June 2002 posts
Acts of Spike -- Finn Mac Cool, 09:28:22 06/15/02 Sat
There are a number of people who are so enamoured in their love of Spike that they try to ignore his evilness. I think Spike is the best character on the show, but that doesn't fool me into thinking he's good. Perhaps the best way to look at this is as if he were legally culpable for the things he's done.
Pre-BtVS: tens of thousands of murders, ranging from 3rd degree to 1st degree. Accomplice to a murder (given how close he and Drusilla were).
Season 2: Numerous acts of murder. Accomplice to dozens of murderers. By assembling the Judge, he stands guilty for the attempted murder of about 6 billion people.
Season 3: One murder, that we see, and presumably more when he's not on the show. Kidnapping of Willow and Xander, as well as extortion.
Season 4: Murder during Harsh Light of Day, and being an accomplice to other vampires/murderers. Attempted murder of the Scooby Gang (when he tried to work through the chip). Failed conspiracy to commit murder when he tried to make the Gang vulnerable to Adam. This same alliance also makes him an accomplice to every death Adam caused.
Season 5: Accomplice to several murders (Harmony did kill people, and, by dating her and not stopping this, Spike implicated himself with everyone she killed). Extortion (threatning to kill the doctor if he didn't take out the chip) and, in the same episode, attempted murder of Buffy. Very direct accomplice to two murders when he got back with Drusilla in "Crush". Kidnapping Buffy. Extortion when he makes Warren build the Buffy-Bot.
Season 6: Cruelty to animals (at least, I'm assuming so, given what demons and vampires are likely to do with kittens). Attempted murder (the girl in Smashed). Another act of extortion when he threatens Warren into checking out his chip. Tampering with a crime scene (in Dead Things). Illegal arms dealing, and, if he had succeeded, he'd be responsible for the hundreds, or even thousands, of people those demons killed. Finally, attempted rape.
Even if you exclude everything from before Spike fell in love with Buffy, he should still rightly be serving several consecutive life sentences. If any of the other characters did a fraction of the things Spike has done, we would be appalled.
[> Re: Acts of Spike -- Q, 11:41:22 06/15/02 Sat
These things you list are the reasons that I *am* enamored with Spike-- I don't ignore them at all. He was brought on the show as a villain, so we are supposed to hate him. It just happens to be that we *love* to hate him.
Of course, unlike some people out there, I draw a *definate* line at supporting a B/S relationship. To me, to have them hook up seriously pre-soul would be akin to making positive statements about *severely* physically, emotionally, and sexually abusive relationships. That is something I could *never* support.
It is different with the soul, of course, I could not have the same qualms. My qualms with them getting together romantically now are less moral qualms, and more qualms with the writing. If they hook up now, it will seem like the absolute most contrived and forced plot line in the history of the world! I pray that they didn't give him a soul just to give the writers an excuse to link them romantically. I feel it will be the weakest thing the show has *EVER* done!
[> Re: Acts of Spike -- Morgane, 13:30:47 06/15/02 Sat
I'm not saying that Spike is good at all, I'm just doing the devil advocate here (almost literally). I mean, I don't believe in such a thing (good/evil), that's all in the greyness to my opinion, but I'm not sure I agree with your arguments.
The fact that Spike is guilty on a juridic level is obvious, you don't need to analyse all is acts for that. But our juridical system is established for humans only. If we consider that demons must be judge with the same rules and laws, then Buffy is quite evil herself. She had killed, tortured and extorted some demons lately, and usually not with a lot of remorse. Maybe her body count doesn't even approach Spike's, but still.
And as she mentionned in Villains :
"XANDER : I'm just saying - he's(Warren) as bad as any
vampire you've sent to dustville-
BUFFY : Being the slayer doesn't give me a
license to kill. Warren's human.
DAWN : So?
BUFFY : So the human world has it's own rules
for dealing with people like him-"
Our rules are done in a world were demons don't exist (or if they do, we never met). To make rules in a world where humans and demons have to live together (Buffyverse), both sides would have to agree on these rules.
It's why I think it's more complicated than that. We can't judge BtVS characters in a juridic way because it simply doesn't apply. Or if we do, we should do it for all the characters equally.
[> And Earl? He ain't sayin' nothin' :) -- Earl Allison, 14:12:09 06/15/02 Sat
Prepare for a firestorm, Finn :)
There are SOME who ignore Spike's evil acts entirely, but most understand that he wasn't a nice guy, and may not be now -- the issue more tends to be, can Spike attempt to reform? And ME seems to be playing both sides of the fence here, that he can try (Redemptionist angle), but that he needs a soul to succeed (Non-Redemptionist angle).
Sure, Spike did lots of bad things, and at least some of the "good" things might have been for Buffy's benefit rather than because they were good, but there aren't too many here that will gloss over everything bad Spike did.
And unless called out or attacked, that's ALL I want to say here :)
Take it and run.
[> Pre-chip Spike was evil. No one denies that. Overstating your case doesn't help you. -- Sophist, 16:03:00 06/15/02 Sat
tens of thousands of murders, ranging from 3rd degree to 1st degree.
I have no doubt Spike was guilty of many murders, but you have no idea how many. The phrase "tens of thousands" means at least 20,000, meaning roughly 2 every three days for 100 years. Nothing we have been shown indicates vampires feed that often. Given the number of vamps we see, such a feeding schedule would make them so conspicuous that no one could ignore them.
California doesn't have 3d degree murder, but it does have voluntary manslaughter. It's hard to see how he could be guilty of that -- as a vampire, he intended to kill.
Numerous acts of murder. Accomplice to dozens of murderers. By assembling the Judge, he stands guilty for the attempted murder of about 6 billion people.
You'll have to list the "numerous" murders he committed. I remember 1, 2 if you count the guy who climbed out the window against Buffy's advice.
You'll also have to list the "dozens" for which he was an accomplice; didn't see 'em myself. As for the Judge, the only qualified "attempts" are the people in the mall.
as well as extortion
I assume you mean trying to get Willow to do a spell. Since he didn't succeed, there was no extortion. Maybe an attempt if you could convince someone that Willow's spell had some value.
accomplice to other vampires/murderers. Attempted murder of the Scooby Gang (when he tried to work through the chip). Failed conspiracy to commit murder when he tried to make the Gang vulnerable to Adam. This same alliance also makes him an accomplice to every death Adam caused.
Again, you'll have to list the murders to which Spike was an accomplice. I guess I missed them. He did not attempt to murder the SG. He attempted to separate them from Buffy. The point of the conspiracy was to keep Buffy alive so she could kill demons. As for his conspiracy with Adam, maybe, but the general rule is that a co-conspirator who helps thwart the conspiracy can avoid liability.
Accomplice to several murders (Harmony did kill people, and, by dating her and not stopping this, Spike implicated himself with everyone she killed).
You have no idea if Harmony killed anyone. Even if she did, failing to stop a murderer, even one you're dating, does not make you an accomplice.
Cruelty to animals
I assume you're joking.
Illegal arms dealing, and, if he had succeeded, he'd be responsible for the hundreds, or even thousands, of people those demons killed.
If you buy this, or anything else in AYW, I have a bridge to sell you.
I have never, ever heard anyone dispute that Spike has done evil. Showing that he has is attacking a straw figure. Asserting "evil" he never did is even more pointless.
The issue is how to deal with the clear change in Spike after Crush, a time when he started doing actual good. It's that change that fascinates everyone.
[> You left out... -- LeeAnn, 16:08:34 06/15/02 Sat
Eating the saleswoman in the Magic Box in Lover's Walk. Only the second murder (that I remember) that they showed us. The first was the black guy in School Hard (You're too old to eat but not too old to kill.) One minute he's talking to her and the next minute she's lunch. Freaky.
[> Re: Acts of Spike -- Finn Mac Cool, 18:50:13 06/15/02 Sat
Apparently, this board has a lot more reasonable people on it than I've encountered elsewhere. My way of judging how a lot of people view Spike is from fanfics I've read, and most seem to say that Spike has completely given up on evil and has a virtual conscience. That just really nauseates me. My real point here was that, in every season, Spike committed several acts that would earn a human a lifetime in prison, but there are still people saying he's all good. I do like Spike, and would like him far less if he wasn't evil. The fact that he loves Buffy and, to a certain extent, Dawn does show growth. How I view is that Spike won't kill someone he likes, though strangers and enemies are open game.
To Sophist,
Now, when I said tens of thousands, that is a very rough estimate, since we don't know how often vampires feed, and how often Spike killed for fun. Sorry for not making that clear. But, if he only killed ten people a year, he would have over a thousand murders on his hands.
We know that most vampires kill when they feed. Therefore, when Spike had minions, he was essentially allying himself with a gang of multiple murderers. Also, it was hinted that the mall was only a starting place for the Judge, and he would soon move on to the rest of the world. Drusilla even said that they were going to destroy the world.
The Adam thing: well, Adam's plan involved siccing the demons and the soldiers against each other. This is a form of mass murder.
Even after he got his chip in, and even after he fell in love with Buffy, he still dated Harmony for a while. We know Harmony is a murderer because a)that's what vampires do, and b)she once makes a reference to killing a clerk. Spike was clearly the stronger of the two and could have stopped her at any time, but didn't.
All right, we don't know what the demons did with the kittens, but you can't rule out cruelty to animals.
Why do you ignore As You Were? Aside from the Judge, that is the most evil act Spike has ever attempted. Those demons coul have, potentially, slaughtered thousands of people.
To Morgane (I think that's the name, right?)
I didn't mean to say that Spike is legally culpable. However, the acts gain more signficance that way. When people refer off-handedly to Spike trying to kill someone, it makes it sound like it's no big deal. When phrased as attempted murder, however, it catches attention.
Again, to everyone, I targeted this at those individuals who can't seem to imagine Spike reverting back to his evil self (without a soul of course. The ending to Grave changes everything). I've run into a lot of them on a sight called fanfiction.net, and I just kind of assumed that sort of thinking was widespread. I'm sorry if I seemed condescending (not sure if that's the right word).
Ta, Finn Mac Cool
[> [> Re: Acts of Spike -- Rufus, 19:06:32 06/15/02 Sat
All of us think too much here, and of course our opinions vary. I see the Buffyverse as a fantasy where the characters symbolize the problems we face in the world. The demons are no more than what every person has the potential to be at their best or worse (we all know Clem is a pretty nice guy). I don't get stuck on which law book we are going to hit any given character over the head with, I just wanna know what will happen next. I love this quote by Joss....
Everything that's going to happen
Posted by: Joss - May 22, 2002, 1:56 AM
As people who have been around for a while know, I always like to get on the "net" and reveal aboslutely everything that's going to happen next year. That way, you don't spend all summer stressing. Here's the important points:
1) Buffy will become a "vampire slayer". I can't really explain what that means yet, 'cause Doug hasn't explained it to me. But it seems to point towards ADVENTURE!
2) Format change: from now on, the first half hour will be about Buffy FIGURING OUT what the monster is, and the second half hour will be about Sam Waterston PROSECUTING the monster.
3) We're easing back on the goats. There've been complaints.
4) Because of the coincidental movie name issue, we will no longer refer to the kids as the "Scooby" Gang. They will be known as the "Scooby Doo, The Film, Coming This Christmas To Your Local DVD Store" gang. Or possibly the "Sharks".
5) The gay thing is so passe. We're over that. But honestly, that's just the way Clem ACTS. We're having a talk.
6) A lot of people were confused at the end when Spike wanted his fish order changed. SOLE, people. Jeez. We HAVE a vampire with a SOUL, you think we're doing that again?
7) Cardigans, cardigans, cardigans.
This is at.......
Bronze VIP Archive
We all bring our experience and opinions to the board and it is reflected in the posts we make. Some people think in a more literal sense finding some of the symbolism escaping them, but we do try to keep things polite here. Unless someone is an obvious troll, and they have something interesting to say, we will talk away about our favorite shows.
[> [> [> Agree absoultely. Thanks for posting this -- shadowkat, 19:28:23 06/15/02 Sat
"2) Format change: from now on, the first half hour will be about Buffy FIGURING OUT what the monster is, and the second half hour will be about Sam Waterston PROSECUTING the monster."
Always wondered about this quote. Do you think Joss read our War Crimes discussion? LOL! Or our debates on Spike is evil and his past crimes- which btw have deservedly become dead topics on at least two boards.
Comments like this are why I love Joss Whedon. The show isn't literal - it's a fantasy. There are no lawyers. The police are deadly stupid. And Buffy slays vampires, who do not to my knowledge exist in our world. The monsters are metaphors for our inner demons. As the writers put it on the FX blurbs: "demons aren't real".
I remember a friend watching the show with me over Thanksgiving and complaining about how Buffy's Mom never seemed to know what was going on and how was it possible that no-one seemed to see the demons except the SG - this was the old re-runs. Season 1 &2. And I said :"It's a fantasy show, stop reading it literally and suspend the disbelief..." My friend did and started to really appreciate it.
I think if you watch it like Law and Order or some real world show - you're missing half the fun. That's what Joss was trying to say in his quote. This is a fun show, an adventure, with metaphorical real world themes...it's why I love it so much.
[> [> [> Personally, I think the "cardigans" quote is a willful mis-direct........ -- redcat, who never forgets that Joss is both god and evil, 21:20:28 06/15/02 Sat
[> [> [> [> No, no. Cardigans will be big for Fall. -- Deeva, 22:37:11 06/15/02 Sat
Joss is just handing out a fashion tip. Ain't he thoughtful? Always looking out for us fans. Hee-hee.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: No, no. Cardigans will be big for Fall. -- shadowkat, 08:25:15 06/16/02 Sun
Gotta be better than those peasant shirts everyone is into this season...IMHO. ;-)
Or it could mean they are having a guest appearence by the Irish Band the Cardigans? Can't see it...but hey, it could be a demon band that used to run with Angelus? ;-)
[> [> [> Re: Acts of Spike -- Finn Mac Cool, 22:32:57 06/15/02 Sat
Okay, let me say that I am not actually considering that Spike should be put in jail or anything. In the context of the show, it makes no sense. I used a legal format because it gives more weight to what Spike has done. The fact that Spike tried to kill someone, even as late as Season Six, seems to run counter to what a number of Redemptionists believe. However, saying "tried to kill someone", compared to the other monsters we see on the show, makes it sound like it was nothing. Say "attempted murder", on the other hand, and it strikes a deeper note with how deeply tied to evil Spike still is.
[> [> [> [> Re: Acts of Spike (long) -- aliera, 09:47:19 06/16/02 Sun
I don't think there's any doubt that the writer's wanted to remind us that the demon soul is evil, that's at the root of Spikes inner conflict this season. It's simply not so simple - if you'll excuse the dichotomy.
One of Shadowkat's essays got me rereading some pyschology theory last night. I believe she related the id/ego/superego to Spike Buffy and Dawn (hope I'm remembering correctly) which holds true for this season. It could also be applied to Spike's character conflicts this season. Frued proposed that the ID was present from birth, the ego developed in early childhood and the superego later.
The ID represents biological forces, the pleasure principle or as Faith so nicely put it, "See, want, take." Originally, Freud defined it on the basis of sex/life force; but, after WWI he expanded this definition to include thanatos or death to account for the instinctual violent urges of humanity. This is the Spike character's demon soul and his dominant trait through season four.
Season 5 we more often see actions and dialogue from Spike that cannot be accounted for by this part of the personality. Most fans have attributed these more positive traits as stemming from his desire to please Buffy and perhaps to win a place in the SG (his society). This is the development of the ego (or the new ego required by his desires). The ego is governed by the recognition of a need to adopt a pragmatic approach to the world, to obey your parent's or community's rules. You still want to wreak havok but realize the consequences of your actions and impose upon yourself restrictions to behavior or adopt behaviors that are socially acceptable.
I would suggest at this point that vamps live primarily in the ID; the ego if it's present is fully in conjuction with the ID. To fit into their vampire families their actions/behaviors are in-line with support their base in evil. Spike's attempted actions however, were clearly not rooted in his demonsoul and so the interesting conflict.
This ego development was sustained through Buffy's death as he continued down this path through Bargaining. We see the reemergence of the ID often in season 6 rooted in (I believe) the fact that the development of accepted behavior does not win him either acceptence into the gang or the love of Buffy.
In Villians we see his stated recognition of the conflict but we also see something else. The super-ego consists of two parts the conscience and the ego-ideal. Guilt is a product of the conscience. According to Freud, a strong super-ego serves to inhibit the biological instincts of the ID while a weak super-ego gives in to the IDs urgings. SR would support weak.
However he goes on to say that the levels of guilt over perceived negative actions/thoughts are high and low respectively. Strong feelings of guilt come from a strong super-ego. It most be mentioned agin here that Spike is unique in vampiredom for feeling guilt over actions which would be completely in-line with a vamp's moral compass.
The second part, the ego-ideal is an idealized view of oneself. Spike cannot determine what this idealized version should be. In fact, there is a strong conflict created by the need to determine this - monster or man. His actions and dialogue indicate that he is off to recreate himself as monster; but, that's not what comes to pass, is it?
The writers have told us that Spike went to Africa seeking a soul which Joss has defined as the moral compass (conscience/ego-ideal). This then would be the real decision - man (or souled demon as the case may be). I think that was the true function of the trials; to bring Spike to a realization of this decision.
The tripartite structure was thought to be dynamic, changing with age and experince. Freud understood the mind as constantly in conflict with itself and understood this conflict as the primary casue of anxiety and unhappiness. The divisoions are not walls or separate entities; but, rather aspects and elements of the same mind.
The souling of Spike of course may make some of this discussion moot, since he has in effect become a new person although with the memories of the demon. Although in my heart I was hoping for the removal of the chip and the interesting conflict that would have generated, I can see that the direction the story has taken is much more in keeping with the Buffyverse mythology and I'm sure will also lead to much sturm & drangst. LOL.
Thanks for intitiating an interesting discussion and for providing me a chance to post some thoughts, although the pysch info should be credited elsewhere since it came from an online essay on new variations on ID/Ego/Superego which unfortunately did not print with the authors name.
[> Re: Acts of Spike -- Purple Tulip, 23:25:02 06/15/02 Sat
All right---this point has been hammered home so many times I could scream. I agree with you that he did bad stuff and that he probably should pay- if this were real life. But it's not, and, hello- he's a VAMPIRE!!! It's not like he's just some regular guy who likes to mame and kill people. You can't hardly compare him to Willow and Xander by saying that if they had done this kind of stuff, then they would pay. They are HUMAN, and in the Buffyverse humans usually do have to pay for their sins in some form, while vampires get away with it until the slayer kills them. Spike's case is unique because of the chip and because of his seeming cross over to the side of good. If Spike were to be held responsible for all that he's done in the past and sent away to prison, then there would be no amazing and intriguing bleach blonde vampire to become engrossed in week after week. So if he's really your faveorite part of the show like you claim, then you should be thanking the writers that be that he's able to go on with life alongside the slayer and her pals.
Buffy/Angel/Firefly news (*spoilers*) -- Corwin of Amber, 10:23:31 06/15/02 Sat
Apparently, Giles and Willow are in England in the season opener.
"I am going to England ... in a couple of weeks to shoot some second-unit with Tony [Head, who plays Giles,] and Alyson [Hannigan, who plays Willow,] for the season premiere of Buffy," Whedon told reporters after receiving his award June 10 in Los Angeles.
In addition, Cordy is returning and Firefly will be on in September.
Sources:
http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art-main.html?2002-06/11/13.00.tv
http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art-main.html?2002-06/11/12.00.tv
http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art-main.html?2002-06/11/11.45.tv
[> Re: Buffy/news (*spoilers*) -- aliera, 11:45:33 06/15/02 Sat
Joss apparently made a remark about Amber returning too...not as Tara though...feels as if news may start a little early though.
Werewolves in the Buffyverse (why did they change Oz?) -- Earl Allison, 14:17:19 06/15/02 Sat
We saw Oz's werewolf form originally in S3 as more lupine, something that might have come out of a Howling or Waxworks feature, complete with a snout. He also came off as being more bipedal, as opposed to going on all fours (as in later seasons).
But in S3 onward, Oz's werewolf form is far more like, well, a bear or something, not very wolfy. Was this ever addressed in an interview or article -- why the makeup/costume was changed?
I guess the biggest letdown was making werewolves (Oz AND Veruca) even more like something in a suit. Now the werewolves go on all fours, and because of the construction of the human body, it REALLY looks like someone running arouond on hands and knees -- really uncomfortable and a bit silly :)
So, I'm running out of topics, sue me :)
Take it and run.
[> Re: Werewolves in the Buffyverse (why did they change Oz?) -- Apophis, 20:52:20 06/15/02 Sat
I also think the original werewolf suit looked better. I think Joss said it looked like a gay possum or something, but I don't see why.
My werewolf question is how's come Oz killed Veruca by tearing out her throat? They said only silver hurt werewolves. Is it like White-Wolf's aggravated damage thing, where the claws and teeth of supernatural creatures hurt each other as badly as their weaknesses? Or maybe she's not dead yet...?
For those who want it -- Robert vs Joey, pt 3 -- VampRiley, 17:23:23 06/15/02 Sat
Previously on Robert vs Joey...
The two combatants were standing on top of a partially constructed frame of a building. Robert was standing there with his left side closer to Joey. His right hand was on the trigger while his left hand was aiming the device at the kid. Joey's eyes grew in shock. Robert smiled and pulled the trigger.
Now, on R vs J...
The metallic rivets came flying towards the child. He ran to his left, catching two in his right calf. He stumbled as he moved. As he put his left foot down, it was too close to the edge of the beam and it slipped off. As he fell, he grabbed onto the edge with both hands. He quickly lost his grip and fell to the beam beneath him. When he landed, he wobbled between falling off and not falling. He saw the ground way down and steadied himself. Robert watched as Joey fell. After Joey started getting up on the beam below, Robert aimed again. Joey quickly got up and started running. He saw a pair of construction gloves sitting on one of the beams near by. Rivets shot past him as he ran. He grabbed the gloves without stopping and tried to put them on. They were really huge. Robert fired again at Joey, but he ran out of rivets. Joey ran to a rope dangling on the outside of the framework and jumped at it. He grabbed it and slid down. Robert threw down the device and hit a button on the controls. The lift moved down. When Joey got to the ground, he took off. When Robert reached the ground, he ran after Joey.
*********************************************************************
Joey entered a department store with it's lights turned off. He headed straight to the kids clothing department. He grabbed a dark green t-shirt, a pair of black jeans, a pair of brand new sneakers and a man-made leather jacket. He finally stopped and pulled the rivets from his leg. Robert entered the store, his Glock drawn. He was holding it up close to his chest with both hands as he crept throw the departments. He entered the kids department and passed several mannequins shaped as kids on his right. His noticed something and moved forward. He saw something on the ground, but it was too dark to see. One of the mannequins turned it's head and looked at Robert. He kneeled down and grabbed one of the items. As he held it up to his face, he saw it was the red shorts Joey had on. Then, he collapsed onto the floor, his gun leaving his hand. Joey was standing above him with a wooden baseball bat. Robert rolled to the left and ended up on his back. When he opened his eyes, he saw Joey swinging down with the bat. He looked like Yoda did in the preview of SW Episode Two as he swung down with his lightsabre. Joey connected with Robert's chest with a loud crack. He swung a second, a third, a fourth and a fifth time. Robert groaned in pain. Joey giggled and ran away, taking the bat with him. Outside, Joey ran across the street. Inside, Robert slowly got up. He sat up on his knees, but he fell forward and caught himself with his hands. His Glock was right by his right hand and he grabbed the handle. He got his right foot on the floor and staggered as he got up. He turned around and went outside.
When got outside, he saw the sun was rising. Joey was just standing across the street. His hands were in the pockets of his jacket. Robert stopped, looking puzzled. He slowly walked out into the street, looking left and right. He heard something behind him and turned. he saw a man dressed in a ninja outfit from head to toe. Only the area around his eye were visible. His arms were crossed in front of his chest. He heard movement to his right and saw a man dressed as a soldier with the word "ARMY" on his jacket. He looked to his left and there was a construction worker with a large wrench. He was hitting his left palm lightly with it. In front of the ninja, there was a logger with a large chainsaw. He pulled on the cord and its teeth spun really fast. Between the soldier and the logger was a butcher with a large meat cleaver. He was dressed in white, his apron all bloodied. Between the ninja and the construction worker was a man dressed in a dark red ceremonial gown and a wizard's hat. Between the construction worker and the logger was a giant king cobra. Between the soldier and the ninja was wild man with one inch finger nails, long scraggy hair, a cave man club and breath so bad that when it hit Robert he literally thought he was gonna throw up. Joey walked inside the building across the street with a smile on his face. He walked to one of the elevators and pushed the up button. The door opened and he got on. The doors closed and he hit 27. He had to jump to hit it. That was the top floor.
Outside, the eight that surrounded Robert slowly walked toward him. Robert put his gun in the back of his waistband and pulled out a long katana from behind his right leg. The elevator doors opened and Joey walked out. He headed to a huge office and climbed into the large swivel chair. He pulled out a small jeep with a white star on the hood and a red flag on the front. left side from his pocket. He moved the toy back and forth, playing on the desk. Down below, the logger charged Robert with his chainsaw raised. He swung down and Robert blocked him with his katana, his right hand above his left. The chainsaw scrapped loudly and harshly against the other metal. Both items shook back and forth. Robert let go with his right hand and spun around. He slammed his right elbow into the spine of the logger.
He fell forward, his chainsaw directly below the center of his rib cage. His body jerked as the chainsaw cut into him. The butcher threw his cleaver and Robert ducked. Surprised, the construction worker got hit in the center of his forehead with the cleaver. He fell to his knees and then dropped to the ground. The wild man leapt at the construction worker. He cracked his skull open with his club and started eating his brains. Robert made a disgusted look right before the butcher came up behind him and grabbed him.
Inside the building, Joey was standing at a water cooler getting a drink from one of those cone-shaped cups made of paper. When he finished, he made a loud, relieved sigh and walked back to the office. Outside, Robert stepped on the butcher's left foot with his. The butcher let go. Robert spun to his right and wrapped his right arm around the back of the butcher's neck, pulling him forward. As he snapped his neck, the butcher's body jerked up a little and fell to the ground. The soldier pulled out his sidearm from the holster on his left thigh and fired at Robert. He hit him in his left shoulder. Robert raised his sword up and to his right with his left arm and threw it at the soldier. It lodged itself in the soldier's throat. He dropped his gun and grabbed his neck. He dropped to his knees, gasping for air. the bullet in Robert fell to the floor.
The cobra jumped at Robert. He coiled his body around him and met face to face with the man. The cobra leaned its face closer to his. Those flap things were spread out. Its mouth was open. Their faces were less than a inch apart when Robert vamped out and bit into the cobra face. The right one of his two elongated canines on his bottom jaw hooked into its left eye as he brought the 6 sharp teeth of his top jaw down into its skull. The cobra's flaps disappeared as he recoiled in pain, but Robert wouldn't let up. He bit all the way through and ripped a chuck of its head off. The cobra let go of him and fell to the ground dead. The wizard started chanting quietly. Robert looked at him, but couldn't hear what he was saying. This transparent blue ball of energy appeared in front of him. Inside, it crackled with white and blue lightning. The sorceror looked at Robert and the ball flew at him. Robert bent backwards at it flew past in front of him. He pulled his gun out with his left and fired three bullets. The cave man looked up at the shots. His lower face was covered in blood. He grabbed his club and came after Robert. He re-aimed his gun and fired. The cave man dropped. He turned his head to the right a little and looked at the ninja.
Upstairs, Joey was bringing a small tv into the office. He set it down onto the desk. He plugged the cord into the outlet on the right side of the room. He pushed the power button and turned the knob a bit. Cartoons appeared on the screen. He sat back down and started laughing. On the street, Robert and the ninja looked at each other for several seconds. Slowly, he moved to the dead soldier. He was laying partially on his left side. The sword was into his neck up to the hilt. He slowly pulled it out and stood up. The ninja let his arms slowly fall to his sides and let them hang there loosely. He pulled out two wakizashi swords from behind his legs. The two fighters stood very still. Then, the ninja charged Robert with blinding speed. Joey was munching on a chocolate bar with his feet on the desk. His right foot was crossed over his left. On the screen, smoke moved away to show that a brown furred coyote, that was standing like a biped would, was actually hanging in
mid-air. This blue feathered bird sounded like a car horn and looked over the edge of the cliff he was on. The coyote looked down and dropped. His neck stretched, leaving his head still on the screen, but that too soon fell as well. Joey laughed. The blue bird ran away leaving a trail of color behind him. The coyote was as flat as a pancake on the ground below. When he stood up, he still looked two-dimensional.
Outside, clanging sounds could be heard, though Joey didn't it because of the tv. The ninja swung down the wakizashi in his right hand. Robert parried, the blade pointed to his left. NinjaMan thrust his other wakizashi into Robert's abdomen. Grunting, Robert hit him with a right cross. NinjaMan stumbled to his right. Robert pulled the sword from his body with another grunt. NinjaMan spun around and threw four chinese stars at once at his opponent. Robert moved his torso to his right, but the final one stuck into the left side of his neck. He reached up with his right and pulled it out.
He looked at NinjaMan and saw the wakizashi he was holding morphed into a japanese katana of average length. NinjaMan leapt into the air. He came down slashing with his weapon. Robert moved to his left. He raised his blade up and to the left and brought it down, hoping to catch NinjaMan's neck, but NinjaMan rolled forward and up to his feet. He turned and squared of with Robert. They circled each other. Then, Robert came at him from high on the right, then on the left. NinjaMan spun and swung low. Robert jumped. NinjaMan bent backward, his left hand touching the ground as he flipped backward, catching Robert in the face with his right foot.
Surprised, Robert steadied himself. NinjaMan came at Robert high and from the left, then right, then left. He spun around, but Robert block his swing. NinjaMan spun the other way and Robert caught him. NinjaMan kicked him just below his left knee and spun. Robert bent forward and rolled. He rolled to his feet as NinjaMan attacked him again. Without turning around, Robert position his blade with both hands behind his left shoulder, then the right as NinjaMan came at him at high on that side as well. NinjaMan spun to his left and came around with a horizontal slash of his weapon, but Robert bent forward. As NinjaMan continued with his movement, Robert dropped his blade on the ground. He jumped forward slightly, ending with his palms on the ground and kicking backward with both feet. NinjaMan staggered backward as Robert flipped forward while picking up his sword. He turned around. He held his sword's handle upside down, but with the blade still pointing to the sky. NinjaMan leapt at him again, his blade poised above his head. Robert jumped as well and spun, bringing his blade diagonally through NinjaMan's torso from the lower, right side, all the way through to the upper left portion. He landed facing the same direction he was before he leapt. NinjaMan's body fell to the ground in front of him. He looked at it for a couple seconds. Then, he slowly looked up at the top floor of the building in front of him with yellow colored eyes.
To be continued...
Constructive criticism and suggestions are welcomed. But if you flame me, I will smite you. I am a god after all, you know.
VR
Classic Movie of the Week - June 15th 2002 -- OnM, 21:38:47 06/15/02 Sat
*******
Maddy: Where do you live?
Margret: Mostly in my head.
*******
Solitude stands by the window / She turns her head as I walk in the room
I can see by her eyes she's been waiting / Standing in the slant of the late afternoon
And she turns to me with her hand extended / Her palm is split with a flower with a flame
Solitude stands in the doorway / And I'm struck once again by her black silhouette
By her long cool stare and her silence / I suddenly remember each time we've met
And she says I've come to set a twisted thing straight
And she says I've come to lighten this dark heart
And she takes my wrist, I feel her imprint of fear
And I say I've never thought of finding you here
I turn to the crowd as they're watching / They're sitting all together in the dark in the warm
I wanted to be in there among them / I see how their eyes are gathered into one
And then she turns to me with her hand extended / Her palm is split with a flower with a flame
Solitude stands in the doorway / And I'm struck once again by her black silhouette
By her long cool stare and her silence / I suddenly remember each time we've met
............ Suzanne Vega
*******
A couple of disclaimers before I start. I realize this is not Citizen Kane. Ah, Citizen Kane is
in black & white and it's about a bald guy, so I realize they're not one and the same; however during the
creative process one tends to feel as though one is making Citizen Kane (and) because of the
difficulty involved you have to get yourself into the mindset where everything you're doing is incredibly
important and (a work of) genius. So if I discuss this as if it were the greatest work of fiction in the history
of America it's because I sort of have to feel that way, and because every decision you make as an artist is
important to you at the time and has meaning even if it doesn't add up to a famous black & white movie
about a bald guy.
............ Joss Whedon, from the DVD commentary track for the BtVS episode Innocence
*******
Earlier this week, I was engaged in doing what I imagine quite a few Buffy fans were doing, which was
sitting back (or forward, as need be) and enjoying the newly released DVD collection of BtVS, Season 2.
Being a hopeless commentary trollop, I naturally gravitated towards those eps in the set that had them, and
eventually came to Joss' thoughts on his ep Innocence. Snarky, self-deprecating and insightful as
per usual, the meister and I eventually arrive at the point near the end of the show where Buffy, faced with
the opportunity to stake Angel(us), decides instead to 'kick him in the goolies' as Joss so eloquently
phrased the action.
Now ya know, this angry feminist/testicle mashing thang is a persistently annoying and unpleasant
TV/movie cliche, and only Joss's general brilliance allows him to get away with it. Hell, this whole BtVS
shebang could be a cliche, it fer sure has the potential, but noooo, somehow time and again the
banal is aptly subverted and even elevated beyond the apex of cleverness, kinda the way John Belushi could
use that single silly stretched-out word that I just copped from his oeuvre over and over again, and make it
funny each and every time. Lesser mortals generally fare much less well.
That doesn't mean that they shouldn't try. If you don't at least try to gain some skills, talents, or at
least a sense of style, and thereby risk failure, you never improve. You may even be fortunate enough to
gain yourself an empathetic muse or a mentor, someone whom you respect, someone who is willing to
teach you what they know, or at least the learnable parts of it. Sometimes you learn something simple and
practical, like a job skill, and you get a promotion or a better paying job as a result. At other times you get
to learn a life skill, a commodity that is often very hard to assign a price to (or even just pay for),
but in terms of greater value received works for you big-time in the long run.
One of the seeming 'givens' in the Jossverse is that enlightenment doesn't come without gaining a personal
appreciation of pain and loss, and the director of this week's Classic Movie would seem to agree with that,
as it would appear does the author of the novel that the film was based upon. Now, I haven't read the
novel, which could be either a good or a bad thing, but whatever it's merits or demerits, I did very much
enjoy watching Foxfire by director Annette Haywood-Carter, based on the novel by well-known writer
Joyce Carol Oates. Foxfire appears at first glance to be a standard teen-age coming-of-age story,
only with the usual band of soon-to-be-brothers-in-arms replaced with a band of sisters-in-arms.
The battle being fought here is one framed in both internal and external terms, which naturally makes for a
far more interesting story. While films such as this have plentiful precedent of the masculine side of the
chromosomal fence, the feminine viewpoint is traditionally far less honored, and Haywood-Carter and her
able cast seek to restore a little gender equity to the genre in this undertaking.
The basic elements of the plot are like so: A 'stranger' comes to town; dark, brooding, attractive,
mysterious-- and female. The stranger, one Margret Sadovsky, who goes by the ironic nick 'Legs', enters
Portland, Oregon and with some inexplicable manner or kind of implied divine guidance makes her way to
a high school in which several female students are about to have their lives changed irrevocably 'Legs'
appearance. Margret/Legs is played by a young Angelina Jolie, nearly unknown at the time, but more
recently visible and just as feisty in her Lara Croft: Tomb Raider role.
The other four main protagonists of Foxfire-- Maddy (Hedy Burress), Rita (Jenny Lewis), Goldie
(Jenny Shimizu) and Violet (Sarah Rosenberg)-- are in biology class, where frogs are being dissected, or
more accurately vivisected if appearances are to be believed. Rita, an obviously shy and introverted girl, is
unable to apply scalpel to amphibian, and is brought nearly to tears as the teacher slyly berates and
threatens her for her supposed 'weakness'. Rita is just about to give in when Legs, who saunted into the
classroom just minutes before (and acting completely like she belonged there) gets up, frees the captive
frog, and then follows it out the window. The teacher is outraged, and threatens to have Legs punished,
only to hear her sarcastic rejoinder that 'I'm not a student here' as she coolly departs the scene. Frustrated
and bitter at his sudden loss of authority in front of the entire class, the teacher assigns Rita the detention
instead. It's clear that he needs to cut the heart out of something, and Rita happens to be the closest lesser
being at hand.
The story now takes a much darker turn as we learn that the biology teacher has a reputation for using his
detention assignments to fondle or otherwise sexually harass the young women he fancies. While seemingly
common knowledge among the school's female student population, no one seems willing to attempt the
risky procedure of challenging the status quo-- at least until Margret shows up. Meeting up with Rita,
Maddy, Violet and Goldie in the lavatory, Legs urges the other girls to stand up for themselves in no
uncertain terms. They seem reluctant, and for good reason-- it's their word against his, and he's a teacher,
they're just students. Rita leaves the lav and goes to her scheduled detention with the biology teacher.
The sleazeball starts to make his move on Rita when Legs, Maddy and the others burst in on the scene, and
threaten to expose what's going on. When he declines to be intimidated, the girls promptly gang up and
pummel him, although not particularly viciously, inflicting just enough damage to get his attention.
Simultaneously terrified and exhilarated at their 'conquest', the girls run away, in shock and disbelief at
what they just did.
There are consequences for their actions, which actually is a theme that runs throughout Foxfire.
This in and of itself is kind of refreshing, since all too many 'teen movies' seem to emphasize the hedonistic
partaking of the party ethic at the expense of the people who are ultimately paying for the party. Granted,
most adult figures in this drama tend to be cut out on the cardboardy side, especially the male constituency,
but I'm willing to cut it some slack in that area since this is a tale told by the young, and it certainly
might be viewed as accurate as far as their perceptions are concerned.
The first consequence takes place the next day, when the girls are called into the principal's office, and
shortly thereafter find themselves on suspension for several weeks. One of the interesting thoughts that
occurred to me as I watched this short but telling scene unfold was whether or not the principal was
angrier at the attack on the biology teacher, or by the snarky laughter engendered in the girls by his idiotic
'what are you, some kind of gang that likes to run with the foxes?' remark.
Whatever the case, the 'foxes' are now free to run about for a while (how come you always punish kids
who hate school by making them leave it?), and run they do. Various and sundry feminist-themed hijinks
follow, but hijinks that naturally have a redeeming purpose, said purpose mainly encompassing the goal of
learning to appreciate the new mother/sister figure's spiritual independence. Margret's 'leadership'
qualities do seem to embody some kind of feminist ideal, although the writer takes care not to depict Legs
as a perfect individual. As strong and independent minded as she is, Legs has her own raw nerves that
don't bear much prodding, and she walks a thin line between rashness and deliberation that only Maddy
seems to be able to clearly discern, and appreciate realistically.
The film, in fact, is as much about the relationship between Legs and Maddy as it is about any general
concepts of female independence, and this brings up the question of whether it is possible to have
independence without accepting a degree-- or possibly several whole latitudes-- of loneliness. The high
points of the movie for me were those scenes that contrasted the closeness of this group of friends with the
undercurrent of the certainty that sometime, someday, they would have to go their seperate ways. The
entire lengthy sequence where the young women have Legs tattoo them with the 'foxfire' symbol while
gathered together in an abandoned house, surrounded by candlelight, is one of those cinematic moments
that people either tend to find obtrusively schmaltzy or else filled with a heart-felt poignancy beyond
words. In this instance, I tend towards the latter sentiment, since in the dark of the theater I prefer to leave
my age-begotten cynicism behind for just a few hours and try to remember what it was like to still be
young and be alive and open in the moment. Those moments come, and they go, and they never come
again. In so many cases, those moments can shape us for the remainder of our lives, or serve as a spiritual
anchor to make us recall that life has some purpose, even when that purpose becomes harder and harder to
wrench free from the inexorable pull of the gravity of existence.
The final scene of the film is inevitable, sad and exhilarating, and the ever-so-slow pullback of the camera
from Maddy, retreating into the 'larger world' around her, presents a perfect visual metaphor for the
journey that lies ahead, and for all of us who attempt to embrace the possibilities.
I do recommend that you embrace this film, or at least give it's possibilities a chance. It may not be a
feminist Citizen Kane, but it is a pretty fair rendering of a flower in a flame.
E. Pluribus Cinema, Unum,
OnM
*******
Technical love tattoos, standing in the slant of the late afternoon:
Foxfire is available on DVD, which was also the format for the review copy. This film was released
in 1996, and is not to be confused with the Foxfire released in 1955 and directed by Joseph Pevney.
Running time of the feature is 1 hour and 42 minutes, and the original theatrical aspect ratio was 2.35:1, so
viewing the DVD version is highly recommended if at all possible to preserve the widescreen mode. (The
DVD video is anamorphically mastered if you are lucky enough to own a widescreen TV).
Writing credits go to Joyce Carol Oates for the novel on which the screenplay was based, and to Elizabeth
White for said screenplay. The executive producer of the film was Mike Figgis. Cinematography was by
Newton Thomas Sigel, with film editing by Louise Innes. Production Design was by John Myhre, with art
direction by Alan Locke and set decoration by Marthe Pineau. Costume Design was by Laura Goldsmith.
Original music was by Michael Colombier, and the theatrical sound mix was standard Dolby Surround.
Cast overview:
Hedy Burress .... Madeline 'Maddy' Wirtz
Angelina Jolie .... Margret 'Legs' Sadovsky
Jenny Lewis .... Rita Faldes
Jenny Shimizu .... Goldie Goldman
Sarah Rosenberg .... Violet Kahn
Peter Facinelli .... Ethan Bixby
Dash Mihok .... Dana Taylor
Michelle Brookhurst .... Cindy
Elden Henson .... Bobby
Cathy Moriarty .... Martha Wirtz
Richard Beymer .... Mr. Parks
Fran Bennett .... Judge Holifield
John Diehl .... Mr. Buttinger
Chris Mulkey .... Dan Goldman
Jay Acovone .... Chuck
*******
An Important Announcement for My Loyal Fans ( all 7 or 8 of them ):
Effective with this week's column, Classic Movie of the Week will be moving to Saturday nights,
with the posting time remaining the standard 10:00 PM to 1:00 AM EST. It is my hope that this change
will accomplish several positive results, my reasoning for which is as follows:
1. My work schedule over the last several months has made it increasingly difficult for me to find the spare
time to do the kind of column I would like to turn out. While things have eased up a bit in the last few
weeks, this may be just a temporary respite. I work until 8:00 PM on Friday evenings, so if I have not been
able to have the column mostly completed before then, I am often simply too tired to think clearly and
come up with something worth reading. Rather than continue to regularly post delay notices on Friday
nights, I'll just move things back a day.
2. The original idea with posting on Friday night was to give readers a chance to seek out and possibly rent
the film under review for viewing that weekend. I have been increasingly aware that this may be too short
a notice for many of you, and so it should not make any real difference if there is another day's wait. These
scribblings of mine are available for a least a reasonable while in the current ATPo archives, and all past
columns will soon be available on the Existential Scoobies website, with the generous assistance of The
Second Evil, Liq, and others who are so kindly laboring on my behalf (and a big thumbs up to you all!)
Comments are always welcome, no matter how old the CMotW. You may respond either on the board, or
e-mail me at objectsinmirror@mindspring.com.
3. I am still very interested in 'Guest Hosted' CMotW's. The ones that I posted back in March and April
were not only providing some tempus fidgeting relief to yours truly, they turned out-- as I expected-- to
further showcase the excellent writing talents of the various contributors and provide a different cinematic
perspective from my own. Anyone who is interested, please contact me at the e-mail address above, and
I'll provide the guidelines and what-fors you need to know. The pressure to directly relate the weekly flick
to a current Buffy or Angel ep is off in the summer months, so there is a lot of flexibility possible. So if the
muse comes, e-beep me!
One other announcement:
Congratulations to Masquerade on the Second Anniversary of the ATPo Discussion Board, and as
I like to do every so often, I wish to acknowledge her kindness for giving me the space to indulge my
movie habit here, and so enable me to use the 'language of cinema' to elaborate on the philosophy of the
Buffyverse, and even the Realverse that's always tangent to it.
Thanks, Masq!
:-)
*******
Miscellaneous:
Here's an interesting quote from a fellow you may have heard of who's in the movie business:
They came up with this analytical toilet that would catch and evaluate what went down and
automatically adjust your diet. I couldn't find a place for that.
............ Steven Spielberg, on a proposed script idea from a team of futurists assembled for the upcoming
(film) Minority Report
( Quote provided by The DVD Journal -- http://www.dvdjournal.com/ )
*******
The Question(s) of the Week:
According to my research, Foxfire, which is based on the novel by Joyce Carol Oates, has undergone
significant modernization to change the setting from the '50s to the '90s. My question relates to those of
you who have both read the book, and seen this filmed version of it. Do you think the movie treatment of
the book was well done? Did the modernization hurt or help the film? If you think that the movie could
have been done better, how would you have changed it?
Post 'em if you've got 'em, and try to keep ahead of the archive monster. Don't be afraid to start a new
thread if the column disappears into the archives, I realize that you might not get the chance to see this
movie right at this moment. Hopefully with the new night of publication for your movie man, things will
stay around a mite longer.
In any event, take care, and I'll see you next week!
*******
[>
stayin' a live -- Vickie, 14:33:38 06/16/02 Sun
I have nothing to add, but don't want to see this die before more folks can read it.
Besides, I had just listened to that same Suzanne Vega song not half an hour before OnM posted (for the first time in over a year). So I'm clearly connected here somehow.
[> Re: Classic Movie of the Week - June 15th 2002 -- beekeepr, 22:48:24 06/16/02 Sun
doing my part to keep it alive-always look forward to OnM's reviews, and particularly fond of Vega's lyrics
A 'Scooby Doo' Review -- posted by LadyStarlight, 06:44:01 06/17/02 Mon
It was a really cool movie. Fans of the cartoon will
get a kick out of the inside jokes. They dropped the
drug and lesbian inuendo, but that is more than made
up for by the attacks on Scrappy they did. Also, it
seemed at times that the cast was taking shots at
themselves (Fred seemed to be a characature of how
most people see Freddie, and Shaggy's comments during
the bodyswitching scene were funny).
I was very glad to see they did it right. Freddie and
Sarah did not hog the movie, and Sarah was actually in
character (the trailers made her look like Buffy).
And most amazingly, I actually liked Freddie in this
movie. He actually learned to act finally. I take
back a sixth of all the mean things I ever said about
him.
But hte best part was Scooby himself. It was hard to
believe seeing it that there was no dog tehre. It was
even better animated than the cartoon.
SO, my thoughts in a nutshell: Cool visuals, funny
story, good acting, hot babes (even Velma looked
good). Go see this movie Now!
Why are you still sitting there reading this!? Go see
it NOW!!!
vhD
[> I saw it yesterday, and I thought it was great... (minor "Scooby Doo" spoilers) -- Rob, 07:44:09 06/17/02 Mon
SMG is a truly great comedienne (sp?). She WAS Daphne. It's that simple. From the voice to the facial expressions to her whole body language...she WAS Daphne. And she seemed to be having a great deal of fun. One great part, in particular, Fred and her souls switch bodies, so she (as Fred) is looking at her breasts, etc, and giving the most gleeful, adorable expression. Especially after seeing her play depressed for a year on "Buffy," it was so cool to see SMG kicking back and having a blast. She was without a doubt the best thing in the movie. Her comedic timing is a joy to watch.
Secondly, Matthew Lillard was the perfect Shaggy. He completely nailed the voice, and while he didn't look as close to the character as SMG, he gave a lot of heart to the character. There was a sweet innocence underlying his whole pseudo-stoner routine that lead to some great character moments. Yes, "Scooby Doo" does have character moments!
I'm not saying it's deep or anything, but I'd classify it as a cut above the rest of most "live-action cartoon" movies. The CGI Scooby was great, too. I had my doubts, from the commercials, but he was truly amazing. He struck just the right balance between realistic dog and cartoon dog.
The movie, on the whole, was a fun bit of fluff, certainly never boring, and totally worth seeing. There were some great in-jokes for "Scooby Doo" fans, including a rather brilliant (IMO) subplot that basically mocks Scrappy Doo relentlessly (and deservedly!). There were also a few (although very subtle) drug jokes, although, as Lady Starlight said, a lot of the more obvious ones, and the lesbian innuendo was cut out, to make it more family-friendly. All I can say is I hope that they release a director's cut on DVD, or at least have the extra scenes as supplements (perhaps a "PG" release and then a "PG-13" release, on a separate disk? I wanna see that Daphne/Velma action!).
I honestly never thought I would enjoy this movie so much, after reading mostly scathing reviews. But it was just plain fun. The screenplay and story were obviously written by a true fan of the cartoon, poking gentle fun at its subject, but still totally loving it.
And I think that's what I loved about the movie. The actors were uniformly great (yes, I can't believe, I actually enjoyed Freddie Prinze, Jr. in a movie! Gadzooks!), the sets were fun...oh, and the ingenious Rowan Atkinson, more widely known as "Mr. Bean" or "Black Adder," (who I think is one of the best British comedy actors, second only to John Cleese)is in it. What more could you ask for?
Rob
[> [> Wow, did you hear Scooby Doo had the largest June opening for a film in history?!? Cool! -- Rob, 07:52:45 06/17/02 Mon
[> Glad you liked it!! idid too check out my review in the archives a week back -- neaux, 08:34:33 06/17/02 Mon
I wrote another review of it about a week ago when I saw a sneakpreview of it!! and thought the same thing.. pretty funny stuff!!
[> We laughed our tushes off..... -- Liq, 13:42:10 06/17/02 Mon
[> Could the evil Bunny have been a nod to Anya? -- Calluna, 18:33:13 06/17/02 Mon
[> Shaggy was very endearing... reason enough to see it. -- Tillow, 05:50:31 06/18/02 Tue
Spike's Trials: Why Herculean in Nature? (spoilers up to end of S6) -- K-Dizzy, 07:38:35 06/17/02 Mon
Looking for the collective insight and opinion of the board… trying to reconcile myth, hopeful speculation, outcome and possible foreshadowing?
Jungian author Erich Neumann's "Amor and Psyche: The Psychic Development of the Feminine" identifies the labors of the mythological Psyche as she develops her consciousness and regains the love of her estranged god husband, Cupid. Her tests involve sorting seeds, gathering wool from nasty sheep, collecting water from a sacred waterfall, and retrieving a box from Queen Persephone in Hades. She does these with the friendly help of ants, water reeds, an eagle from Zeus (elements of nature and the divine). Her labors are often contrasted with those labors of the masculine, Hercules. His challenges are feats of sheer strength and iron will. He defeats, dominates, confronts/alters nature (e.g. diverting entire rivers, conquering creatures). He himself ventures into Hades twice, to take what he wants (Cerberus, Alcestis). Psyche listens, plans, gently works with nature and uses cooperation/strategy to prevail; Hercules triumphs because of his raw nerve, muscle and unbowed spirit.
Hopeful Speculation: past spoilers suggested that in his trial/s Spike would somehow face the significant women of his past: his mom, Cecily, Drusilla, Harmony, Buffy, perhaps Dawn, and his encounters with them would represent some test of his resourcefulness, patience, passion, and overall heroic worthiness. Fans expressed lots of creative ideas about him passing or even failing said symbolic test, and becoming human (a reward/penalty) as a result. And now we know how this played out.... And it seems like many were disappointed- they really hoped that Spike's trial would be a 'deep' psychological test of his true love and devotion. Spike as wild Romantic ideal is a part of his attraction? A man so in tune with his feeling feminine side, he could 'quest' in this fashion and come out smelling like a rose?
Outcome: in reality, what little we saw of Spike's labors was male/Herculean all the way: dark, brutal, pretty much to the point and to the death. The last trial seen was him steeling himself against/defying a force of nature (insects: sampling"The Mummy," Egyptian myth, Kafka??) But it didn't have to be this way- The Trials of Spike could have been actualized in many ways. Now, of course, ME might have used "Cave Demon & Co." to save money (this is, not hiring the necessary actresses) but could it be that this plot choice- choosing the Herculean over the 'Psychian'- implies... something? Interestingly enough, both the Hercules AND Psyche myths have an aspect of love gone bad, and a strong central redemption theme. Human Psyche labors to redeem herself and prove her devotion and worthiness to her god husband: after a private betrayal, redemption is sought in the name of love and union. In contrast, Hercules labors as penance for- publicly- killing his wife and family when in a possessed bloodlust due to a curse by jealous goddess: redemption is sought to regain self-respect, assuage his guilt and to pay his heartfelt "debt" to society....
So, any thoughts about how this choice might foreshadow Spike's S7 journey? Much of Spike's prior narrative set-up is evocative of Psyche's efforts- all for love- but his Herculean struggles suggest another motivation- or outcome. Maybe how ME creators envision the development of his (heroic?) character? It does seem to indicate, at the very least, a certain divide between how Spike's creators and some of his devoted fanbase view the persona, and what they want, hope and expect for him....
Thoughts?
[> Masculine/Feminine Mystique in Spike's Trials -- cjl, 09:24:25 06/17/02 Mon
You might have a point, there, K-Diz, regarding fan's expectations about the trials--especially when Mercedes McNab let it "slip" that she'd be back on BtVS. THIS season. Did they scrap the Harm/Dru/Buffy psychological aspect of the trials due to time or budget constraints? We'll never know.
But if fans felt cheated, it was mainly because the whole sequence of aggressively male, Herculean trials did seem to run contrary to everything ME was telling us about Spike's character this season. Spike was desperately trying to deny the emerging feminized, William aspect of his personality and keep up his hyper-masculine image of the Dark Warrior--and up until "Two to Go," ME was continually mocking his attempts. He went to Africa, apparently wanting to resume his Big Bad ways, and the Lurker Demon gave him EXACTLY the type of trials Spike was expecting: mortal combat with a series of big 'n' nasty opponents. IMO, most of the Buffy-watching audience was waiting for the moment when Spike, having polished off his combat opponents, would have approached Lurkey and asked for his prize. At that point, the Lurker would have grinned evilly and told him: "That was the easy part. Now comes the REAL test." Then we'd get the shades of Harm, Dru, and Buffy coming out of the walls, and the more "feminine" trials. But that didn't happen.
Maybe the trials themselves meant less than we thought they did. Maybe the whole point to the combat was that it was pointless, and--with the restoration of his soul--the REAL trials for Spike are still coming.
[> [> Agree--the REAL trials are still to come ... (Spoilers) -- Exegy, 09:44:07 06/17/02 Mon
I think the trials at the end of this season merely indicate Spike's initial desire to change. He proves that he wants to change ... but will he be able? This is the struggle we'll see next season, and it'll be far more intense and psychological than anything that could be shown in five minutes of finale.
Just my quick response.
[> [> [> Actually they had all sorts of metaphorical connotations -- shadowkat, 11:23:15 06/17/02 Mon
But have no time to discuss them now...get back to you later.
[> [> [> [> while we're waiting, I'll take a stab (spoilers) -- ponygirl, 13:02:48 06/17/02 Mon
I know shadowcat will have far more interesting points to make, however after a looong boring Monday, I feel the urge to jump in with some fun and wacky speculation on the symbolism of Spike's trials.
The first trial gives Spike a hyper-masculinized "action figure" to battle. Significantly his hands burst into flame. Fire is Spike's own particular symbol, representing his all-consuming passion. Spike doesn't battle him very effectively, he actually grabs the flaming fist and seems surprised that he's burned, something that even he realizes is a spectacularly bad move. It is a battle that echoes Buffy's line in OMWF about wanting to touch the fire, and Spike's description of a love that burns and consumes in SR. But we all saw how well this philosophy has worked for Spike in the past. Now he is showing the visible signs of what trying to hold onto fire (or passion) will do, he's burned and he's losing. It's only when he steps back, reconsiders his approach and finally kicks the other guy in the balls does he triumph. It's a punk move, completely in character, yet also an effective defeat of the cartoonish symbol of masculinity.
The battle with the demons (two? two-headed?) we don't see maybe because we've watched Spike battle the demon within him for so long. So now that he's defeated the monsters and the man what's left? It's a question that Spike's been asking of himself for a long time -- not a monster, not a man. Who is he? Something so dead that the bugs crawl in. Icky. But the beetles are symbols of fertility and rebirth. Spike can't defeat them, he can only endure. Whatever's left is a being stripped down completely, dead but ready to be reborn as something new.
[> [> [> [> [> Actually very good take. -- shadowkat, 06:14:33 06/18/02 Tue
"So now that he's defeated the monsters and the man what's left? It's a question that Spike's been asking of himself for a long time -- not a monster, not a man. Who is he? Something so dead that the bugs crawl in. Icky. But the beetles are symbols of fertility and rebirth. Spike can't defeat them, he can only endure. Whatever's left is a being stripped down completely, dead but ready to be reborn as something new."
I actually prefer this take to mine. I think we all agree, of the trials, the last was the most interesting metaphorically.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks 'kat! -- ponygirl, 06:39:46 06/18/02 Tue
Maybe the reason the trials were so brief, was that the trials themselves really weren't the point. We've seen Spike endure pain and torture before, we've seen him try to change and both succeed and fail. Really the only thing the trials proved was Spike's commitment to become something different, the real story was what led him to that point and of course what happens after.
I agree that the bug trial was the most interesting because there was no clear way to fight. Really how do you win or lose a situation like that? Just scream a bit and let the bugs crawl in. I hope that's not some horribly depressing metaphor for life.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yes, your first paragraph illustrates exactly my thoughts ... -- Exegy, 09:32:57 06/18/02 Tue
... and I also agree wholeheartedly with your take on the fire and rebirth imagery. It's like OMWF--we see various aspects of Spike's journey up to this point in a far condensed version. Battling the fire with his bare hands symbolizes his struggle with all-consuming passion ("The torch I bear / is scorching me"). He touches the flame, and it begins to destroy him. The marks the fire leaves upon him represent the psychological damage he has undergone all this season, the damage that leads him to the point of nothing. Which is where we see him at his final trial ... an empty vessel ready to be cleaned out and remade. But what he becomes? That's the journey of next season. Should be interesting.
You wrote a very nice post, ponygirl. Pretty much captured what I was thinking, anyway.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Yes, your first paragraph illustrates exactly my thoughts ... -- ponygirl, 10:04:45 06/18/02 Tue
Thanks Exegy! And I hope you know that I love just about everything you write.
This thread has got me thinking about how much easier it is to pick out metaphors and symbols at season's end. To paraphrase K-Dizzy it is very difficult to reconcile myth, speculation and actual events. We can come up with so many amazing intrepretations and theories that it sometimes becomes difficult to remember that we are trying to understand stories that are not ours to tell and more importantly stories that have not concluded. The trick is not becoming so wedded to a particular idea that its execution becomes essential to our enjoyment of the show. I remember before the finale, based on my own thoughts, the board, and a few spoilers that I couldn't resist, I had convinced myself of a Plato's Cave take on Spike's journey and that he would be made human in the end. Now, I didn't really want Spike to be human, but I was so convinced of my take on things that I was actually a little miffed when he just got the soul. Now I'm happy with my more literal take on Spike's trials as a representation of his attempt to find something beyond man or monster, but I'm trying to stay open 'cause who knows where this story will go.
Sorry for the ramblings, as always enjoying everyone's thoughts!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> More OMWF imagery (hindsight speculation, spoilers) -- Exegy, 10:34:25 06/18/02 Tue
Spike's lines in "Walk Through the Fire" ring particularly poignant come season's end. His "I hope she fries / I'm free if that bitch dies!" echoes his expressed sentiments in SR: "Bitch is gonna see a change." It seems as if Spike, like Warren, is out to destroy Buffy. He appears to desire restoration as the Big Bad. But we see that this is not his intent at all. Rather, he wants to become someone whom Buffy deserves. "I better help her out" indeed! That last line is mentioned seemingly as an afterthought to his conflicted internal debate (kill her or save her?), but it's really the most important decision of all. It's the decision that allows Spike to reappear on the scene and save Buffy in OMWF; it's the decision that causes him to actively seek positive growth in the last episodes. It's the decision that stays with him after all his external defenses have been stripped away, leaving only that internal resolve. That desire for change.
But has Spike gotten what he wanted? Or has he reached a dead-end (the alley scene in OMWF)? Is there some other barrier to his journey? Time will tell, but I assume that there are many difficulties and surprises in store for Spike.
And I totally agree with shadowkat--whoever diminishes Spike's journey is missing out on one of the most fascinating character arcs ever.
Thanks for the praise, ponygirl! I love discussing this with you and others. Like I said, I think you really hit the nail on the head with the imagery of Spike's trials.
Can't wait 'til next season!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks Exegy and shadowcat for a lovely discussion! -- ponygirl, 11:43:36 06/18/02 Tue
[> Spike's trials and why they are significant metaphorically -- shadowkat, 13:03:34 06/17/02 Mon
Spike's Herculean Trials
I think everyone missed what these trials were about - by looking for literal/figurative representations in the myths. I don't seem them as Herculean. Angel in my opinion fits the Herculean metaphor better, not Spike. Hercules went insane and killed his family. Angel became Angelus and went insane trying to destroy the world. Now he is doing penance. Spike is not Hercules in the myths - he is closer to the tricksters - like Orpheus, Eros (which is an ironic twist), or better correlation Cuchalain who lost every woman he loved and had to go through all sorts of horrors in Celtic myth.
But since the season is about growing up. I think this is a far better and closer metaphor - the primitive trials of manhood. The trials Spike went through are very similar to the trials of manhood still practiced by many primitive/native societies in Australia (aboriginies), Africa, South America, US, and the Pacific islands.
To become a man, the young warrior must brave three tests, one of fire, one of skill, and one of natural elements.
1. Trial by fire - fighting the demon with the fire hands. This is very similar to being forced to walk over hot coals or to run through flames. It also works for ME as a metaphorical tie in with Willow who is shooting fire from her hands literally the scene before. Fire can represent the flames of vengeance.
2. Skill - usually the young warrior is asked to bring back the head of a wild animal or horrible beast. A similar trial is scene when the hero brings back the gorgon's head. Spike decapitates and brings forth the heads of two horrific beasts. This trial can be seen in classic literature as well: Jabberwocky and Beowulf.
3. Endurance. In some cultures men are forced to be covered with insects or to be emerged in the dirt up to their necks with ants and other insects crawling over them. My memory my be off but I vaguely remember seeing this trial in the old Western "A Man Called Horse" and other westerns. Whedon loves the Western and most of these trials have been seen in one aspect or another in the trials the native Americans force the white men to undergo.
Once the young man passes the tests - he is sent on a vision quest and given a soul or animal guide. The primal shadow self. To become a man. Usually they give him his native name - such as the wolf or eagle to describe the spirit that he has now incorporated within himself - the spirit he needs to become a man. Spike already has the bestial soul or primal - so he gets his human soul returned to him after his trials. A very fitting twist.
This links with Willow very well - since Willow undergoes all three tests and unleashes her primal force and almost loses her soul as result.
1. Fire - fire from her hands. And she absorbs fire from each victim through her hands. (BTW - once again we have "the hand" metaphor - the warrior exudes power through his hands and so does Willow, the warriors is bright, her's is dark.)
2. Heads of victims - she kills Warren and Rack - that's two. But she doesn't get Jonathan or Andrew. But it is another to take her to her final stage.
3. Bugs - the dark magical text that crawls into her and she then tries to unleash on the world.
Willow becomes a dark twisted version of her former self and almost loses her soul.
Btw this sort of parallels Angel - Cordy passes tests, becomes half demon and goes to heaven, Wesely almost loses his soul and is in the dark with Lilah.
Just a few thoughts. Run with it.
shadowkat
[> [> But it's precisely the "rite of manhood" quality that throws us off.... -- cjl, 13:53:15 06/17/02 Mon
Kat:
You're absolutely correct about the rite of manhood aspect of Spike's trials, the initiation of a male member of the tribe into a higher state of being. But as I said before, this is exactly what's throwing off a lot of Buffyphiles in the audience.
This was precisely the sort of trial Spike was expecting when he came to Africa. He came in to the cave strutting like the Dark Warrior of old, looking to kick some ass and take some names, and the Lurker Demon gave him his WWF smackdown rite of passage. But what, in a dramatic sense, did this form of trial have to do with the way Spike has been portrayed the rest of the season? Again, Spike has been trying to repress the William part of his personality, trying to hang on to the hyper-masculine, demonic aspect--his Big Badness. Mutant Enemy has continually told us that his denial of the Man within the Monster is tearing his pscyhe apart. So when Spike hit the cave in Africa, I think everybody was waiting for the Lurker Demon to spring a surprise on Spikey: no battles with flame-fisted bruisers--a test of the Man, not the Monster. Hence, a psychological combat with mommy, Harm, Dru (maybe Darla) and probably ending with Buffy.
[I did like the beetles, though, and the symbolic "excavation" of the vessel to prepare the way for his new/old soul.]
And, I've got to admit, there was a cheesiness to the combat scenes I couldn't quite shake off. When Spike appeared stripped to the waist for his first battle, the image of Capt. James T. (Naked Torso) Kirk immediately popped into my head. He was battling the Drill Thralls in "The Gamesters of Triskelion," and I heard that Star Trek "Kirk in combat" theme music. I was waiting for another Lurker Demon to walk into the cave to place a bet.
["Three hundred quatloos on the newcomer!"]
I understand the symbolic significance of Spike's trials as they were presented. I just think it would have fit in a lot better with their portrayal of Spike over the past three years if they went a different way.
[> [> [> Re: But it's precisely the "rite of manhood" quality that throws us off.... -- shadowkat, 18:22:53 06/17/02 Mon
I agree with lulabel's post below which states this very well but I want to adress something interesting here. Because I disagree partly with what you state.
"But what, in a dramatic sense, did this form of trial have to do with the way Spike has been portrayed the rest of the season? Again, Spike has been trying to repress the William part of his personality, trying to hang on to the hyper-masculine, demonic aspect--his Big Badness."
Yes and he lost it towards the end. Each battle weakened the bravado further. Weakened the monster. Brought out the ego(William) over the id(Spike).
"Mutant Enemy has continually told us that his denial of the Man within the Monster is tearing his pscyhe apart. So when Spike hit the cave in Africa, I think everybody was waiting for the Lurker Demon to spring a surprise on Spikey: no battles with flame-fisted bruisers--a test of the Man, not the Monster. Hence, a psychological combat with mommy, Harm, Dru (maybe Darla) and probably ending with Buffy."
I understand what you are going for - but I think you are missing what Me was doing here. The Monster was going for the soul. There was no man inside, not really, just an ego or as Fury states : "the ghost of a man". He didn't have a soul. I know you and the other Buffyphiles wanted to believe he didn't need one, that the inner William was screaming out - but ME wasn't writing that story. I finally realized it when I rewatched the seasonal arcs of Angel and Btvs. From the writer's pov, there can't be psychological combat without the full soul present. It would contradict the Angel story and throw all sorts of bad light on Buffy's slaying of vampires.
But there's another more important point you're missing. Spike's monster could have handled the psychological combat. His vampire/big bad self. He was already doing that to himself, that's why he was there. We already watched the warfare you stated, shown in Entropy and Seeing Red. Remember the tormented replays in SR? The monster liked the evil he did. The monster didn't understand the guilt. If the trial you suggest took place - he would have chosen the removal of the chip and gone gunning for Buffy. A perfect comparison is Warren or if you like Angelus who went through these psychological trials - Angelus went insane and decided to destroy the world (I ONLY HAVE EYES FOR YOU) and Warren well that's what Willow did to him. Although I think it happened before that when he went after Buffy with a gun. What the lurker demon did with Spike's trials was help the ego tear down the id's or the physical big bad's defenses. He was tired by the end, worn out, barely able to move. No longer able to maintain the bravado...so he could get what he really wanted. The monster was out of commission by the trials.
By doing the opposite of the stereotype, giving the big bad vampire the trials he'd expect, the physical trials not the psychological ones, Spike gets the result of the soul - the inner William. I think the psychological combat you are so eager to watch will come next year, when William's soul and Spike's id or monster or whatever word you want to call it go to battle. That's when it will and must happen, not before. His journey and trials are far from over. Just as Willow's, Buffy's, Xander's, Dawn's and Anya's are far from over.
I agree with aliera - Season 6 and Season 7 are a two year arc. We just finished part I.
Finally they needed to parallel Spike's physical challenges with Willow, a psychological combat would not have worked
metaphorically here. At least not at this point. It's way too early in the game.
Patience.
[> [> [> [> Spike's trials and a certain cave in Dagobah -- cjl, 21:38:53 06/17/02 Mon
Hmmm. "Ghost of a man." But are we sure there was nothing left in there before Lurkey gave him a soul?
Let's face it, Spike is unprecedented. He's certainly different from Angelus, who has no conscience, no heart, and certainly no guilt. Thanks to the chip, to his love for Buffy, and maybe even his friendship with Clem, Spike definitely experienced guilt after the attempted rape. Guilt is simply NOT in the vampire lexicon. He was ready for change, his inner man wanted to emerge, even though his monster wouldn't admit it. There WAS elbow room for psychological trials even though Spike didn't have a soul.
I'm not saying there wouldn't be violence in my ideal scenario for Spike's trials. Violence would definitely be required to break down the last bit of resistance to receiving the soul. But rather than facing opponents like Firehands and the two-headed demon, I thought Spike's combat would involve opponents of a more PERSONAL nature.
If you want a handy reference point, the nearest pop culture analog to Spike's trials is Luke Skywalker's Jedi training on Dagobah. Luke enters the cave (his own psychic underbelly), and battles Vader, the representation of the Dark Side of the Force, everything Luke hates and morally opposes. He defeats Vader, but when he unmasks the villain, he finds his own face. In this way, Yoda teaches Luke that once you start tapping into the power of the Force (realizing your strengths), the Dark Side is always waiting to tempt even the strongest Jedi. This encounter picks up additional resonance at the end of the film, when Vader is revealed as Luke's father; but it also HELPS Luke in Episode Six, when he uses this knowledge to bring his father back to the light.
[Yes, I know, comparing Lucas and Whedon is like comparing apples and oranges. Bear with me here...]
Let's create a hypothetical scenario. Spike is ready for rock 'em/sock 'em combat, but instead, there's a flash of light and the Lurker runs him through his entire history, from William's Mom through Dru (hosting a birthday party for the King of Cups!), upping the psychological torture in each phase, until Spike is ready for his ultimate foe--the Slayer. (Not necessarily Buffy. The creature could "represent" Buffy--masked, similar to the mud/elemental mask Buffy wore in her "Restless" dream.) It is a brutal, furious fight, at the end of which he is beaten down while the voices of all the women in his un-life call him "an evil, soul-less thing." After a final blow, "Spike" explodes into a million pieces--an army of beetles. Suddenly, Spike is standing where the Slayer was standing a moment before, his mouth open in astonishment. The beetles swarm over him, pouring into every orifice (ew). There's another flash of light, and Spike is alone in the cave. He stands up proudly. He's survived the trials. He asks the Lurker Demon to give him what he came for.
And, of course, he gets it.
The trials weren't the be-all end-all of Spike's journey. As you said, we're entering a new phase of the battle within Spike's tortured mind. They were a transitional phase, and I'm just saying it would have benefitted ME if they had more clearly demonstrated the enormous gulf Spike was about to leap. Perhaps the combat trials had symbolic resonance, but IMO, they lacked dramatic resonance. Joss and crew could have satisfied us both, but fell short.
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Spike's trials and a certain cave in Dagobah -- aliera, 14:33:32 06/18/02 Tue
1) ghost of a man...no we're not sure...what if Williams soul was actually there all the time and that's what made him different...just kidding but this is the joss verse anything is possible...(and I like this because this would allow the demon to put him thru trials and basically give him nothing which is more in keeping with how these wish granting demons always operate.)
I just thought it was amusing in the JE interview where she said he looked DEEEP into his inner *soul* and asked for his soul back like even they're having trouble figuring out the hypotheticals on this VLOL
2)Spike unprecedented...oh yes! yummy absolutely correct about the guilt very strange in retro spec.
3)Wasn't season 6 itself a pyschological trial? What about the journey over water to Africa (wish we actually had more build up for this but hey).
4) Let's create a hypothetical...I don't think they are ready to do all this with us yet...in fact I would spec that at the beginning of the season there was no plan for Spike's trials at all...
4)I agree with what you are saying about the finale (I felt ahppy to see Spike at all) but decidely ho hum re: trials but there were bigger ho hums for me the satanic temple or temple top or whatever...and I liked some of his dialogue so moot point.
Overall I think you're right. If so many people felt let down than it could have been better done. But we may look back on this differently next season and see that there was a reason.
Overall I'm not sure that it matters. : )
[> [> [> [> Patience, schmatience; I want it all, and I want it NOW! -- Off-kilter, and much with the id *summer's too long*, 00:22:37 06/18/02 Tue
[> [> [> [> Re: But it's precisely the "rite of manhood" quality that throws us off.... -- leslie, 15:12:36 06/18/02 Tue
Dare I hope that ME are working their way toward a new definition of manhood? Pretty please? Spike has been battling his Williamosity, okay, trying to hold on to his Big-Badness, but in so doing defining Big Bad as "masculine" and William as "feminine." But William was the one with the soul. What happened here was that the result of being a macho man was getting a soul. Being both. Proving that what real manhood is, is being able to receive/accept the feminine as well as the masculine.
[> [> [> [> [> Wiiliamosity -- LOL. Great word!! -- redcat, 15:42:41 06/18/02 Tue
[> [> [> [> [> Rebuttal (feat. MORE irritating pop culture references!) -- cjl, 17:04:45 06/18/02 Tue
"What happened here was that the result of being a macho man was getting a soul. Being both. Proving that what real manhood is, is being able to receive/accept the feminine as well as the masculine."
Well...
[cjl tilts his head in his best "OK, I'm trying very hard to see your point, but it's just not happening" pose]
I think I felt the same way about Spike's trials that science fiction writer David Gerrold (classic Trek's "The Trouble with Tribbles," The Man Who Folded Himself) did when he reviewed Superman III for Starlog magazine back in the day. Gerrold had enough troubles with most of the movie, but his brain really blew out when he saw the climactic battle scene.
You remember that one, folks. Richard Pryor's character synthesized artificial kryptonite, but instead of killing Big Blue, it turned him nasty and selfish--as if all the wild impulses held back by years of civic duty were let loose at once. (In essence, Supes was "vamped.") Eventually, though, the "good" part of Superman (you know, the one devoted to Truth, Justice, etc., etc.) split away from his nasty half, and the two had a kick-ass battle in a Metropolis junkyard. And how did Superman resolve this identity crisis? How did his good half bring his darker impulses back under control? Gerrold's description lives with me to this day:
"Good STRANGLE[D] evil with its bare hands."
If you listened closely, you could hear Gerrold's head banging against his desk.
Jeez, talk about a counter-intuitive solution to a script problem.
As a former Trek writer and superfan, Gerrold knew how the plotline should be resolved. Classic Trek's "The Enemy Within" handled it perfectly. When Kirk was split into his "William" (Shatner) half and his VampKirk half, the resolution wasn't phasers at 20 meters, but the gentle, intellectual part of Kirk calmly talking his darker half into surrendering. Their embrace--the acknowledgement that both halves were needed for Kirk to survive--was one of the most affecting moments of the series.
So, getting back to Buffy...Spike earns a soul--the center of empathy and caritas--by beating the snot out of a bunch of demons? Nope. Pure cognitive dissonance here. The more I think about it, the more my brain threatens to short circuit.
I'm not going to worry about it too much, though. As 'kat and everyone else said, this was just a transition phase, and in a few months, we'll be too busy talking about Souled Spike to worry about how he got there.
Gotta go. "Flooded" is on in NYC...
[> [> [> [> [> [> Well ... on the symbolism (S6 Spoilers) -- Exegy, 21:29:38 06/18/02 Tue
I don't think that significance should be placed on Spike "beating the snot out of a bunch of demons" ... so much as on Spike being beaten himself. He's not proving his masculine prowess in the cave; he's having that Big Bad exterior stripped away. First the flame that scorches him (echoing the flame of his passion that has scorched and nearly consumed him this season). Then the series of ugly demons that leave Spike without physical strength (he drops to his knees in exhaustion). And finally the beetles, which surge into Spike when he is bared and completely vulnerable, "excavating" him so that he may be reborn.
What we are seeing depicted is an inner transformation. When Spike travels to the dark caves, he descends into the depths of his psyche. Now he's truly in a world apart from Sunnydale, beneath the surface of outward reality. Here he battles his inner "demons," systematically purging himself of his limited ideals of all-consuming passion and vampiric prowess. He leaves himself bared and open, ready and willing to accept the change that descends upon him (open to the beetles of rebirth). He's destroyed the forms of that which once defined him; now he seeks new definition (as symbolized by his acquiring of the soul, that essence which now fills him and signifies the internal resolve to change he has just proven). An inner journey, indeed, established by "outward" forms (human action figure, demons, beetles, and soul). Perhaps not obvious as such, but hey--the writers do what they can in under four minutes. We'll see a lot more next year, so not a problem.
Note: On the Kirk embrace of the "VampKirk" ... I assume you had Willow in mind?
[> [> [> [> [> Yes! you said what I wanted to say -- shadowkat, 19:54:11 06/18/02 Tue
Dang it, I was going to hop on the board quickly at 9 and go to bed early tonight and it's almost 11...(get up at
6)..but the posts are great tonight.
"Dare I hope that ME are working their way toward a new definition of manhood? Pretty please? Spike has been battling his Williamosity, okay, trying to hold on to his Big-Badness, but in so doing defining Big Bad as "masculine" and William as "feminine." But William was the one with the soul. What happened here was that the result of being a macho man was getting a soul. Being both. Proving that what real manhood is, is being able to receive/accept the feminine as well as the masculine."
This was what I was trying to tell cjl. Everyone seems to think that William is the weaker entity, that the feminine side is weak. I've seen so many posts on how much stronger Angelus (super masculine) and Riley (again macho guy)
were. But I beg to differ. I always found William to be stronger. In fact in Season 6, particularly in the beginning of the year and at the end of last year to show an odd quiet strength. Towards the end of Season 6, I felt he was in conflict with his feminine and masculine sides. The masculine BB was trying to quench the feminine - hence the attempted rape and the trials. We needed those trials to weaken Mr BB, the macho man. So I saw the whole thing as mixture of the two as you brillantly state above. And very ironic.
Once again we have Mr. BB vampire going through what on the surface may appear to be herculean trials, but not to win the removal of a chip or some macho reward like become human as Angel dreams of - but the feminine side, the soul, the ability to emphasize with humanity, to feel for those outside himself, to feel the impact of the violence, which Angel never considered a reward, rather a curse, most vampires would. The soul is painful and from Angelus' perspective at least emasculating (similar to Spike's chip). You're right William was far more feminine than Spike. Spike buried William, who as cjl points out kept surfacing. We don't need some long drawn out soap opera with all the women in his life to show this conflict - it was already shown in Tabula Rasa through
Seeing Red. Possibly even before. He's already been fighting that. No it's far more ironic to do as leslie states, have the macho tasks only to receive the softer
part of yourself - the part that cares.
It reminds me, leslie of the Celtic myths more than the Greek...but it has been so long since I studied them. Am I right? It also makes me think a little of the Egyptian tales which tend to have more feminine metaphors.
[> [> absolutely yes -- lulabel, 17:28:13 06/17/02 Mon
Absolutely. I see very little correlation with Spike's trials and the trials of Hercules which as shadowkat observes were all about penance, and presumably redemption. Angel very clearly fits this mold in circumstance, as well the aspect that both Hercules and Angel are unequivocally heroes who fight the good fight because it's what they do. They are chosen warriors of the Gods/PTB.
Additionally, the idea of penance or redemption implies a certain acquiescence to a higher authority; a submission to something outside of the self. I see Spike's actions as being all about HIM. He may have been motivated in part by remorse, but in fundamental character Spike is not an apologist.
I saw Spike's trials as having everything to do with metamorphosis - thus the shedding of his leather coat, the Big Bad's metaphorical skin. His trials are rites of passage, or the trials of manhood as shadowkat so wonderfully describes. They are about re-defining of self.
[> [> Re: Spike's trials and why they are significant metaphorically -- leslie, 15:05:10 06/18/02 Tue
(God, I will do ANYTHING rather than proofread today...)
"Once the young man passes the tests - he is sent on a vision quest and given a soul or animal guide. The primal shadow self. To become a man. Usually they give him his native name - such as the wolf or eagle to describe the spirit that he has now incorporated within himself - the spirit he needs to become a man. Spike already has the bestial soul or primal - so he gets his human soul returned to him after his trials. A very fitting twist."
Not entirely sure of this, certainly it doesn't hold worldwide, but sometimes, you don't *have* a soul until you undergo your rite-of-passage, I believe. Or not a complete one, not a "real" i.e. adult one.
As for Spike's relation to Cu, don't get me started! (the bleached hair! the riastrad/"warp spasm"! the serglige/"love sickness", which includes Cu being whipped by two Otherworldly dominatrixes! the "warrior of his people" which is exactly what Lurky Demon calls Spike!) I would make a quick reference to the Tochmarc Emer ("The Wooing of Emer") in which Cu must journey to the Otherworld and undergo a series of tests in order to win his true love Emer (pronounced "Ever" by the way). Why does he need to get married? Well, the men of Ulster think he needs to settle down because he's just too damned sexy and all the women are swooning over him.
[> Re: Spike's Trials: Why Herculean in Nature? (spoilers up to end of S6) -- K-Dizzy, 13:21:57 06/17/02 Mon
Also perhaps worth recalling: In "Helpless," after being deprived of her "Herculean" ability to aggressively fight, Buffy survives her Cruciamentum "trial" by
channeling her inner "Psyche": by listening (to Kralik), planning, with some cooperation (from Giles), etc....
[> Re: Spike's Trials: Why Herculean in Nature? (spoilers up to end of S6) -- redcat, 15:26:58 06/17/02 Mon
"Human Psyche labors to redeem herself and prove her devotion and worthiness to her god
husband: after a private betrayal, redemption is sought in the name of love and union. In
contrast, Hercules labors as penance for- publicly- killing his wife and family when in a
possessed bloodlust due to a curse by jealous goddess: redemption is sought to regain self-
respect, assuage his guilt and to pay his heartfelt "debt" to society...."
I find your encoding of Spike's trials as Herculean rather than Psychian quite thought-
provoking, although I agree in general with shadowkat and ponygirl that other myth structures,
especially seen through their pop-culture descendants and through broad-spread cultural
patterns of male initiation, better fit the actual trials we see enacted. However, the question
your analysis raises is intriguing. Why would ME give Spike such non-Psychian trials when his
entire journey, as cjl notes, drives him toward the very Psychian goal of union with the
beloved? Angel clearly fits the Herculean model much better, but if Spike doesn't fit it very
well, then why must he undergo such masculinity-defining tests? Perhaps because it isn't, in
fact, the Romantic Man who has something to prove, nor is it the Dark Warrior who Slays
Slayers, but the very being who is in the process of becoming *through* these trials -- the
ensouled vampire that the Lurker Demon and his power-buddies ("WE return your soul to you")
must have known from the onset of the trials that Spike could/would become. Neither William
nor the Spike that we met in S2 could have successfully undergone all three trials, including
the last and worst of them, being "excavated" internally by the scuttling invasion of the
instruments of spiritual fertility and rebirth. Just as Angel is neither Liam nor Angelus, so the
ensouled vampire formerly known as Spike is neither William nor the Spike that we've come to
know. Some have suggested that he will return with little or no obvious changes, all the work
to be done inside as the season progresses. Perhaps, and we've certainly seen enormous
growth in the character over the last three years to support such a view. But I'm not so sure.
The thing about mythic heros is that their stories are often tragic and generally end badly.
While this may be an accurate description of Joss' attitude toward love affairs between
beautiful women and guys with bumps (see Tara's comments on "The Hunchback of Notre
Dame"), I'm not convinced this is necessarily where Spike is headed. I'm not sure that I
believe in the notion of redemption, but am pretty certain that Joss does, and am very certain
that he likes to play around with it's dramatic possibilities. What I doubt he'll do, in any case, is
stick too closely to anyone else's pre-existing-myth script. Even if Spike's trials can be
analogized to Hercules', and the impetus for them to Psyche's, I doubt we'll see a direct
reflection of their stories, or even a very clear-cut structural or metonymic correspondence to a
single set of myths, any time soon.
But I really enjoyed reading your post, K-Dizzy!! Thanks for getting my brain going this
morning!
redcat
[> [> Re: Spike's Trials: Why Herculean in Nature? (spoilers up to end of S6) -- Rahael, 16:46:04 06/17/02 Mon
rc, agree with you exactly about how Joss plays around with myths, and doesn't follow one blue print for a narrative.
And some very interesting thoughts about Spike's trial.
[> [> Re: Spike's Trials -- K-Dizzy, 06:04:30 06/18/02 Tue
from redcat:" Why would ME give Spike such non-Psychian trials when his entire journey, as cjl notes, drives him toward the very Psychian goal of union with the beloved? Angel clearly fits the Herculean model much better, but if Spike doesn't fit it very well, then why must he undergo such masculinity-defining tests?"
Thanks for completing my thought process! Nicely summarized. Also to clarify, didn't mean to suggest ME would be as pedestrian to lift entire narrative plotlines from Greek myth, and meant only to reference to general feminine/masculine archetypes- not imply that Spike is on a specific Herculean path. Indeed, several responses here (suggesting Angel's story is a better match) continue the confusion: so WHY choose such physical tests for Spike? The initiation into manhood parallels work-more so if this was intended/expected by all parties. I dunno, I guess one could even throw Arthurian type "questing" (for the Holy Grail- the cup of redemption) into the mix, and find some mythic parallels. In all cases, Spike may certainly come to want redemption for its own sake (newly souled, this seems possible), but this- much like his motivation for asking (what?) and the motivation of the Lurker Demon for giving (a soul? as reward, punishment, or fee paid in full?) is still rather unclear.
While I did think Spike's trials would be psychological, I expected more of a 'Starfleet Academy' entrance type exam (a la Wesley Crusher having to abandon/let a crewmate die, like Picard did to Wesley's father); that the Lurker Demon would somehow apprehend Spike's worst fear/nightmare and make him play this out. Whether this involves the women of his life, who knows? And yes, this isn't his show, but I think many expected a little more than 3 1/2 minutes of smackdown! action. However, the thought did occur that after watching two seasons of Spike mooning after Buffy, maybe the hyper-masculine aspects of Spike's trial were to reassure UPN's coveted male demographic that even though the first rule of Sunnydale Fight Club is "Don't talk about Fight Club!" (e.g. apres DT), our boy is still a kick-ass, card-carrying member. Still, would have been interesting to see Horus (Lurky) doing his best Jack Nicholson psych-out: "You want the truth, vamp? You can't HANDLE the truth...!"
And I agree about the uncertainty of redemption, but would add: if ME keeps to their promise that Spike's adventures will not be like Angel's, leaving Angel to his more epic "challenges of the champion" labors, seems like a pretty good deal for Spike.... Psyche herself only had four tests, culminating in a symbolic 'failure': to appear more desirable to her god husband (a creature above her status) she opens Persephone's casket, falls into a death-like sleep, and must be saved by her love- who's off nursing his wounds- and pride. Petulantly, Cupid was cooling his wings (and quiver of romantic arrows) at his mom Aphrodite's place, but soon healed and grew restless. His old ways and connections are no longer enough: he grows up. He goes to Psyche, awakens her and in doing so, essentially tells his Mom to get over it: he will still continue his duties (slaying hearts with painful shafts of love!), but he needs to have Psyche at his side. And so they are reunited. Perhaps for all her efforts she becomes immortal, and they have a daughter named Pleasure (or Joy). Of course this is a happy ending, and that's not ME's way... but still- it's a lovely story.
One final thought about good old Quasimodo: maybe the love affair part didn't work out, but in a society decayed by corrupt institutions, wasn't love supposed to be the only moral compass/action of any value? As such, if Quasi was a fool for love, this makes his journey a heroic one....
Parallels in the assaults in DT/OaFA and SR/Villains and their partner's subsequent reactions. -- VHF, 11:36:10 06/17/02 Mon
I was just re-watching Dead Things and Villains when I discovered some major parallels between the two episodes.
Person assaults (ex-)lover (DT, SR)
Person expresses a limited level of remorse to someone completely unrelated to the assault (Tara and Clem), even though their remorse is laced with blaming their partner. "Why did I let Spike do those things to me", "What has she done to me".
Wronged party seems to forgive partner and turns up on person's doorstep as if nothing happened in the next
episode (OaFA, Villains)
I am not quite sure what the writers are trying to say other then Buffy and Spike don't play by the rules that normal humans have in relationships. Any other ideas?
Normal Again -- Nickala, 12:44:24 06/17/02 Mon
I don't know about the rest of you but I think that Normal again was possibly the best episode every written, if only due to all the phiolosophical questions that they ask in that ep.
The whole am I really here thing speaks to me.. and I have to agree with Buffy in that ep, what does seem more plausible? Being a superhero who must fight vampires and has faced at least half a dozen apocalypes' in her 21 year life? Or a girl in a insane asylum?
Granted the show wouldn't have worked if Buffy decided to go along with her delision, you know, cause the show kind of revolves around a female superhero that fights vampires and saves the world. but it was very nice to see the writters take that direction in the show, if only for one episode.
[> It's definitely on my top 10 list. -- Rob, 12:49:16 06/17/02 Mon
[> I have it at no. 4. Could go higher once the absentee ballots are counted. -- Sophist, 12:52:38 06/17/02 Mon
[> [> It's #5 for me, since I couldn't put it above Joss' "I'm A Freaking Genius" Trilogy or "Restless" -- Rob, 13:01:21 06/17/02 Mon
The list now stands as:
1) Once More, With Feeling
2) The Body
3) Hush
4) Restless
5) Normal Again
6) I Only Have Eyes for You
7) Earshot
8) The Gift
9) Doppelgangland
10)Becoming, Part Two
[> [> [> I have real problems even creating a top 10, since there are more than 10 great ones. -- Sophist, 13:31:03 06/17/02 Mon
Proving that I'm a sucker for the emotional ones, here's mine:
1. Becoming 1&2
2. The Body
3. Passion
4. NA
5. Surprise/Innocence
6. OMWF
7. The Gift
8. Hush
9. Wild at Heart
10.FFL
DT would be no. 10 if they'd just do something to close out that alley scene in a reasonable way.
And yeah, I cheated by treating double episodes as one. So sue me.
[> [> [> [> Passion! -- DickBD, 14:31:27 06/17/02 Mon
That episode made me really start taking Buffy seriously. I have watched it many times, and it is masterfully done in terms of acting and the use of music. The use of Angel's voice overs was well done, too, especially since it was done during an "evil" phase.
[> [> [> [> [> "Passion" is my fave -- Masq, 14:33:42 06/17/02 Mon
For its artistic mastery, among other things.
[> [> [> [> [> [> The more I watch it, the more think I should raise it to No. 1. I may yet. -- Sophist, 15:15:45 06/17/02 Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> Trivia on "Passion" (spoilers) -- Vickie, 15:28:50 06/17/02 Mon
I just rewatched it (DVDs!), and am annoyed. It's among my favorites also and I HATE finding snags in my favorite episodes.
Does anyone remember Angel ever being in Giles' apartment prior to Passion? Otherwise, how did he get in there with Jenny's body?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Trivia on "Passion" (spoilers) -- Masq, 15:50:58 06/17/02 Mon
They never showed it, but you'll notice when Willow is done casting the spell to protect Buffy's house, she gives the book to Giles and he says, "I suppose I should do my place next."
Yeah, this is one place where they didn't do the necessary groundwork prior to the episode, but had to imply that they had done it within the episode itself.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks, Masq! -- Vickie, 16:02:00 06/17/02 Mon
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> "Passion"'s brilliance (spoilers, "Passion" {no kidding}) -- Fred, the obvious pseudonym, 13:16:52 06/18/02 Tue
The skill with which JW set up the stage for the horrific discovery by Giles of Jenny dead in his bed -- the key being the audience knows what's about to happen and the beloved protagonist within the episode doesn't.
The best Hannibal Lecter moment I've seen on commercial TV in the last decade. No gore -- only psychological pressure. Well done, Mr. Whedon.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Yeah, talk about dramatic irony! -- Exegy, 20:58:28 06/18/02 Tue
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Trivia on "Passion" (spoilers) -- Rattletrap, 20:11:02 06/17/02 Mon
Yeah, but remember we only see these people's lives for an hour a week--there's another 167 that we miss. It isn't unreasonable to assume Angel had been invited in at some point in the previous year. No big deal.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Perhaps "Angel-being-invited-into-Gile's-place" could take place in the animated Buffy series? -- Rob, 10:27:01 06/18/02 Tue
[> [> [> [> [> [> "Passion" was soooo close to making my list, but... -- Rob, 19:23:58 06/17/02 Mon
...I decided to go with "Earshot" instead, since I wanted a nice range of different kinds of episodes, and I already had two other Buffy/Angel eps: Becoming II and I Only Have Eyes for You.
It would definitely make my top 20...and it was a very hard decision to not take it in the top 10, but Becoming...can't get better than that...and I Only Have Eyes for You...I just couldn't bring myself to take that one off.
I will say, though, that "Passion" is one of the most emotional episodes for me to watch. It is the first "Buffy" ep that made me cry. And no matter how many times I see that episode, it still affects me as strongly. Just saw it the other day on the DVD set, and I almost completely broke down in that scene with Buffy and Giles, hugging and crying, right after leaving the factory.
It really is so hard to pick the best episode of "Buffy" since there are so many great ones. I could name at least another 20 that could be on a best-of list.
"Superstar"...there's another one I wanted on the list. Grr aargh!
Rob
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Passion! -- ravenhair, 16:37:49 06/18/02 Tue
I received my S2 DVD set yesterday and immediately watched "Passion". Wonderful episode! Not very good at top 10 lists but my faves from S2 are: School Hard, BB&B, Passion, IOHEFY, & Becoming I&II.
[> [> [> [> Re: I have real problems even creating a top 10, since there are more than 10 great ones. -- Wizardman, 01:44:44 06/18/02 Tue
I completely agree with the difficulty thing. Buffy at its worst is still a hell of a lot better than most of TV ever will be (IMHO). Still, if I had to choose a top ten...
10- Restless. It didn't have the emotional impact of other eps, and it was a damn frustrating way to end a season, esp. a Buffy season, but it was COOL to the extreme!
9- The Prom. Okay, there are more artistically well done, and moe emotional ones, but this gets me in some fashion. This ep gave us a further display of Buffy's capacity for self-sacrifice for her firends, established Cordelia's financial plight( and root reason for going to L.A.), saw an end to the Xander-Cordy hostilities, featured the Scoobies in formalwear, showed us that the students at Sunnydale High AREN'T completely clueless, and broke up Angel and Buffy while still giving them a semi-happy ending (done to the tune of "Wild Horses," IMHO the 2nd most appropriate song choice on the entire show).
8- The Wish. If anything ever told us how vital Buffy is to Sunnydale, this is it! "So the world is a living hell because some dead ditz made a wish?"- Larry.
7- The Gift. Blew me away. Best ending since Becoming pt. 2. It might have been more effective- and definitely higher on this list- if I knew that Buffy would be back for another season, and if it hadn't been hinted at earlier in the season, but I'm not about to quibble. Glory got her's, and Ben got his- am I the only person who pitied the guy, even after the Queller incident and his betrayal of Dawn? I mean, he was willing to sacrifice an innocent to save his own skin, but he did manage to work against Glory until almost the very end. And as to that, if his humanity was affecting Glory, then couldn't Glory's hellbitchyness have been affecting him?
6- Graduation Day Pt.1 &2. Great ep! Perfect resolution to the Mayor plotline, while leaving Faith around to return. The school was blown up! Snyder FINALLY got his! Angel departed from the series in high style, which almost makes up for Cordy's not being able to do so. Has any other ep featured as many character deaths- Larry, Harmony, Snyder, the Mayor, ets.? Best battle scene of any Buffy ep, with the possible exception of that in 'The Gift.'
5- Hush. A 'gimmick' ep perhaps, but a damned effective one. The actors demonstrated their range by having to mime most of the ep, while proving to us just how vital those oft exchanged wordless looks are to the characters' interactions.
4- Passion. Holy s---! Angelus proved just how evil he really was, while giving us our first major character death! And Giles displays that things other than Ethan can cause the Ripper to emerge!
3- Once More With Feeling. It certainly had plenty of feeling. I wanted to hug all the characters, while smacking a few of them. I knew that Anthony could sing, but Amber, Emma and James were very pleasant surprises! "Whisper in a dead man's ear, doesn't make it real" "I lived in a world of magic, I thought I lived there alone" "BUNNIES AREN'T JUST CUTE LIKE EVERYONE SUPPOSES! THEY GOT THEM FLOPPY EARS AND THEM TWITCHY LITTLE NOSES! AND WHAT'S WITH ALL THE CARROTS? WHAT DO THEY NEED GOOD EYESIGHT FOR ANYWAY? BUNNIES! BUNNIES! IT MUST BE BUNNIES!.. or maybe midgets."
2- The Body. Good lord, it had it all- teasers, tragedy, humour, and everything in between. It would have been #1, except the uber-awesome ending of 'I Was Made to Love You' stole it's thunder somewhat, leaving...
1- Becoming Pts.1& 2. Woah. Parts of me STILL hurt. Faintly, yes, but that is a lot considering it was four years ago. I definitely 'needed a hug!' Surprise packed ep, culminating in something no one expected, followed by an action that was completely logical under the circumstances. And this ep holds the record for most appropriate song choice: "Full of Grace."
[> [> [> And I thought I was getting too involved! -- DickBD, 14:26:00 06/17/02 Mon
I thought I was getting too obsessed with following and taping the Buffy episodes, but I don't even know which one "Once more with feeling" is. "Normal Again" did blow me away, but so did "Becoming Pt. II."
I guess I am still a newby with this. I only noticed the titles being used on the last two of this past season. I guess you got the others from the various indices (and I assume the names were taken from working scripts)?
I must confess that I am not as fond of "Restless" as some of you seem to be. I mean the symbolism and foreshadowing were interesting--but it didn't move me like "Becoming" or "The Gift." Individual differences? Or just that I am not there yet on my Buffy scholarship attempts?
[> [> [> [> Once More with Feeling -- Vickie, 15:31:48 06/17/02 Mon
This was the musical episode. Unlike the others, its title was prominently displayed on screen at the beginning of the episode.
Yes, mostly we get the episode titles from indices and spoilers. And yes, we are way too involved in all things Buffy.
As for Restless, some folks love the complex intellectual challenge, some prefer the emotional whammy. I love it all, so I'm extra happy with the show.
[> [> [> [> [> Thanks, Vickie -- DickBD, 14:52:51 06/18/02 Tue
I'm with you. I really love everything. Although I am a real music buff, I may not have taken the musical episode seriously. I didn't even tape it. But I'll get my chance on the re-runs.
[> [> [> I don't even have IOHEFY on my honorable mentions for S2 -- JBone, 18:02:12 06/18/02 Tue
For season 2 alone, I rank Becoming, Part I/II, Surprise/Innocence, Passion, When She Was Bad, Halloween, What's My Line, Part II/I, and Killed By Death all higher than IOHEFY. And if you twist my arm, I'll throw Go Fish in front of it also.
[> Re: Normal Again (spoilers) -- Robert, 15:16:45 06/17/02 Mon
I enjoyed the twist on an old theme in this episode and, while I wouldn't call it my favorite, it certainly was an important episode to the seasonal story arc. This was the episode that forced Buffy to make a decision about whether she was going to live or not. Buffy chose her friends and family over the delusion she prefered.
[> Re: Normal Again -- Finn Mac Cool, 15:30:13 06/17/02 Mon
I wouldn't call Normal Again my favorite. I'd say it is a little above the average Buffy episode (meaning it is pretty great!).
My top ten list goes:
10)Passion
9)Tabula Rosa
8)The Body
7)Prophecy Girl
6)Becoming
5)Graduation Day
4)Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered
3)Surprise/Innocence
2)The Gift
1)School Hard
Keep in mind, though, I haven't seen Once More With Feeling yet, and have only seen the beginning and end of Hush (the part where they talk and the battle scene where there isn't a lot of talking anyway).
[> Re: Normal Again -- Finn Mac Cool, 17:24:52 06/17/02 Mon
Actually, I just realized I left a very important episode out:
10)Tabula Rosa
9)The Body
8)Prophecy Girl
7)Becoming
6)Fool For Love
5)Graduation Day
4)Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered
3)Surprise/Innocence
2)The Gift
1)School Hard
[> [> Re: Normal Again -- rattletrap, 20:27:01 06/17/02 Mon
OK, might as well get in on the action here. "Normal Again" doesn't quite make my list, though I thoroughly enjoyed the episode. Anyway, like any self-respecting guitar player, my top-10 list goes to 11:
1. Hush
2. The Body
3. Once More With Feeling
4. Innocence
5. Passion
6. TTG/Grave
7. Graduation Day
8. The Gift
9. Checkpoint
10. Earshot
11. Faith, Hope, and Trick
[> NA is #2 on my list, right between OMWF and Restless. GREAT EPISODE! -- Exegy, 20:09:10 06/17/02 Mon
Benefits of Watching OLD Re-runs -Spoilers for Season 6 -- Spike Lover, 14:49:01 06/17/02 Mon
Hello all. This weekend I caught to old Buffy eps and reaped some new ammunition for some old arguments that deal with Season Six.
Let's see. The episode? Buffy is a senior at high school. She is dating a new guy. Angel has just reappeared from nowhere (back from a hell dimension.) The actual episode is a sort of jekyl/hide ep where the boyfriend of Buffy's new beau has been at the chemistry set trying to make himself a bit more manly and has had an 'incredible hulk' accident, sans green. The following interesting things are said.
Buffy, having discovered wild Angel, tells Giles she had a 'dream' that Angel returned. She asked, 'could anything of the true Angel still exist after being in a hell dimension for so long?' Giles answers: There are two kinds of monsters- those that want to be redeemed, and those that shun all love, etc. (Sorry not an exact quote.) I am using the above misquotations for my arguments about Spike not being an unredeemable, evil thing (even before he was re-souled). (see archives?)
2nd really interesting thing is that the jekyl guy hits his girlfriend. Buffy says to her: The best thing to do for a black eye is not to get hit. The whole ep is like a poster child against abusive relationships.
The other ep. Buffy is dating Riley at college. Faith has switched bodies with Buffy. You have that really interesting scene w/ Spike where Faith tells him she could have anyone, including him. She could ride him at a gallop until his eyes roll back in his head, etc, etc. She says the reason why she doesn't is because 'it is wrong'. (Am I remembering correctly?) He says that when he gets that chip out of his head, they are going to have a confrontation. (or when the chip no longer works on her, as it were.)
What is even more interesting is the scene at the end when Faith and Buffy are fighting in the church, (Faith in Buffy's body and Buffy in Faith's). You see evil Faith -in Buffy's body slamming Faith's head repeatedly against the floor as she screams 'you are disgusting' several times. Now clearly this is a moment of self-hatred for Faith, but it really parallels the alley scene in Season 6 w/ when Buffy is beating Spike to a pulp.
Then there is also the kinky- sex scene w/ Riley. Faith wants to be all kind of wild sex girl. (like what Buffy has with Spike.) But when Riley tells Faith he loves her, she freaks. (Buffy does not seem to like Spike's declarations of love any better. Could the reason be the same? That Buffy does not find herself worthy of love? Probably not.)
In fact, season 6 was like a long drawn out version of the ep of Faith in Buffy's body. So what was Season 6 about? How bad can we be? and What I hate about myself...
Any thoughts or comments?
Thoughts on the structural psychology of the demon soul. VERY LONG, but no spoilers. -- redcat, 17:16:05 06/17/02 Mon
I began writing this post a few days ago in response to an excellent post by aliera on the
demon ego and id, in a wonderful thread on demon psychology that has now hit the archive.
I'm bringing this forward again in hopes some might like to continue the discussion.
I thought aliera's post brought a great deal of clarity to the topic of a Freudian-based
psychological analysis of Buffy. I'm especially intrigued, as I was with shadowkat's original
essays, with her exploration of the relationship between the demon id and ego, and by her
clarification of the dynamic nature of the integrated tripartite structure of id/ego/super-ego,
raising the possibility of change over time ("age and experience").
However, I have a set of questions generated by aliera's (again, wonderfully written!) post in
conjunction with my having read and fully enjoyed the recent spate of truly superb posts about
the id, ego and super-ego by yourself, shadowkat, Exegy and Rufus; an equally compelling set
of posts on the related psychological themes of depression and survival/recovery, especially
the beautifully written gifts of Rahael; the long thread that began with Exegy's work on
emotional burial and to which so many great writers on this board contributed; and
O'Cailleagh's posts in his (planned) 3-part series on holistic metaphysics, especially part 2,
which includes an argument for a vampire's possessing only a demon "group-soul," similar to
other animal group-souls as described within his system.
Trying to put all this together in my head, it seems to me that, across the last few weeks, many
of us have been struggling to understand a set of psychological, metaphysical and structural
relations between humans and vampires in new or more detailed ways, occasioned, I suspect,
by the broad-ranging and still ambiguous implications of the season cliff-hanger in which Spike
"got his fish order changed." I do realize, as I know (or at least hope) the rest of you do, that
all these discussions of vampire souls are a complete fantasy. Buffy is just a TV show...repeat
after me, Buffy is just a TV show...repeat after me....
HOWEVER, I am entirely intrigued by this set of imaginary constructs and can't get out of my
mind a whole range of questions about just what the heck this demon soul is anyway??? It
seems we (the community here) have been collectively articulating a set of interlinking but
somewhat conflicting models about the psychology and metaphysics of vampires in
relationship to humans, many of which either implicitly or explicitly engage notions of "the
demon soul." As Sophist's and my earlier conversation on Godel's Incompleteness Theorem
suggests, in both the Buffyverse and the Realverse, and especially in this community, two
contradictory explanations may simultaneously be accepted as equally-applicable hermeneutic
models. However, aliera's post directly above was so clearly written that I was drawn to think
through those contradictions and to lay out for myself some of these uses of and notions about
the demon soul, taking them to their logical conclusions in an attempt to see where such ideas
might take us. This exercise is merely one of collation, not creation, and I apologize in
advance for being way too lazy to go searching through a month of posts to find every single
poster who wrote about some aspect of one or more of these ideas. My intention here is
merely to lay out a schema of the discussion as I've seen it develop lately. I offer the thoughts
below merely in the hopes of fostering discussion.
1) First option: The "demon soul" has no equivalent to the human super-ego and the demon
ego is only poorly developed, providing just enough control mechanisms to serve the demon
id's needs to feed and survive. (This is not an exact description of O'C's group soul, but his
design shares some characteristics with this option.)
Problem: Such a poorly developed ego would not allow for much differentiation due to
personality, which in humans is understood as an effect of the interplay between super-ego,
ego and id. We have excessive examples of vampires with distinct personalities. In fact, any
vamp who is on the screen for more than about 30 seconds, even those who are primarily
stake-fodder, are written as distinct personality types, presumably based on the memories of
the human whose body the demon has overtaken. Even without any super-ego, these vamps
display well-developed egos.
2) Second option: The demon ego functions quite a bit like the human ego, allowing for the
development of personality and growth over time, but the demon soul still has no equivalent to
the super-ego.
Problem: in such an internal structure, the ego would still primarily function to serve the
id. Since the human id is understood to have no relationship to concepts like good and evil,
but rather is concerned only with the primary instincts of animal survival - food, safety and sex
- we would have to assume that the demon id functions similarly. A demon ego serving such
an id without a super-ego would have no specific reason and certainly no inclination to serve
evil, although it might commit evil acts in the process of satisfying it's id's desires. But good
and evil are concepts of the super-ego. We have multiple examples of vampires committed to
serving evil in ways similar to, and even institutionalized similarly to, the ways humans "should"
serve good, e.g., the Order of Aurelius and the Lurker Demon's accusation of Spike that he
was no longer a warrior for the dark side.
3) Third option: The demon soul does have a demon super-ego along with a demon ego and
demon id, and the needle of it's moral compass naturally points toward evil, leading the best of
such souls to work very hard for side of the Really Big Bads.
Problem #1: the problematics of this schema (or one very much like it) were at the
center of nearly 500 years of European Catholic controversy, resulting in the deaths of tens of
thousands of "heretics" and the eventual victory of a dogma which argues that the Devil is not
God's equal, only his failed servant. If good and evil are actually merely opposite sides of a
shared continuum, as I and others have argued in previous posts on different subjects, and if
Joss and ME intend us to understand that the important tensions lie not in their stark
differences but in the overlapping grey areas between them, as many of us have also argued,
then any condemnation of any vampires' actions is really only partisan booing from the
bleachers. We want "our" side to win, and so do the warriors "naturally" dedicated to the other
side. In such a struggle, victory is only meaningful because our opponents are just like us --
worthy of battle on an even playing field. Our heros are not better than our villains -- unless
they win, of course, in which case they have bested their opponents even if they are not, on
some grand objective scale, better than them. This is a quite complex problematic, but is, I
would argue, the option ME offers us more consistently than the other two above. And for at
least some of us, the moral ambiguities of this option add a texture of reality to the show, even
if in our real lives we don't always have the luxury of omniscient objectivity about the bi-polar
nature of good and evil.
Problem #2: If, however, all vampires do possess a demon soul with attached super-
ego, fully-functioning ego and basic id, then statistically, some vampires will, over time and
under the influence of events, turn their moral compass to the "good" end, just as some
humans turn theirs to the "evil" end of the continuum. Thus, *some* vampires are, in terms of
humans' understanding of the continuum, redeemable. Spike may be the best example of
such a vamp, but he may also NOT be the only example. We have limited experience here
and, for the sake of the logical extension of the example, we need to admit the possibility that
he is not unique, even chipped, as other types of "events" in other vampire's lives may have hd
similar results. This, of course, make #3 the most dangerous of the options, turning the
Buffster into a genocidal serial murderer, which few of us want or are willing to accept, I would
wager.
So, where does that leave us? This is only a rudimentary schematic, and I would love to see
others contestations, corrections, addendums and revisions. Thoughts, anyone?
Thanks for reading,
redcat
[> Re: Thoughts on the structural psychology of the demon soul. VERY LONG, but no spoilers. -- Finn Mac Cool, 17:43:15 06/17/02 Mon
It's agreed that a demon possesses a functioning id. The ego is probably still intact, but altered because a vampire has new threats (sunlight, crosses) while some are gone (humans no longer pose much of a threat, an attitude which makes the Slayer dangerous, since their instinct is human=food). Now, what about the superego?
I think it is a reverse superego. However, I believe that no human superego is motivated to do evil. It can be non-functioning, leaving us with an amoral person who has ego/id-motivation for doing evil. They can also have a messed up sense of morals that drives them to do evil, but their definition of good is very different from most people's.
Likewise, no demon has a superego that tells them to do good. There are amoral demons, like Spike, who will do whatever it takes to satisfy their ego/id. And there are ones like Angelus, who see evil as slowly torturing someone rather than a high body count.
Demon superegos never encourage good, and human superegos never encourage evil. The closest either comes is a lack of morals that lets them do what is best for their self interest.
[> [> Re: Thoughts on the structural psychology of the demon soul. VERY LONG, but no spoilers. -- shadowkat, 18:50:57 06/17/02 Mon
A reverse super-ego, eh? Interesting idea. Don't know if it works entirely. I don't think from my readings of Freud that a super-ego can be defined as a motivator to do good or evil. I think it is a moral compass - a framework or structure comprised of the values and beliefs that we have gained over time from society, parents, our environment and that are within us at birth. In humans the moral compass tends to point towards good. In demons towards evil. But I'm not sure demons, or at least all demons have the super-ego. Because I don't think they have that structure - I think that goes by-bye at death and a demonic id infects them. I think the soul is, as one poster put it a combination of the human id, ego and super-ego. But the demon soul is all id and ego. The moral framework, the structure gone.
I disagree with you on Angelus - oh he liked high body counts, bigger ones than just about any vamp before or after him. The Master describes him as the most viscious creature he ever met. In The Prodigal - we see Angelus take out his entire family and the village he lived in. (Darla askes who he will kill first? He says how about the whole village?) With Holtz - he took out Holtz's entire family, all the kids and the babies. Angelus was the worst of the Fanged Four. Darla even tells him at one point that he has passed her in cruelty, he has reached levels she couldn't comprehend. Then in Becoming Part I & II? He wants to suck the entire world into hell. That vamp was the worst vamp in history, which is why the curse was so wonderful. Gotta appreciate the irony. It's also why the crew on Angel fear him ever reverting back to form. It's also why Holtz's crusade against him is understandable and so incredibly fascinating. And it's why he isn't going to be redeemed any time soon. The difference between him and our other vamps, is we only get flashbacks of how bad he was or that brief arc in Season 2, we never really got to see him change slowly from villain to anti-hero who wants redemption.
(An aside:From your posts I get the impression that you don't think much of Spike or his journey...am I misreading this? I really hope so. Or is this just a reaction against some romantic fanfic? Because if I'm not wrong, I hope you reconsider, you are missing out on the greatest creative character arc i've seen attempted on television. I am riveted to see if they can pull it off. It's certainly far more fascinating then watching a cartoon big bad fall over himself repeatedly ImHO. ;-))
[> Re: Thoughts on the structural psychology of the demon soul. VERY LONG, but no spoilers. -- O'Cailleagh, 18:38:43 06/17/02 Mon
Wow! Nice post rc, a great attempt to consolidate what we've all been trying to say! I must admit that I didn't read much of the demon psychology threads-although I understand the different parts of the mind, I find psychological terms confusing-after reading this though, I wish that I had! From what I understood of your post, it seems the problem is that there is a conflict of sorts between the id/ego/etc of the human and that of the demon-in-residence, the demon soul's animalistic nature driving the vampire on a survival level, while all the time its actions are informed by the thoughts, feelings and memories of the human it was.
It might make for an interesting project this summer for a group of us to try and map out these various areas within the Buffyverse, to further consolidate our theories into a (hopefully!) workable whole.
[> [> Re: Thoughts on the structural psychology of the demon soul. VERY LONG, but no spoilers. -- shadowkat, 19:04:20 06/17/02 Mon
"It might make for an interesting project this summer for a group of us to try and map out these various areas within the Buffyverse, to further consolidate our theories into a (hopefully!) workable whole."
Since i'm partially responsible for starting this, because I'm obsessed with psychological impulses at the moment, I'll volunteer to participate. Just tell me how.
Oh here's some help on understanding super-ego, ego and id.
Id = hyena people, animals, the monster the boy became in the Beauty and Beasts episode. Shadows - are often characterized as the dark id in Freud. Jung tends to take a broader view.
Ego = this is the motor function, what makes us able to speak. It also controls the id, holds back negative and positive impulses as needed. Freud saw it as repressing dark sexual impulses, but Freud was a Victorian. Ego without an id would probably be a robot.
Ego with id - I think is most vampires.
Super-ego - this is the moral framework, the structure that gives us our values. It's what we strive for in the big picture. Super-egos make it possible for you to want to help others, to see outside yourself. To strive to be a good person. (now I'm not sure but it is possible to have a negative super-ego, where you would strive to be a bad person, but this didn't seem to work under Freud, then again I doubt Freud imagined a world such as the Buffyverse.)
Superego with ego would probably be Mr. Spock or Lt. Data on Star trek.
The problem with this is these concepts do overlap, hence the confusion. What I've been trying to do is figure it out, without confusing myself further. Jung I found more confusing than Freud because he allows for more overlap.
Jung's concepts:
Shadow - this is our darker side, represented in BTvs by Spike and Faith. In Season 1 and part of 2, it may have been Angel for Buffy, not positive.
yin/yang also were in Jung.
feminine/masculine
All of this stuff is fairly unconscious and I doubt deliberate on ME's part. But it does help us figure out where they are going with the characters and themes and helps us understand it all better.
Hope that helped and didn't confuse everyone further. ;- )
Excellent post redcat, copied off to read - will get back to you later. Been loving all of your posts by the way!
[> [> [> Can you describe the Soul in psychological terms? -- cjl, 22:05:19 06/17/02 Mon
Unless I'm misreading my old psychology textbooks, I don't think the masters (Freud and Jung, not Mark Metcalfe) delved into the soul that deeply, because it's too ephemeral a concept to deal with in terms of psychological processes.
IMO, the way Joss Whedon describes the soul, it is separate from id, ego and super-ego, transcending psychologcial processes. It is the link and shared awareness between all living creatures, the source of empathy, and the foundation of all human society. (Jung discussed the concept of the collective unconscious, but I don't think it's exactly the same thing. Been awhile. Please correct me if I'm wrong.)
Maybe if we take the soul OUT of the equation, classification might go a bit easier?
[> [> [> [> Re: Can you describe the Soul in psychological terms? -- shadowkat, 05:20:54 06/18/02 Tue
"It is the link and shared awareness between all living creatures, the source of empathy, and the foundation of all human society."
What you stated above is how Charles Brenner and Freud described the super-ego. Joss described the soul as a moral compass or framework which is also described as super-ego.
I don't think Joss looks at it in Judeo-Christian terms.
I think he uses it as sort of a pseudo-conscience.
That said there are a few problems that I haven't figured out answers for - contradictions really in the writing.
1. If demons have souls why isn't Angel and Angelus souls at constant war? Now if the human soul is a super-ego and the demon is just ego and id - then logically the super-ego wins under Freudian analysis. If the human soul is super-ego, id and ego and the demon is just ego and id, the human soul would have no problem quelling the demon but this doesn't really work well on a metaphorical level nor does it help express the real world morality themes that ME seems to be working towards. It works better if the demons represent the id or the dark bestial qualities the SG must slay to deal with their world.
2. I'd like to not get into the religious concept of the soul b/c I get the feeling that ME is circumventing that.
I think their concept of the soul from the quotes I've read by the writers is more psychological than religious.
But I could be misreading them. The religious concept is one I'm sort of struggling with here. The link between creatures idea you suggest - makes me think more of a collective unconscious than a soul. A soul I see religiously as being a portion of the force that created the universe, the world,etc - but that is my own religious view. When we die that energy returns to it's source or is sent on to start new life. There is no evidence in the show that seems to support the idea that the ME writers share this view. Personally I think they are wisely circumventing it to stay out of a religion debate.
3. The switching souls deal? Clearly the human soul holds quite a bit of weight - otherwise when Marcus switchs souls with Angel, MArcus wouldn't have control of Angel's body, Angelus would. Also when Buffy and Faith - switch souls, their personalities go with them. This leads me to believe that maybe in Jossverse the human soul is all three? But demon soul is less than the human soul, weaker? So could it just be id and ego not sure what the Jungian equivalent is.
[> [> [> [> [> How many angels can dance on the head of a pin and other conundrums -- cjl, 08:05:45 06/18/02 Tue
"The religious concept is one I'm sort of struggling with here. The link between creatures idea you suggest - makes me think more of a collective unconscious than a soul. A soul I see religiously as being a portion of the force that created the universe, the world, etc. - but that is my own religious view. When we die that energy returns to it's source or is sent on to start new life."
The problem is, I personally don't see any separation from the psychological and the religious conceptions of the soul as you and I have defined them here. If we take the existence of the soul as a priori, it is the very fact that the soul is a portion of the force that created the universe that results in the empathic qualities I described in my post. Trying to isolate the psychological aspects of Buffyverse souls from the religious is splitting hairs on a metaphysical level, and one of those theological conundrums you're never going to resolve to anyone's satisfaction.
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: How many angels can dance on the head of a pin and other conundrums -- shadowkat, 12:48:35 06/18/02 Tue
After reading some of the posts below...and getting thoroughly confused..by Finn's views of the reverse super-ego, I've decided you're right:
"Trying to isolate the psychological aspects of Buffyverse souls from the religious is splitting hairs on a metaphysical level, and one of those theological conundrums you're never going to resolve to anyone's satisfaction."
Methinks I have inadvertently helped create a monster. Oh well it was a fun intellectual enterprise. No longer sure what the heck a soul is...in our universe, in Joss's, in psychology. The whole thing's giving me a headache. Going back to the nice safe robot essay I'm working on...;-)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> LOL! Didn't mean to discourage you, kat! (Maybe a Skinner-ian approach?) -- cjl, 14:54:11 06/18/02 Tue
From birth to old age (of a vampire):
Birth: Rises from the grave, feeling hungry and powerful. Pretty much raw instinct all the way. Demonic infection and bloodlust has temporarily overwhelmed human memories.
After a couple of feedings, tentative homeostatic balance achieved. Remnants of human memories--human host's previous patterns of behavior--start to filter through into conscious mind forming "shadow" personality for vampire. Animal instinct and continuing bloodlust have obliterated human host's socialization patterns.
Depending upon personality of human host, demonic social interactions form next. Vampire either hunts alone, forms loose, anarchic unit, or falls in with one of the demonic orders. (On rare occasions, passive human personality balances out need to hunt and subject acquires blood through other means--Willie's bar, the vampwhores.)
[Uh oh, I'm running into trouble...I'm trying to explain vampire behavior purely through stimulus/response reactions, and now I have to resort to a mystical explanaton! Can anybody explain the Master's behavior with resorting to words like "demonic soul"? HELP!]
Vampiric old age: the older a vampire gets, the more the demonic infection eats away at the human host, and the more the vampire becomes attuned to the siren song of the Ancients, locked away behind the Hellmouth. (The Master and Kakistos had large followings, and they dedicated their existences to perpetuating their line and/or the restoration of their masters to our dimension.)
Vampire death: The Slayer (duh.)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: LOL! Didn't mean to discourage you, kat! (Maybe a Skinner-ian approach?) -- redcat, 16:16:32 06/18/02 Tue
"[Uh oh, I'm running into trouble...I'm trying to explain vampire behavior purely through stimulus/response reactions, and now I have to resort to a mystical explanaton! Can anybody explain the Master's behavior with resorting to words like "demonic soul"? HELP!]"
Sure, no problem. He's like a couple thousand years old, right? So he was probably some Roman senator before he got vamped. Or maybe a failed general. I mean, come on -- order, hierarchy, conquest based on good engineering, and long-winded, self-aggrandizing speeches. Hey, works for me..
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: LOL! Didn't mean to discourage you, kat! (Maybe a Skinner-ian approach?) -- Rufus, 16:49:56 06/18/02 Tue
Uh oh, I'm running into trouble...I'm trying to explain vampire behavior purely through stimulus/response reactions, and now I have to resort to a mystical explanaton! Can anybody explain the Master's behavior with resorting to words like "demonic soul"? HELP!]
Vampiric old age: the older a vampire gets, the more the demonic infection eats away at the human host, and the more the vampire becomes attuned to the siren song of the Ancients, locked away behind the Hellmouth. (The Master and Kakistos had large followings, and they dedicated their existences to perpetuating their line and/or the restoration of their masters to our dimension.)
The vampire is the result of an infection of the demon who last left this reality, the infecting agent is his soul....From The Harvest
Giles: The books tell the last demon to leave this reality fed off a human, mixed their blood. He was a human form possessed, infected by the demon's soul. He bit another, and another, and so they walk the Earth, feeding... Killing some, mixing their blood with others to make more of their kind. Waiting for the animals to die out, and the old ones to return.
So all subsequent vampires are a result of that original infection....all passing on that fragment of the demons soul, the wildcard in their behavior is their experience as a person, perverted by the demon preference for evil. The infection is a progressive one that eventually kills off any humanity in the host....leaving vampires such as The Master and Kakistos. Angelus was right to be concerned about aquiring a bat nose...;)
The one thing that is consistant in vampires is this original impetus to pave the way for the old ones to return...this desire is more pronounced in some vampires....many vampires not much caring for much more than their personal comforts.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Know what you mean, 'kat -- redcat, 16:40:53 06/18/02 Tue
This whole topic has got me in a spin, too. JE's interview made me realize that if THEY don't know what a soul is and use the word so loosely and in so many different ways, then our collective confusion about demon souls and super-egos, or about the relevance of Freud OR Jung (if any) to JossVerse bloosuckers, is but organized child's play compared to the gang-fights the creators of that universe must be having in their heads.
You get on back to the robot essay and I'll just mosey over to the misogyny discussion. At least that's something I actually do know something about.
But you know 'kat, your original essays on this stuff are still lodged pretty deep up there in my old noggin. There is something here, even if we never can quite put a name to it. I've never been partial to Freud, have always been more attracted to a post-Jungian perspective, but even with all the contradictions using it in this case offers, I find thinking about the role of vampires in the JossVerse as metaphors for human problems enriched by considering them within the Freudian framework. Perhaps one thing this discussion, the previous ones about it and the current thread on misogyny have encouraged us all to do, is to be more specific in the ways we use common religious, psychological and metaphysical concepts. At the very least, that's a positive outcome for such a difficult discussion. Thanks for getting me started thinking in these ways, and thanks to all who've contributed over the last several weeks to these quite wonderful discussions.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: How many angels can dance on the head of a pin and other conundrums -- aliera, 17:13:13 06/18/02 Tue
Oh funny! I printed this off at work to bring home not knowing what it was.
Firstly, I should probably have mentioned that the paper that inspired the orginal post was a recent rebuttal regarding these very issues (sans spikes soul of course) in what had apparently become a heated debate in the pysch community. See we can't even answer these questions for humans and Freud released these theories when? Something like eighty years ago?
Secondly, but most importantly, this is a fictitious world - the Jossverse and how much has Joss defined these things? LOL very very little, naturally! i'm not sure that he works this way. I sometimes feel that the story is telling itself through him that he's not a writer that sits down a maps out timelines and definitions in the way we are trying to do here.
Thirdly, the mystery is part of the magic. If we *ever* fully understand all before the show is done it will be intellectually satisfying but I would suggest to you that we would lose the magic and these wonderful discussions.
I have so enjoyed reading all the essays and questions and theories and even frustrations. You are all very gifted.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Thanks shadowkat, aliera rufus, redcat, and everyone for this frustrating thread-let! -- cjl, 17:19:28 06/18/02 Tue
We can't find the answers. Hell, we can't even define the questions! But sometimes, the intellectual process itself is worth the frustration.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Actually your post was great... -- shadowkat, 18:46:18 06/18/02 Tue
aliera - just finished reading your previous post in full tonight and it was wonderfully clear. I think it was the whole demon soul thing that started confusing me.
But I really like your take on psychological development:
child = id, growing the ego, adult forms the super-ego.
And the Charles Brenner paper I read on it seemed to suggest the psychological community was equally confused.
In fact my friend who knew more about this than I do, her mother being an analyst, told me that actually most analystes no longer rely on Jung or Freud any more, they find the theories limiting and way too precise. Hmmm.
This in a nutshell is why I stayed away from Psychology and become an English Major/Myth Major then went into law.
LOL!
Okay question for you - why did Angel's human soul/super-ego overwhelm the demon's? I asked elsewhere...but just in case you don't see it..;-)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> OK Does anyone know...(probably dumb ? but bugging me) -- shadowkat, 18:39:43 06/18/02 Tue
Reading aliera and Rufus and Ete and redcat and cjl's posts at home tonight - which helped clear my muddled mind a bit, I found myself wondering the same dumb question I wondered at the end of Carpe Diem on Ats last night.
If the vampire has a super-ego or demon soul as theorized by everyone above - how does this explain, Angel being in control over Angelus? Or Marcus taking control of Angelus
when he switchs bodies with Angel? Did Angel and Angelus jump into Marcus' body?
My theory is the demon is in the infection so can't switch bodies, it stays in the vampires. Only the human soul can get in and out, so that answers the question regarding why just Angel switches to Marcus' body.
But this leaves the question of why Angel's soul controls
Angel, not the demon's soul. Any theories?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: OK Does anyone know...(probably dumb ? but bugging me) -- O'Cailleagh, 19:04:57 06/18/02 Tue
Does this help 'Kat?
From part 2 of my essay 'The Metaphysics of the Realverse vs. the Buffyverse' (still in archive 2)
"Angel is a special case among vampires (as is Spike by all accounts) in that he possesses, in addition to his demon soul, a human soul. This human soul, being the original 'inhabitant' of the physical body and of a higher point of evolution than the demon group-soul, has dominance (for the most part) over the demon. This gives Angel a true conscience, comparable to any human or full demon, unlike other vampires. He still has the urges to drink blood, but is content to drink animal blood, safe in the knowledge that he is not causing harm to humans."
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> It helps...the orginal occupant would have seniority but -- shadowkat, 19:58:31 06/18/02 Tue
But that does not explain why Marcus was able to control
Angel's body - he doesn't have seniority, he's not the original occupant. Why didn't the demon boot him out like Eyghorn? Or was it because MArcus was human? Is it the humanity that's important not who the human soul belongs to?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: OK Does anyone know...(probably dumb ? but bugging me) -- Finn Mac Cool, 20:03:22 06/18/02 Tue
Well, the gypsy curse wouldn't have much of a point if Angelus could control Angel. The spell probably set it up so that the human soul would be dominant. When Marcus entered Angel's body, he took the position Angel's soul used to be in, putting him in the same seat of power.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: OK Does anyone know...(probably dumb ? but bugging me) -- O'Cailleagh, 20:09:15 06/18/02 Tue
I was going to agree that the humanity was the deciding factor on the dominance issue, but Finn makes a very good point here....perhaps we will have to wait and see how Spike handles his soul (or how the soul handles Spike!), if indeed that is what he's been given (not that I don't trust the writers...!)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> What we once were informs all that we become. -- Rufus, 04:31:50 06/19/02 Wed
But this leaves the question of why Angel's soul controls
Angel, not the demon's soul. Any theories?
When a host is infected with the soul of the last demon to leave this reality there is a schism of the self, the conscience thrown into the ether, the resulting demon unable to feel remourse the way that a person would or should feel, they now follow a different star, one that has them feel good doing evil. But the demon, vampire is basically the person they always were, possessed by the demon soul, and only the infecting soul. What that means is that the contribution of the infection is the immortality, physical power, and evil bent......the mind is that of the person who once was, with all those thoughts surface and hidden there like a big old menu to choose from. The vampire seems to act out old conflicts that the host had, just with the power and the inability to feel remourse for anything they do.
To Angel, the reason that he overtakes the demon is that the mind is now all his.......his memories, personality is now balanced by the infusion of the soul and the changing of the star he will follow. Angel can still do evil, but now he can feel the emotional weight of the consequences of his actions. He no longer feels good doing evil, most of the time.
In Pylea the demon surfaced in its pure form, all kill, no feeling. But Angel is a man with a demon in him, not the other way around, the man with a soul has the power to say no to the impulse of the beast within to kill, drink, destroy.......doesn't mean that he isn't tempted to go back to some of the old ways, but we know that he couldn't deal with the pain of hurting innocents anymore. Angel is the one in the drivers seat......and sometimes he is an impaired driver....;)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> To 'kat--Were you inspired by my (robot paper) suggestion?! If so, then I am honored! -- Exegy, 21:43:28 06/18/02 Tue
I love your essays ... always fodder for great discussion. I can't wait to see where you take this robot paper!
Exegy *rubbing hands together with evil anticipation*
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: To 'kat--Were you inspired by my (robot paper) suggestion?! If so, then I am honored! -- shadowkat, 06:11:38 06/19/02 Wed
Yes...you and by the whole "What happened to April" thread on the misogyny post. Hope you aren't disappointed. And it's looking to be quite long...partly because being verbose
is my middle name. But since i left the draft I made notes
to at HOME (ugh!!)- it might be a little longer than I expected before I post.
Was trying to keep Spike out of it - but that's impossible since he fits the theme in two ways..chip and the Buffbot.
Oh well.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> You never disappoint. Can't wait! : -D -- Exegy, 08:04:28 06/19/02 Wed
[> The Soul is Amorphous -- Rufus, 00:50:50 06/18/02 Tue
We know by just looking at current events that a soul doesn't mean we are going to be nice to each other. In the Buffyverse it seems to be the element that allows the best potential to do good be realized. The fact that Joss even says that those with and without souls start at the same midpoint indicates that there are many points along the spectrum of good and evil behavior that a demon or human can intentionally or uninentionally find themselves. In the end, at lest for Spike, he was able to go only so far before he was able to look inward and see that there was one thing he lacked that could make the difference between Buffy seeing or not seeing him. He made the choice to take the chance on being able to feel the emotional consequences of his actions again. I have seen the state of being a vampire being compared to being in an inauthentic state, unable to to be genuinely human. In choosing a soul, Spike has chosen to take the chance of being totally rejected not just as a demon but as the man he has always been capable of being. Not only will he feel the full impact of the remourse he has felt pangs of, but he will have to face once and for all who he once was and either grow or fall into true despair.
[> [> YES!!! Agrees here. Well said. -- Tillow, 05:45:33 06/18/02 Tue
[> [> Re: The Soul is Amorphous -- shadowkat, 18:53:58 06/18/02 Tue
"I have seen the state of being a vampire being compared to being in an inauthentic state, unable to to be genuinely human. In choosing a soul, Spike has chosen to take the chance of being totally rejected not just as a demon but as the man he has always been capable of being. Not only will he feel the full impact of the remourse he has felt pangs of, but he will have to face once and for all who he once was and either grow or fall into true despair."
I like this theory quite a bit. Actually I think I prefer it to the super-ego one, since it deals with that nagging problem of - if demon's have souls why did a human soul
overwhelm the demon one. I think yours deals with the far more interesting and real issue - can the child learn to take full responsibility for his actions? This is fitting with the speech Buffy gives Giles in Grave, when she confesses all their crimes and takes responsibility for them. Giles forgives her giving her permission to laugh.
In Flooded, she is shirking her responsibilities onto Giles.
Spike does the same thing prior to going after his soul - he shirks the responsibility of his actions onto Buffy, the SG, everyone else, until the attempted rape, then he realizes it's him, he has to take responsibility for himself and his future. So he goes to Africa and more or less confesses to the demon who tests him and gives him a soul which causes him to have to face the full impact of his actions as well.
I think by defining the soul psychologically we are being too precise, too literal, as opposed to looking at it in far simpler metaphorical context as you do in your excellent post above.
[> [> Yes, I totally agree with this more figurative interpretation ... -- Exegy, 21:36:10 06/18/02 Tue
Nice post, Rufus! I haven't had time to reply to this thread (I was focusing on those monsters down below, LOL!), but now I see that I don't have to outline my stance ... you pretty much have it covered! Thank you!
[> Immorality and Amorality -- Ete, 03:51:38 06/18/02 Tue
I think we've been shown two kinds of "evil" in the form of demons and such. There is the amoral kind, who are predatory, bestial, without anykind of knowledge of good or evil and just act upon their needs and desires. The "Id" kind of demons.
And there is the immoral ones, who act upon a perversion of morality, they understand good and evil and they are here to act for evil, they are organised, "civilized", even rafined. They act as the "evil super-ego".
With vampire in particulary, we've seen the two kind of behaviours. Minions in general are amoral more than anything, and, offcourse, vampire are predatory in nature. But Darla, the Master, Drusilla and Angelus more than anyone, are the other kind.
Spike was always more amoral than immoral, more chaos than evil, when he was doing evil, it was for fun, not for duty.
The demon soul, now, can be said to serve two things : it removes the human super-ego, and it adds a new demon super-ego. Thus, vampire are primarly amoral in nature, self-serving. Then, as the vampire grows older and stronger, the demon super-ego forms itself under the influence of the demon society and they become more clearly immoral.
[> [> Quite interesting theory -- redcat, 08:11:35 06/18/02 Tue
I think this idea solves several problems. First, it allows for the differentiation we see in vamps, particularly older ones vs. those just recently turned. By separating chaos from evil (amoral from immoral), you've also laid out two different types of dark-side forces, both of which the Slayer is duty-bound to oppose. Second, this absolves Buffy from the charge of being a mass murderer, because when she's killing a young vamp fresh out of the grave, she's controlling potential chaos, and when she goes after a more seasoned vamp who has already demonstrated her/his ability to choose and has chosen evil, she's also simply doing her duty. Third, this also explains the development of vampiric institutionalized evil such as the Order of Aurelius and the Dark Warrior designation. And it helps explain why not all vamps are involved in such institutions or are connected to organized evil. Those with only an immaturely-developed id/ego would not generally be drawn to join such institutions; as the demon super-ego develops, they would. Fourth, I think it helps explain vampires' socialization tendencies. We've seen even very young vamps apparently crave social interactions with other vamps. They nest, form familes, and eventually, within your explanation, the demon super-ego would seek out associations through which it could learn and form a more integrated structure of immoral guidelines.
However, I don't think it completely solves the problem that, even within this explanation, at least some vampires, in the process of developing their super-ego, and in the context of, 1) the memories/perceptions left by the original human and, 2) the possibility of chip-like events (events that produce similar internal psychological results as the chip did for Spike), that Spike might not be so unique. How do we know that he is the only vampire who has ever wanted to "change"? Statistically, its very likely that a small percentage of vamps would develop into the vamp equivalent of a human sociopath (understanding good and evil and the one s/he "should" pick, but choosing to act on the "perverse" side of good). The existence, or even the potential existence, of a vamp like this throws Buffy's actions back into morally-questionable territory. On the other hand, I think this is going to be the perennial conundrum with accepting the possibility of a demon super-ego. Setting up a world of ambiguity leaves Joss and ME with ambiguities they maybe didn't count on? And it doesn't solve the "problem" of our partisanship. If good and evil really are in balance, and if a Dark Warrior and a Warrior of the People are really just offensive chargers for opposing teams (any Manchester United fans out there?), then we may be right to root for our side, but does that make our side Right?
But this is a very explanation, Ete! Thanks!
[> [> [> Trying to answer -- Etrangere, 08:39:40 06/18/02 Tue
About your first point, I think there is indeed vampires that are the "vamp equivalent of a human sociopath", we've seen some under the form of the vamp-ho of Into the Wood. Harmony was at a time very closed to be like that too, or anyway, for a small time, willing to do the effort. Anyway, Giles answer to Buffy about the vampho in my opinion show us what is the "White Hat" official position about this. If it isn't a straigh threat to human society, don't bother to kill them. That's also the reason why they didn't kill Spike initialy or why Buffy let Willy's bar exist.
About the cultural relativism adapted to Human and Demon societies; well, I don't think being in the Side of Good makes people Good. I you do "evil" in the name of evil it's still evil. If you do "good" in the name of evil, it's still good. Morality IMO is quite an individual matter.
Again, the "White Hat" are justified in their war against the demons because, and only in the conditions, where they threaten human lives to exist. It's a straight self-defence logic. Actually when Buffy can let a demon live without killing people, she does ! cf Go Fish or Triangle. The side of humanity has never been decribed as being good just because it is the side of humanity(indeed the whole Initiative arc showed how such an idea was wrong), it's just our side, our family, and Buffy shows that protecting yourself, your family and your friends is something right.
Is this satisfying to you ?
[> [> [> [> Great points, Ete -- redcat, 16:51:12 06/18/02 Tue
I think you're right that Buffy is primarily working to keep her side alive, and that what makes her different from the unquestioning-soldier attitude of Kendra or the Initiative is her ability to distinguish those demons who are a direct threat from those who aren't. This makes her a true hero rather than just a partisan automaton. Giles' teachings are key here, but Buffy also accepts those teachings and basically stays within their guidelines, with few exeptions (that last vampho in the fight in the alley does come to mind, however).
[> [> [> Re: Quite interesting theory -- Finn Mac Cool, 08:54:32 06/18/02 Tue
Ah, here's the thing:
Vampires and many demons are drawn instinctively towards evil by their demon superego.
Humans are drawn naturally to good by their mortal superego.
Now, if there are humans who are evil, there must be vampires who are good, right?
Actually, no human being really has a reverse superego like vampires do. There are humans who have very weak superegos or non-functioning ones. This allows them to do evil without feeling guilt. If the person also has a touch of sadism, pyromania, or something else like that in them, they become sociopaths, inflicting harm for the sheer sake of doing so. But they are NOT drawn towards evil. They simply don't have a problem with it.
Just as no human is drawn to evil for evil's sake, no vampire is drawn to good for good's sake. Like humans, their superego can function poorly or not at all, leaving them with no qualms about good or evil. They do whichever suits them.
Therefore, the vampires who are the closest to being good are about as bad as the worst killers humanity has to offer.
Current board
| More June 2002