's "Oh! Baby, you left such a big whole! It hurts so bad!" In S2's Halloween, Spike playfully implored Dru to "talk to Daddy". Let's assume that back in day, these two crazy kids did engage in some kinky play acting (and really in retrospect their relationship seemed like a long game of pretend play). On one level we could say it's their own brand of fun. On another it's Spike conceding to being Daddy's proxy. That oughta burn ::sigh:: Love's bitch. So in the context of the above scene, it's on one level Fake Dru's throwback to the old days ::burn:: On another, and my immediate impression of the whole thing, it played out as a sarcastic comeback. Fake Dru's quirky way of saying "Look who's talking, Angel wannabe" in response to the now souled Spike's calling the First a Dru imitator. And the way JM played it (annoyed, eye roll, pissed. Hee! Burn.), Spike got the taunt. Going back to that bit in Halloween, note that it's Spike who said it and not Dru. Say the actual Dru indeed only reserved the title for Angel, then Fake Dru's daddy-ing just twists the knife further in. "But I'll be bad if you like" was in my mind a pointed comment about Spike reinventing himself to suit his lady love, who unfortunately happens to always be someone Angel/Angelus/Daddy had first ::burn:: Fake Dru rubs in the inescapable fact that he's always had taken cues from his grandsire, he's always lived in the shadow of his grandsire, thus a mere shadow of his grandsire ::burn:: Great morale booster, that.

[> Re: Bring on the Night revisited (spoilers, of course) -- luvthistle1, 03:52:09 01/04/03 Sat

Joyce -How and why would Joyce no anything about the first? which Joyce was real the one that visit Dawn or the one that visit Buffy? I think neither were real. because , she didn't say anything they could really use. If it was Joyce that visit Dawn , wouldn't she had told Dawn why buffy wouldn't chose her? if it was the real Joyce that visit Buffy would she had showed concern for Dawn as well , or at least mention her? after all Dawn is the youngest.



The locator spell - when Willow did a spell to locate Xander and Buffy , it said they didn't exist, yet she didn't do another one to make sure it was her or that they really didn't exist . she soul have ask Anya (she use to be a witch before becoming a vengeances demon) to do the spell over and than compare notes. she should have mention that to Buffy.


Giles - "the First is unlike anything we've faced before speech. Did Giles become forgetful? did he not remember that they face the first evil back when Angel return in season 4 "Amends". well, we know Angel and Spike were/are both dead, and both receive a soul. so, that was why the first evil were visiting them. but suppose they all are dead? think about it, suppose Willow spell did not work, or reverse, and instead of bring buffy back, brought them all into the dimension of the dead. Giles would not be able to touch them, but they would be able to touch Giles. (the first touch Spike (as Dru).




Kennedy - how did she know Willow was gay? I doubt that Giles would have time to mention that when he was trying to find a place to keep them safe.i doubt if Giles would mention anyone's personal life., and if he did, wouldn't he had mention Tara? she seems a lttle pushy, and it's way too soon.

The whole Annabelle thing:
she seem so together. what made her run, and where was she running to?



Ubervamp- the ubervamp didn't kill buffy because the slayer not in order. he suppose to kill the "sits" first, than the slayers I suppose.


Time - I think that time might be a little off. In "same time, same place" willow called Giles and was told that he was in a meeting with the council, yet when Buffy called she got through, and there was no mention of the council. there was something wrong with the time , in stsp. but it might not only be that time. everything seem off.

[> [> Kennedy didn't have to know -- Finn Mac Cool, 09:30:29 01/04/03 Sat

Actually, I don't think Kennedy did know Willow was gay. I think she was just saying that since there were too many people and so few places to sleep, they'd have to be in the same bed.

And, even if Kennedy meant the sleeping arrangements things as innuendo, she did stand a one out of ten chance of being right, after all.

Or maybe Giles mentioned the whole Willow going crazy on magic when her girlfriend got killed thing.

[> [> [> Re: Kennedy didn't have to know -- Darby, 10:16:30 01/04/03 Sat

I vote for the last, or some other gossip-based thing. Those Slayerettes do talk, after all, and you can't shut a Watcher up!

[> [> [> [> Re: Kennedy didn't have to know -- slain, 13:27:17 01/04/03 Sat

I'm inclined to believe it's more 'gaydar' (remembering a line from Six Feet Under), because I'm not sure if any gossip about Willow last year would exactly have made anyone think she was someone who was either ready, or entirely safe, to date. But of course if Kennedy is fully aware of this it would add credence to my thoughts that she's a new Faith figure, with a danger-loving streak. Which might not exactly bode well for the future. Oh well.

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Kennedy didn't have to know -- deeva, 15:01:52 01/04/03 Sat

I'm going with the "gaydar" thing, too. Sometimes it's just something that you sese or know about another person.

[> Re: Bring on the Night revisited (spoilers, of course) -- Silky, 07:20:06 01/04/03 Sat

I wondered also why both times Buffy went after the Uber-Vamp she carried no weapons (other than the stake). It didn't make sense. Neither did Annabelle bolting, esp. since she was the one who spoke of being safe in the slayer's home.

And the time of the epiosdes is off - apparently. But, remember Spike's comment to Buffy that time had been all wonky since his return to Sunnydale after getting his soul back? I think the time/date stamp at the beginning of CWDP is somehow important. Has Buffy been dreaming ever since?? Is the First playing with all their minds and time as well? It will be interesting to see if another, later episode has a time/date reference. I don't think it took Principal Wood 3 weeks to bury Jonathan. Or Andrew and Warren 3 weeks to go for more blood.

I thought Joyce telling Buffy to wake up meant that Buffy needed to see something obvious that she isn't seeing.

I think we are supposed to be confused. Those evil writers probably enjoy driving us nuts...

[> [> Time and Place -- Valheru, 17:44:17 01/04/03 Sat

Anyone else expecting the First to pull a Fallen, morph into John Goodman and sing "Time is On My Side?" Sweet vs. Lorne, Round 21: A New Opponent!

At first, I thought the time discrepancies were stupid writing mistakes (and they still could be), but it would have to be gross stupidity by now. "CWDP" couldn't have been more than a week ago, so unless the Buffyverse abandoned the Julian calendar, it can't be Christmas there. There are too many "time markers" for several weeks to have passed unnoticed. The wonkiness must be intentional.

In addition to time troubles, Buffy is having some strange reality shifts with her dreams. The first Joyce encounter is a tricky one. When did reality end and Buffy's dream begin? Did Buffy see Dawn slapping Andrew, but only speak to her in the dream? Or does Buffy fall asleep before that? There's a possibility that none of the scene was real, that it was all Buffy's dream, from Xander's time loop theory to Joyce--in other words, that the first "real" moment was Xander waking Buffy. If that's the case, given Buffy's prophecy-dream accuracy, everything said in that first scene could be very important. For example, both "Xander" and "Dawn" mention problems in time: Xander with the mummy-hand-time-loop idea, and he and Dawn with Andrew's unusually-long unconsciousness.

The second Joyce encounter seems subtly different than the first one. I can't really explain, but the first one seemed like Buffy's old prophecy dreams, while the second played more like "Restless." The shifts are more jarring this time, with Buffy not only being displaced in reality, but also in location. On first watching, I figured Buffy's trip to the school restroom a part of the dream, but what if it wasn't? What if Buffy really did go to the school bathroom, but not remember going back to her cubicle or seeing a student? Of course, that sets up the possibility that whole portions of this season are like Buffy's "blackouts" during Warren's time-accelaration in "Life Serial," which would be enormously confusing, but it would explain both the time and space discrepancies.

Lastly, there's a very practical reason behind an intentional time/space shift: Faith. Remember, Eliza's supposed to make a 3 episode appearance on AtS before she appears on BtVS. BtVS's schedule is running ahead of AtS's, making it difficult to do this. And while BtVS's schedule is further ahead, AtS's actual timeline will probably overtake it quickly. So ME has to coordinate the timeline with the schedule. Enter time wackiness. Then the First will shift space, switching the WB Universe with the UPN Universe in order for Faith to cross over without a legal battle (and if a legal dispute does come up, UPN will be represented by Wolfram and Hart while the WB gets Drusally McBeal).

[> Hey, this looks like Writer's Journal! -- Cactus Watcher, 07:41:53 01/04/03 Sat

Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks like that.

I haven't had too much to say about anything on Buffy this year because it's all so surreal. It's kind of the year of 'Salvador Dali' Buffy. All the familiar pieces are there, but nothing is quite right. If I personally had to write the rest of the season without knowing Joss' plans I'd go with OnM's idea of multiple dimensions of reality. Blurring reality is always tricky. I've seen too many movies like the original Solaris, in which the plot was just plan dull except for the blurring of reality. Other, more artsy, movies blurr reality so much nobody can figure out what the hell is going on at all. (And it's always a hoot to listen to B.S. artists try to make something of those movies.) But, I'm just letting the Buffy story carry me along, and I'll trust it will make some sense at the end.

Re: Annabelle - Actually this charcter, and her demise didn't bother me much. She was the one who wanted to stay in the house and let Buffy protect her while the other two wanted to go out and fight. We all know that the main idea behind the Buffy story was to break the helpless-blonde-girl movie stereotype; the one where the girl is slways out of her mind with fear, always makes exactly the wrong choices and always walks exactly down the wrong street. Annabelle is that girl. She wouldn't have made much of a Slayer, would she? Contrasting her with the other girls is just standard writing procedure.

[> [> Annabelle rennt -- Snuffynelson, 10:35:56 01/04/03 Sat

Regarding Annabelle's mad dash for freedom. It struck me as wrong at first, too, but after watching it again, I could see that they tried to signpost it a little.

She's a pre-Slayer in the key of Kendre. She represents book-learnin'. She is the slayer-in-training who dutifully carries the Watcher's Council books--and she's the S-I-T who takes notes when Giles or Buffy exposits. Throughout the first part of the episode she defers completely to her authority figures: Giles and then Buffy. She upbraids Molly and Kennedy three times when they interrupt or doubt Giles or Buffy. ("Shhh Molly, Mr Giles doesn't need us prattling on." "Kennedy!" in response to Kennedy wanting to hide on the other side of the globe, etc) She trusts them completely.

She begins to waver when Buffy and Giles return from meeting the uber-vamp the first time. She takes notes on the Urkan-whatever, but then asks "um...did you Slay it?" w/ a wistful/hopeful look on her face. When Buffy says no--when the authority figure admits failure, this is when Annabelle starts to "run."

We see the SITs next in the scene just before sunset, when the scoobies are boarding up the house and joking in the face of death. She looks around nervously and fidgets w/ her hands. She still toes the party line: "We'll be armed when the Slayer feels we're ready." "We're with the Slayer, safe as houses" "Do you see the house we're in?" One more shot of Annabelle nervously looking around. She then says, "It'll come straight for us, won't it?" Annabelle asks questions not for answers, but for reassurance. She receives none, either time. She reaches for the cross around her neck, reverting to another authority.

And so she runs--panicky, still clutching her cross. The final authority fails her too, in the end, falling to the ground rather than having any effect at all on the uber-vamp.

I think if ME had had the luxury of drawing out this progression over two or three episodes, it wouldn't feel so jarring. But the progression is there. In a situation where there are no solid facts and where she perceives her authority figures as failing, her world crumbles and down she goes. Ironically, i think if she had been able to hear Buffy's speech at the end, she'd have gotten what she needed.

[> [> [> Re: Annabelle rennt -- slain, 13:20:39 01/04/03 Sat

Of course, it's always possible that once M.E. had realised how trully appaling her accent was, they realised they had to get rid of her sooner than expected. But that's just my theory.

[> [> [> [> And while I'm obsessing... -- slain, 09:36:41 01/05/03 Sun

Some brief research tells me that all three actresses are, yes, American; which unfortunately spoils my theory that the actress playing Anabelle was either Welsh or Australian. Which is how she sounded to me.

[> [> [> Kendra and Annabelle -- HonorH, 17:23:59 01/04/03 Sat

I had exactly the same thought. This girl had a ramrod jammed firmly down her spine and absolutely no ability to adjust to new circumstances. Kennedy apparently saw what the Bringers did to her Watcher; I doubt Annabelle did, because I think that would've caused her to snap sooner. As it was, I think the above theory is quite correct. Simply put, Annabelle couldn't deal with the tension, so she ran. Wouldn't be the first person to do the stupidest thing possible because she lost her nerve.

Then again, the accent theory could very well be correct. It was bad!

[> [> [> Another theory on why Annabelle ran -- HonorH, 18:51:15 01/05/03 Sun

This time in the form of fanfic. Jeanny just posted this, and I thought it as good a theory as any, and better than a lot:

Not the Girl You Think You Are

[> Big Restless connection (spoilers, of course) -- Darby, 10:15:04 01/04/03 Sat

Because it's all connected, you know...

Above, I noted the resemblence between Giles' line and a line he sings in Restless. But, while shoveling and snowblowing, I remembered another line from his "song": The spell we cast with Buffy must have released some primal evil, that's come back seeking... I'm not sure what. This was the First Slayer, invoked in (wait for it...) Primeval. And what's a synonym for Prime or Primal? First.

There is a definite connection between the Slayer power and the First Evil (I seem to remember having a theory on that, but it's not really fresh right now).

- Darby, who has been hearing that song in his head like a commercial jingle for days now.

[> Re: Bring on the Night revisited (spoilers, of course) -- Snow White, 17:50:05 01/04/03 Sat

>>why it seems so important for the First to neutralize Willow
maybe its knocking out support struts?
and/or maybe Willow's like a child whose abilities outstrip its powers of application? But which (abilities and powers of application) are surfacable in the conditions approaching?

[> [> Agree w/ Snow White..... -- Briar Rose, 23:54:05 01/04/03 Sat

Taking the script dialog seriously and without innuendo or misguidance or any other of the wonderful layers ME writers are so flipping good at...

The one overall message thus far is that Buffy can't kill the FE in the usual way. It's going to take bigger guns and more primal powers than Slayer versus FE. Or even more than Buffy could ever conjure up on her own.... Like in Primevil.

Hence, Willow and the rest of the Witch types are going to be needed to help the Slayer. By neutralizing her now through self doubt and attacks? The FE wears down that avenue of support. And Giles is also a danger in that respect. It is possible (my own spec and probably really wildly so....) that Giles is not the FE, nor dead, nor himself_himself entirely. He could very well be a physical, thoroughly realized energy manifestation sent by the Coven.

And if so - it would explain a lot of the weirdness about Giles right now. Teleportation would sheild him physically and also his inner energy - while allowing him to corporeally protect the SITS and the Scoobies at the same time.

This doesn't bode well for Anya and Dawn either if magick is one of the required tools to kill the First.

Current board | More January 2003