January 2004 posts
My
problem with the near-end to 'Damage' (Spoilers) -- Earl Allison, 06:48:35
01/29/04 Thu
This comes from a lower thread, where I'm not sure if my points
are getting across or not. Hopefully, this will help.
Let me sum up;
Had Andrew and the Council taken the position that they created
the problem, so they felt responsible for taking custody of Dana,
I would have been fine with it. It would have been more in keeping
with personal responsibilities, IMHO.
The problem was in the snipe that no one trusts Angel, because
he works for/is Wolfram and Hart.
In other words, Angel's decision (regardless of reason or consequence)
has made him untrustworthy, because he heads the LA branch of
W&H, an evil organization.
Yet Buffy's decision to empower all Potentials, which resulted
in Dana and Lord knows how many more like her, is being portrayed
as an unequivocally good thing (regardless of reason or consequence).
Buffy and the Council are the Good Guys here according to the
portrayals last night. I am being asked to ignore Buffy's far
more direct influence in Dana's rampage, the lack of action from
Andrew's Slayers in apprehending Dana, and asked to consider Angel's
behavior only. Coming from Andrew only made it worse, since I
never respected the character before, and wasn't about to start
now.
A few seasons ago, the Council was a Bad Thing. They mistreated
Buffy, initiated the Cruciamentum, would have imprisoned or killed
Baith (Buffy-in-Faith), and tried to get Buffy under their thumb
during "Checkpoint."
Yet Buffy's council is happy to employ strongarm tactics by using
Slayers as virtual mob-enforcers to carry out their edicts --
markedly similar to how the wetworks team came to take Faith in
S3 and S4. But ANGEL is the bad, untrustworthy one, not Buffy,
who in S7 became more like the Council than I think she acknowledged.
My problem is in, basically, the Pot tapping the Kettle on the
shoulder and saying "by the way, you're black, you know."
Oh, and Dana is not and never was a monster. But that's for another
time.
Take it and run.
Replies:
[> Re: My problem with the near-end to 'Damage' (Spoilers)
-- Ultimate Fanboy, 07:39:51 01/29/04 Thu
Who's to say that Buffy and the Scoobs /didn't/ feel responsible
for Dana and thus that's part of the reason why they collected
her? I do not for one moment believe that Buffy would have intended
it to be that the only reason they were collecting her was because
Angel could not be trusted. Such would imply that had Angel not
signed up with Wolfram & Hart, Buffy might have left Dana in Angel's
care. I do not think this would be the case. I tend to look at
it as the reasons why Dana was collected were because, first and
foremost, she was a Slayer and belonged with other Slayers who
could relate to her and, secondly, because they recognize they
are responsible for her. In fact, don't you think that's largely
why they're making the effort to go around the world and collect
all the slayers? I think the implications with Angel is simple:
they didn't trust them under Wolfram & Hart and rightly so. But
as I've said, I do not think the fact that they no longer trust
Angel explicity states they do not take full responsibility for
Dana.
Also, I do not think it's fair to simply assume that Andrew had
the twelve slayers at his command throughout his entire stay in
Los Angelos. He could have left before them or they could have
been in an entirely different part of the country at the time.
Perhaps, even, all of the slayers who answer to Buffy are in Rome
and it took them a while to get on the move and into LA? From
what I garnered from the episode is that all of the Scoobies are
around the world collecting slayers and Giles while training Andrew
is collecting slayers in America. The only slayers Andrew and
Giles would have immediate access to are the newest of recruits,
who I cannot imagine as being battle-ready against Dana, herself,
let alone Wolfram & Hart! So, Buffy could have dispatched twelve
slayers to assist Andrew and he simply arrived there earlier because
he was already in America.
Though I agree that Buffy made some crappy decisions in S7, I
do not think it's fair to compare her with the Council. Buffy
was at war, in the fullest sense of the word, with the First Evil,
who was trying to destroy the entire Slayer Lineage and raise
the Turo-Khan from the darkest pits of Hell. The Watchers' Coucil
was on a permanent power trip free from sense who viewed the Slayer
as a tool. Buffy saw the potentials as warriors, many of whom
would meet their death at an early age like she accepted long
ago. It's very much the difference between a hardened veteran
of war leading a nation's army and a blue-blood prince of the
upper-classes using his own people as expendable plastic soldiers.
Just my two pennies.
[> [> Dana is valuable -- King over the water, 09:37:27
01/29/04 Thu
Lets not forget that, due to her mental illness, Dana seems to
have some (notice the word some) conscious access to memories
that other slayer's can--literally-- only dream about. If she
can be treated and helped, she might be able to provide lots of
info that the Watcher's diaries only allude to.
Second point: Dana wasn't just in Angel's hands. She was in Wolfram
& Hart's. They might be answering to Angel, but Angel trusts them
so much that he's bloodtesting them weekly to make sure they're
not eating humans. Are you really going to let W&H, and potentially
the Senior Partners, have access to the--albeit rambling--memories
of all the dead Slayers? And the weaknesses it might reveal?
Buffy's orders aren't just a mercy call. She's protecting herself
and the Slayer Army she's creating.
As a caveat, Buffy and her Slayer Army can call themselves whatever
they want--The Beatles, Josie and the Pussycats, The Watcher's
Council--the fact is, the Watcher's Council of the Cruciamentum
and Checkpoint is dead, blown up last year. Even if they call
themselves Watcher's Whatever what they are is the Scooby Council.
And we're seeing something else. For 5 seasons, the opposition
to evil Wolfram and Hart has been the Fang Gang. Now, the opposition
are the Scoobs. We could potentially be seeing the set-up for
the rest of Angel's run where we have to watch our heroes, The
Fang Gang, face off against our heroes, The Scooby Gang. Where
will we put our sympathies?
[> [> [> Re: Dana is valuable -- sarah,
05:37:29 02/01/04 Sun
I agree with you. Plus I am proud of the fact that as soon as
Spike could leave W & H he did because he has worked with Buffy
enough to know that no good can come from working with eveil and
if the two gangs ever have to fight each other we know which side
he will be on. Also W & H would have used Dana for their own reasons
most likely to get rid of the slayers.
[> See my reply to Earl in the thread below, and... (Spoilers)
-- CW, 07:47:52 01/29/04 Thu
It is very disturbing to think about what the mass promotion of
potentials to slayers unleashed on the Earth. I have to disagree
with Earl about Dana being a monster. She is, and is one very
much on the order of what Angel and Spike had once been. Where
as they lusted after blood, she lusts after peace of mind. To
get it she indiscriminately slays, stakes and cuts off heads as
her dreams tell her to. The fact it wasn't how her life should
have turned out is not really even important any more. The real
question is can she be cured short of putting her out of her misery?
Locking her away somewhere would just be tormenting her in the
same way even more.
What about all the rest of the 'bad' girls? Faith apparently was
a decent enough person before she became a slayer, but she turned
bad quickly enough even with people half way looking after her.
What about the less the honest, less than caring girls who suddenly
found themselves with all the physical power they'd ever dreamed
of? It's as if Buffy created a new class of demon, no doubt one
the slayers feel they have to deal with themselves. But, do they
really have the sole right to do it?
[> [> New Class of Monster -- Irene, 08:22:10
01/29/04 Thu
If you think about it, that new class of monster was created when
the Shadowmen began the Slayer line. I mean . . . judging from
the actions of the WC's henchmen in episodes like "Consequences"
and "Sanctuary", it's obvious that Faith wasn't the
first rogue Slayer. How many other Slayers in the past had turned
murderous? And how many other past Slayers had ended up insane
like Dana?
[> [> [> New perspective on the WC -- Gyrus, 10:22:29
01/29/04 Thu
...judging from the actions of the WC's henchmen in episodes
like "Consequences" and "Sanctuary", it's
obvious that Faith wasn't the first rogue Slayer. How many other
Slayers in the past had turned murderous? And how many other past
Slayers had ended up insane like Dana?
Gives one a new perspective on the control-freakishness of the
Council when it comes to Slayers. Buffy, at least, can sic 10
good Slayers on one bad one; the WC had only their normal, human
selves. So maybe their insistence on having total control over
the Slayer came partly from past experiences with Slayers who
went bad, and the Council's desire to prevent that from happening
again.
Not that this excuses the Council's often-deplorable behavior
towards Slayers -- especially the Cruciamentum -- but it does
put it in context.
[> [> Re: See my reply to Earl in the thread below, and...
(Spoilers) -- skeeve, 10:21:33 01/29/04 Thu
Whether Dana is a monster depends on one's precise definition
of monster.
More important than the precise definiton of a word is what to
do about Dana.
Three things:
Keep her from hurting more people.
Keep her from being used to hurt more people.
Help her deal.
As noted elsewhere, Angel & Co. might have trouble with number
2.
The Slayers are probably better with number 3.
Helping her deal might include showing her pictures of her attacker,
preferably of his autopsy.
If all else fails, a little graverobbing might be in order.
Dealing with the dreams is something for which having another
Slayer around would be helpful.
[> [> [> Re: See my reply to Earl in the thread below,
and... (Spoilers) -- DorianQ, 20:41:39 01/29/04 Thu
It depends on what resources that the new Council (that is what
they are; the old Watcher's Council is as much gone as the Old
Wolfram and Hart. They both may have all new employees, new leadership,
and new policies, but I wouldn't trust either of them at this
point) has in its power. Last time I checked, Dawn didn't turn
into a trained psychologist and the last time EITHER Buffy or
the Council tried to deal with an abnormal slayer (Faith) they
ended up making the problem a lot worse than it was. And also
think about Buffy's favorite method of problem solving as noted
(off of the top of my head, there might be more references) in
The Pack, Inca Mummy Girl, Killed by Death. I really don't think
that more violence is what this woman needs. And don't forget
Giles's method of dealing with possible evil (Ben and Spike).
Angel was the one who helped save Faith and probably is in the
best position to help Dana as well. I think that W & H have competant
and Good psychics and psychologists who could help Dana. Then
she should be given a choice whether or not she wants to join
up with the rest of the Slayers and the Council, like Faith did
eventually.
But I do think Buffy was wrong to whisk Dana away at such a critical
time when she would be best helped right where she was and use,
and then raise the ire of Wolfram and Hart to get her. Even with
an army of Slayers, I don't think they could survive a feud with
them. Right now, Angel CAN take her, and if, as she thinks, Angel
has gone evil and can't be trusted, then should be far more careful
in matters dealing with them.
[> [> [> [> Not quite the same thing -- Finn
Mac Cool, 22:06:28 01/29/04 Thu
With W&H, the Senior Partners are still at the top of the
pyramid, there are plenty of employees left over from the evil
regime, and their client base remains predominantly of immoral
characters. With the new Watchers' Council, though, the only members
left from the old Council are Buffy and Giles, and they were always
the ones most likely to disagree with the Council's decisions.
Also, Giles killed Ben because to do otherwise would guarantee
more people would die. He's not some guy who goes around willy-nilly
offing people he deems evil. And, while I agree Buffy certainly
isn't the best psychologist, she's got experience with the whole
Slayer thing that Dana has. Besides, with the Scoobies' ranks
expanded now, who's to say Buffy and Giles will even deal with
Dana directly? Perhaps one of the new Slayers they've found is
good at psychology, or perhaps they get Faith (who can sympathise
with the psycho-Slayer thing) to do it.
[> [> [> [> Re: See my reply to Earl in the thread
below, and... (Spoilers) -- skeeve, 09:18:11 01/30/04 Fri
The issue is not so much whether Buffy believes Angel but whether
she is sure Angel is good and can have his will done.
Angel can't do much for Dana in person.
Angel looks too much like a man and Dana has major man issues.
Angel would have to rely on help.
Help might or might not help.
The other Slayers might be able to help her just by keeping her
away from sharp objects and men until she calms down.
Being more durable than other humans, they wouldn't have to restrain
her as much as would other humans.
Buffy might be in charge and capable of doing a real bad job of
helping Dana, but Buffy also has this army of Slayers that is
quite capable of telling her when she's doing a real bad job.
BTW was it made clear when Dana became a Slayer?
Is she evidence that potentials are still being called?
[> Organizations and individuals (Damage Spoilers) --
Ames, 08:40:32 01/29/04 Thu
I think AtS is starting to deal with the issue that individuals
are not fully in control of organizations - an organization has
its own existance and agenda independent of the individuals who
make it up.
Buffy is right to suspect that W&H is not trustworthy, even if
she still has confidence in Angel himself. But more than that,
Buffy's organization of Slayers/Watchers is itself not fully under
her control. We've seen before how the Council's agenda got kind
of murky. It's happening again as the new organization takes on
a life of its own. Buffy's organization may well clash with Angel's,
even though the two of them remain close.
As long as Buffy and Angel were acting as individuals, or strong
leaders of very small groups, they could take full responsibility
for their actions. They were not corrupted by their own power
because they could not distance themselves from the direct consequences
of using it. But by the same token they were limited in what they
could accomplish. Now they have extended the scope of their power
by wielding it through larger organizations, but the insidious
corruption has begun. They are no longer directly responsible
for every action of their organizations, and they are distanced
from the direct consequences of those actions. The agenda of the
organization has begun to take control.
[> I'm with you, Earl... (Spoilers) -- HarryParachute,
10:31:38 01/29/04 Thu
...or maybe not. I perhaps go too far in condemning the action,
but...
...I don't care how many times a learned man with an uppercrust
British accent calls it "Brilliant" or how far you want
to ride the sharing-feminine-power metaphor...activating demonic
energy and preternatural strength in thousands of young people
who are in that very awkward age between child and adult is an
unfathomably dangerous move that can only end up in a lot of people
getting hurt and killed. They're kids for chrissake, and
frankly, I see little difference between that course of action
and spontaneously slapping a machine gun into their hands.
I mean, really, did it even accomplish anything in "Chosen",
save buying Spike the time to get the amulet up and running?
...Feh.
At any rate, I forgot how much it bugged me until I saw the trained-thugs
of the next generation of the feminazi-youth movement step out
of the shadows and mad-dog the Angel Patrol.
Looking at all of them, I can just imagine Andrew going door to
door with an entourage and explaining to a newly activated Slayer's
parents that, "NEWS FLASH! Your daughter's a Slayer of VampIRES.
She belongs with us now".
Of course this is no doubt after she's broken her sibling's arms
and put the kids who made fun of her at school in the hospital.
Maybe they're glad to send their impressionable young child off
to some sort of paramilitary secret cult across the ocean that's
run by some old dude who used to work at a high-school and a college
dropout.
At any rate, I'd give the By-Slayers-For-Slayers organization
another few months before succumbing to internal strife. Buffy
will find it's a bit harder to threaten, strong-arm, and bully
her underlings into line when they're able to kick her ass if
they've had enough of it...especially when the core group went
through that when they weren't superpowered.
Of course, that's just if it were in any way a reality. I'm sure
in the Whedonverse it'll be a fantastic success with lots of democratic
world-saveage followed with ice-cream and pillowfights.
*rubs temples*
...Now I feel all icky.
[> [> You know what makes me feel icky? -- Pony,
10:51:02 01/29/04 Thu
The use of the word "feminazi" in a post full of Buffy-bashing.
But then I guess it is very threatening to have the status quo
shaken. To trust that people would be able to use their own morality
and the rules of society and not attack and intimidate those who
are physiologically weaker? It would make one uneasy. Or, you
know, a woman.
[> [> [> Interesting Reactions -- Irene, 11:04:52
01/29/04 Thu
It's interesting that fans have been wondering if the Fang Gang
can withstand being corrupted by their employment at Wolfram & Hart
- even when Spike has expressed such feelings. Yet, when Andrew
revealed that Buffy harbored the same reservations about Angel
& Co., her character is suddenly bashed.
Like I said - interesting.
[> [> [> [> Re: Interesting Reactions -- Ultimate
Fanboy, 11:26:32 01/29/04 Thu
If we take the comics as canon, something must intervene and change
the spell Willow cast, no?
[> [> [> [> [> Possible -- Irene, 15:10:14
01/29/04 Thu
It's possible that story has yet to be told. After all, the 21st
century has only been in existence for . . . three or four years.
[> [> [> [> You know... -- Random, 17:29:24
01/30/04 Fri
...I've heard this implication of a "double standard"
expressed by other posters -- Rina and Claudia spring to mind
-- but perhaps it would behoove us to take into account that things
aren't that simplistic
[> [> [> Yep, you caught me. -- HarryParachute,
11:20:52 01/29/04 Thu
Dagnabbit, I was SO hoping I could slowly start building a following
to end Women's Sufferage over the next ten years. If only I not
tipped my hand and shown showed more support to a strong independent
woman like Miss Summers who insult their dead sisters-in-arms
while still holding the shovel she buried them with.
...now look...
13 year old? Not. Kirshnamurti.
So if anyone wants to shake up a status quo, I'd prefer it's not
twelve of them who can punch through walls and who take orders
from a field commander who's a pathological liar, murderer, and
inept trekkie.
Boy or Girl, at that age they're angst-ridden hormone bombs who
don't even know who they are yet, much less fully-formed individuals
or intellectuals who apply metaphysics and philosophical or ethical
hermenuetics to a television show.
So call me crazy, or worse a misogynist, but I think at least
a G.E.D. should be required before you make the important decision
of pursuing a career in killing sentient creatures with your bare
hands.
Thank you vvvvery much.
[> [> [> [> Kinda missed my point but you got to
bash Buffy again! So win-win! -- Pony, 11:32:26 01/29/04
Thu
[> [> [> [> [> Giving and Sharing! It's S7 all
over again! -- HarryParachute, 11:38:23 01/29/04 Thu
[> [> [> [> [> Absolutly no offense at all,
but ... -- V Omega, 20:56:26 01/29/04 Thu
... your response sounded that you missed his point. I think what
he was trying to say is that it was dangerous to randomly turn
hundreds of adolescents (men OR women) into killing machines.
As a metaphor for sharing power among fellow sisters, it was beautiful,
but as a practical reality, it's horrifying. Buffy had to reform
the patriarchal Council just to try and keep tabs of them and
judging from this episode, she's even had to turn to less reputable
sources (Angel) to handle her field operations and then hope that
the threat of physical force is enough to get them to turn slayers
over to her. Buffy is at least partly responsible for the deaths
that occured in this episode. That has nothing to to with her
being a woman or not. Had Angel, Xander, or Giles done that, the
descision made in Chosen would still be just as wrong.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Absolutly no offense
at all, but ... -- Dariel, 21:27:03 01/29/04 Thu
I doubt that Pony missed the point. It's just not a very good
point. In Chosen, the First was about to send its supercharged
vampires (and who knows what else) out to overrun the planet.
Empowering the potential slayers wasn't some kind of whim (hey,
cool, it's girl power!), but a last ditch effort to stop the First
and its minions. No one said it was the perfect solution; just
the best one at hand.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Absolutly no
offense at all, but... -- DorianQ, 16:58:10 01/30/04 Fri
I guess it just struck me as causing way more problems than it
solved, even the immediate one. The army definitly helped out
keeping the Neanderthals off of Spike until the amulet was activated,
but I could see one of Willow's barrier spells doing the same
thing just as well. I think in one of the Season Five episodes,
she even devised a spell that could release pure sunlight from
a candle or something like that. I guess I'm just saying that
there were other options left open to them and they did still
have some time on their side. Buffy had just finished off the
First's lead fighter and had received a very powerful new waepon
to use. Buffy then decided that they should got the drop on them
and in doing so, may have jumpped the gun to her own detriment.
I know I'm playing Monday morning quaterback here, but the plan
was really rushed and almost failed.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> But what if
Buffy's forces had been wiped out at the Hellmouth? -- LonesomeSundown,
06:34:32 01/31/04 Sat
If the spell had not been cast, the FE would have won. Once the
spell was cast there would be multiple slayers in every generation
to carry on the good fight. Seems to me that the choice was a
good one given that victory was not assured.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> A few disagreements
-- Finn Mac Cool, 13:02:33 01/31/04 Sat
First, no one knew what the amulet might do; it was an X-Factor,
and it's not good to base your entire plan upon an X-Factor.
Second, Willow said she was trying to create a sunlight spell
in Season 5, but we never actually got to see it developed. Given
that such a spell was never turned up or mentioned for two and
a half years afterwards, I think we can assume Willow was simply
unable to actually make the spell.
Third, part of this argument revolves around two factors we can
only guess at: first, how many of the new Slayers are actively
fighting evil; second, how many of them are using their power
for selfish or evil purposes. I, personally, am working under
the assumption that people are, by and large, good. As such, while
I don't think all of the new Slayers will choose to become warriors
for good (maybe as few as 10-20% will take this path), I think
that the number which chooses to use their power to hurt others
will be far smaller. Of course, this is all reliant upon a world
view in which human beings tend to be good more often than not,
which I realize not everyone agrees on.
[> [> Teenage girls, eh -- Pip, 11:19:54 01/29/04
Thu
Yeah, you're right. Give teenage girls energy and strength is
just like slapping a machine gun into their hands. They should
be sent back into the kitchen, where they'll only have access
to lots of razor sharp knives ;-)
Yup, those new Slayers will get lots of their relatives and friends
hurt and killed. Teenagers should not be allowed access to machine
guns. Unless, of course, they're in the armed forces - which is
the closest mundane thing to Buffy's new Slayer army.
I believe that the armed forces hand over machine guns to teenage
girls all the time. They find that the overwhelming majority of
the girls are remarkably responsible. ;-)
[> [> [> Re: Teenage girls, eh -- Ultimate Fanboy,
11:32:50 01/29/04 Thu
Except the Armed Forces doesn't express-mail machine guns to thousands
of girls across the world indiscriminately.
There was probably a reason why TPB took up the task of /choosing/
-which- potential became the slayer and I suspect that reason
is for sad, but inevitable cases like Dana. I'm sure when the
slayer is /chosen/, the best is /chosen/.
[> [> [> [> Like Faith? -- Arethusa, 11:46:59
01/29/04 Thu
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Like Faith? -- Ultimate
Fanboy, 12:03:18 01/29/04 Thu
Faith does nothing for the point of opposition.
Don't get me wrong. I do not agree with the ``dissenters`` who
chide Buffy and her actions and motivations as revealed both by
the previous seasons and in this episode. However, I do not think
the Armed Forces/Slayer Line analogy is applicable.
But to directly address Faith and her wayward ways, one could
argue that the reason Faith was /chosen/ as compared to those
like Dana is for her present state. Of course, that's assuming
there's a predestination aspect to the nature of the Buffyverse
or, at the very least, a predictable factor to an inividual's
life.
I don't think for one moment that The Powers That Be are as idiotic
as most would make them out to be. I believe there's a logical
reason as to why the Chosen Ones were /chosen/. I think there's
a reason why Buffy was chosen and those reasons must lie in her
character and her soul which could let the PTB glimpse into what
a person can do and what a person could handle. Undoubtedly, we
see people in our own lives who are amazingly strong and we admire
them. Think what information on a person TPB could garnish with
even m ore intimiate knowledge coupled with divination? The reason
the last guardian of the Hellmouth was so powerful and so great
was because she /was/ Buffy Summers.
Likewise, the same could be said of Faith, who despite her confusion
and trip down the dark side, had a part of her character which
made her suited to be a great champion. If not, she would never
have been redeemed.
Just me two pennies.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Like Faith? --
Arethusa, 12:25:08 01/29/04 Thu
we don't know if TPTB Chose anyone. For all we know, it's an automatic
process created by the Shadowmen. Also, is Faith a great champion?
She has't really had the chance to become one yet, although that
could easily change-or not. Don't her evil actions also say something
about her character? I'm beginning to hate the word "Champion."
They are all just people,, heroic and cowardly, strong and weak,
self-sacrificing and selfish. Evil and Good are concepts, not
people.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Evil Faith = win
for good guys -- Athena, 17:37:37 01/29/04 Thu
It could be argued that if not for Faith turning evil the Scoobies
and the Fang Gang might not be alive today. After all, she accidently
slipped the Mayor's plan to Buffy and Angel. Later on, she brought
out the Mayor's human weakness, which in turn allowed Buffy to
lead him to into a trap.
I don't know how good the PTB are at predicting the future, but
isn't it a possibility that they might have picked her for these
reasons?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Evil Faith
= win for good guys -- Arethusa, 17:58:46 01/29/04 Thu
I'm not sure the PTB are omnipotent, or that they even picked
Faith at all, as I stated before. Jasmine wasn't omnipotent, or
she would have eliminated Fred at the beginning.
If they had picked Faith in the expectation that she would inadvertantly
help save the world, that meant they also expected her to kill
the scientist, poison Angel, and batter or kill several others
in LA.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Evil
Faith = win for good guys -- Ultimate Fanboy, 18:03:08
01/29/04 Thu
Divination does not necessitate omnipotence nor omniscience. Perhaps
they have powers or resources to powers similar to Lorne? It's
all speculation, indeed, but I'm just keeping an open mind. I
do not think it's any more productive to try to understand a storyline
by inferring certain ideas and concepts than it is to simply be
open to every possibility.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Evil Faith = win for good guys -- Arethusa, 18:55:11 01/29/04
Thu
Athena's suggestion was that TPTB were omniscent enough to be
able to predict that Faith's actions would help save the world.
My response was that TPTB didn't choose the slayer, as far as
we know. The only slayer we actually saw chosen by someone/thing
is the first slayer, and she was picked by the Shadowmen, not
TPTB.
However, if appearences are deceiving and TPTB does indeed pick
the slayer and knew what Faith was going to do, they also knew
she would commit murder, assault, and poisoning. That implies
TPTB condoned these acts, and are willing to let some die to save
others.
Any analysis is possible, but I prefer to eliminate the least
likely possibilities to more deeply examine the more likely possibilities.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Evil Faith = win for good guys -- Ultimate Fanboy,
00:44:24 01/30/04 Fri
How do you figure TPB have nothing to do with the selection of
the Slayer?
If she's a force working under TPB, one would assume they have
control over his lineage, no?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Ah, that's the question. -- Arethusa, 08:11:52
01/30/04 Fri
Is the slayer working under TPTB? Angel certainly was, but I don't
think we can say for sure that Buffy is. IIRC, they never contacted
her directly or intervened with slayers in any way, although I
could be wrong.
Which reminds me of another question: Are TPTB divinities at all,
or simply very powerful supernatural creatures? Do you remember
a Star Trek episode where aliens set themselves up as the Greek
Gods until their believers abandoned them?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Jossverse's type of god? -- Athena, 11:39:19
01/31/04 Sat
( ^_^ I remember that Star Trek episode. I was about five, if
not younger when I first saw it. )
Maybe in Jossverse the western idea of god as an all powerful,
all knowing being simply doesn't exist. Fanboy's mention of the
gods and ancient Greece is an apt one. The Olympians were more
like higher beings than fitting in with the notion of god that
most of us grow up with. Not one of them was all knowing, powerful
or seeing, even the creators of the universe Uranus and Gaia (Mother
Earth) where unable to control all of their descendants.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> ...I mean Arethusa's mention of the Greek gods.
(N/T) -- Athena, 11:50:09 01/31/04 Sat
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Evil
Faith = win for good guys -- Ultimate Fanboy, 18:05:54
01/29/04 Thu
Divination does not necessitate omnipotence nor omniscience. Perhaps
they have powers or resources to powers similar to Lorne? It's
all speculation, indeed, but I'm just keeping an open mind. I
do not think it's any more productive to try to understand a storyline
by inferring certain ideas and concepts than it is to simply be
open to every possibility.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Jasmine
-- Athena, 18:41:16 01/29/04 Thu
I agree with you, Arethusa, but keep in mind that Jasmine was
able to put a bunch of things in motion with a very good idea
of how they'd turn out. She is also evidence that there may be
other Powers believe that "the ends justifies the means."
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> PTB? --
Irene, 10:15:57 01/30/04 Fri
Many keep stating that the PTB are responsible for maintaining
the Slayer. Didn't "Get It Done" and Andrew in this
latest episode establish that the Shadowmen's magic was responsible
for creating and continuing the Slayer line?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> They've
done this sort of thing before -- Athena, 11:14:14 01/31/04
Sat
I understand and believe that as well, but the Shadowmen are long
dead while their magic continues to work. Unless the magic has
some self-sustained intelligence to it, it would seem that after
a Slayer died that it would pick the next Slayer at random.
Let's assume Jasmine was telling the truth when she said that
she organized for the debt that was owed to Darla in "The
Trial" by the birth of Connor. If that is true, then is it
unreasonable to think that on occasion another Power might organize
for a particular girl to be Called?
Maybe Faith isn't someone the PTB picked. I can accept that, but
for the most part it seems like they are up sittting on clouds.
I think that if they interfere in a way that would be relatively
subtle that they probably would. They did this with when Cordelia
got Doyle's visions; after all, the Oracles mentioned something
about them supplying Angel with another link to them.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
They've done this sort of thing before -- sarah,
06:07:20 02/01/04 Sun
Qustion? Isn't Angel now cut off from the powers that be? Cab
he ever get back to them if he wants too? Some choices that he
made he he ever go back to being the Angel with a soul to do good
after joining W & H? Remember Spike told them flat out that W
& H was evil and got out of there as soon as he could. Who was
the person that Wes. tried to burn their contract with W & H and
if her contract can'y be burned can theirs not be burned also,
and did they know of this before they agreed to the deal?
[> [> [> [> Re: Teenage girls, eh -- Irene,
15:13:26 01/29/04 Thu
[There was probably a reason why TPB took up the task of /choosing/
-which- potential became the slayer and I suspect that reason
is for sad, but inevitable cases like Dana. I'm sure when the
slayer is /chosen/, the best is /chosen/.]
TPTB had nothing to do with the Slayer line. The Shadowmen were
the ones who created it. It was their magic that randomly chose
which girls would become Slayers.
And wasn't it the Shadowmen's magic that insure only one Slayer
would be chosen at a time? The question is . . . did they create
that system for balance? Or to assume tight control over a Slayer?
[> [> [> [> [> Or because they only had the
resources to create one -- Doug, 15:52:04 01/29/04 Thu
Caged demon essences aren't exactly available at every corner
drugstore. The spell created a new form of being, it didn't limit
something that was already there (this got shown in "Get
it Done"). They may not have been able to cast it more than
once. From my understanding all the potentials shared bloodline
descent from the first slayer, and so carried the ability to carry
the essence, so their weren't thousands of available hosts 7000
years ago.
The real question we should be asking is how the demon essence
expanded from one slayer, to two slayers, to a thousand slayers.
It's strength must be growing proportional to the available hosts.
Am I the only one who's scared of the thought of a demonic essence,
confined for millenia in the bodies of young girls, empowering
their flesh to battle it's own kind, suddenly finding itself with
it's power increasing that much? Some people have problems with
the possible consequences of Willow's spell that have got nothing
to do with gender politics.
[> [> [> Re: Teenage girls, eh -- Irene, 12:31:19
01/29/04 Thu
"Yeah, you're right. Give teenage girls energy and strength
is just like slapping a machine gun into their hands. They should
be sent back into the kitchen, where they'll only have access
to lots of razor sharp knives ;-)"
How do we know that all of the new Slayers are teenagers?
And would you really trust a psychotic Slayer in the hands of
Wolfram & Hart . . . even in an office headed by a souled vampire?
And to be quite frank - the old Watcher's Council, headed by adults
- weren't that hot, either.
[> [> [> [> Re: Teenage girls, eh -- Pip, 14:26:58
01/29/04 Thu
How do we know that all of the new Slayers are teenagers?
Strictly, we don't. But both the Potentials and the girls in the
'Slayer rush' scene in Chosen looked teenage, ranging from just
teenage to nearly twenty (Kennedy, who was worried that she was
'too old'.) The Chinese Slayer that Spike killed in FFL also looked
like a teenager. The only Slayer we've seen who wasn't a teenager
(apart from Buffy) was Nikki Wood, and we have no information
on how long she had been a Slayer when she died. Personally, I
think she could well have had Robin when she was already a Slayer
- Buffy took summers off more than once [grin], so a few months
maternity leave was probably survivable. [bigger grin]
Since Spike attributed Buffy's survival to the family and friends
that connected her to life, it's plausible that Robin actually
helped Nikki live longer than was usual for a Slayer.
And would you really trust a psychotic Slayer in the hands
of Wolfram & Hart . . . even in an office headed by a souled vampire?
I wouldn't trust anyone in the hands of Wolfram and Hart. And
I think the old Watcher's Council were probably best blown up
- they'd reached the point of causing more harm than good.
Incidentally, I normally use the ;-) sign to convey that I'm being
sarcastic/ironic. Is a different convention used on this board?
My comments in the post above seem to have been taken at face
value, which was not my intention.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Teenage girls, eh --
Irene, 10:43:06 01/30/04 Fri
[Strictly, we don't. But both the Potentials and the girls in
the 'Slayer rush' scene in Chosen looked teenage, ranging from
just teenage to nearly twenty (Kennedy, who was worried that she
was 'too old'.) The Chinese Slayer that Spike killed in FFL also
looked like a teenager. The only Slayer we've seen who wasn't
a teenager (apart from Buffy) was Nikki Wood, and we have no information
on how long she had been a Slayer when she died.]
But this is what I'm talking about. We don't know for certain
that all of the Slayers are teenagers or that all of the past
Slayers were teenagers.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Why is it important whether
or not all the Slayers are teenagers? -- Pip, 14:25:22
01/30/04 Fri
[> [> [> not just teenagers, apparently -- celticross,
21:03:36 01/29/04 Thu
Dana is about 25, judging from the timeframe given in the episode,
which says her family was killed 15 years ago, when she was 10.
[> [> [> [> Great. Now I have Jeriatric Slayer's
in my mind... -- Majin Gojira, 08:07:29 01/30/04 Fri
[> [> I'm not. -- Arethusa, 12:16:36 01/29/04
Thu
All the slayers have been kids. No doubt, some of them have been
bad people, but the power did't make them bad. Your extreme
generalizations don't help your case,. Teenagers have held jobs,
had children, been responsible or learned responsibility, fought
in armies, even led them-including at least one teenage girl.
How many girls and women have been groped, hit, demeaned, insulted,
injured, murdered just because they were't physically strong enough
to fight back? Millions more than have abused their strength,
I'll bet. Lethal power is available to millions of girls now,
in the form of knives and guns. How many of them hurt or kill
their siblings or others? Do you think that every boy who can
kill with his hands should be hobbled-after all, they might break
their siblings' limbs or kill too.
Regarding Buffy, you're overlooking the simple fact that she shared
her power with these women. They are free to live their own lives
if they want, never using their strength for anything more than
opening a pickle jar. What they've really been given is the power
of choice-the choice to not be a victim, not be weak, not
be unable to protect themselves and others.
I just can't understand this. Would people feel the same way if
the Potentials had become as strong as men and no stronger? Are
men so very afraid of victimization that the idea of the other
sex being much, much stronger than them makes them angry? If so,
they now know what it's like to be a woman.
[> [> [> You said that much better than I did, thanks.
-- Pony, 12:21:52 01/29/04 Thu
[> [> [> [> Thanks to you, too. -- Arethusa,
13:53:20 01/29/04 Thu
[> [> [> Re: I'm not. -- Ultimate Fanboy, 12:38:34
01/29/04 Thu
I support Buffy and her actions wholeheartedly and I'm entirely
on her side in this regard. I see nothing wrong with her choices
as relayed to us by this episode, however, I do think you're reading
too much into another poster's statements in which he makes a
valid point about responsibility and the ethics of creating superhumanly
powered teens.
I know I and I'm sure this applies to everyone else could care
less about the sex of the Slayer in this regard. The point would
stand just as firmly if Slayers were male because the sex of the
beings do not enter into the equation. Male or female, I can see
the worry that some might have about giving such awesome pretenatural
strength, agility, and reflex to adolescents who are prone to
bouts of emotional instability. We have children in our nation
who engage in excepionally illegal activities, who are sent to
jail at a startling rate, and who die because of their lives of
violence. Any one of them could be a slayer. How you can make
such a worrisome issue into implications of sexism is beyod me.
[> [> [> [> Re: I'm not. -- Arethusa, 13:43:51
01/29/04 Thu
"Feminatzi." That's why I think part of the argument
in question was affected by gender ideas/biases. You might not
be old enough to remember, but I can remember many men in the
late 60s and 70s saying that women shouldn't be allowed
to work outside the home or serve in the military because menstruation
made them emotionally unstable. Why, if a woman became president
she could set off a nuclear warhead when she got PMS! So that
argument hasn't been one of my favorites. If you deny power to
a group because it might be abused by a few, no one would have
power. Which might make the demon world happy, but not the rest
of the population.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: I'm not. -- Ultimate
Fanboy, 18:34:33 01/29/04 Thu
I may not be old enough to remember? I was not even conceived
of yet during those eras. :)
I was a raised by a strong woman and had always had a strong feminine
presence in my life. Indeed, I could identify more with women
than I could men due to my own inate character which is eerily
echoed by Joss' own childhood and his own fascination with powerful
women. If I were to quote Joss, himself, I could even apply it
to myself when speaking of his childhood and the origins of his
fascination with strong women:
"A lot of people thought I girl, but I was cool with it.
I was... quite tiny and was just the guy no one took into account
much. And that one, the person you might look at and dismiss,
is going to be the person who saves the world."
This is where his love for Buffy comes from and it's where mine
comes from as well as my fascination with Xena, Callisto, Gabrielle,
and other such media icons!
In any matter, despite that odd tangent, I can certainly see the
validity of the hesitation some of these individuals are expressing
and these reservations, in my mind, have absolutely positively
nothing to do with sex. Being an individual who is coming out
of his awkward teenage years and finally becoming comfortable
with the mantle of adulthood, I can tell you that though I would
trust myself and others like me with such great power, there are
a plethora of my peers that I would shudder to think of them possessing
such amazing powers---girl or not.
Sure, there are many adolescents who, like Buffy, could share
that burden and use it well. There are adolescents such as myself
who had to learn to become an adult real quick because they had
a family to keep together and a sick ssingle-mother to look after
and there are some who simply possess an innate character compass
and inner strength. Likewise, though, there are many of those,
perhaps arguably especially in my generation, who lack such a
strong character and self-realized ethos. Luckily, these teenagers
are not given slayer powers in real life... they can simply buy
guns.
Also, if I am wrong, I'm sure the poster who originally used the
phrase will correct me, but I do not think he meant to utilize
the term "feminazi" as a commentary on their sex so
much as their actions. It wasn't the fact that they were young
girls who were forcing older men to do what they wanted, but that
they were, indeed, forcing others to do what they wanted with
the threat of their brute strength. Of course, I am of the camp
that this was a wonderful strategic move and one certainly necessary,
but I am simply trying to diffuse an awesome conversation of unnecessary
sexist implications and accusations.
[> [> [> [> [> [> 95% agreeing with you
-- Maura, 18:57:31 01/29/04 Thu
I think you stated very well the concerns that I'd have about
all those people with superpowers. I agree that the potential
problem with Slayer/normal-human power inequality (looked at in
a fairly literal light) is not about sex (at least not primarily).
I might only add that I think you and Arethusa are coming at this
issue out of pretty different discourses. She's remembering a
lot of deep-seated societal sexism she's encountered (directly
or indirectly). You apparently haven't encountered quite the same
cultural context, being younger and maybe being male as well (as
I gather you are). That might well make her more sensitive to
overtones of sexism that still occur in these discussions. And
it's probably not a bad thing at all to be sensitive to those
overtones.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I'm not. -- Arethusa,
21:20:36 01/29/04 Thu
Sex and power are irrevocably intertwined, since sex (gender)
has been used as a reason to dole out or withhold power from half
of the human race for millenia. Gender is power-the power elite
always has been mostly masculine, based on the greater physical
strength of men. Power divorced from gender is a very recent phenomenon,
historically speaking.
I have no doubt that some slayers will be dangerous to the general
populace, just as some gun owners will be dangerous to the general
populace. But I cannot say that no young person should be given
great power because some might abuse it. The Buffyverse depends
on powerful young people to protect it, from witches to watchers
to slayers. Some of them will go bad, as Giles and Willow and
Faith did. They recovered, as Dana might recover, and are leading
the good fight.
It is disingenious to say a word containing femi- is not about
women and -natzi is not insulting.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I'm not.
-- Ultimate Fanboy, 01:01:08 01/30/04 Fri
Indeed, I am far removed from the cultural view that many of you
are, but if anything, I would think the generations who worked
for equity would be happy about that.
I know that a lot of individuals, male or female, my age have
a hard time understanding socio-political issues regarding sexism
and racism because many of us are not as directly affected by
them as your generations and those preceeding. I, like many of
my generation, grew up not only learning, but whole-heartedly
believing that all individuals are equal regardless of sex or
race and so from our perspective, I do admit it's hard to understand
the issue and where the individual is coming from. I did not work
for the world which you have created, I simply enjoy its fruits,
but like I said, I think that's a good thing.
In regards to the term again, I do not mean that it is not relevant
to women or could be used offensively. However, I do not think
that he meant it that way. I believe his use of the word in context
of his post would point to it being rather benign without any
sexist connotations. In other words, I thought it was meant to
be analogous to "thug", but then again, the word might
have more meaning than I understand.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I'm not.
-- Arethusa, 08:04:48 01/30/04 Fri
I don't deserve any credit for any elimination of sexism. I haven't
done anything but say what I think and feel. Sexism might be less
overt than it used to be, but it's still alive and well, like
racism. I'm glad your generation is less infused with it than
mine.
I'm most concerned about the misuse of power in families. I once
asked a criminal lawyer why men (and women!) get such very light
sentences for abusing their children. He said that there's just
too many of them to put them all in jail for a longer time. It's
not over yet.
[> [> [> [> [> Metaphor Spoilers Damage; AtS
5; Buffy: Chosen, S6-7. -- Age, 19:55:40 01/29/04 Thu
I think the metaphorical aspect of slayer power is being overlooked
also. As already mentioned, Buffy gave this new generation of
young women the choice to be strong(and thereby wield power),
or, more like it, the show as social reflection displayed the
change in culture that affluence, education AND hard fought battles
by women over the last century brought about. When Willow in 'Chosen'
says that they changed the world, this change is not literal,
but figurative, pertaining to our culture.
Neither slayers nor vampires exist in real life(sorry couldn't
resist stating the obvious). There isn't now (and Whedon deliberately
set 'Buffy' in the present day) a generation of women who will
discover that they have superhuman strength, but there is actually
a generation of young women that has grown up in a culture that
does not deny them the chance to become strong either physically
or emotionally(they no longer have to be weak dumb blonds who
scream and faint). The slayer strength is simply an exageration
and focus on what has been denied to women culturally, a denial
symbolized by there having been only one slayer per generation.
To be powerful for a woman (and again we are speaking within a
certain culture)would be as if she were demonized, as was literally
the first slayer. Willow's spell, a metaphor for a change in culture,
transformed this demonization: women having strength isn't wrong
anymore.(Because a bunch of men deemed it so(one slayer chosen)
sometime in the past is simply another way of saying that a certain
culture decided to treat men one way and women another. Note here
that the other metaphor attached to the slayer, that of dealing
with emotions, ie vampires, demons as emotions that take on a
life of their own, is restricted therefore also, as a male culture
does not give importance to what is judged to be feminine, leading
to the hellmouth as symbol of repression of problem, emotion rather
than dealing with it.)
As for power, it, like anything else, has its problems: season
seven of 'Buffy' didn't happen before season six nearly saw the
most powerful woman in the world destroy it. Joss Whedon made
it quite clear that simply having power doesn't lead to a fairy
tale world where all is well, but then isn't that what season
five of 'Angel' is reiterating for us. Quite clearly simply having
power isn't enough. The plot of 'Damage' shows this in the actions
and reactions respectively of Dana's captor and Dana herself.
(Although I might add that Dana's situation is a metaphorical
reiteration of the isolation of women in a male culture; the shackling
of women's ideas about their place in society and the torturing
of their sense of self by a male culture, with Dana's reaction
being not one of wanting power, but wanting not to be made (to
think herself, ie culture) weak (ie just wants to be herself)
as the constant references to the syringes imply and allude to
perhaps the third season 'Buffy' episode where she was drugged.
Even the male doctor's keeping Dana drugged(and therefore not
truly helping her in order to write his book) reinforces the theme
of women being kept down by a male authority. )
The point is, women now do enjoy a great deal more power in our
society than they used to. The question is what do they do with
it? And, yes, this is a universal question. What equally do men
do with power? But, do women shy away from the use of power, and
not, as Andrew and the slayers did in 'Damage,' be an authority
based on wielding power, because quite frankly that would be naive.
(It would be equally naive to think that effort isn't required
to use power, rather than be ruled by it, but this brings in the
other aspect of the choice to be strong: emotional strength.)
If power exists then it's going to affect you one way or another.
You have to take it into consideration. In other words, if you
have two good arms, then you don't shy away from using them.
Which brings me to another point. Are we to read the amputation
of Spike's forearms as a symbolic emasculation? Certainly Spike
has been rendered powerless by drugs (metaphor for internalization
of culture?); but Dana's desire isn't to have power over Spike,
but to have power over herself by eliminating the threat of someone
else attempting to have power over her. The answer to the question
lies in the type of culture of course: if indeed males gain a
sense of power through the subjugation of women then a powerful
woman's action would probably lead to the perception of emasculation
on the part of the males.
Anyway, whether we like it or not, teenage boys AND now girls
discover that they do indeed have a degree of power: the world,
to paraphrase Willow again, has been changed. Are we to see the
Scoobies' roaming the world, seeking out fictional slayers, in
a literal sense as the creation of a new army of inexperienced
super teenagers, taking orders from a new young leader; or, more
figuratively as a new generation of young adults taking responsibility
for the effects of the change in our culture, helping to guide
those who have never had power before in our culture (and isn't
this what Dana was meant to symbolize in the extreme?), with the
final confrontation of Andrew and the slayers in 'Damage' as a
symbolic representation of the new generation of women choosing
to be strong. I think the answer is the latter, but is not confined
to it. Whedon wouldn't give up the chance to use a budding organization
as that begun by the Scoobies to study its strengths and weaknesses,
nor could the Scoobies be somehow immune to human foibles simply
because they may be tied to a more feminist culture. If nothing
else in both series, we have learned that the complexity of our
lives requires constant work; there are no easy answers, no seemingly
easy solutions like the one attached to becoming the CEO of Wolfram
and Hart.
(As further evidence of a metaphorical reading, in 'Damage' Dana
is first presented physically as if she were possessed by a demon,
resembling somewhat Regan as possessed in 'The Exorcist.' In fact
Spike mistakes the case as possession. But we learn that Dana
is not possessed, not a demon, but an innocent victim. I would
suggest that the possession motif is meant to represent what powerful
women used to be judged as, and that an actual exorcism, not of
a demon, but of culture, is being attempted by Dana herself.)
Age.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Metaphor Spoilers Damage;
AtS 5; Buffy: Chosen, S6-7. -- Dariel, 21:10:55 01/29/04
Thu
Thanks for an enlightening post! Being rather literal-minded,
I must rely on others to suss out the metaphors of the Buffyverse.
I haven't seen your name in a long time, but I always enjoyed
your wonderful posts.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Great post! [and good to
see you back here] -- LittleBit, 21:12:55 01/29/04 Thu
I've felt that the metaphor of the shows has been getting lost
in the detail of looking at the choices and events as things that
could happen here, in this world, instead of seeing the symbolism.
Your post here has spelled out a number of things I have thought
about in rather vague terms. Thank you for expressing them so
well.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Seconding what Bit
said-- and likewise, great to see you back, Age! -- OnM, 06:25:11
01/30/04 Fri
[> [> [> [> [> [> Interesting metaphorical
analysis! Some additional thoughts. -- shadowkat, 21:20:56
01/29/04 Thu
Coming out of lurkerdom to say hi. I missed you, Age.
Glad to see you're still out there.
Are we to see the Scoobies' roaming the world, seeking out
fictional slayers, in a literal sense as the creation of a new
army of inexperienced super teenagers, taking orders from a new
young leader; or, more figuratively as a new generation of young
adults taking responsibility for the effects of the change in
our culture, helping to guide those who have never had power before
in our culture (and isn't this what Dana was meant to symbolize
in the extreme?), with the final confrontation of Andrew and the
slayers in 'Damage' as a symbolic representation of the new generation
of women choosing to be strong.
To take this analysis a step further - because you've just made
me realize something I'd missed. Excuse the rambling - it's a
bit of a brainstorm, so may not be as coherent as your post above.
In the confrontation scene - Angel is standing surrounded by men
in combat uniforms, there are no women present. Fred took off
in the ambulance with Spike. Note in Conviction, no women with
Hauser's unit. So here's Angel, ordering the people around him
-"I want armed men surrounding her at all times." Up
pops Andrew, who is in some ways effeminate in his mannerisms.
Girlish. Unlike Angel who is the polar opposite, very male and
a solid unbreakable wall. Andrew is someone Angel can easily brush
aside. But Andrew confronts him. When Angel challengs him, 12
girls step out. Why 12?
To match the same number of men surrounding Angel. Angel has 12
men in combat gear with guns. Andrew has 12 girls without combat
gear nor guns. Remember Buffy never used guns. The image is reminiscent
of the Initiative. Angel as Riley with his military troops. Buffy
with the Scooby Gang.
Angel uses Buffy as his ace - implying, ex-girlfriend, she trusts
me - in a way Angel always had a fatherly/protector relationship
with Buffy, Buffy in some ways, from possibly Angel's perspective
gave sway to his opinion. In Five By Five, Sanctuary - Buffy leaves
town her tail between her legs. That episode was also about a
rogue slayer. Now, Andrew looks Angel in the eye and states:"My
orders came from Buffy. None of these girls slept with you..."
Interesting choice of words. When Wes - who in some ways metaphorically
parallels Andrew (both had sissy/effeminate manners, both were
looked at with distrust, both study to be watchers), asks Angel
if he's just going to let them take her... Angel nods. Letting
them go and place Dana in a matching black van to Angel's own.
Interesting. The last time I saw vans and this switch, was Lilah
taking Billy, a misogynst demon from Angel and putting him in
a van. She represented W&H. Now the wheels have turned. Angel
has the power. And we are hit over the head with it again and
again in this episode. Angel's power at W&H is very similar to
Prof Walsh's at the Initiative.
He has technology. He can pinpoint a target with a satellite and
take it out. Gunn mentions that they can launch a tactical assault.
When they get Dana, five people, men, shoot her with tranq darts.
So Angel has joined the "corporate beast". A little
girl used to be the conduit, now we have a male cat. And the little
girl may be an evil manipulator. In the beginning of the episode
- Angel is with his team and Gunn is telling him they might want
to be careful with EVE, she may have more power than they realize.
She may not be so easily taken out. That's when Harmony barges
in to tell them about
Dana - the demon possession. They don't take Harm seriously at
first and talk over her, finally she gets through. Fred is also
barely listened to in this episode - the main strategists are
Wes, Gunn, Lorne, and Angel. Andrew doesn't even use Fred's name
- she's relegated to young skinny attractive female.
In the hospital - it is a female technician who screws up the
meds. She gives the male manic-depressive thorazin and the female
psychotic lithium. The male falls to the ground holding his arms
in a fetal state. The female blasts the door in. The male doctor
and his assistants try to take her out. She escapes and every
victim without exception is a man. She attacks them only after
they try to touch her.
1. Doctor - stretchs out syringe. She pulls off grate to go after
him
2.Male Technician - in the hospital - reaches out to touch her,
she swings chopping off his head
3. Male supermarket clerk - reaches out to touch her shoulder.
She snaps his shoulder.
4. Male Cop holds a gun on her - she swings the knife
5. Doc worker stretches out a hand and touches her shoulder, she
attacks him
6. Spike uses his hands to fight her and speaks with his hands
holding them in front of him like weapons
7. Andrew uses a trang gun with his hands
8. In the flashes - Walter uses his hands to torture her, so she
often just sees the hands, not the face, just the hands.
9. Angel uses his hands to throw Dana off Spike and she makes
fists with hers to attack him, he holds her with his hands while
his men tranq her.
(The slayer is known as the hand. The closed fist and open hand.
Andrew's army has no weapons but their hands. Andrew himself is
covered with weapons.)
Note, Dana does not attack any of these people, until they touch
her or confront her in some way with their hands.
Makes sense she'd chop off the hands. Are they an image of emasculation
- chopping them off? Or a symbol of power?
The closed fist, the open hand?
When the episode ends, the two vampires consider themselves and
their victims and ask if Dana is redeemable. I think the question
being asked is are they? The parallel here is interesting as well
- Dana is turned into a monster by three groups: Walter (a man
who gains power by torturing young girls - a reference to the
demon Spike yells at when he first encounters Dana, ironic since
of the two Spike is closer to that monster than Dana is.), The
Doctor (who gains power by tranquilizing and studying the girl
- sort of like W&H and the male watcher council with Buffy in
Helpless), and Buffy & Willow (who do the opposite, they empower
and make Dana far worse, far more dangerous, by sharing power,
not lording over or using it to hurt - they both set her free/make
her no longer weak, and give her the ability to become monsterous.)
But as Spike states, he and Angel were also victims once - their
deaths are engineered by women. Who both kill them and empower
them, turning them into monsters. Darla and Dru respectively do
to Angel and Spike somewhat the same things Walter/Dr/Buffy-Willow
combined due to Dana. In both cases - it's women passing on the
power, sharing it. How the power is used...that's another story.
Not sure if this adds anything to your analysis. Thanks again
for posting. I missed reading your posts.
best,
sk
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Awaking from a nightmare....
-- Rufus, 01:48:49 01/30/04 Fri
I see a progression through the episode where Dana starts as someone
waking from a drug induced dream to wander through a wasteland
to the end where her sisters find her and take her to a safe place.
Her dreams of being a slayer mix with her memories of torture
and she feels powerless and afraid acting out towards any male
who threatens her in any way. Spike doesn't help this when he
morphs into game face bringing the dreams and memories together
in a confusing soup of reactions and emotions. When Angel holds
her to be put down or to sleep he can only offer the same future
that doctor did, the difference being Angel wouldn't write a book
about it. The Doctor didn't offer a cure he offered an existance
where things would never have changed. Angel tells Dana she is
strong and at that last moment before a dart hits she understands
that she is not just a girl in a basement to be messed with, she
is in fact strong. If she had been left with Angel he would have
resorted to what he would think would work and doomed Dana to
a continuing hell. Instead, Andrew has brought her sisters to
her to take her home. Someplace safe. Dana went with them because
Angel didn't deserve the job of helping someone when he had so
many problems himself to work through. Dana is taken from the
wasteland where Angel is the head of and evil stronghold to a
place where some healing may begin.
Now anyone saying that I must be nuts to think Dana can be saved
should look at either favorite vampire and think the same of them.
Neither Dana/Slayer or Angel, Spike/started as a monster and what
happens now will depend how they end.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Insightful
readings, Sk & Rufus! -- MaeveRigan, 08:00:03 01/30/04
Fri
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Hmmm, a quibble
here - consider Connor/Dru -- s'kat, 09:10:51 01/30/04
Fri
Now anyone saying that I must be nuts to think Dana can be
saved should look at either favorite vampire and think the same
of them. Neither Dana/Slayer or Angel, Spike/started as a monster
and what happens now will depend how they end.
Ah, but you are comparing Dana to the wrong people here regarding
saving. Spike and Angel aren't crazy. Someone did not systematically
torture, drug and then empower them.
A far better comparison is two people you haven't mentioned and
the series' writers have stated can't be redeemed or at least
they haven't tried to:
1. Drusilla. Who is insane. She like Dana was systematically tortured
by someone a lot like Walter Kindel.
This monster killed her family, killed her friends, then took
her, raped and tortured her, then finally turned her into a monster
to do the same to others. Dru - like Dana - is cursed with visions
of future and past. She may not be a slayer, but she became a
vampire. Drusilla is Dana's dark sister. If Dru got a soul? Do
you think she'd have the chance that Spike, Angel or even Darla
did?
2. Connor - likewise, Connor was taken and tortured by a man claiming
to be his father, to a demon dimension as a baby. He was trained
to kill without thinking or caring.
He came back and attempted to fit into the new world, but
his surrogate father returned and tricked him into believing his
real father was a monster again. He tries again. This time the
surrogate mother manipulates him and he helps bring forth a child,
who he watchs give the great life to everyone but with a deadly
price. Everyone but him.
By the time he has to kill the child, he's psychologically tramautized.
He begins to see every man as the representation of his two fathers
- Holtz/Angel who removed his family. Every family as being broken.
He goes insane and wants to blow up a sporting goods store. Become
the destroyer. The only way Angel can see of helping Connor is
to wipe the slate clean, thus Angel takes W&H's bargain.
Dana is a comment on Connor and Drusilla. Angel's children.
So, the question you might want to be asking is not whether Spike
and Angel can be redeemed - that's closer to Faith, but whether
Connor and Drusilla could ever be redeemed?
Is it possible to redeem someone who is insane? In our world,
Dana wouldn't go to prison for her crimes nor would she be executed
- Spike and Angel and Faith would. She would be placed in a mental
institution. Because she lacks the capacity to know the difference
between right and wrong.
She is "insane". So the question is *not* whether she
can be redeemed, so much as whether they can cure her so she can
be able to some day reclaim her life. Is she a rabid
animal, who has lost all ability to be cured? Or someone who just
had the wrong treatment?
It's an interesting question. How do you deal with the person
who kills because they are insane?
Angel could help Faith, he was also to some extent able to help
the woman in Untouched and Darla and even Spike, that's saving
souls. But Connor, Dru, Dana, even Fred were tough cases for him.
How do you handle insanity? And Angel himself admits to Spike
- that they are the wrong people to try and help her - they are
vampires, she's a slayer - everything in her tells her to kill
them. She doesn't have the mental capacity to understand that
they are now good or can be good vampires (heck some audience
members don't completely understand this ;-) ). Placing her in
a soulled vampire's care - is like placing her in the Doctor's
or
a regretful Walter Kindel's. While it's a nice romantic fantasy
that someone like Angel or Spike (monsters who'd done at one time
the same crimes the human monster Kindel did) can help Dana, redeeming
themselves in the process, it's not very realistic. How could
Dana ever look at someone like Angel or Spike and not see nightmare
images?
Any more than Connor could ever really look at Angel, after what
Holtz did to him, and not see nightmare images?
Or Drusilla, for that matter?
There are some people we *ourselves* do not have the capacity
to help - that does not mean they cannot be helped.
Nor does that mean they can be. What it means is we aren't the
ones to do it. Someone else however is.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Hmmm,
a quibble here - consider Connor/Dru -- Rufus, 14:06:28
01/30/04 Fri
In watching the show I had to wonder just how insane Dana would
be if she wasn't on constant Thorazine instead of getting some
real therapy. My feeling is that Rabinaw was drugging the patient
and keeping her in a state of limbo where she only had nightmares
she couldn't fully undersand. Dr. Rabinaw wasn't interested in
his patient getting well as much as he was interested in a top
ten best seller at her expense.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re:
Hmmm, a quibble here - consider Connor/Dru -- Ann, 14:55:24
01/30/04 Fri
Every one has used Dana in some way. The doctor's abuse might
have been the worst as he should have known better. Again it goes
to ability and resources (psychological and otherwise). His treatment
of her bothered me the most. He was the one person who was supposed
to be helping her but kept her drugged. When a person is so vulnurable
and their abuse continues, I think this is the greatest evil.
I have issues with therapists (the/rapists) using their patients
for their own gain. Whether it be for the reason Dana's doctor
did, or for personal advancement and personal psychological healing,
doctors have an obligation not to use their patients for their
own gain.
Walter, not to be excused, probably couldn't help himself as he
had issues. I can only assumed he learned that behavior somewhere!
Vampires don't generally have a choice in their behavior. The
doctor manipulated an innocent girl for his financial gain and
for publications and for an increase in his reputation. Yuck!
I hope that Dana's handling, and that is what it will have to
be, will not be continued by the new "leaders" in such
a manipulative way. When someone is so vulnerable, so childlike
in their fear, yet underneath has the strength to go on and take
back the night, which Dana did, there is hope.
I feel the same about hope for Connor.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I
agree - some more thoughts -- s'kat, 15:33:51 01/30/04
Fri
In watching the show I had to wonder just how insane Dana would
be if she wasn't on constant Thorazine instead of getting some
real therapy. My feeling is that Rabinaw was drugging the patient
and keeping her in a state of limbo where she only had nightmares
she couldn't fully undersand. Dr. Rabinaw wasn't interested in
his patient getting well as much as he was interested in a top
ten best seller at her expense.
I'd agree. (See my post in the thread about River/Dana - where
I discuss different types of insanity for more details on this.)
I think what we see with Dana is the MPD (multiple personality
disorder or disassociation) which is better treated with therapy
as opposed to chemicals. Seems that she went into a catatonic
state - sort of like asylum world Buffy in Normal Again, when
she came out of it - they drugged her. Dr. Rabinawa makes the
mistake lots of people do when attempting to treat insanity brought
on by traumatic experiences - drugs. The problem isn't a chemical
imbalance - it's the patient's inability to handle a horrible
event.
Ironically enough - I think Spike may have actually helped Dana
more by becoming her victim, than he or anyone else would have
if they'd simply caught her and drugged her. Actually they helped
each other in a very odd way. Spike by both pursuing Dana, vamping
out, and finally, albeit involuntarily, having her turn the tables
on him and turn him into her victim - provided her with the means
to re-experience the trauma and take control over it. In counseling
MPD patients, therapists will often set up a safe scenerio where
the patient mentally re-experiences the trauma, except this round
they mentally confront the torturer/abuser and take control. That's
literally what happened in Damage. Through Spike -each one of
Dana's personalities (the child, Nikki, the Chinese slayer, Dana
herself) confronted her tormentor and turned the tables on him,
by literally removing his hands - she not only demonstrated to
him what he'd done to her, but she metaphorically and literally
removed his ability to continue to do it. She ended the loop in
her mind of her torturer continuing to touch her, over and over
and over again. Likewise - the therapy - forced Spike to re-experience
first hand what he did without thinking to his victims as a demon.
It made him realize what that statment he makes to Buffy way back
in fool for love means...and the consequences of the resulting
trauma. Made him feel what happened to Nikki and Chinese Slayer.
Feel it more than just guilt. (This episode reminds me a great
deal of The Sonmabulist in S1 where Angel is forced to relive
his crimes through a vampire who is recreating them and forced
to deal head on with the monster he created - Damage is a slightly
different take on this theme, just as Untouched was.) By doing
this both Spike and Dana are released from the eternal loop...Spike
is Dana's substitute for Walter Kindel. I think, and I could be
wrong here, Giles may have a far easier time treating Dana than
Rabinawa or anyone else did, b/c she's confronted the thing that
split her apart and made her insane. Now, perhaps the healing
can begin.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Yeah, but most people can't butcher the entire asylum staff
-- Doug, 16:59:01 01/30/04 Fri
When you are dealing with someone with that level of power containment
and protection of others kinda take precedence. (same reasoning
as why Buffy didn't let every vamp she met wander free and unrestrained,
how many people are you willing to let die?) Let's face it; the
doctor,though he may have been trying to write a book, would have
done the same things even if he wasn't. Her therapy might have
required her to be able to mutilate some random man, but trhe
doctor had a duty to make sure that she couldn't hurt anyone.
I don't know, maybe if the doctor had got some nice thick steel
manacles and chained her to a wall then that would have been better,
but I doubt it. More likely she would have torn through her own
wrists trying to get free. Given the doctor had neither souled
vamps or slayers working there as orderlies his options were extremly
limited.
I honestly don't like the thought of doping someone up like that,actually
to speak with absolute candor I loath the thought of it, but it
was entirely likely that after the catatonia she'd been trapped
in the nightmares for long enough that she was too dangerous to
let her get free. To be perfectly honest this has been discussed
on this board before: Is Buffy right to kill vampires based on
the fact that they will harm the human population despite the
chance that one might repent?. As I recall the consensus was that
Buffy was justified; that, as distateful as many of us find the
idea of vigilantism and the thought of killing something that
has even a small likelihood of turning it's existence around and
doing good, there weren't alot of other options. Did I miss a
debate or 2 where this was contradicted? If so I apologize.
If not then I wonder: Exactly how many human lives are worth Dana's
sanity? 5? 10? 100? 1? If to cure her Giles has to let her loose
to maim and possibly kill one person, who may very well not possess
Spike's vampiric nature and acompanying resilience and healing
abilities, should he let her loose? Should the doctor have let
her loose on the justification that murdering people might help
her? I say no to both, but you're free to say yes (after all,
slayers are better and more important than us mere mortals right?).
Angel has facilities that could contain Dana without drugs, we
are to believe that Buffy has somehow gained such facilities herself
in the last 6 months (unlikely, but I'll play along). The doctor
did not have such facilities, but he was asked to deal with something
he wasn't supposed to have to deal with, and until she escaped
no one was volunteering to take over.
In terms of general treatment I agree with you, but as I've had
pointed out to me before; where the supernatural comes into things
the normal rules just don't work.
I'm really sorry about the sarcasm but I've been on edge recently.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Agree, Great points made. -- DorianQ, 18:31:56
01/30/04 Fri
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Re: Yeah, but most people can't butcher the entire asylum
staff -- s'kat, 19:06:59 01/30/04 Fri
Oh don't misunderstand me, I think you'd have to use some type
of drug to keep Dana contained. She's superstrong and as Angel
found out, more than ready to tear him apart, regardless of what
he said.
But you are forgetting something about Giles and the SG - they
do have resources. Caleb didn't blow up everything, just the headquarters.
Robeson was still alive and so is Wes' father Roger. Which leads
me to believe there may have been others out there that Caleb
didn't get. Also, remember Helpless (S3 BTVS)? In that episode
Giles uses a drug that makes Buffy weak, it removes her superstrength
and slayer powers. A far more effective drug than thorazine and
possibly one that W&H nor the normal doctors have on hand.
While killing Dana makes sense if you can't contain her, they
can contain her. And her actions? Not completely under her control.
They weren't her choice. She was insane at the time. This is similar
to triggered Spike last year - whom Buffy chose not to kill, even
though he was incredibly dangerous. Why? She could contain him
and it wasn't his choice. Same with Andrew - who she chose not
to kill - why? Because he could and was willing to change. Same
with Willow, an incredibly dangerous person - why? They found
a way to pull her out of it.
Contrast this with the vampires rising from the grave. They don't
have a moral compass. They aren't living creatures.
They are connected to evil. Their goal in life is to kill.
Yes, there are a few anomalies like Harmony. But most of them?
Kill humans. Spread their plague. Make more. I can see why Buffy
slayed them. The show is admittedly making this question a little
murkier than it did before, but it is very different to let a
vampire live and to let a girl who is traumatized live, particularly
when you can give the girl the correct drug to weaken her strength
and treat the illness. There's no cure for vampirism. It's not
the same thing.
You didn't come across that sarcastic. So no worries.
sk
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Murkier and Murkier and the compass keeps spinning....;)
-- Rufus, 01:21:11 01/31/04 Sat
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Not to worry Doug. -- Rufus, 01:19:58 01/31/04
Sat
I honestly don't like the thought of doping someone up like
that,actually to speak with absolute candor I loath the thought
of it, but it was entirely likely that after the catatonia she'd
been trapped in the nightmares for long enough that she was too
dangerous to let her get free.
I don't think she will be out patrolling next week with a gang
of Slayers, I do think that in an atmosphere where she can begin
to sort out who she is without Thorazine and someone with a top
ten on their mind she just may have a chance of getting better.
I'd rather see her with people with the power to control her tempered
with the compassion to care about her unlike the treatment she
has gotten so far. How many dead people is Dana worth? I don't
know I'd have to go count up the bodies for Spike and Angel first.
It's easy to sympathize with Angel and Spike because we don't
see them killing innocent people in the here and now but is there
a parallel between the killing of innocents by the insane or someone
who is possessed by a demon and has no soul to help them understand
the difference between right and wrong?
I'm not worried about the sarcasm I like the hard questions and
they are easier to deal with when we are talking about the metaphorical
as opposed to the real life in the flesh present now that would
immediately change our perspective.
Oh if I've missed you joining the board welcome....:):):)
[> [> [> [> [> [> Thank you for a fascinating
post. Gives me lots to think about. -- Jane, 22:18:40 01/29/04
Thu
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Metaphor Spoilers Damage;
AtS 5; Buffy: Chosen, S6-7. -- Rufus, 01:36:26 01/30/04
Fri
Are we to read the amputation of Spike's forearms as a symbolic
emasculation?
To Dana the power of the hand harms, tortures, restrains. If you
watch the end of the show and the confrontation with Angel, Dana
begins to subtly change as she realizes she has power. When speaking
with Spike she can only act towards him like she would her torturer
and murderer of her family, and Spike's own words doesn't much
change her attitude. She not only sees Spike through the eyes
of the child who was tortured but the Slayers that Spike killed.
Earlier in the show when Spike assumes that Dana is a demon he
shows his own demon face bringing forth Dana's Slayer instincts.
She can only see Spike in the worst way and he inadvertantly reinforces
this talking about the Slayers he killed. Angel is the one to
say he is there to help Dana, that she is strong. Is Dana still
a monster like Spike saw her? Or is Spike wrong and the potential
for the girl who was a victim will heal with other of her kind
around to help?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Words Spoiler
'Damage' -- Age, 18:37:46 01/30/04 Fri
That's the problem with words, they tend to create a permanent
identity when all is flux: is Dana a monster or are her acts monstrous?
Still, throughout both series Whedon has made it clear that the
attitude change signified by the death metaphor, losing a human
soul and gaining a demon one, is so drastic that much effort,
and the intervention of others, is required to change it. But,
of course, Dana still has her human 'soul.' Her horrendous experiences
will stay with her for the rest of her life. How she assimilates
them will depend on what help she receives. How will she direct
her anger? How will she reconnect with others?
Age.
[> [> [> [> [> [> excellent post, age.
-- lynx, 01:42:07 01/30/04 Fri
[> [> [> [> [> [> All excellent posts!!
-- Ann, 04:27:19 01/30/04 Fri
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Metaphor Spoilers Damage;
AtS 5; Buffy: Chosen, S6-7. -- Rahael, 07:19:30 01/30/04
Fri
Hey! Age!
I have problems with this ep (not about slayer power - I agree
with you absolutely re metaphors).
I have problems with the characterization of Dana (I'm going by
other people's reactions here, both negative and positive). Yours
so far is the interpretation I find most easeful, and meaningful
and non distressing.
Thanks for that.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Victims -- Arethusa,
08:42:00 01/30/04 Fri
Dana is raw power, like the First Slayer, like W&H, her humanity
stripped away, as perhaps AI's humanity is being stripped away.
She draws lines down her face like the FS, battle paint, the dreams
and nightmares of past slayers churning through her head. But
Buffy's in there too. Dana's memories of her parents' love and
her visions of slayers' love and sacrifices might help her recover.
As you say, power isn't enough.
Dana is also the embodiment of Angel's self-image, that of a victim;
hence the conversation between Angel and Spike at the end of the
episode. We were victims too, once upon a time, they say. When
Spike is victimized he is finally able to feel and understand
the larger consequences of his evil deeds. (As Andrew was forced
to feel his crime by Buffy, which is no doubt why he led the slayers
and not someone who was more than 85% manly.) Because Spike is
able to acknowledge his crimes, Angel is able to share his guilt
and regret, and perhaps put it in perspective, something they
can't do with anyone else for fear of being thought callous.
Misuse of power-using and refusing it-created an endless chain
of victims. Under the surface, as always, is Connor, kidnapped
and abused by a madman who had been victimized himself by Angel,
who had been victimizedby Darla, who had been victimized by society
and used by the Master, who probably also had been an innocent
human being at one time. If anyone needs to know why they should
be concerned with the welfare of all mankind, surely the ever-ending
chain of victimization should point out why.
Wonderful post, Age. Thanks.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> 'never-ending chain'
not 'ever-ending' -- Arethusa, 08:43:18 01/30/04 Fri
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Victims --
Irene, 12:19:05 01/30/04 Fri
"Dana is raw power, like the First Slayer, like W&H,
her humanity stripped away, as perhaps AI's humanity is being
stripped away."
I don't know if this is a fair comparison of Dana and the First
Slayer. None of us really know what the First Slayer was like
as a character.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> First Slayer
-- Arethusa, 12:31:29 01/30/04 Fri
Based on what we've seen of the First Slayer, I think that the
infusion of demon power overcame or subjegated her humanity. She's
the hunt, the kill. She seems isolated and wild, and does not
or cannot speak for herself. (There are may excellent posts in
the archives that discuss the first slayer.) I'd quote Restless
and Intervention, but I have to run!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: First
Slayer -- Irene, 13:03:25 01/30/04 Fri
"Based on what we've seen of the First Slayer, I think that
the infusion of demon power overcame or subjegated her humanity.
She's the hunt, the kill. She seems isolated and wild, and does
not or cannot speak for herself."
I still find it difficult to accept this, due to the fact that
we are viewing the First Slayer from Buffy's eyes. What we saw
in "Restless" was Buffy's view of whom the First Slayer
was. Until ME gives us the opportunity to view the First Slayer
from her eyes, I don't think I can accept any opinion of what
she was like.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Fair
enough. -- Arethusa, 13:44:28 01/30/04 Fri
It's very true that we can learn more about people from seeing
many points of view, but remember that we also have the slayer's
on words about herself in the two episodes I mentioned. Also,
people's views of themselves can be as distorted as others' views
of them, as Skip said to Cordy. (Not that I trust Skip, the rotter.)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Joss's opening story to 'Tales of the Slayers' (comic strip,
not prose) sheds light on the FS -- KdS, 04:10:29 01/31/04
Sat
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Victims Spoilers
'Damage'; 'Soul Purpose'; AtS S4; Buffy S4,7. -- Age, 16:59:08
01/30/04 Fri
Yes, I got the same impression, very much the first slayer, all
the raw aggressive energy that little good girls never were supposed
to have but of course always did; (the way her lines were spoken
at times also reminded me of the first slayer: not being weak
replacing the first slayer's no friends.)
The chain of victimization is one of the reasons why Whedon concentrates
so much on the need to grow up, for there to be adults to look
after the next generation. To grow up, to work at remaining human
rather than staying as perpetual teenagers like the vampires is
necessary because adult-children instead of seeking to give to
the next generation of children will, in their childish perceived
role as permanent dependents, expect to be nurtured by the next
generation, with the parasitic nourishment symbolized obviously
in life's blood to vampire. To quote seventh season 'Buffy': it's
all connected.
Yes, I was thinking the same thing about Dana and Angel. It can't
be just a coincidence that last week Angel had to be rescued from
his nightmares, waking up from/to them with a renewed sense of
his own condition, and in this week we have a young woman waking
up from/to her nightmares, especially we are given the impression
that Angel is thinking that coming to Wolfram and Hart was a mistake.
Still, like Dana he's not out of the woods yet: he still felt
that he could bring her to Wolfram and Hart for treatment(?!)
And, it may be that Dana's path away from Wolfram and Hart and
towards a family of sisters is an indication of where Angel should
be proceeding, seeing as the members of the Fang Gang no longer
seem to be family, but co-workers. Still, what would be the cost?
What of Connor?
An intriguing contrast at the end of the episode is made between
Spike who is carted off to Wolfram and Hart to have limbs reassembled,
with a mention of cadavres(obvious symbol of death) by Fred; and
Dana who is taken to the slayers to further her healing process.
In a strictly physical sense Wolfram and Hart can put people back
together, but what about the person herself? Note: this reiterates
the meaning behind the juxtaposition of Angel's statement about
doubt in coming to Wolfram and Hart with Gunn's positive outlook:
Gunn:
Look, I know our move to Wolfram and Hart hasn't
been all flowers and candy, but we've been able to
do some serious good while we're here: lives saved,
disasters averted, with all our fingers and souls
still attached. End of the day, I'm thinking we made
the right choice.
[Cut to Angel]
Angel:
Maybe we made a mistake coming here.
****
Well, at least all their fingers still attached...uh, re-attached
when necessary.
Age.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Regarding attachments
(Spoilers 'Damage', Dead EndAtS S2). -- s'kat, 18:54:03
01/30/04 Fri
An intriguing contrast at the end of the episode is made between
Spike who is carted off to Wolfram and Hart to have limbs reassembled,
with a mention of cadavres(obvious symbol of death) by Fred; and
Dana who is taken to the slayers to further her healing process.
In a strictly physical sense Wolfram and Hart can put people back
together, but what about the person herself?
This reminds me of what happened with another character, Lindsey
in Season 2. Angel chops off Lindsey's hand while fighting over
the reanimation of whatever is in the box in To Shanshue in La.
Later after putting up with a fake hand and getting it shattered
by Angel, W&H finally give Lindsey a new hand courtesy of dark
demonic shamans and well a body part dept. The hand is telling
Lindsey to kill. But not to kill others - it wants Lindsey to
kill the human being that W&H is keeping alive in order to supply
body parts. Discovering what W&H is doing is the final straw -
Lindsey decides to cut his ties with W&H and leaves town using
the hand to get W&H to let him go. The hand instead of turning
Lindsey evil in this episode, or turning him into a puppet, sets
him free. But W&H was the group that reattached it.
Same thing with Spike - W&H re-attaches Spike's hands. But Spike
stares down at them wondering if there's hope for the rest of
him, for his soul. He also seems to come to an odd epiphany about
being a victim by becoming one himself, again.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Victims
Spoilers 'Damage'; 'Soul Purpose'; AtS S4; Buffy S4,7. --
Rufus, 01:29:19 01/31/04 Sat
Still, like Dana he's not out of the woods yet: he still felt
that he could bring her to Wolfram and Hart for treatment(?!)
I think that Angel figures that as long as he is at Wolfram and
Hart he is in control.....but as we saw in the beginning
of the episode if he can't fire Eve is he really in control? I
that question is troubling him...even more so at the end when
Andrew tells him that he's fooling himself. His problem is the
mindwipe of his friends and how to quit someplace that has interesting
severance packages...;)
I'd say the time to question where the hell you're hanging your
hat is when an employee says...
Knox: Hey, no. We've contained more plagues than we've ever
designed. I'm not all about destruction here.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Victims & power
-- Rahael, 03:19:28 01/31/04 Sat
I agree with you Arethusa, but it only tells one little part of
the story, at least in the world that I see. Victims may create
victims, but sometimes it's just the 'powerful', creating victim,
after victim, after victim after victim.
These victims don't necessarily *ever* hurt other people.
I've known many people who have been tortured. Not ONE of them
has ever hurt anyone else. In any way. They withdraw into themselves.
they become broken. And yet, they still remain capable of great
depths of sensitivity, humanity and generosity.
More so than many people who have been 'victimised'. Focusing
only on the desperate and sad takes our gaze form those who can
distance themselves from hte pain and destruction they cause.
Who themselves never suffer. Who never are called to account.
These 'victims' remain great human beings, doing great things,
and *yet* that doesn' stop injustice in the world.
I have seen comments about how those who are trespassed against
should not trespass against others. I agree. But no one points
out that the vast majority of people who are damaged would not
ever do it to anyone else. Because they know how terrible it is.
I think these are the most sane, most powerful people around,
and sometimes I feel sad that I have to say it so constantly.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> I agree, good
point. (Spoilers Firefly Objects in Space) -- s'kat, 08:54:38
01/31/04 Sat
But no one points out that the vast majority of people who
are damaged would not ever do it to anyone else. Because they
know how terrible it is. I think these are the most sane, most
powerful people around, and sometimes I feel sad that I have to
say it so constantly.
This is a very good point and you're right is not emphasized enough.
We have a tendency to make generalizations about why people do
the things they do.
Oh - they did this because they were abused. Forgetting that 85%
of those who are abused, tortured or victimized do not engage
in acts of torture themselves - they become a well-adjusted human
beings who work to help others. Most of the people I've known
in my life who have had horrendous experiences went on to do wonderful
things and did not use being a victim as an excuse to become monsterous
themselves.
This leads me to believe the 10%, or whatever small percentage
we wish to give, who do use the horrible torture, rape, etc they
endured to excuse monsterous acts of their own - have something
else going on. The torture etc may have just opened up that tendency
in them or they may have done it anyway.
Then there's the torturers, rapists, abusers, murderers out there
who really were never abused. John Steinbeck does a very good
job of exploring someone like this in his book East of Eden. Whedon
actually explores it in Objects in Space with the character of
Early. In Movies? I've seen it done twice with Owen Wilson in
the Minus Man, and Michael Rooker in Henry: Portrait of a Serial
Killer. Not all serial killers and torturers and murderers were
abused or victimized. The reasons why some human beings prey on
other human beings is something I'm not sure we can begin to understand.
We keep trying...but for every generalization or rational we pinpoint
- someone finds an exception.
What is it that turns one person into a killer and another into
someone who helps others (I want to say saint, but don't like
the religious connotation). Why do William and Liam become two
of the worst vamps in history - legends, while Harmony has barely
killed a soul. Why did Faith kill people, while Buffy saved them?
And should that have been taken into consideration when Buffy
shared her power with faceless unknown girls? I don't know. Whedon
in his commentary on Objects in Space - explores this through
River and Early - two people who lack something in their human
makeup, yet...River remains good while Early enjoys inflicting
pain.
It's such a tough thing to figure out. But I think the reason
we have stories like Objects in Space or the episodes in BTVS
and ATS is we desire to, because maybe then, we can find a way
of preventing these acts of violence against each other - if only,
if only we can understand the reason or cause of them.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: I
agree, good point. (Spoilers Firefly Objects in Space) --
Arethusa, 09:29:30 01/31/04 Sat
This is something I'm almost to close to to discuss.
I never forget those who suffered for years yet didn't let it
twist or crush them. How could I-I'm one of them. Yet it feels
very prentetious to talk about why I turned out okay, graduated
from college, kept my sanity and sense of humor and even love
of humanity (at least in the abstract!). Others didn't-they became
addicts, prostitutes, just messed up people who contiue to hurt
themselves and hurt others. I know a lot of people who
followed that path.
Is it something inside of me? Am I special, different? I don't
really think so. But I became stronger and a better person, more
compassionate and understanding, and have a fairly successful
life. (Do you see why I don't talk about this, lol?) Am I just
lucky? That's pretty ironic if true.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Destructive/self
destructive people -- Rahael, 11:22:15 01/31/04 Sat
I've seen many of those people, and yes, they've had troubled
lives/pasts. I don't put them on the level of those people who've
willingly and terrifyingly wrecked the lives of countless people.
I can see that I'm not that different from those who might be
destructive/ or self-destructive to the people around me. We all
have that capacity, in small ways. When I was young, I truanted
from school every day. As often as I could. I could see very clearly
that I could just throw my life away, and cause immense pain and
sadness to the people who cared about me. Something extra kept
me going - the love of the people around me. I feel sad for those
who don't have the gifts that I got. That is why I feel fortunate.
But the welter of poverty and sadness and pain some live is, I
would argue qualitatively different from people who commit what
I consider to be geniunely evil acts, with forethought and cold
purpose.
I can see that this could be a controversial view though, especially
if one has had to live with those who carelessly and clumsily
go around life causing hurt (I've had to walk away from troubled
friends who in the end, cost me too much).
I can see the effect of trauma in little ways in the people around
me. But I can see the great beauty as well as the scars. It's
one of the things I get misty eyed about nearly every day. It's
what gave me hope to go on. It's the ultimate redemption story
- rising above humiliation and degredation to grasp one's humanity.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Destructive/self destructive people -- Arethusa, 12:30:19
01/31/04 Sat
Yes, the people who destroy others for personal gain are on a
different level. I don't think that's controversial at all; they
know better and do it anyway. Half the people I talk to don't
think it's a big deal, so what if people use others to get what
they want? That's just incomprehensible to me. It's sickening
to see my nation (amoung others, of course) worship and emulate
the rich and powerful, many (if not most) who made their fortune
by squeezing the life blood of the populace. They're the real
vampires.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Destructive/self destructive people -- sdev, 13:40:15
01/31/04 Sat
I think the age of the abuse victim is very significant in terms
of what kind of person they may later become. The younger the
worse off they may be.
In seeing Dana it was obvious to me that the possibility of choice
was just not there. I can in no way blame her for her weakness.
She never had a chance to make choices. She appeared practically
programmed for destruction in the throes of her delusions.
That in no way denigrates or overlooks the accomplishments of
those heroic individuals who have struggled and overcome their
pasts. But one must start from a place of cognition. I do believe
there is a middle group who makes choices in both directions,
but Dana was outside of that group.
Honestly I have no idea what the difference is between a Dana
and the people you are describing who get to make choices. Not
to avoid the concept of personal responsibility, but in the far
gone cases such as Dana genetics becomes a strong likelihood,
some type of predisposition to psychosis. Sometimes mental ilness
is as real and unavoidable as diabetes or leukemia.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[> Re: Destructive/self destructive people -- Jane,
16:25:58 01/31/04 Sat
What is it that allows one person to rise above horrendous tragedy
and remain a functioning human being, while another crumbles under
similar pressures? I find this a fascinating subject, one to which
I have no answer. I often suspect that there is some genetic marker
for coping. In my work with the critically ill, I see some families
come apart under the pressure, while others become stronger and
more closely knit. What enables some to grow through pain and
trauma must be a combination of many factors, one of which I think
is an innate ability to deal effectively with stress. I'm no expert,
but years of working in an Intensive Care Unit have put me in
a position to make a somewhat educated guess.
This is a very interesting discussion. Thanks to all for it. To
bring it back to Dana, I think her chances of healing are much
better under the care of the Watchers/Slayers than it would be
at W&H. Surrounding her with men in black armed to the teeth
would only feed her disconnect and paranoia, since she relates
to men as the instruments of her torture. I would hope that the
new Watchers would have access to people such as the Devon Coven
who could help her.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Excellent post, Age. Welcome
back--we've missed you. -- cjl, 11:23:41 01/30/04 Fri
[> [> [> Re: I'm not. -- phoenix, 12:44:09
01/29/04 Thu
*Stands up and cheers* I'm glad you said that Arethusa.
[> [> [> [> Thank you. -- Arethusa, 13:46:09
01/29/04 Thu
[> [> [> [> Cheering along with you. Well said,
Arethusa. -- Jane, 14:53:09 01/29/04 Thu
[> [> [> I agree completely and wholeheartedly.
-- Plin, 04:58:29 01/30/04 Fri
[> [> [> If Buffy were really about equality...
-- Seven, 13:02:42 01/30/04 Fri
She would have had another idea. For the reasons of the show (being
figuratively about, to coin a phrase, "girl power,")
Joss had Buffy empower many, many girls. But wouldn't a better
solution have been to empower all people? Let's forget about the
limitations of Willow's power. I have seen here on the board a
gender war brewing. I am not going to get wrapped up in it. (yeah,
right) But seriously, if Willow was able to do what she did, it
is concievable that with time, she could figure out how to empower
all people with the slayer power. Then everyone would be on an
equal footing. Since emotions seem to be so high right now, I
imagine that many of the male posters are saying, "Yeah,
how 'bout that?" And that some of the female posters are
thinking, "No, it's about female empowerment."
NOTICE I SAID SOME NOT EVERY ONE.
The point is we are getting caught up in an argument that is inconsequential.
The argument should not be whether what was done was wrong or
right or feminist or not, the fact is Buffy did this as last ditch
effort to fight the first. If there were thousands of ubervamps
running around, we would be better off with thousands of slayers.The
problem is, there are no thousands of ubervamps. There likely
aren't any. So now the world is left with a small percentage of
the population being gifted with super-powers who have no "Calling"
, no "Duty" . There are hundreds of girls to fight the
forces of darkness, Why should every girl have to? Won't many
of them jsut say screw this and rob a liquer store? Won't some
become "Vigalantes" in the city (a la Spike/Angel/Batman/Buffy)
Was buffy justified in empowering these girls? Yes
Did it also cause a problem? Yes.
Is Buffy dealing with that problem? Yes.
Was angel justified in taking over W&H? Yes
Did this cause problems? Yes
IS Angel dealing with those problems? Yes at least he is starting
to (eve)
i think the fact that this whole deal was brought up is a testament
to ME. Buffy's choice has consequences just like Angel's does.
The parralell is amazing and great.
Angel -- the series is about living with the choices one has made.
This season is a clear testament to that. Buffy's decision is
a parralell to that and was used briliantly.
Can we just drop the gender fued?
7
[> [> [> [> Re: If Buffy were really about equality...
-- Irene, 13:22:16 01/30/04 Fri
"She would have had another idea. For the reasons of the
show (being figuratively about, to coin a phrase, "girl power,")
Joss had Buffy empower many, many girls. But wouldn't a better
solution have been to empower all people?"
The spell only worked for those who were born as Potential Slayers.
"Was angel justified in taking over W&H? Yes"
I don't think so. I'm still horrified by his actions in "Home".
[> [> [> [> [> Re: If Buffy were really about
equality... -- Seven, 15:30:36 01/30/04 Fri
I realize that the spell only worked for potentials who were all
girls. I was stating that given time, the spell could be reworked
to include everyone. Also, isn't what Buffy did the same thing
that the Shadowmen did? Putting a demon spirit into an unwanting/unknowing
girl/s?
Also, I didn't say that Angel's decision was the right one, only
that it was justified considering the situation. Many people,
it seems, have been disgusted by Buffy's decision as well.
What seems like a good idea or even is a good idea can (sometime)
later come back to haunt you.
That is what the show is about
[> [> [> [> [> [> Spell -- Irene, 15:51:20
01/30/04 Fri
"Also, isn't what Buffy did the same thing that the Shadowmen
did? Putting a demon spirit into an unwanting/unknowing girl/s?"
I don't think so. I believe that what Buffy and Willow did was
activated the demon spirit that was already laying dormant in
the girls. Remember - all Slayers are basically born as Potentials.
[> [> [> [> for equality...Spoilers: Angel and
Buffy to present. -- Age, 18:22:28 01/31/04 Sat
I disagree to some extent.
Firstly, I think that giving all the potentials the ability to
choose to be strong, reflecting a cultural change, is meant to
be interpreted as giving women equality with men. It's that slayer
power is an exagerated metaphor for the strength that women have
always possessed but were denied in a male dominated culture,
just as the vampire metaphor is a dramatic exageration representing
arrested development. It's a matter of focus, with both series
being set precisely in the present to reflect the cultural change
that our society has undergone due to the women's movement, a
movement symbolized at the beginning of 'Buffy' by the single
mum and daughter moving to the suburbs. I think that this focus
on women means that we are to assume that men already have the
cultural permission to be strong; hence, the exagerated strength
of the slayer highlighting for women that which men already enjoy.
Secondly, as slayers are supernatural metaphors, I think we have
to ascribe to their being only women a certain symbolic significance:
with only one slayer chosen each generation, one could say that
she has represented the empowered feminine in both women AND men
that was marginalized in a male dominated society. Giving all
the potentials the ability to be strong is a metaphor for the
recent more universal empowerment of the feminine in our society:
equality works both ways, allowing the traditionally masculine
in women and the feminine in men. However, that doesn't mean that
everyone can be strong, the episode 'Potential' made this clear.
But, the spell in 'Chosen' was meant to symbolize the removal
of the culture disallowing those women who want and can be strong
from doing so.
Thirdly, I think we have to see the new slayers in an evolving
manner. Buffy changed the rules. This means that the rules can
be changed even more in later generations with the influence of
the new slayers. What if Willow's spell fades or gets altered
in later years as the number of vampires and demons diminishes?
What if the thematic movement is towards a symbol of equality
between the sexes as the slayers and demons fade out(assuming
of course that the demons and vampires represent those who have
given into the more traditionally male cultured approach to relationships,
ie that of power)? Or, what if the symbol of equality is the introduction
of male slayers as females allowed to embrace power in fact do
so, resulting in more becoming as if demons or vampires?
Fourthly, given the metaphorical nature of both series, in the
likelihood that a slayer does not embrace her duty, and uses her
strength for a self centred and harmful purpose, the metaphor
would also change: she would become a demon or a vampire. She
would necessarily, as the metaphor structure of the shows demands,
lose her human 'soul' and get a demon one, assuming that the selfish
act is not just a mistake, but signifies a more fundamental attitude
change.
Fifthly, what if the super strength of the new slayers has another
metaphorical meaning. We have only just emerged from a male dominated
culture. What if the age of the new slayers symbolizes the youth
of the new culture, with many aspects of the old culture still
in place. What if the super strength of the new slayers is meant
to represent what women making their way in the world feel they
have to be to overcome some of the boundaries that may still be
in place?
Sixthly, I think your posting like others I have read recently
highlights the problem that we face in analyzing these series:
how much of this can we take literally and how much do we fall
back on metaphor? I don't think Whedon and his writers would want
us to limit ourselves to one or the other as I don't think they
do; rather, they try as much as possible to use both. In this
light I think your comment about Buffy's decision to make all
the potentials slayers is well worth merit. Metaphorically, this
is about the empowered feminine, but it's possible that Whedon
anticipated an objection to having just women gain super strength,
and so he had it done literally as a last ditch effort by Buffy.
That's it's literal excuse, and allows both the metaphorical reading
and the literal opportunity to study themes of responsibility,
organizations, consequences as your comment about the parallel
to Angel suggests.
Seventhly, as a male poster I welcome the focus on women having
strength because it highlights for me how I may equally embrace
in myself the traditionally feminine which had been previously
disallowed and in fact denigrated.
Age.
[> [> [> [> [> One simply cannot take a hard-SF
approach to this -- KdS, 03:41:26 02/01/04 Sun
Because if one attempts to analyse the mass mobilisation (and
I use that word deliberately) in Chosen in terms of its
likely social and political results in a world identical to our
own, the consequences would disrupt society in ways far more significant
than just conferring superpowers on a few violent lunatics. I
think most of them were already suggested at the time of Chosen
and in fanfic since, but one has to wonder about the reactions
of governments; the very high probability that Slayers in more
lawless and unstable societies, or in countries at war, would
feel impelled to use their powers for purposes going well beyond
dealing with mystical threats; the reactions of religious bodies
to mystically superpowered women; the probable increased visibility
of the supernatural to society...
[> [> [> [> [> [> I actually doubt there
would be a great deal of change -- Finn Mac Cool, 08:04:09
02/01/04 Sun
Why? Because there are still, and have always been, thousands
of more demons, vampires, and witches in the Buffyverse then there
are Slayers. Yes, governments could employ Slayers as assassins,
for example, but before they might have used demons or vampires
for that task, instead. The Buffyverse has always had a great
deal of supernatural talent to draw on; the only difference the
new Slayers will make is that, unlike most of the demons in the
Buffyverse, they fight on the side of good. So, while Slayers
may make a big dent on the supernatural community, I don't see
the relation to the "normal" world being greatly altered.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: for equality...Spoilers:
Angel and Buffy to present. -- Rufus, 04:36:22 02/01/04
Sun
Thirdly, I think we have to see the new slayers in an evolving
manner. Buffy changed the rules. This means that the rules can
be changed even more in later generations with the influence of
the new slayers.
I've always seen Chosen as new beginning instead of an end. That
cookie dough speech that pissed off so many shippers kinda makes
some sense. Buffy, even at the age of 22 is still cookie dough,
nowhere near being done or maturing. We could take that to the
Slayers themselves, as a shared power they are in fact cookie
dough...we just don't know how they get to be 'done' or if somehow
they end up burnt.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: for equality...Spoilers:
Angel and Buffy to present. -- punkinpuss, 13:17:24 02/01/04
Sun
Great post!
ME walks a very fine line in balancing metaphor with narrative,
one that gets smudged every time we presume to categorize their
intentions in a strictly literal way.
[> Responsible (Damage Spoilers) -- heywhynot, 12:59:30
01/29/04 Thu
To me the Scooby Gang has taken responsibility for removing the
limits placed upon the potentials around the world. They are actively
seeking potentials and seemingly training them. They are going
to take Dana in. Had Angel and gang not been part of WH, then
I can see Dana staying in their care as Angel has shown in the
past the ability to help a troubled slayer. Heck the Fang Gang
might be part of the extended New Watcher's Council if it wasn't
for the fact they are working for the Senior Partners. Choices
after all do have consequences.
The Fang Gang though did choose to work in the belly of the best.
To make change from within. That is a process that has just started.
They have not remade WH over. Why give WH a psychotic slayer?
WH is not to be trusted. Angel does not trust the senior partners,
why should Buffy? Angel works for the Senior Partners.
And just how responsible should Buffy and gang be? The potentials
were being limited by a spell that only allowed one slayer to
be chosen at a time. Each had the potential for more, but was
limited. Buffy opened the doors, gave each girl a full choice
on who they were going to be. Isn't that what Angel fought for
in the end of last season? To insure that each person in the world
was not limited, to be free? Access to their full potential and
shape it the way they wanted? Does that mean Angel is responsible
for all the bad done in the world since? Angel fought Jasmine
to save humanity's free will to well commit "evil".
She may of killed a few people which raised the stakes but Angel
made it clear he was going to protect free will.
Angel reopened the doors that had closed by Jasmine & prevented
others from closing. Buffy opened doors that had been artificially
locked by a group of three men so they could keep their super-warrior
under their control. Allowing choice means both good and bad can
come. Do you have hope that more good will come of it and any
bad you can overcome? Or do you despair about that bad? To me
a hero sides with hope. Angel and Buffy sided with hope & are
dealing with the bad. Angel just seems to be stuck dwelling now
on the bad and has lost sight of hope. Which is another reason
not to trust him with a psychotic slayer.
[> [> Very good points. I agree. -- Jane, 15:04:07
01/29/04 Thu
[> [> Re: Responsible (Damage Spoilers) -- Ultimate
Fanboy, 18:38:41 01/29/04 Thu
Well said!
[> Re: My problem with the near-end to 'Damage' (Spoilers)
-- punkinpuss, 17:34:20 01/29/04 Thu
Yet Buffy's decision to empower all Potentials, which resulted
in Dana and Lord knows how many more like her, is being portrayed
as an unequivocally good thing (regardless of reason or consequence).
Buffy and the Council are the Good Guys here according to the
portrayals last night. I am being asked to ignore Buffy's far
more direct influence in Dana's rampage, the lack of action from
Andrew's Slayers in apprehending Dana, and asked to consider Angel's
behavior only. Coming from Andrew only made it worse, since I
never respected the character before, and wasn't about to start
now.
Funny, but I thought one of the main points of the episode was
that Buffy's activation of all slayers was NOT an unequivocally
good thing, as if such a thing is possible. IIRC one of the scenes
in Chosen was of an abused girl stopping a punch during a beating.
That would suggest that ME certainly thought of that potential
for harm, even if Buffy didn't.
I don't think ME is asking you to dismiss Buffy's responsibility
in Dana's fate at all. Nor to look only at Angel's actions. But
Buffy's inadequacy in finding and protecting Dana is meant to
comment on Angel's situation. Like Buffy, Angel does mean well,
but can't always control the outcome of his actions no matter
how good his intentions are. That's the problem, as it is in RL.
You can't always foresee every turn of events. That's part of
growing up as I imagine Buffy is learning now, that her actions
can have dire consequences for others.
All you can do sometimes is take the responsibility to follow
up and try to fix things or make them better. Buffy does that
by taking responsibility for Dana. Whether she trusted Angel or
not, she should've done that because she was responsible
for making Dana worse. It would've been far more irresponsible
to leave her fate to other people IMO.
As for the slayers coming in late to the game, you might want
to consider that Andrew was never sent in alone. If they weren't
sure they could trust Angel and the Fang Gang at W&H, it would
make sense to send in the non-threatening and pretty expendable
Andrew rather than a Slayer. Also, if you don't trust W&H,
why tip your hand and let them know you've got a team of slayers
in town looking for Dana? For all Giles knew, they could've been
walking into a trap.
Sending Andrew in makes sense because he's an idiot. He's
not there to help W&H. He's there to see what W&H are up to
and tip off the slayers when Dana is found.
There are plenty of troubling things about Buffy's decision to
activate the slayers. She doesn't tell Angel what she did, the
one vampire left in the world she might wanna keep around? Huh?
Who would make a better target for an unwitting and untrained
slayer than the high-profile vampire about town? That's pretty
dumb and irresponsible of her. And it's not like she hasn't talked
to him since the events of Chosen. She just forgot to mention
that some more tiny superstrong girls might try to stake him?
Another question is how did they find all these other slayers
but miss Dana? Their slayer-finding mojo doesn't work on the mentally
insane or emotionally disturbed?
Lastly, although these new Slayer developments are so rich in
storytelling potential, the fact that it is not a show about
Buffy means that we won't get to see those arcs played out.
It's about Angel and there's not much point in whining
about it since it's logistically impossible to tell a Buffy story
without Buffy. Which is sad because there's obviously some life
left in the old girl yet. ;-)
[> [> Re: My problem with the near-end to 'Damage' (Spoilers)
-- sdev, 18:05:50 01/29/04 Thu
I agree with this. I also think the Potential empowerment is meant
to comment on Angel and Spike's multiple hero situation. Who's
in charge and how do you control loose cannons? In theory the
more fighters for good with superpowers the better. In practice,
not so simple.
[> [> Re: My problem with the near-end to 'Damage' (Spoilers)
-- Jane, 18:14:09 01/29/04 Thu
You make some very good points here. I wonder if the reason Dana
wasn't found sooner is because she was kept sedated on very strong
psych drugs? Perhaps that put her below the radar, so to speak?
Also, since the Scooby gang is still actively searching for new
slayers,maybe they were aware of a slayer in L.A., just hadn't
located her yet.
Do we know for sure Angel didn't know about the slayer mojo? I
haven't rewatched the episode, but did he figure out Dana was
a Slayer before or after Andrew arrived? Must check. I agree,
Andrew is perfect smokescreen material.
[> [> Mostly agree with your thoughts, but one small
comment. -- OnM, 06:50:27 01/30/04 Fri
*** As for the slayers coming in late to the game, you might
want to consider that Andrew was never sent in alone. If they
weren't sure they could trust Angel and the Fang Gang at W&H,
it would make sense to send in the non-threatening and pretty
expendable Andrew rather than a Slayer. Also, if you don't
trust W&H, why tip your hand and let them know you've got
a team of slayers in town looking for Dana? For all Giles knew,
they could've been walking into a trap.
Sending Andrew in makes sense because he's an idiot. He's not
there to help W&H. He's there to see what W&H are up to and
tip off the slayers when Dana is found. ***
This was my exact take on the sitch also-- and considering the
way that Giles treated Andrew in the latter eps of Buffy S7, it's
perfectly in keeping with his 'style'.
However, I don't think that Andrew is an idiot, although
this gets into the Inspector Closeau (sp?) syndrome whereby you're
never sure whether the Inspector is one incredibly lucky dimwit,
or just playing the role of one to put people off the track.
What Andrew appears to be, however, is harmless, unthreatening.
He's such an obvious geek that Giles (and Buffy) would understand
that none of the Fang Gang would suspect him of ulterior motives
or subterfuge. (Note that at the very end, Spike comments that
'there may be hope for [him] after all', because he 'double-crossed'
W&H.)
I too believe that the Slayers were there all along, just waiting
in the wings, and I didn't see Andrew as their 'leader' so much
as a co-ordinator standing in for Giles and/or Buffy.
[> [> [> Re: Hope for the ponce yet -- punkinpuss,
08:51:56 01/30/04 Fri
Agree, Andrew is more complicated than the cardboard stooge that
he's made out to be in the fandom. He plays the geek naif so well,
but underneath it is a good degree of intelligence. It's his pretensions
that make him look idiotic (82% more manly!), but that's why the
double-cross was so effective coming from him.
I can't see how any other Scooby could've taken his place, it
would've required an entirely different story. Tom Lenk did a
marvelous job.
[> [> [> [> Have to disagree -- CW, 09:13:30
01/30/04 Fri
Andrew has repeatedly proven himself to have no inner moral standards.
Putting him in this postition even as a coordinator just doesn't
make sense. He really hasn't proven himself to be reliable enough
even to be a front for one of the slayers running things from
the shadows. It looks like a case of ME wanting to have a visit
from a familar face and having to shoe-horn the character into
the Angel plot line. You can make excuses for jumps in character
development. You can ascribe the character of Andrew with all
kinds of virtues he's never shown. But, it just doesn't work according
to what we've actually seen of him.
None of this has anything to do with Tom Lenk's portrayal which
has been consistant. He did do a good job with the matieral as
punkinpuss says.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Have to disagree -- punkinpuss,
13:11:56 01/30/04 Fri
"Andrew has repeatedly proven himself to have no inner
moral standards.",
Then why didn't Buffy just kill him at the end of Storyteller?
Or send him packing? Was Storyteller completely pointless?
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Have to disagree
-- Irene, 14:05:48 01/30/04 Fri
You can also ask if Andrew's actions in "First Date"
were also pointless.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Well -- CW, 17:34:54
01/30/04 Fri
There is a difference between recognizing someone is a hopeless,
spineless loser and deciding they shouldn't live. ;o) If Buffy
had let Andrew go he'd have been easy pickings for the First Evil's
influence again. Much stronger people than Andrew were being controled
by the FE during season 7.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Hopeless, spineless
loser? Maybe, maybe not. Time will tell. -- OnM, 20:12:29
01/30/04 Fri
Collected this little scene for ya'all to peruse:
Andrew: Okay. (probing) Say, do you have any weaknesses
I should know about, if I'm gonna work
for you? Like kryptonite or allergies...?
Jonathan/First: What are you asking?
(Andrew is toying dangerously with the gun-bag now, trying to
be super-casual.)
Andrew: Oh, nothing. Are you made out of the evil impulses
of humans? So, like, if everyone was
unconscious at the same time, you would fade away?
(Jonathan/FE stares at him...)
J/FE: You're asking a lot of questions.
Andrew: Well, yes. Because I'm evil and I want to do the
best I can at that. So I want to know stuff.
Like, when do we kill Buffy?
J/FE: Are you wearing a wire?
CUT TO:
INT. SUMMERS' HOUSE - BASEMENT - NIGHT
Where Willow, Kennedy, Amanda and Dawn are sitting at a table
in front of listening equipment. Willow has on
headphones and frowns, concentrating.
Suddenly, Willow jumps and rips the headphones off.
Kennedy: What's going on?
Willow: The First. It screamed... (then) I think it knows
about the wire.
Amanda: Poor Andrew. He must be scared.
*** [Going back to the FE/Andrew confrontation] ***
J/FE: This is what you did to him. Took away everything
that he was and left him like this. You started
down a road with that action. You have to keep going.
(Andrew stares at Jonathan... steeling himself. He makes a decision.
A big hero moment. Low and calm and
measured: )
Andrew: (steely) Stop looking like Jonathan. You're not
him. You're The First and you're trying to get
me to shoot innocent girls. But I won't do it. I'm good now and
after the fight is over I'm going to pay for killing
Jonathan.
J/FE: You're gonna pay for more than that. Know why? Because
the biggest, baddest, first evil in the
world is angry with you.
*** (Later on) ***
INT. SUMMERS' HOUSE - LIVING ROOM - NIGHT
Willow, Kennedy, Amanda, Dawn and the pale huddled Andrew are
briefing Anya and Spike and Giles on what
just happened with The First.
Spike: You tried to record the ultimate evil? Why? In a
complex effort to royally piss it off?
Kennedy: Guess we succeeded pretty good, huh?
Andrew: Oh, god. I never should've gone in wired. Redemption
is hard.
Giles:: Back to Spike's question. Why did you try to record
it?
Willow: To study it, see if we could figure something out
from what it was saying. Because, guys, we've
gotta face it, we know nothing about The First.
Anya: Well, now we know not to record it. So that's something.
Spike: Why'd it appear to... (can't think of name) ...this
one, then? Thought it was s'posed to be pulling
my strings.
(Dawn is finished removing the wire. Andrew rubs his chest.)
Andrew: It said it wasn't time for you yet.
(As Spike absorbs that non-comforting news, the girls exchange
looks -- they know this means Spike could be a
danger to them.
Andrew: I'm frightened and my chest hurts where the tape
was.
Dawn: It's okay, Andrew. You did good. You stood up to
it, that's really amazing.
***
So there is that last line to consider. Do we trust Dawn's opinion?
Remember that Dawn detested Andrew when she first met him, but
gradually started to treat him better as time went on.
And, he may not have fought very well in the last battle in Chosen
but he did show up of his own free will. He even admitted that
he expected to die. That does take a certain degree of non-spinelessness,
don't you think?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Hopeless,
spineless loser? Maybe, maybe not. Time will tell. -- punkinpuss,
20:49:15 01/30/04 Fri
CW, you seem to have written off Andrew inspite of what happened
in S7 eps beginning with Storyteller.
What did you think the point of Storyteller was, if not to show
that there was a redeemable human being in Andrew? If he'd failed
Buffy's test, they would've kept him tied to a chair for the rest
of the season, but he proved himself worthy of helping.
Lots of people make terrible mistakes when they're young. It's
when we can face up to our mistakes and learn from them that we
begin to develop our a sense of morality, a code of ethics for
life that's grounded in personal experience and not just the hypothetical.
Andrew may sound like an idiot a lot of the time, but his actions
post-Storyteller show that he's actually working at becoming a
better man, if not 82% more so.
As OnM points out, he risked his life by sticking around for the
final battle. While his chances for survival outside of Sunnydale
might not have been a whole lot better, they were better than
putting himself in the thick of the fighting. Now, months later,
he's still no Viggo Mortensen battle stud, but ya gotta give him
credit for continuing to go out on those mean streets with so
few skills and so much more to lose.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> ' Joxer
the Mighty / He's very tidy... ' ;-) -- OnM, 14:45:32 01/31/04
Sat
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Have to disagree -- Ultimate
Fanboy, 19:43:44 01/30/04 Fri
Wouldn't you be assuming that none of the characters have changed
since the series ended? We have had quite a long time and character
arcs have taken less than the time we have had to make great changes
to their lives.
I think we were given a glimpse into what's happening in the Buffyverse
according to the Scoob's, but nothing more than that. A lot of
what we analyze in this regard is simple grasping at straws and
I don't think it's entirely fair to ME or the character of Andrew
to simply judge in such an ill-informed manner. The truth is simple:
we don't know what's happened in the Buffyverse to the Scoobs
in the past seven or eight months.
[> [> Re: My problem with the near-end to 'Damage' (Spoilers)
-- Irene, 13:50:54 01/30/04 Fri
"Another question is how did they find all these other slayers
but miss Dana? Their slayer-finding mojo doesn't work on the mentally
insane or emotionally disturbed?"
It just happened. Or it could be that the Scoobies are still tracking
down new Slayers. After all, the Watchers Council didn't know
about Buffy until after she was called.
[> Re: My problem with the near-end to 'Damage' (Spoilers)
-- Athena, 18:32:06 01/29/04 Thu
The old Watchers Council incredibly detached from the Slayer.
Except for the Slayer's own personal Watcher, they rarely helped
her. I'm not saying she should've had them all trailing after
her at all times, but they're are plenty of things they could've
done, if only by phone. I doubt that
The few times that they did get involved was either to reassert
their power of the Slayer or to prevent an Apocolypse on the horizon.
They trained Potentials, a noble act, but if they were able to
afford Special Ops and a fancy building. Why not support the Slayer
a little more? It seems as if they liked their power, and saying
that it was needed in the fight against evil was their own self-dillusion.
Now the motivation behind the new Watchers is a bit different.
They are taking responsibility for what they had to do. It isn't
comparible to the Shadowmen because as far as we know one of Shadowmen
could have volunteered to be infused with the demon essence; meanwhile,
the Scoobies could only see two options:
1) Don't magically Call the Potentials; therefore, these girls
would have little to no chance of surviving Bringer assasins.
(...as well as the First Evil getting its Apocolypse.)
2) Call the Potentials. (Keep in mind they didn't know the true
power of Spike's amulet.)
Xander and Anya - cursed to oblivion? --
Celebaelin, 14:57:16 01/29/04 Thu
Surely not. But according to this
site NB and EC are not going to be big after Buffy. I'm pretty
sure that most readers will regard this as at least unfair and
possibly beyond comprehension. NB in particular is particularly
talented IMO and doesn't deserve this rather depressing write
up.
If there's any news that the authors of this piece aren't aware
of I'd appreciate it. It would be a great loss if life imitated
art and played a cruel trick on the 'mere mortal' couple of the
Buffyverse. Maybe they should have a 'reconciliation' on another
show.
I can hear the critics now (picture does the wobbly thing)...NB
'lacks depth' and EC 'rabbits on'... And to think that it's the
Buffy fans who are generally accused of living in a fantasy
world, please!
Replies:
[> Re: Xander and Anya - cursed to oblivion? -- Glenn66,
23:11:38 01/29/04 Thu
I think that Emma Caufield has sooo much going for her, she's
really HOT, she can play funny, sad, evil, etc. I think if she
can get into a well written Romantic Comedy (as a lead or as supporting
actress) she can really get alot of attention.
In general I'm not into those Slasher type Horror movies, and
it seems that EC and NB seem to be in those movies currently.
Alyson Hannigan was luckly (but totally worthy) to get into a
Comedy like American Pie, as those roles are remembered better
than Horror roles (IMHO)
A theory about Army of slayers vs. Demons/Vamps/Evil?
-- angel, 17:36:25 01/29/04 Thu
Even with the growing slayer army from hundreds to thousands per
generation there still alot of evil out there. Vampires numbers
grow really fast plus there are thousands of evil demon breeds
out there. From what we seen there are incredible powerful beings
that can kill a slayer with ease. My opinion is that the new slayer
even things out a bit. Plus most new slayers old or really would
be probably easiest to target for evil. Also it made alot more
problems than it solved.
Replies:
[> Re: A theory about Army of slayers vs. Demons/Vamps/Evil?
-- Glenn66, 21:46:54 01/29/04 Thu
I think the difference would be that with only one (or two) slayers
only the worst (or worst at the hellmouth) would have to deal
with a Slayer. Now with an Army of Slayers there would be more
areas they could "Police" or could take on lesser profile
Big-Bads.
Musing on themes (spoilers through 5.11)
-- Tyreseus, 18:22:33 01/29/04 Thu
Wow! Last night's episode had me up all night thinking about the
myriad thematic discussions we've had on this board before. At
one point, I literally walked around my living room chanting "head,
heart, spirit, hand..."
No particular order to my thoughts just yet, but wanted to get
some discussion going today. I apologize if anything has been
brought up elsewehere, but I haven't really seen anyone hit on
these ideas in what I've read so far of today's postings.
Head, Heart, Spirit, Hand
Perhaps it was the way Dana kept repeating the phrase "heart
and head" that really made me take notice of this one. I
know this set of symbols came into their own from the conjoining
spell at the end of BtVS season 4, but I'm wondering how they
plan to use it effectively on Ats.
For instance - Spike has journeyed from the "hand" (warrior,
strength, fighter, action) to the "spirit" (magic, soul
- and all that implies, i.e. purpose, conscience, etc.) and back
to "hand." Only in this episode, he finds his hands
removed and he's once again forced to confront his spiritual journey.
But his real weaknesses (symbolically and practically) are the
head and heart. How much of his current hang-ups come from his
refusal to think things through or cope with his feelings for
Buffy in light of his new life?
But what about Angel? I see him surrounding himself almost entirely
by the symbols of head and spirit. He solves problems through
reason (Gunn), magic (Lorne's psychics), strategy/research (Wes)
or science (Fred). He's nearly lost his own "hands"
since Gunn has left that camp and he's involved more than ever
in "non-engage" methods.
Reality versus Perception
I deliberately switched from "Fantasy" to "Perception"
because it seems to me that the word applies better in many cases.
Dana's mixed up visions and memories parallel reality in "Damage."
Last week, Angel's dreams parallel the growing inter- and intra-personal
problems. Two weeks ago, Harmony had to prove reality over the
perception that she was guilty of murder. See, if you take percetion
into account versus just fantasy, it goes all the way through
this season (including the ever-important Connor memory-wipe).
For some reason I can't pinpoint clearly, I think of this theme
most during the final scene between Angel and Spike. Spike admits
that he never really looked at his victims, it was all about the
rush, the crunch. Angel says he couldn't stop looking at his victims,
delighting in the evil. In a way, both are continuing that pattern
in their role as heroes. Angel started his path to champion by
taking that same focus on his victims and turning it to reconnecting
with humanity. Spike isn't reconnecting with humanity, he's just
focused on the violence and rush of saving another anonymous helpless
soul. Spike never philosophically considered the nature of evil,
nor is he doing it now for the nature of good. Angel has tied
his soul up into knots over his struggle with the nature of good
and evil (and the hated "gray area.")
Leftover thoughts
Laughed out loud at the Andrew/Spike reunion. Just a shame that
Andrew didn't suggest a good spot for an onion blossom.
When Andrew revealed that Buffy & co. don't trust Angel anymore,
it felt like a slap in the face. How Angel can ignore that kind
of rude awakening, I don't know, but I hope it continues into
next week's episode and the "special guest" who's finally
coming back.
Andrew did seem more grown up at the end of the episode. Backed
by a dozen slayers or not, it took a lot of guts to stand up to
Angel like that. I wonder if he can really be trusted not
to let Spike's cat out of the bag to Buffy. Never thought he could
keep a secret before. Still, he's matured in subtle ways if you
look beyond the hyper-geek rambling. Would old Andrew have taken
that shot at a psycho-slayer (even if he missed)? Would the old
Andrew have been capable of tracking Spike beyond the door to
Wolfram and Hart, much less into the industrial district of L.A.?
Good to finally get some hints at what our BtVS gang is up to,
even if it's more teasing than anything else. Missed out on not
getting a read on Faith and her role in the new Council. Is she
still Second-Slayer-In-Command? Oh, I hope that whatever Powers
That Finance Mutant Enemy have in mind, it ends with a full-length
feature film with the Slayer Army facing off against a murky Wolfram
& Hart force.
Anyway, that's my brain spew for today. It's nice to finally have
an episode that inspired me to so much contemplation and thought
again. Most of this season has seemed a little less than spectacular
in that regard (possibly excepting "Hellbound").
Replies:
[> Re: Musing on themes (spoilers through 5.11) -- Glenn66,
21:56:43 01/29/04 Thu
Id assume that Giles would put Andrew (and Zander, and Dawn when
she is old enough) thru some form of Watcher Basic Training. That,
and fighting and Surviving the final battle at Sunnydale would
tend to mature Andrew a bit.
Loved the Andrew and Spike scenes, I suspect that there is a ton
of "Spike/Andrew ship" fiction being written all over
the place :D
Spike and Dana (spoilers for Damaged) --
Vash the Stampede, 08:30:23 01/30/04 Fri
After the initial shock wore off after seeing that Spike was Dana's
tormentor, I quickly realized that Dana's memories were simply
mixed up with those of past slayers. There is no way soulless
Spike would have ever done that to her. Why? Because it's not
his style. He was (and still pretty much is)all about instant
gratification. He got his pleasure or high from fighting, from
killing people in the heat of battle. That is not to say he wouldn't
have killed a whole family for a snack or kicks, but to go to
the extremes that Dana's kidnapper did? Uh uh, that is Angelus's
territory, not Spike's.
Great episode though. I even liked Andrew up until the end. I
mean, I am all for revenge of the nerds fantasies come to life,
but he acted way to smug, and came off as too much of a poser
(which I know was the point, but it still bugged me). I wish Angel
would have just bopped him one for good measure
Replies:
[> Re: Spike and Dana (spoilers for Damaged) -- Mighty
Mouse, 08:36:59 01/30/04 Fri
I think Angel would have if not for the hurtful Buffy comment.
That was indeed a stake to the heart - "No one trusts you
anymore" sheesh. It was cool to see all those Slayers come
out, and the sudden tremor of "Oh crud" that you could
see fly through Angel, Wesley (and even the Strike team who reached
for their weapons), etc. Angel could probably take on one or two
Slayers (if they're inexperienced and non-psychotic), but Twelve?
No chance probably. Awesome episode, I think it's right up there
with "Destiny."
Um, the 'nifty spell' -- Hauptman, 10:53:56
01/30/04 Fri
I was just wondering about the "New" council and how
it differs from the old, and from Wolfram and Hart. And I wondered
if Willow is capable of removing slayerness as well as bestowing
it. That would be major. As a group, the new slayer's council
has unprecedented power in Buffy, Willow and the army of Hot Slayers
(are all the slayers on Atkins). My question is a little vague,
but it goes like this: Are potential slayers still being born?
I was under the impression that they were on the verge of being
wiped out by the end of BTVS' run. Now they have strike forces
and are gathering on every continent. What's up. I missed the
first 20 minutes, so maybe that was covered. And if a slayer is
killed, what happens? The power goes where? I'm just wondering
about the old rules.
Oh, and to answer someones question below, as far as I remember,
Faith was the first rogue slayer. I am fairly sure that Giles
said that she was "unprecedented", but, then again,
it has been demonstrated several times that the council did not
exactly share everything with ol' Ripper.
Replies:
[> Re: Um, the 'nifty spell' -- Rob, 11:38:04 01/30/04
Fri
Are potential slayers still being born? I was under the impression
that they were on the verge of being wiped out by the end of BTVS'
run.
Yes, Potentials are still being born, but the younger ones won't
become Slayers until they reach adolescence. The fact that there
are so many Potentials being awakened over the world now points
to the futility of the First's plan.
And if a slayer is killed, what happens? The power goes where?
I'm just wondering about the old rules.
Since Willow's spell completely broke the chain of succession
for the Slayers and released the power to every single Potential,
now every time a Potential reaches the age that she is eligible
to become a Slayer, she becomes a Slayer, without an earlier Slayer
needing to die for the power to pass to her. The Watchers used
to have us believe that the power of the Slayer was something
that could only be in one person at a time, which was challenged
by the appearance of Kendra and then Faith. Now we know that what
passes wasn't the physical power itself. That power was within
each Potential from the beginning. What the death of a Slayer
did was activate this latent power. So I doubt that the
power after a Slayer dies now needs to go anywhere.
Rob
[> [> That is slightly misleading.. -- ZachsMind,
12:36:44 01/30/04 Fri
For those that were dubbed 'potentials' prior to the 'nifty' spell,
they had within them whatever it was the Slayer Force was anticipating.
They had the tendency to attract the power of the slayer which
the average person does not have. However, although there was
a dormant potential within every Potential, they still needed
the Slayer Force in order to become a Slayer. Willow's spell removed
the restriction that the Force could only inhabit one human vessel
at a time. That's all. That black itchy stuff which tried to crawl
into Buffy when she met the Shadowmen? that still exists. It's
just not tangible any longer, and not in any way limited to conventional
physical forces.
We do not yet know what it is that sets someone like Kennedy apart
from any other woman who is not slated as a potential. We don't
even know if the Watcher's really understood what they were looking
for. Whedon's been purposefully vague about all that.
[> Regarding The 'new' Watcher's Council -- ZachsMind,
11:52:56 01/30/04 Fri
The 'new' Watcher's Council consists of Watchers who, like Giles,
were on assignment away from the council HQ at the time The First
Evil had it destroyed. We do not know for certain who is in charge.
We're led to believe that Quentin Travers did not survive past
the episode "Never Leave Me" in season seven. We've
been given indications that both Rupert Giles and Wesley's father
Roger Wyndam-Price are both instrumental in this new incarnation
of the Council. However, in the case of Giles the information
has been sketchy hearsay from Andrew, and in the case of Roger
the information was from a robot disguised as him and therefore
not very valid information. However, it was enough to convince
Wesley, so we can assume his father is still instrumental in the
Council's daily activities on some uncertain level.
We do not know for certain who is in charge. One would think Giles
would be most qualified, having been THE Watcher of The Slayer
who turned chosen into choice. However there's admittedly bad
blood there so I doubt Giles would be in Quentin Travers' shoes.
We do know however that Giles is now tutoring Andrew, though perhaps
not to the extent Andrew indicated since he tends to exagerrate
everything. We know Giles is involved in the Council's strategy,
and has his share of leverage within the organization. We just
don't know how much yet.
The rest of the Council would comprise of field agents who were
out on assignment and most certainly returned to England once
word of the destruction of the HQ reached them. They've had time
to regroup and rebuild, and mobilize. I'd say The First set the
Council back with the destruction of the HQ, but there were enough
resources for them to live again. Probably not the first time
something like this happened. The Watchers have been around almost
as long as the line of Slayers. So, ultimately, the new Council
probably has a slightly more modern and sleek attitude now, may
not even have a permanent base of operations since that makes
them a standing target. Other than that they're probably not all
that different from what they've always been.
[> [> New Watcher's Council -- Irene, 14:46:39
01/30/04 Fri
"The 'new' Watcher's Council consists of Watchers who, like
Giles, were on assignment away from the council HQ at the time
The First Evil had it destroyed. We do not know for certain who
is in charge. We're led to believe that Quentin Travers did not
survive past the episode "Never Leave Me" in season
seven. We've been given indications that both Rupert Giles and
Wesley's father Roger Wyndam-Price are both instrumental in this
new incarnation of the Council. However, in the case of Giles
the information has been sketchy hearsay from Andrew, and in the
case of Roger the information was from a robot disguised as him
and therefore not very valid information. However, it was enough
to convince Wesley, so we can assume his father is still instrumental
in the Council's daily activities on some uncertain level."
The series has NEVER indicated that some of the old Watchers -
other than Giles - are part of the new WC. Nor do we know for
a fact that the real Roger Wyndham-Price was instrumental in the
creation of the new Council. You're making a very big assumption,
based on the words of the phony Roger.
[> [> It's possible there might be two 'Watcher's Council'
s [spoilers up to 'Damage'] -- Pip, 15:35:46 01/30/04 Fri
[Disclaimer - I'm in the UK so I've only read spoilers on Damage,
and haven't actually seen the episode yet]
If we take the phoney Roger Wyndham-Pryce as telling something
of the truth (as evil people do all the time), then there is a
'Watcher's Council' which consists of retired watchers
('Roger' describes them as the 'remaining former Watchers'). This
may be the group that is running the cyborg ninja's - Wesley in
Lineage states that the ninja's are attacking evil groups.
If it is the retired watchers running the cyborg ninja's, that
suggests they don't have a Slayer army. If they did, they wouldn't
need the ninjas.
The info from Damage suggests that Rupert Giles has set
up a new 'Watcher's Council'. This council uses the Scooby Gang
as its new cadre. There may or may not be other active Watchers
in the new council - the events of Season 7 suggested that Giles
still had at least one supporter amongst his former colleagues.
This 'Watcher's Council' seems successful at finding the new Slayers.
It also seems to have access to some of the old Council's funds.
It doesn't sound like the same organisation the fake Roger was
talking about.
It depends on whether the Roger Wyndham-Pryce cyborg was telling
the truth or not. If it was, there are probably two groups, which
may or may not be rivals. One is the old style council. The other
is the new Scooby council.
From the point of view of the AI team, what counts is that neither
group trusts AI in the slightest. AI've gone to work for Wolfram
& Hart and both groups (if there are two groups) are assuming
that they've sold out.
[> [> [> Re: It's possible there might be two 'Watcher's
Council' s [spoilers up to 'Damage'] -- Irene, 15:46:00
01/30/04 Fri
"the events of Season 7 suggested that Giles still had at
least one supporter amongst his former colleagues."
Are you referring to the guy from "Never Leave Me"?
Who was injured by a Bringer?
I have a feeling that you might need to watch "Damage"
again. Even though Giles is training Andrew, the latter stated
that he was receiving his orders from Buffy (of course, Andrew
could be lying). And can you really see the Scoobies - especially
Buffy - taking orders from a new group of Watchers? I don't.
And has it been established that the cyborgs from "Lineage"
are being controlled by a new Watcher's Council? When the show
establishes that as a fact - I will accept that Wes' dad is part
of a new group of Watchers.
[> [> [> It's Entirely possible -- Doug, 15:53:44
01/30/04 Fri
Particularly given the mutual animosity between Buffy and many
of the Watchers.
[> Regarding Willow's newfound powers... -- ZachsMind,
12:22:05 01/30/04 Fri
We know very little about how Willow's enactment of the 'nifty'
spell has changed her. We know that the cosmetic changes were
temporary. However, even after Sunnydale cratered, we know Willow
was reporting an ability to sense the awakening of Potentials
as Slayers the world over. This eventually caused our Scooby Gang
to expand their efforts. I found it interesting that Buffy was
attending school in Italy, perhaps not far from Vatican City.
I would imagine the roman catholic church has its own equivalent
of 'watchers' or 'guardians' and although in semi-retirement I'm
sure Buffy's keeping herself busy. The rest of the gang are scattered
throughout the world, doing among other things what Andrew did
in the latest episode of Angel; tracking down and retrieving as
many Slayers as possible.
Willow however is now in a most unique position. I'm thinking
she's the new Guardian. She watches the Watchers. It can be said
she reforged the scythe weapon, using it as a focal point for
reconfiguring how the Slayer power functions. Willow is the new
beginning of a group of women who.. well...
From the episode "End of Days":
GUARDIAN: We forged [the scythe] in secrecy and kept it hidden
from the Shadow Men who-
BUFFY: Yeah, met those guys. Didn't really care too much for 'em.
GUARDIAN: Ah, yes. Then you know. And they became the Watchers
and the Watchers watched the Slayers... but we were watching them.
Willow is the new Guardian. So technically, she and Giles are
more at odds with each other than ever before. It's not that the
Watcher's Council is evil. The Shadow Men were not evil. They
were well intentioned, I guess. However, any one force alone is
either corrupted or otherwise ineffectual. Together, the Slayers,
Guardians and Watchers perform a sort of checks and balances among
one another, preventing one another in some ways and helping in
others, so that eventually, in theory, the good gets done and
the bad gets forgotten. At least in theory. And it's been like
this in one form or another since the beginning.
[> [> Re: Regarding Willow's newfound powers... --
Ultimate Fanboy, 19:15:40 01/30/04 Fri
But what was the role of the Guardians and how did they effect
the Slayers' life?
I don't think we know enough of the Guradians.
[> Re: Um, the 'nifty spell' -- heywhynot, 08:34:02
02/01/04 Sun
To me it seems the demon essence triggered the activation of the
latent ability of a potential to become the Slayer, it was the
catalyst. The First Slayer was chosen by the Shadowmen to be the
one to receive the demon essence probably based on a potential
they saw in her. The Shadowmen it appears put a restriction through
magic such that the demon essence could only trigger one girl
at a time. In fairness to the Shadowmen, maybe that is all they
were capable or knew about. They had one demon essence & thought
it could only "power" one girl. I think they saw the
abilities of the Slayer arising solely from the demon. The fact
"they" offered Buffy more power through the demon essence
seems to support this. I personally don't think it would of worked.
The abilities of the Slayer come from within and the outside push
brings them out. If Buffy had accepted the demon essence, I think
she would of been just as strong in terms of physical ability
but would of been well more demonic and less herself.
One slayer dies, another is then activated. Of course back in
the day, CPR was not known about & the Watcher's being so stuck
in tradition couldn't quite get the meaning of Buffy & Kendra
(then Faith) coexisting at the sametime. Buffy did not loose her
abilities following her death upon Kendra's activation. Add that
to the fact potentials have a latent connection to past slayers
even if they were not called & we were told magics work within
the natural laws of the universe, and I think it is a good bet
to view the demon essence as a catalyst.
Willow's spell it seems removed the restriction of the Shadowmen
and allowed all girls with the potential to have full access to
their abilities. When a Slayer dies, nothing happens save she
dies. There is no power to go anywhere, just like when way in
the future Jerry Rice dies, his abilities as a wide receiver don't
go anywhere.
To me the white haired Willow seemed to indicate that she was
going along with the natural order of things in activating all
the potentials. When we had Dark Willow, the point was made was
she using magics that ran counter to the natural tendency of the
universe. Given the spell was a catalyst in theory the reverse
reaction is possible. Activating the potentials though was like
pushing a rock down a hill, easy. Rerestricting the Slayers, would
be like pushing the rock back up the hill, possible but very difficult.
In terms of the Slayers being well toned, given their ability
to recover from wounds and how much they seemed to eat, I would
go with that fact they have great natural metabolic rates (not
to mention probably them going through a training regiment).
What does the Shanshu mean? Spoilers to 5x11.
-- abt, 09:59:05 01/31/04 Sat
What does the Shanshu mean? It's a reward of humanity, but what
does it mean?
I think initially it has been presented as meaning redemption,
forgiveness.
After seeing Soul Purpose with Angel's vision of Spike
becoming a "real boy", I think the Shanshu also
means free will.
In Lineage Robo-Roger-Wyndham-Pryce said of Angel, "He's
a puppet. He always has been. To the Powers That Be, to Wolfram
& Hart. Now he's ours."
In this light, the Shanshu isn't so much about becoming a "real
boy", as it is about no longer being a puppet.
Replies:
[> Shanshu means both 'death' and 'life' -- Finn Mac
Cool, 13:15:31 01/31/04 Sat
Or, using Wesley's interpretation, it means "live until you
die", which can't happen unless you're actually alive/human.
Now, as for what it means to Angel, while it does mean redemption,
I think it also means conection. A problem Angel has always had
is that he doesn't relate well to others. By becoming human, and
thus attached to humanity, he'll be able to stop isolating himself.
[> maybe the best way to put it... -- anom, 23:54:35
01/31/04 Sat
...is "become mortal," i.e., capable of dying, i.e.,
alive. I don't think it's been presented as meaning redemption
so much as as a way to show the redemption has already been achieved.
I wouldn't take robo-Roger's word for it that Angel has always
been a puppet. He wasn't exactly a reliable source, either to
Angel & co. or to us. Having free will doesn't mean you can't
be manipulated. One of the things you can decide w/your free will
is whether you need to act in spite of possibly not having adequate
information, a position that all of us are put in at one time
(or many!) or another, & that can leave you open to manipulation
by someone who withholds info or supplies false info. The decision
to seek more info or risk taking action without it, & to deal
w/the consequences, is still yours.
In fact, I'd say free will is a prerequisite to earning redemption,
not only in terms of avoiding or risking manipulation but of questioning
assumptions & ingrained habits of thinking (is that crazed killer
possessed, or an insane Slayer?). After all, if your mind is bound
by habit, how free is your will?
Current board
| February 2004