March 2002 posts
Next's Week Buffy
Promo and the Picture on UPN's site (spoilers) -- neaux, 04:58:24 03/01/02 Fri
Please do not read this if you dont want to get spoiled...
ok.. so the trailer is online. cool. But if you count all the people in GREEN DRESSES.. (the brides
maids) you have Buffy and Willow and Hallie..
if you look at UPN's site..on the "more" link. there is an extra picture of Tara as well!
Yay! She's in the wedding too.
I hope that wasnt too spoilery!!
[>
Re: Next's Week Buffy Promo and the Picture on UPN's site (spoilers) -- WW, 08:29:40
03/01/02 Fri
Don't forget Dawn, she's in a green dress, too although I didn't see Hallie in one...
[> [>
Re: Next's Week Buffy Promo and the Picture on UPN's site (spoilers) -- neaux,
08:42:45 03/01/02 Fri
Yeah.. she's in a green dress greeting the guest with Dawn.. When Dawn picks up the
"Live" package in a green dress.. hmmm... so 5 bridesmaids.. will there be 5
groomsmen??
[> [> [>
Re: Next's Week Buffy Promo and the Picture on UPN's site (spoilers) -- WW, 08:47:54
03/01/02 Fri
Oh, sure! Let's see...Tito, Richard, um...Spike? Giles? Oz? Larry's dead. Riley's in Nepal. No
crossovers, so no Angel or Wesley. He doesn't even know Gunn. Ummm, gee, Xander is sadly lacking
in the male-bonding arena!
;o)
[> [> [> [>
Re: Next's Week Buffy Promo and the Picture on UPN's site (spoilers) -- Dochawk,
10:16:11 03/01/02 Fri
Why exactly would Spike be invited to the wedding? Xander has given every indication that he hates
Spike.
Why would Giles not be at the wedding? Talk about someone who has been important in your life.
His relationship with Xander wasn't his with Buffy or Willow but still.
Why is Hallie still invited? She was willing to sentence Anya to death from starvation with her
vengeance spell.
Remember the words "punitive damages". Although I can see setting that aside for the
wedding, where is Dawn's punishment (I am willing to concede that Buffy and Dawn had it out after
the episode, but Anya's another story)
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Next's Week Buffy Promo and the Picture on UPN's site (spoilers) -- Lilac, 11:30:17
03/01/02 Fri
I think that Xander and Spike seem to have reached a detente during the period of Buffy's trip to
heaven. Xander undoubtedly doesn't love Spike, but probably figures he'd come anyway even if not
invited. As far as Dawn and Hallie go, a wedding is a big deal, dropping either one from the wedding
party would be a major statement. To drop Dawn would be a severe punishment indeed, so Anya is
showing some maturity in not doing so. To drop Hallie would probably be dangerous, since vengence
is her game.
As You Were - Yet Another
Conspiracy Theory (Grassy Knoll Spoilers) -- Darby, 05:57:09 03/01/02 Fri
Accept that large parts of what Riley told Buffy were true - he's never been a good spy guy, anyway.
There are holes in the story, discussed at length in other threads, but nothing all that substantial,
except that they throw some doubt on the actual reason for Riley being in town - a rampaging army
of "rare" demons, a mysterious dealer called "The Doctor," Spike doing a job
but not being given critical information about it, etc. What could all of this be hiding?
It was the discussion about magic and Willow and Sam that got me thinking...
Okay, the government's still in a war with demons. But things have changed since the Initiative -
they are apparently learning about how the Other Side works, employing shaman as well as
scientists (Ethan Rayne, anyone-?). So they're starting to go at it logically - where are they getting
the information about how such a war should be fought? Who's got the real deal info on the
quintessential demon hunter?
I won't keep you in suspense - I think that As You Were might have been a feeler put out
from the special ops guys into bringing in the Slayer as an agent, or at least a consultant. Back in a
position of power, Riley would certainly advise them to do it. And there are too many questions that
lead that way:
First, can we agree that there have probably been agents keeping track of Buffy's activities? They
were tracking Riley when he was with her, but what she does impacts directly on their mission - they
would probably have at least an outline idea of her current situation (including Spike - they haven't
been that clandestine, as waved in our face right at the beginning of the ep!). They would easily
know about Dawn's problems, Buffy's money difficulties, Giles' departure, maybe even Willow's
problems. Watching from a discreet distance (and they'd be better at it that Warren) would only
confirm Riley's stories about her abilities. Maybe it's time to look over the earlier eps for vehicles
other than the Black Van that also happened to be around (remember the one with the
stickers?).
Why go to such trouble to draw the distinctions between DMP (and arrange it so that she might have
lost her job) and cool ninja ass-kicking? Everyone has wondered why Riley "happened"
to have a teeny-tiny little GI Jane suit in his back seat - no cow-on-a-hat...
Why send in only two operatives on such a critical mission? Someone upstairs had to know Riley's
plan (or was it Riley's?) to involve Buffy. Why agree to it unless it was a test?
And why a husband-and-wife team? To show a demon-hunting process that can include successful
relationships, even happy marriage. And involving Spike, through some agents, in their "evil
plan" is yet another way to drive a wedge into Buffy's life and intensify the comparison.
If I am anywhere near right here, we will see more of the Government Boys before too long. This
also would set up a way to deal with the Geek Chorus without killing them or trying to use regular
legal channels. They could get nice jobs at Area 51...and show up on Roswell...
And who says that the BSD can't be Riley?
Okay, okay, I don't even like Oliver Stone's movies, and this is even scaring me a little bit,
but the pieces do fit together in an alarming sort of way.
[>
Re: As You Were - Yet Another Conspiracy Theory (Grassy Knoll Spoilers) -- Goji3,
06:49:47 03/01/02 Fri
Good theory...but I'm thinking that Rack might be involved somehow...
[>
Good Theory. I like it. Could Work. -- VampRiley, 07:32:11 03/01/02 Fri
[>
Neat, but... -- Lanna de la Rosa, 08:07:23 03/01/02 Fri
I agree that if ME had wanted to portray a realistic government environment, things could easily
esculate to that stage. However, I don't think that ME will return to the Initiative type plotline both
because of its lack of success and plus, they have never repeated a story arc before to that extent. So,
while the theory is sound, I don't really think ME would do it. I see them as heading in a different
direction altogether.
[>
I thought Roswell was cancelled. :P -- neaux, 08:07:35 03/01/02 Fri
[> [>
What? The conspiracy goes deeper than we thought!!! -- Oliver Stone (who looks
suspiciously like Darby), 08:14:45 03/01/02 Fri
[> [> [>
Re: the geek factor -- neaux, 08:24:07 03/01/02 Fri
The Lone Gunmen didnt last as an X-files spinoff show...
hmm.... the idea of the troika on Roswell may have caused that show's demise as well!!
[> [> [> [>
Buffy: The Conspiracy -- Fred, the obvious pseudonym, 12:51:06 03/01/02 Fri
"Stay alert. Trust no one. Keep your pencil sharpener handy."
[For the stakes, 'natch.]
The continuity of Willow's
character -- Shabidoo, 06:22:07 03/01/02 Fri
"I thought her use of magic was a metaphor for the addictiveness of power, especially for
someone who had esteem issues. That would be interesting. Little did I know it was actually just
your basic crack metaphor. As far I'm concerned, they showed us Willow getting addicted and having
withdrawal from spells being done *to* her, instead of the rush of the spells she was doing herself,
which to me makes all the difference between a quality TV and an afterschool war on drugs
special."
This post largely responds to sentiments articulated by yez in the "It doesn't touch who you
are" thread which got pushed to the archives. Yez, among others, expresses that Willow's
encounters with Rack destroy the subtle idea of Willow's addiction to power. I'd like to contest the
idea that the Rack story line has done some sort of radical retooling of Willow's character by
changing the focus of her addiction.
First, I’ll examine character continuity. After Willow split up with Oz and was drinking to numb the
pain, Willow and Buffy had this exchange in Something Blue:
>WILLOW
>I just can't stand feeling this way.
>I want it to be over.
>BUFFY
>And it will be. I promise. But it's going
>to take some time.
>WILLOW
>That's not good enough.
>BUFFY
>I know. But that's how it is. You have
>to go through the pain.
>WILLOW
>Isn't there some way I can make it
>go away? Just 'cause I say so?
>Can't I make it go poof?
This clearly foreshadows Willow’s proclivity for finding a magical way to rid her of undesired
emotions. (The same could be said of her incomplete delusting spell in season 3). Her motivation is
her unwillingness to cope with undesired emotions over time; taking the time is just not "good
enough." Clearly this tendency was at work when Willow visited Rack.
Her need of an emotional shortcut is all about control. Much to a power-obsessed Willow’s chagrin,
emotions happen whether we want them to or not. Part of the "I will it so" spell in
Something Blue is:
>WILLOW
>Control the outside. Control within.
Willow doesn’t just want to be able to manipulate her environment and other human beings; she
wants the ability to manipulate herself. In Something Blue, this is beyond her skills. In, Smashed,
she is finally able to control her emotions by getting off on the rush of power that comes from
manipulating all The Bronze patrons. (The slope to the drug metaphor here is not all that steep.
Insofar as someone takes drugs to escape, he is doing so to gain control over his emotional responses
to an overwhelming world.) However, Willow can only avoid her grief temporarily. She is still
unsatisfied with her level of power despite Rack’s opinion to the contrary:
>RACK
>I mean you have power, girl. Coming
>off you in waves.
>WILLOW
>Not so much. I mean, I can do stuff.
>But I get tapped out quick. And I've
>used practically every spell I know-
Her grief over Tara’s departure is so immense that not even Willow’s incredible power is able to quell
it. She must find a supplement, if she is to maintain power over her grief.
Willow’s desperation and lack of discipline are foreshadowed in her spell to get Amy back:
>WILLOW (cont'd)
>Amy, I swear, if I could find a way
>to bring you back...
>Willow turns back to look at the rat.
>WILLOW (cont'd)
>Any way.
The means are no longer important to her which was also clear when she killed the fawn and
vomited a snake in Bargaining. She will do anything to achieve her ends. If she must surrender
some of her power to Rack to manage her grief, then it should come as no surprise that she does
so.
I don’t, however, believe that Willow surrendered all her power to Rack. That is, I don’t think Rack’s
spells were "being done *to* her," so much as being done through her.
The Demon that attacks Willow and Dawn says:
>MANDRAZ
>(to Willow)
>You summon me, witch?
>WILLOW
>What? I didn't-
>MANDRAZ
>Did. You raised hell with your
>majiks...
The power was somehow directed through Willow. Mandraz doesn’t attack Rack; Willow has to
accept the consequences because she is responsible for the summoning. From a cosmic point of view,
apparently, Willow is one of the agents performing those spells. This point is crucial because Willow
could still be getting off on the rush of power which would gel with her general character.
Clearly her choice of Rack as the one to supplement her power was misguided. Only after she visits
Rack do we see physical manifestations of addiction. It stands to reason that Rack would make sure
his spells caused physical dependency so his customers would keep coming back. He is highly
motivated by whatever it is that he takes from his junkies. So, ultimately Willow’s misplaced trust
in Rack is responsible for her withdrawal symptoms.
[>
Re: The continuity of Willow's character -- Goji3, 06:45:21 03/01/02 Fri
Wowza, you said a mouthful, and it makes excelent sense! Good Job!
[>
Re: The continuity of Willow's character -- skeeve, 08:42:58 03/01/02 Fri
Shabidoo wrote "The means are no longer important to her which was also clear when she
killed the fawn and vomited a snake in Bargaining. She will do anything to achieve her
ends."
I take issue with this. Killing the fawn had the same moral significance as eating venison. Vomiting
the snake was a tad ugly. So what? Doing something ugly (in the literal sense) is not indicative of a
do anything to achieve one's ends attitude.
Given their beliefs about the situation, raising Buffy was a right thing to do. Doing some digging
first would have made it better.
BTW where is Mr. Pointy?
[> [>
Re: The continuity of Willow's character -- Rob, 08:58:03 03/01/02 Fri
"Killing the fawn had the same moral significance as eating venison."
Excuse me, but I just can't buy that! You honestly think that what Willow did...embracing a fawn,
holding it close, and then fiercely stabbing it in the heart, honestly had no more more significance
than eating venison? It was a fierce, horrifying act, done onto an animal that was still a baby. I think
you're brushing aside the horrifying aspects of Willow's actions too easily.
Here's how I'd judge the moral difference. I'm sure Willow wouldn't have minded admitting to Tara
that she ate venison. And yet she never told her about killing the deer. The fact that she had to keep
it secret makes its moral implications quite clear to me.
Rob
[> [> [>
Re: The continuity of Willow's character -- vandalia, 11:53:39 03/01/02 Fri
Actually, Willow's words before the fawn appeared on the scene were "...the gods do command
ye from thy majesty...Come forward, Blessed One, know your calling..."
Then after she stabs it:
"Adonai, Helomi, Pine... Divine creature, child of Elomina, accept our humble gratitude for
your offering. In death, you give life. May you find wings to the kingdom."
She didn't just kill a deer for food. She killed a divine creature for the 'Blood of the Mother.' In Wicca
I believe Mother refers to Mother Earth (though I could be wrong) which represents all they believe
in (Xander's line: Cuz Wiccas they were persecuted witches good and women power and love the
earth and I'll be over here.")
The symbolism of this scene said to me that Willow was betraying everything Wiccas stand for in the
Buffyverse by killing the fawn (which represented everything good and noble about Wicca, its tenets)
to raise the dead. This is also backed up by Tara in S5 when she cautions Dawn against raising her
mother from the dead and saying it goes against the laws of nature itself.
Willow did a Bad Thing(tm) and she knows it; note the guilty looking around for witnesses after she
kills the deer, then change in clothing from white to red in the next scene, her lying to Tara about
how/where she got the 'sangre de madre.'
[> [> [>
Re: The continuity of Willow's character -- skeeve, 15:52:48 03/01/02 Fri
Rob wrote "You honestly think that what Willow
did...embracing a fawn, holding it close, and then fiercely stabbing it in the heart, honestly had no
more more significance than eating venison? It was a fierce, horrifying act, done onto an animal that
was still a baby. I think you're brushing aside the horrifying aspects of Willow's actions too
easily."
To the hunted, hunting is a fierce horrifying act. How do you feel about baby back ribs or other meat
from young animals? I wrote that it had the same *moral* significance as eating venison. The social
significance might have been quite different. So far as I could tell, none of the scoobies hunt for
pleasure. Fawns are cuddlier than cows.
Willow's sudden "fierceness" doesn't bother me either. There wouldn't have been any
point in killing the fawn slowly or in torturing it first.
That said, I would have handled the final ingredient questions a bit differently. I would have said
something like "I'll tell you if you want, but any vegetarians should leave the room." If
encouraged to continue, I would have then have told them that it was blood from a fawn. "I got
it from the black market" wouldn't have satisfied me. Quite the opposite.
BTW I'm not a hunter either. I have trouble imagining that anyone hunts for pleasure. I also have
trouble imagining that anyone enjoys eating cottage cheese. Those who can, may, but I realy don't
want to watch.
[>
Re: Rack and the Drug metaphor -- Dochawk, 09:31:12 03/01/02 Fri
Shabidoo said "Clearly her choice of Rack as the one to supplement her power was misguided.
Only after she visits Rack do we see physical manifestations of addiction. It stands to reason that
Rack would make sure his spells caused physical dependency so his customers would keep coming
back. He is highly motivated by whatever it is that he takes from his junkies. So, ultimately Willow’s
misplaced trust in Rack is responsible for her withdrawal symptoms."
I have been thinking about this aspect since reviewing the episode. In fact, Willow doesn't show any
physical manifestations of Majik until she visits Rack. If you want to use the drug metaphor, Majik
is like Marijauna, gives you a little high but for most people is a recreational/nonaddictive drug. But
Rack laces it with LSD or Cocaine giving magic a much higher high and a mich more addictive
quality. if this is true then Willow eventually could go back to using marijuana (everyday
magic)without the physical side effects. You still don't want to abuse it (as Tara says) because it has
longer term effects, but she could get away with it.
[> [>
She had previous physical side effects... -- Rob, 10:22:09 03/01/02 Fri
Some of which included her eyes turning black after some spells, headaches she complained of
having after some powerful spells (from an ep in the 5th season, can't remember which), and
nosebleeds.
Rob
[> [> [>
Re: Character continuity (non-magic). -- DEN, 10:49:22 03/01/02 Fri
To me the real disconnect is Willow's apparent disconnecting from domestic maintenance. She's
always been a pitch-in girl. Can the combination of "addiction" and breakup have
entirely desensitized her? Buffy is her best friend; it seems completely out of character that she is
not doing SOME of the everyday chores. Sure, it makes Willow easier to dislike--but at the price of
sacrificing a fundamental aspect of a persona ME spent years developing! WTF?
[> [> [> [>
Re: Character continuity (non-magic). -- Lilac, 11:23:30 03/01/02 Fri
You know, while I agree that it seems that Buffy isn't getting a lot of help with domestic stuff, I
think we have to remember the things that we don't see. It may well be that Willow does a lot of
laundry, vacuums, dusts, goes to the market (assuming anyone ever does in that house) -- there are a
million things to do in a house, a sink full of dishes and the trash to take out aren't the lion's share of
it. Also, Willow seems to be expected to do a lot of Buffy's "most important" job -- taking
care of Dawn. It would probably make all of us feel better if we were shown someone other than
Buffy doing the domestic grunt work, but just because we don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Same thing goes for Willow chipping in towards supporting the house she lives in -- she may well,
but since overhead is high it doesn't help much, but since we haven't ever seen it, it bothers us.
[> [> [>
Re: She had previous physical side effects... -- Dochawk, 11:17:43 03/01/02 Fri
the eyes turning black are part of the use of the black magic. it happened to others who are not
addicted when they used it (Ethan Rayne for example). and the headaches would be like a hangover,
certainly not something that is related to the actual addiction. it is the momentary pleasant affects
(or what you perceive as pleasurable) that make you reuse a substance. Later its avoidance of the
withdrawal symptoms as well. Although this does bring up a different complication, if using magic
to avoid feelings of loss is perceived as pleasurable (which is the reason many addicts start to avoid
the pain of life) then simple magic may still be an addiction. I still think Rak laced the magic with
something to make it more addictive.
Realism in Season 6 -- spoilers
(Very long, too; sorry) -- Katrina, 07:03:43 03/01/02 Fri
I've been thinking about the question of how much fan dissatisfaction with this season is related to
the more "realistic" tone and the "realistic" problems Buffy is facing. To a
certain extent I think it's true, and I certainly give the show credit for trying to go in a different
direction and tackle some different issues. But as I watch the episodes, I keep asking sometimes
trivial questions that added up don't seem so trivial, and I've seen a lot of those questions reflected
on the Discussion Board. My questions include (and you've all heard some of these before): the
classic, why isn't Willow paying rent? If she is paying rent, why hasn't it been mentioned in all the
financial woe? Why aren't Willow and Dawn helping with the housework? Why isn't Buffy looking for
a straight waitress job with tips rather than low-paying fast food? How is Tara supporting herself,
with no job and no contact with her family? And then bigger questions, like, if Hank isn't paying
child support for Dawn, why hasn't someone taken him to court? Why doesn't Buffy sell the house
and move her and Dawn to a little two-bedroom apartment? And why is she even staying in
Sunnydale? The whole reason she couldn't leave is because she's got to watch the Hellmouth. But
this season, there's more action all over the world, and nearby in L.A., than there is in Sunnydale,
where domesticated demons play poker with the Slayer. Heck, Buffy and Dawn could go to L.A. and
crash at the Hyperion while she looks for a better paying job. Okay, obviously that isn't going to
happen because they're on different shows. But there should be a better narrative reason why not, or
there's a flaw in the structure of the thing. My point is, the fact that we can ask all these questions,
without the show even seeming to address them, maybe shows that the implications of a more
"realistic" Buffy haven't really been explored. When the show was focused more on the
supernatural, like AtS still is, they can fight metaphorical monsters and some of those pesky
"realistic" details can be glossed over, or mentioned in passing, or we can be given the
impression it's being taken care of offscreen. I mean, I'm sure the teenaged Buffy and Joyce fought
over doing the dishes. But since it wasn't the focus, it didn't matter. Now it is the focus, but the
scenarios don't seem fully fleshed out, leaving me, anyway, with the sense that it's supposed to be
realistic, but it doesn't seem realistic, because it's not really going all the way with it. A thought,
anyway.
[>
Re: Realism in Season 6 -- spoilers (Very long, too; sorry) -- Rendyl, 09:15:16 03/01/02
Fri
You have a good point. With so much of this season focused on 'normal' problems and concerns it is
more obvious when a plot point goes unexplained.
For me the storyline just gets more and more unreal as the episodes unfold. The characters don't act
the same way from one episode to the next, and the details are either very boldly shoved at us or
completely ignored.
Now I do like much of this season but it often feels like we are watching Buffy's hallucination or
nightmare of her life rather than watching her actual life unfold. Many episodes have scenes that
are surreal. The more realism the writers plop in the more the episode seems unreal. AYW was an
entire episode with this problem. I kept watching it and wondering if it would make more sense if I
had a few drinks first.
(The helicopter whisking Mr and Mrs Commando off into the night for more exotic adventures was
the capper for me. It could not just land somewhere?)
Several times this season I have had that thing - like when you are reading a very good book and
just get lost in it, you sort of live the story. Then the author uses an awkward turn of phrase and
wham! You come to your senses and realize you were reading, not experiencing. (if that makes any
sense?)
Ren -who thought Riley needed boots and the theme from High Chaparrel (sp?) playing in the
background of his scenes-
[> [>
Re: Realism in Season 6 -- spoilers (Very long, too; sorry) -- Wiscoboy, 09:28:04
03/01/02 Fri
By your thoughts on this, could you better relate to this season if it turns out to be the entire season
is actually nothing more than Buffy's thoughts and fears as she is hurtling herself thru the mystical
energy of the season5 ending(paralleling the movie "Jacob's Ladder") or could she still be
in the coffin attempting to punch her way out as all these thoughts are racing thru her head?
[> [>
Re: Realism in Season 6 -- spoilers (Very long, too; sorry) -- Wiscoboy, 09:31:57
03/01/02 Fri
By your thoughts on this, could you better relate to this season if it turns out to be the entire season
is actually nothing more than Buffy's thoughts and fears as she is hurtling herself thru the mystical
energy of the season5 ending(paralleling the movie "Jacob's Ladder") or could she still be
in the coffin attempting to punch her way out as all these thoughts are racing thru her head?
[> [> [>
Re: Excuse all the duplicates -- wiscoboy, 09:40:01 03/01/02 Fri
I sometimes find a problem with this posting board or my browser, but this isn't the 1st instance
something I sent to the board was semt multiple times.
[> [> [> [>
I've seen double posts, and once a triple post . . . -- d'Herblay, 10:37:04 03/01/02 Fri
. . . but this is the first quintuple post.
Congratulations Wiscoboy!
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: I've seen double posts, and once a triple post . . . -- wiscoboy, 14:56:25 03/01/02
Fri
Thank the firewall I need to pass.
[>
Re: Realism in Season 6 -- spoilers (Very long, too; sorry) -- Andy, 11:47:13 03/01/02
Fri
This reminds me of something Joseph Campbell discussed. I don't actually own the source but IIRC,
Campbell stressed that it's best to set certain stories such as the Hero's Journey in fantasy worlds
that we don't know much about. The reason is that if we don't have first-hand experience with the
setting then we'll be more likely to accept what happens without too many questions about how that
setting might realistically function.
Campbell used Star Wars as an example - while galaxies and outer space and space ships are indeed
real and have real rules governing them, the vast majority of Star Wars's audience does not have any
tangible experience with those things; i.e., most of us aren't astronauts or scientists so the fact that
Star Wars depicts things like NOISE in outer space doesn't bother us even though it's scientifically
impossible. Likewise, I don't think many of us really care how the internal politics of the Empire
function. It's just not a big issue beyond "there's this Emperor and he's a bad guy and has bad
guys working for him." We don't need a detailed explanation of what a "Moff" is
and what his duties are because the story isn't about the damn Empire; it's about Luke's journey so
who really cares? So Star Wars can still work as a setting for most of us.
Buffy has always flied in the face of this by being set in a relatively realistic world but at least it was
good at either making a funny joke about it, or better yet, drawing strength from it by giving us
stories that we could more immediately relate to. But now as it attempts to be more realistic it's
running into those problems that Campbell warned of, as our own knowledge of the Real World is
clashing with what the show wants us to believe of it and it's leading to frustration from the
audience. We're too distracted by our own experiences to focus on the stories being told.
Andy
[>
Re: Realism in Season 6 -- spoilers (Very long, too; sorry) -- Andy, 11:50:33 03/01/02
Fri
This reminds me of something Joseph Campbell discussed. I don't actually own the source but IIRC,
Campbell stressed that it's best to set certain stories such as the Hero's Journey in fantasy worlds
that we don't know much about. The reason is that if we don't have first-hand experience with the
setting then we'll be more likely to accept what happens without too many questions about how that
setting might realistically function.
Campbell used Star Wars as an example - while galaxies and outer space and space ships are indeed
real and have real rules governing them, the vast majority of Star Wars's audience does not have any
tangible experience with those things; i.e., most of us aren't astronauts or scientists so the fact that
Star Wars depicts things like NOISE in outer space doesn't bother us even though it's scientifically
impossible. Likewise, I don't think many of us really care how the internal politics of the Empire
function. It's just not a big issue beyond "there's this Emperor and he's a bad guy and has bad
guys working for him." We don't need a detailed explanation of what a "Moff" is
and what his duties are because the story isn't about the damn Empire; it's about Luke's journey so
who really cares? So Star Wars can still work as a setting for most of us.
Buffy has always flied in the face of this by being set in a relatively realistic world but at least it was
good at either making a funny joke about it, or better yet, drawing strength from it by giving us
stories that we could more immediately relate to. But now as it attempts to be more realistic it's
running into those problems that Campbell warned of, as our own knowledge of the Real World is
clashing with what the show wants us to believe of it and it's leading to frustration from the
audience. We're too distracted by our own experiences to focus on the stories being told.
Andy
[>
Good Posts, Katrina and Andy! -- Belladonna, 14:20:33 03/01/02 Fri
I completely agree. You've succinctly (sp?) explained one of the fundemental problems of this season.
Thanks!
For fans of Angel the Series
-- Rufus, 07:10:05 03/01/02 Fri
There will be a book out in April called Angel:Casefiles, written by some of the authors of the Buffy
Watchers Guides. This book will give lots of information and trivia for those longing for more.
Angel: Casefiles
Shooting Script for : As You
Were......link inside -- Rufus, 07:19:18 03/01/02 Fri
Psyche's transcripts
[>
Re: Shooting Script for : As You Were......link inside -- ponygirl, 08:21:08 03/01/02
Fri
Thanks Rufus! Just had a skim through it and there are some intriguing differences between script
and finished product including the final shot.
Is Cordelia really part demon?
Getchur Angel topics here! -- Masquerade, 09:14:44 03/01/02 Fri
I was poking through my site last night working on updating my subject index and had the chance to
revisit the episode, "Birthday".
In this episode, Cordelia is given a test to see if she will do what is required to keep her visions.
According to Skip, she must become part demon to withstand the impact of her visions. So Cordelia
says, "demonize me", not knowing what consequences that will have on her life. Skip
says it might mean she will never have a normal human life again.
But what effects have we seen so far beyond easier visions and one incidence of floating (that could
be a side effect of some simple spell Skip did to make her visions easier, not to make her a demon).
We haven't seen physical stuff like tails, no additional floating, no increased fighting skills or
strength.
What if the test was simply to see if she was willing to go that far (seeing as Cordelia has had
trouble with the whole ick factor of demons), but Skip did not actually make her part demon?
[>
How obvious a demon was Doyle? -- Darby, 09:27:35 03/01/02 Fri
[> [>
Re: How obvious a demon was Doyle? -- Masq, 09:35:07 03/01/02 Fri
He did turn into a green, pointy faced brachen demon by choice and sometimes on reflex (while
sneezing, for example).
So far, we haven't been told what "type" of demon Cordy was turned into.
[>
Re: Is Cordelia really part demon? Getchur Angel topics here! -- matching mole,
10:01:26 03/01/02 Fri
Well it seems clear that she isn't a 'normal' human anymore because she gets the visions in a
completely different way than she did. Unless everything Skip showed her was a deceptive test (the
woman with the back of her head gone, etc.) it is likely that some 'unhumanizing' was required. The
unfolding of the Cordelia visions plot has seemed a little odd to me. If the PTB didn't like it, why did
they wait two years to do anything about it? The only explanation that makes sense to me, is that
they didn't want to demonize her and delayed doing anything until events forced them to step in to
prevent Cordelia dying (and Angel losing access to the visions). If giving Cordy safe visions didn't
involve some profound transformation of her being they would have had no reason not to do it earlier
(after testing her with deception). Of course I'm applying human logic to the PTB but if I don't do
that then I'd have nothing to say.
Demon-human mixes have been shown as hybrids (Doyle) and as the result of an infection-like
process (vampires). Cordelia's process seems more like a vaccination.
[> [>
It's a plot plant -- darrenK, 11:09:18 03/01/02 Fri
I think the demon thing is a plotline for the future, maybe even AtS season 4 and probably dovetails
with some other plotline that hasn't come to fruition yet. It could very well be that Cordy's demoness
is central to how AtS s4 is resolved.
It's smart of them to plant it right in the middle of the season so that when the plotline blossoms it
won't be out of the blue.
In every episode since Birthday, Cordy has played a VERY minor role. She doesn't have enough
screen time for us to really see what's different about her. And, of course, last week she wasn't even
in the episode. My opinion is that this is a very intentional way of having the writers delay the issue.
dK
[> [> [>
Re: It's a plot plant -- Masq, 11:21:13 03/01/02 Fri
Delay it all the way to season 4? That's possible, we've seen it from ME/Joss more than once. It's also
possible it's being saved for later this season.
How many times has it been mentioned since Birthday? I remember only one mention, in the very
next episode. If the writers are keeping it fresh in our minds, it might be a plot plant for late season
3. Usually, plot plants for later seasons occur towards the end of the previous season, not smack in
the middle.
Maybe it will be important in resolving this whole Holtz/Nyazian prophecy/Tro Clon/Connor
business.
[> [> [> [>
And speaking of Connor, what is anyone's theory about what's going to happen to him? --
Masq, 11:24:57 03/01/02 Fri
So far they're not aging him, which somebody feared a while back.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: And speaking of Connor, what is anyone's theory about what's going to happen to him?
-- Apophis, 11:37:05 03/01/02 Fri
I still stand by the aging theory. There's still a time-travelling demon out there.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
A vague prediction -- matching mole, 11:48:59 03/01/02 Fri
My guess is that time travel plays into it but not in terms of rapid aging. Instead I postulate that
Angel learns that Connor will suffer some unpleasant fate if Angel keeps him (turns evil, is killed,
gets voted off Survivor:Pylea in the first round) and so Angel must change history and give him up
(to Holtz, to Justine, or to the mom with the colicy baby). Lots of angst and an opportunity for the
show to pull off another of its patented surprise changes in direction.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: A vague prediction -- Rahael, 12:01:24 03/01/02 Fri
Could it be that the Angel - Connor dilemma has a direct counterpoint and echo in the Buffy - Dawn
dilemma in the Gift?
In both there appears to be the threat that the 'parent' will have to, for whatever reason, kill the
child. Perhaps Angel's decision will be an ethical/emotional/metaphorical compare and contrast to
Buffy's decision, just as Buffy's sacrifice of herself for the key in Season 5 contained echoes of her
sacrifice *of* the key in Season 2.
The parental issues/tensions between the Holtz and Justine character could also come into play here
as a dramatic device.
Given that Angel was prepared to die for Darla to be given human life, not even knowing whether
she would make good use of his sacrifice, it would have to be very exceptional circumstances for him
to come close to thinking about devouring Connor.
A final idle thought - don't we see another prophecied about baby who is hunted by all sorts of people
in Angel Season 2? Angel kills the existing champion, the prio motu and replaces it. Given ME's
fondness for repeating and interlocking patterns, I wondered what the significance of that was. Not
that I'm suggesting that the baby and mother are going to reappear, but the significance of the
earlier portrayal.
And it's in that same episode that Angel has to cope with the fact that he killed an innocent.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
That's true... -- Masq, 12:08:15 03/01/02 Fri
About the mother and the baby in the first episode of Season 2. Perhaps the ME writers got
intrigued by the idea of the baby from that ep being some sort of "chosen one"-- a great
seer, leader, etc, but couldn't play out an exploration of this plot with such a minor character from
one episode.
So they decided to have a baby born to Angel to explore it with. The question is, how far can they
explore it while Connor remains so young?
Maybe that's where the time travel thing comes in. An adult Connor shows up somehow and they
don't have to rapid-age him to get mileage out of the story line.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Helping the helpless -- matching mole, 12:28:55 03/01/02 Fri
Angel also protected defenseless children of great import in 'Blind Date' S1. AI's slogan is
emblematic of Angel's often overprotective instincts. He doesn't seem to be happy unless he has
someone to save and who needs more saving than a baby? An enormous amount of conflict on AtS
has stemmed from Angel's desire to protect those around him. He gives up invulnerability and
mortality in S1 so he can continue his work. He fires his staff to keep them away from him during
his moral decline or at least that was part of the reason. He goes to enormous lengths to try and
save the human Darla. And so on.
I think the Dawn/Buffy parallel Rahael pointed out is interesting. My prediction is that rather than
sacrificing his life (which would be easier) Angel will have to sacrifice his role in Connor's life in
order to protect Connor. You could interpret that as Angel 'killing' his son as Connor will be dead to
him and the person that Connor would have become will never exist. A completely different Connor
will exist instead. Time travel will figure into this in some way.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
I like your theory! Here's another one... (spoilers) -- Scroll, 19:59:10 03/01/02 Fri
I hope you're right that Angel will only metaphorically 'kill' his son by giving him up.... But the
Burger Loa did say that "the vampire will devour his child"... so I can only hold my
breath.
I wonder what Sahjhan (time-shifting guy) is so afraid of. He says he isn't afraid of Angel, but since
he really wants Angel deaddeaddead, then he must be afraid of something Angel is going to do (in
the future). So here's my theory:
What if Sahjhan is actually a good demon? Or at least a balancing demon like Whistler? If Connor is
supposed to bring about the ruination/purification of mankind, and he isn't evil, then he might be a
powerful force for good. Connor could be the one to stop the apocalypse.
But the Nyazian prophecies say Angel will kill Connor. If Connor dies, apocalypse destoys the world.
Therefore, kill Angel before he can kill Connor. World saved. Simple. Right?
What do you guys think?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: A vague prediction -- O'Cailleagh, 13:33:14 03/01/02 Fri
Connor is Holtz. Angel kills Holtz (not realising who he is). Could it be that simple?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: A vague prediction -- Masq, 13:51:00 03/01/02 Fri
There is a thread, now in the archives, where this possibility was raised. It was compared to the
quandry Oedipus (sorry for my spelling) got into when he tried to avoid the prophecy that he would
kill his father and marry his mother and in the process of trying to avoid it, made it come true.
I think the parallel was drawn because Wesley is trying to prevent the prophecy that "the
father will kill the son" and is getting out of control with it, which might bring about the
fulfillment of the prophecy itself.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: A vague prediction -- Apophis, 14:14:30 03/01/02 Fri
Let's not forget the fact that Connor shouldn't exist in the first place. Someone wanted him to be
born and bent the rules to make it happen and protect him while he gestated. I should think he'd
have a bigger role to play than just getting eaten by his father (like Zeus).
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
We're still waiting for an explanation for that... -- Masq, 14:48:01 03/01/02 Fri
But I get the impression it's coming soon.
[> [> [> [>
As long as we never have to see him... -- Dichotomy, 13:15:51 03/01/02 Fri
... as a precocious 3-yr.old saying things like "I'm down with the demon-slaying,
dude!"
[>
Re: Angel topics (Spoilers, Speculation, etc.) -- mundusmundi, 12:03:55 03/01/02 Fri
I'd say most definitely she is, one reason being that it levels the playing field between Cordy and
Angel, making a potential pairing between them more...plausible, I guess. Skip doesn't strike me as
one to pull punches, so I seriously doubt they'll go the "Golly gee, you haven't changed at
all" route like they've done with Buffy (assuming Tara is indeed correct on that point, a big
question mark). There's plenty the writers can do with Cordy, and I suspect more will be done once
the current arc has been resolved.
[>
Re: Is Cordelia really part demon?poss spoilers -- yabyumpan, 15:34:48 03/01/02
Fri
I think that Cordy's Demonness will emerge meore while she's away with Groo (or where ever she
is,there are rumours that she's been kidnapped). I read somewhere recently (poss interveiew with
DG)that she has her own "epiphany" while she's away, maybe something to do with her
Demon. I'm wondering if her demonnness will emerge more fully when she has sex with Groo, maybe
too much like the whole Angel thing but it might be a way of getting round the curse if neither of
them can really "do it" for fear of the "innner demon". just a thought.
[> [>
I just hope this doesn't all happen off-camera -- Masq, 15:38:58 03/01/02 Fri
Important epiphanies need a little background info!
Things Have Changed (*Spoilers
for AYW*) -- Wisewoman, 10:20:24 03/01/02 Fri
Buffy's break-up with Spike at the end of AYW was pretty much exactly as I predicted it would be...a
realization that she doesn't love him (or, as she said, she can't love him) and that she's been using
him, which is having a deleterious effect on her, and an apology, albeit a very brief "I'm
sorry."
What I didn't predict and find surprising is what I see as her underlying motivation for the break-up.
I do think it has a lot to do with Riley, and a comparison between her two lovers, but previously I
would have thought the comparison centered around good and evil. Now it appears to center around
smart and dumb.
Riley made it pretty clear what his opinion was when he referred to Buffy sleeping with "that
idiot." He was more disgusted at the fact that Spike didn't know enough to keep the eggs
frozen than he seemed to be with the fact that he had the eggs in the first place. It was reflected in
Buffy saying to Spike, "That's just you. I should have remembered." That line didn't
come across as, "That's just you...evil," it came across as, "That's just
you...stupid."
This is causing me to rethink my predictions for the future, if any, of the B/S relationship. Spike, the
evil vampire trying to do good for the sake of Buffy's love, might eventually be worthy of that love.
Spike, the bumbling idiot, never would be. He at least has some control over whether or not he
engages in good or evil acts. He doesn't have any control over how bright he is.
This focus on Spike's lack of smarts seems to be a new wrinkle in the scenario. Wasn't he always the
one who could be counted on to strike straight to the heart of an issue? Wasn't he previously both
sensitive and insightful?
Is this another instance of retrofitting the characters/script to comply with an upcoming change in
storyline? I guess only time (and spoilers) will tell...
;o)
[>
Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- cjc36, 10:34:20 03/01/02 Fri
Wisewoman, I'd never woudda thought of that. But, darn, you're right! The episode in general had
less angst, and even Dawn's punishment of Riley was short and sweet--not the now all too familiar
screamfests we've had from the little bit.
A dumb Spike....
That will take some getting used too. Or, as I suspect, the 'dumb facet' will be added--hopefully to
surface only when it'll make character sense, and I’ll give’em the egg thing just cause I love them so
much! (that Spike could be stupid in some things I'll buy, if done right from now on). If they don't do
the character right, then BtVS will have become X-Files- bending character arc/motivations
whenever the convoluted plot demands it--no questions asked.
[> [>
Remember the Rules of Love -- neaux, 10:48:41 03/01/02 Fri
Insightful Spike might be gone when replaced with Head over Heels Spike.
Don't forget that Love makes people do crazy things/stupid things like Keep nasty demon eggs in
their basements (which I assumed was to make money for Buffy).
And since I assume.. I am making an ass of myself at this moment too. hmmmmm... maybe I'm like
spike?
[> [> [>
A Dumb Spike! What next? A Vampire Mime? -- Brian, 10:53:34 03/01/02 Fri
[> [> [> [>
That calls for an automatic staking, whether they're good or evil. -- VampRiley,
12:24:44 03/01/02 Fri
[>
Where's Spike? -- darrenK, 10:52:13 03/01/02 Fri
You're right about the retrofitting. This weird lack of consistency is beneath the Buffy writers.
The Spike from AYW is only sort of the character that protected Dawn so carefully and so
conscientiously while Buffy was dead; the "that's just Spike" who Dawn could count
on.
And what happened to Buffy needing Spike's strength and fighting skills in Spiral and The Gift
?
And isn't he the vampire who killed two slayers?
Or am I getting him confused with Spike?
dK
[>
Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- Doriander, 10:53:26 03/01/02 Fri
Now that I think about it, this is precisely my gripe with episode. I'm more upset with his colossal
stupidity, his failure to freeze the eggs, or finding a better hiding place for them, than with him
getting caught. Why sprawl the eggs near his bed where Buffy frequents? If he could pull off
something as sophistacted as doing business with warlords, follow through it, dammit!
To be fair, he has a history of bulloxing his own plans, brilliant though they were when he
started.
[> [>
Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- Brian, 10:56:08 03/01/02 Fri
He has messed up his plans in the past because he is impatient, and he wants Action/Results ASAP,
not because he ain't a smarty.
[>
Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- Belladonna, 10:58:56 03/01/02
Fri
I didn't realize that before, Wisewoman, but I see what you mean. This bothers me in so many ways.
When Spike first came on the scene, back in season 2, he was both intelligent, and strong. He had
taken out 2 slayers, and came very close to killing Buffy. When his first attempt failed, he started
observing her fighting skills to find weaknesses. He may have had a temper, and sometimes acted
rashly, but he wasn't stupid. This isn't someone who would be stupid enough to keep the eggs
unfrozen in his basement, next to the bed in which he regularly sleeps with the Slayer. It doesn't
make sense. I hope they have a master plan here. Otherwise it does look like they're changing
characters to serve the plot. One of my favorite things about this show is they never did that. They
always stayed true to character.
[> [>
Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- Lilac, 11:13:30 03/01/02 Fri
I really think that all of this points to the idea (discussed in other threads), that this wasn't really
Spike's plan. He certainly had no idea why there was all of that "Doctor" talk. Since the
eggs were out in the open in an area that Buffy has been frequenting, I can only assume that he was
indeed holding them for someone else, had no idea that they needed to be frozen, and probably
wasn't expecting them to be there long. He was not given a chance to explain what he was doing with
them -- the keeping them safe for someone else for money for Buffy seems a pretty credible scenario
to me. I hope this is something that is explained better in some future episode. I refuse to believe
that Spike has suddenly lost track of that many IQ points.
[> [> [>
Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- Fred, the obvious pseudonym, 12:43:15
03/01/02 Fri
Maybe Spike's chip is rusting and it's affecting his brain.
(After all, it is a government product -- bought from the lowest bidder.)
[> [> [>
A Funny Thought -- Spike Lover, 18:20:35 03/01/02 Fri
I thought that the doctor at first was that demon that cut Dawn up on the tower. Then I got to
thinking it might be "Sam", who is a little too good to be true. Sam said that her whole
"infirmary" was taken out by the creatures.
Could there be a bigger plot here? (Perhaps not.)
I don't think Spike is stupid and when R said it, it really caught my attention. -Though Buffy seems
to think he is stupid. She told R, "He can't be the Doctor. He isn't smart enough." Of
course, this is also the girl who did not believe her sister was a shoplifter even when the evidence
was presented to her. So you can say that Buffy herself is not really insightful.
It is then R that says, Spike who is cunning... Can you be cunning and not intelligent?
[> [> [> [>
Re: A Funny Thought -- leslie,
20:43:05 03/01/02 Fri
"It is then R that says, Spike who is cunning... Can you be cunning and not
intelligent?"
Baldrick. (Blackadder.)
That said, I think we may safely regard Spike as a master of longterm planning in comparison.
[> [> [> [> [>
ROFL--good one, leslie! ;o) -- WW, 20:56:24 03/01/02 Fri
[> [>
Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- Prancer, 11:18:50 03/01/02 Fri
I was bothered by Riley's 'Spike's an idiot' comment, too. It's like the writer's forgot about the Riley
and Spike drink fest right before Riley left. But Riley is still a bigot black-and-white guy, and his
willingness to kill Spike on the presumption he is 'the doctor' just puts Riley on my 'not really a good
guy' list. Buffy also moved away from Riley after he said that and didn't join in the big group hug-o-
rama. But I didn't like that Buffy said Spike was incompetent. I have always thought of Spike as one
of the smartest characters on the show. That and Buffy agreeing with what Riley said was a betrayal
of Spike and their relationship - such as it was. Not to mention all the things Spike has done for
Buffy - things Riley didn't know about, but Buffy sure does.
Does Buffy believe Spike is the doctor? Wouldn't she be more angery if she did believe it? And does
calling him William mean she is accepting him as a 'person?'
And does "I can't love you" mean "I can't love anyone, because I don't love
myself"?
I found this episode very confusing - as if the writer's are once again leading us down false paths.And
I'm thinking about it way too much.
[> [> [>
Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- Katrina, 11:45:03 03/01/02 Fri
I like your comment, that maybe Buffy can't love Spike because she doesn't love herself. I'm
reminded of Cordelia's talent show wisdom way back in Season One, that "Learning to love
yourself is The Greatest Love of All."
This episode, with Riley's return, had a clear parallellism with "Into the Woods," the
episode in which Riley left. In that episode, it was at least in part a conversation with Spike that
made Riley come to grips with the idea (true or not) that Buffy didn't love him. And I believe Spike
actually brought up the conundrum of whether it's better not to have her, and think there might be
hope (his situation at the time), or to have her without really having her (Riley's situation). A year
later, of course, Spike is in exactly that position, having her sexually while she claims not to love him
the way he loves her. (Whoa, that sentence's a tangle). And in this episode, it's Riley's return that
spurs Buffy to come to grips with the issues in her relationship with Spike, however realistically it
may or may not play out in the episode itself. In Riley's case, he left Buffy because he didn't think
she loved him (and I suspect he was right. Only speculation on my part, but I always thought the
effect of Xander's love lecture was to make her realize she never opened herself up to the possibility
of having a real, "scary, messy" relationship with Riley, that her feelings were idealistic
and unrealistic, and that she was willing to take a chance on trying again...not that she was
suddenly thinking yes, he's the absolute one, my true love I can't live without). In Spike's case, Buffy
leaves Spike because, she says, she doesn't love him. What's the common denominator? This is two
completely different guys in a row who are totally and hopelessly devoted to her, both guys she has
great sex with, but she seemingly can't love. (Although her feelings for Riley and for Spike are
obviously debatable, we know it's what Riley believes in the first case and what Buffy professes in
the second).
There's an extra irony in that Xander's lecture about Riley also encouraged him to take his
relationship with Anya to the "next level" and declare his love for her; Xander of course
being the original character with an long-standing unrequited love for Buffy.
So why doesn't Buffy love anybody? We've seen her express her love for Joyce and Dawn, for her
friends and Giles, and of course Angel, which could be the subject of another long ramble, because I
think that relationship, genuine and intense as it was, was more about youthful passion, again
idealized and romanticized, than it was about any conception of grown-up love. Not that I want to
put her on the couch here, but does everything go back to her traumatic first love experiences with
Angel, or is it something to do with her relationship with death, that she can't open up emotionally
and sexually at the same time?
Or, in true soap opera fashion, has she just not found her Mr. Right? (Yes, I'm kidding about
that).
[> [> [> [>
You have hit the nail on the head several times -- Spike Lover, 18:25:40 03/01/02
Fri
[> [>
out of character -- Doriander, 11:29:40 03/01/02 Fri
Otherwise it does look like they're changing characters to serve the plot. One of my favorite
things about this show is they never did that. They always stayed true to character.
Because I'm more involved with Spike than any character on the show, I noticed one particular
instance that they did this in All the Way:
VAMP 1: What is your malfunction, man?!
Spike makes an angry face, gets up and shoves the vamp down into the dirt.
SPIKE: It's Halloween, you nit! We take the night off. Those are the rules.
VAMP 1: (gets up) Me and mine don't follow no stinkin' rules! We're rebels!
He takes a swing at Spike, who blocks it, head-butts him, and then kicks him in the chest. The vamp
slams back against a tree trunk and slides down it to the ground.
SPIKE: No. I'm a rebel. You're an idiot.
Since when did he care about rules? He's not a traditionalist. He threw out demon rules by killing
his own kind, even pre-chip (Annoying One). He gleefully strolled the streets of Sunnydale and
recruited little demons in Halloween. That's why I'm not too impressed by his
"rebel" quip. And here I'm not even sure if it served the plot.
[>
Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- LoriAnn, 11:09:54 03/01/02 Fri
"It was reflected in Buffy saying to Spike, 'That's just you. I should have remembered.' That
line didn't come across as, 'That's just you...evil,' it came across as, 'That's just
you...stupid.'"
Wisewoman, what was reflected in Buffy's saying this was Riley's attitude. Spike hasn't seemed to be
stupid in the past, and not keeping the eggs frozen isn't stupid, it's ignorant. He didn't know they
should be frozen, which perhaps tells us that he was telling the truth when he said he was keeping
them for someone else.
Riley's attitude throughout the show was highly superior. He had no need to ask questions, to offer
answers, to explain, he just went about his business as if no one else mattered. He told Buffy he
needed help and expected her to drop everything and follow him. What a twit she was to do it. He
didn't bother to tell her he was married becuase HE would decide when the time was right. Also,
Riley was willing to kill Spike because Riley had decided Spike was the Doctor, but with no real
evidence that he was, but some evidence that he wasn't. If Spike were this big time bio-weapons
purveyor, why didn't he know enough to keep his merchendise frozen? But Riley decided, and the
only thing that mattered more than that was what Riley said he was willing to allow to matter. That
is, he threw Buffy a bone.
He didn't treat his wife much better, "Stand down, Soldier."
Riley's little you're so wonderful speach was his telling her what she was and what mattered. What
she thought was one of the things he didn't think mattered.
AYW was undoubtedly a complex episode. And in it, the things that point out something to look at
most closely are the things that seem wrong.
[> [>
"Hey, Passive-Aggressive Guy!" (Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for
AYW*)) -- vandalia, 11:34:20 03/01/02 Fri
Could this, perhaps, have been Spike's passive-aggressive way of telling Buffy he couldn't handle
their current relationship anymore? Consciously, yes, he wants her any way he can have her, but we
know he's not happy with it (Gone) and we know she's not happy with it (AYW). Leaving the eggs in
an obvious location (I will concede he didn't know about the freezing them) would have almost
guaranteed she'd see them (though I will note he'd made up the crypt aboveground like a bed,
something he hasn't done since early S5/S4, so he obviously doesn't want to be sleeping next to them)
Could this have been Spike's way of saying 'how badly do you want this' by throwing his 'eeevil' in
Buffy's face? Could Spike have wanted an end to this relationship as it was despite himself? I don't
think Buffy was the only one it was killing.
[> [> [>
Good point. -- Traveler, 15:32:22 03/01/02 Fri
[> [> [>
Re: "Hey, Passive-Aggressive Guy!" (Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for
AYW*)) -- alcibiades, 19:18:59 03/01/02 Fri
Oh yeah. I'm in complete agreement. I think Spike wanted to get caught, but by Buffy, not Riley.
Riley added a whole layer of complication his subconscious didn't plan for. I also think Buffy
wanted to get caught with Spike by Riley. And I think Dawn wanted to get caught by Buffy last
episode.
alcibiades
[> [> [>
Re: "Hey, Passive-Aggressive Guy!" (Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for
AYW*)) -- Terrapin, 10:05:27 03/02/02 Sat
Kinda like what Dawn did.
[>
But Spike IS dumb... (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- Darby, 11:36:18 03/01/02 Fri
It's been established that he's not big with the plannin'.
When he captured Willow and Xander, the only reason that Buffy didn't find them wasn't that she
didn't think that he was dumb enough to hide them in such an obvious place (but you can tell from
his reaction that he didn't realize how dumb it was).
Of course Spike thinks that his various plans for Buffy have been foiled by bad luck and that pesky
Slayer's tendency to win, but have any of his plans been that good? Showing up at school? The
Judge? Letting Buffy take his super-ring off? Not following up on his "Yoko" scheme?
Never kidnapping a neurosurgeon to remove his chip? BtVS plots depend on Spike not being
good at this.
He is very insightful into people, into emotions and motivations, but being bright in one arena
doesn't mean being bright in another. After all, Buffy's a great planner, but her insight, it ain't so
good...oh, no! Another area where B/S "match up"!
But, as stated elsewhere, I don't think that As You Were's developments derive from Spike's
being dumb, but from his being ignorant.
[> [>
Re: But Spike IS dumb... thanks for saying it better than I could -- Dochawk, 11:44:50
03/01/02 Fri
[> [>
Re: "It's lucky to be smart, but it's smarter to be lucky" -- Brian, 12:28:44
03/01/02 Fri
[> [>
Don't forget Spike's drinking binge. -- yez, 14:44:45 03/01/02 Fri
His "stupidity" for hiding them in the most obvious spot could easily have been due to
being drunk, which would also explain why he went to hang out at the slayer's house -- I never
understood what the point of that was...
yez
[> [>
I don't know about dumb, but.... -- Kevin, 16:48:06 03/01/02 Fri
I don't know if I would call him "dumb" but you're right. Big evil plans have never been
Spike's strong suit. I think Angel says something like that in the ep where Spike goes to get his ring
back. Spike's all about the here and now, not about the long range planning and details.
Spike is very intelligent but his strengths are all about direct, immediate interaction...whether it's
intuition about each person's motivations and character or about direct physical confrontation. No
long range drawn out games like Angelus liked to play.
I'm going to have to think about that some more...I'm having a thought about why he and Buffy
always work together pretty well when faced with some crisis involving a big bad...Why he is so
perfectly her second in a fight. Very strong and courageous, but a not the plan maker. He follows
her lead without having all of the ego problems that Riley always had about not being the
leader.
I'm going roll this one around in my brain for awhile.
[> [> [>
Re: I don't know about dumb, but.... -- Malandanza, 18:31:33 03/01/02 Fri
"I don't know if I would call him "dumb" but you're right. Big evil plans have
never been Spike's strong suit. I think Angel says something like that in the ep where Spike goes to
get his ring back. Spike's all about the here and now, not about the long range planning and details.
"
I hate to defend Spike, but I agree that he's not stupid. Impulsive, incompetent and impatient, yes,
but not stupid. We have seen times when his brilliance has shown through (his behind the scenes
manipulation in The Yoko Factor and in helping the Riley/Buffy relationship disintegrate).
There is a difference between Harmony (who is stupid and doesn't understand the consequences of
her actions) and Spike (who is smart but lazy and can't be bothered to worry about consequences). I
think that ME have been pretty consistent in showing Spike to be clever but undisciplined. His first
appearance in Sunnydale was with the Saint Vigeous fiasco -- where he threw out plans to attack
when the vampires would be at there most powerful because he was bored. Problems were
exacerbated when he killed the Anointed One (the Order of Aurelius contained experienced,
disciplined vampires willing to do the Anointed One's bidding -- and the Anointed One was willing
permit Spike to make the decisions for him -- Spike ultimately destroyed an order that had persisted
for centuries out of sheer incompetence). Spike was willing to allow the judge to torch the book-
loving vampire (who was crucial for translating the various texts they had been using) just to see
what would happen. Then there's the whole hunting slayers thing -- not great judgement on his part
(remember Mr. Trick's comments about vengeance crusades being passe?) Trusting Adam was
another typical Spike blunder -- why would Adam keep his promise after Spike had served his use?
It's not that he's stupid -- it that he just doesn't think past the present (as you suggest).
I think ME has been (since FFL) slowly revealing Spike for what he is, rather than what he pretends
to be. The inconsistencies with Spike's character are not breaks in the continuity -- they show lapses
in Spike's facade -- the inconsistencies are the real Spike. When we see Giles bribing Spike with
$100 and Spike scoffs and insists on $200 -- that is the real Spike. The wheel-chair bound
vampire weeping because "It's just, I've had it with this place. Nothing goes off the way its
supposed to." is the real Spike. The vampire who gambles and loses (in spite of cheating)
at Kitten Poker is the real Spike. The vampire consumed by self pity because the slayer told him
that he's beneath her (while scrabbling in the dirt for the money she threw at him) is the real Spike.
The vampire who was willing to stake his eternal love to prove his devotion to his new love -- but
only if he receives certain assurances before hand from the slayer is the real Spike. But most of all,
the vampire who treated Harmony so badly is the real Spike -- he's capable of being charming when
he wants something, but you can tell what kind of person he really is by the way he treats people he
doesn't need. Maybe deep down inside the Big-Bad persona there's a nice guy -- buy dig a little
deeper and beneath that nice guy is Warren (and a little bit of Andrew -- believing his own
propaganda and living in a little fantasy world).
My feeling about the eggs is that Spike knew they were dangerous (maybe not how dangerous), that
he was paid too little for the risks he took (as with Giles and the $200) yet believed he got a good
deal, and that he knew he was supposed to keep them cold but couldn't be bothered to do the job
correctly (probably figuring that since the crypt is pretty cold, the eggs would keep).
And, really, keeping them for a friend? How many friends does Spike even have (especially after he
started killing them for pleasure)? His explanation sounds like a teen-ager caught with alcohol or
cigarettes.
[>
What about Riley? Is he back on drugs? How is he strong enough to fight demons now? --
Sophist, 12:42:59 03/01/02 Fri
[>
The shooting script says -- Tillow, 12:49:21 03/01/02 Fri
I didn't read through all the replies so I'm not sure if anyone pointed this out but the shooting script
said
I'm not here ... yadda yadda stupid, evil scheme.
Interesting that they took that word out. Seems to support your theory about a change in plot.
[>
Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- Aven, 15:19:17 03/01/02 Fri
Haven't seen this episode yet in the UK, but am very disturbed by the way the writers seem to have
changed the characture of Spike in his relationship with Buffy. Doesn't seem like the same guy who
was so tender with the Buffybot in Season Five. We're up to episode nine, Season 6 and I think the
writing so far (With the exception of Joss's song & dance episode) has none of the depth I have
come to expect. Truly AYW - this is a return to the simplistic approach of Seasons 1 & 2.
[> [>
Re: Things Have Changed (*Spoilers for AYW*) -- anneth, 15:46:48 03/01/02 Fri
"Haven't seen this episode yet in the UK, but am very disturbed by the way the writers seem to
have changed the characture of Spike in his relationship with Buffy. Doesn't seem like the same guy
who was so tender with the Buffybot in Season Five. We're up to episode nine, Season 6 and I think
the writing so far (With the exception of Joss's song & dance episode) has none of the depth I
have come to expect. Truly AYW - this is a return to the simplistic approach of Seasons 1 &
2."
that's been bugging me too. I love that ep with the buffybot b/c it's really one of the very few glances
the audience has into spike sans all defenses. he's not trying to impress or intimidate anyone, even
himself. I want to see that spike again - the kind of man he very possibly could be. once more with
feeling offered us a second glimpse.... and then it was gone. grr.
Keep your friends close, your
enemies closer -- Prancer, 11:04:32 03/01/02 Fri
Delurking...
Did anyone attach any signifigance to Buffy's DMP co-worker's yammerings about "keeping
your friends close and your enemies closer? I had the feeling those evil ME writer's were dropping
hints again.
[>
It might be referring to the Troika.... -- AurraSing, 11:21:39 03/01/02 Fri
It's a crying shame that the Scoobs have put so little apparent effort into finding the Geeks.Odds are
good that they are the BB of this season and not working hard to find them may end up causing our
group much grief in the future.
[> [>
Re: It might be referring to the Troika.... -- Robert, 11:54:00 03/01/02 Fri
>> "It's a crying shame that the Scoobs have put so little apparent effort into finding the
Geeks."
Up to this point, the incompetent troika have not shown themselves to be a big bad. Compared to the
antagonists of previous seasons, it is easy to imagine why the gang don't find them worthy of much
effort. As "super villains", the troika must find this humiliating.
I agree with you that this is likely a mistake for the gang not to hunt down at least Warren. On the
other hand, it is permissible for the protagonists to make mistakes, so long as the mistakes are
reasonable and consistent with the show.
I don't think that the troika will ever be a big bad, in the sense of previous seasons. I am siding with
those who believe that maybe we won't see a big bad this season.
[> [> [>
Re: It might be referring to the Troika.... -- Mr. B, 14:39:24 03/01/02 Fri
So killing Katrina wasn't a big deal? Hmmm...
[>
Keep your friends close, your enemies closer (spoilers for ancient X-files ep) -- Fred, the
obvious pseudonym, 12:39:36 03/01/02 Fri
Possibly a reference to "X-Files," season one (before it, well, deteriorated). In the season
one finale, Mulder's contact inside the Evil Organization (I forget his name) uses the "friends
close . . . " quote. Right before he's killed.
So, either the DMP co-worker had best pay up her life insurance -- or there's some kind of internal
intrigue/treachery afoot.
Or Whedon & Co. just like the line.
"The order of
Aurelius"...question? -- Teri, 11:40:34 03/01/02 Fri
On ATS in the ep "Darla" when Angel goes to meet the master he is told that they are
from The order of Aurelius.
As far as I know this is the first and only time the order is mentioned...
So my question is...is this the first time we hear this name in the Buffyverse or is more mentioned in
another ep either on Angel or Buffy? I'm wanting to know more about what this order is
exactly.
Anyone know?
I thought also that maybe the Buffy or Angel books might go into it more? Haven't had a chance to
read myself.
Any little bit of info that anyone might be able to give would be mucho appreciated, even if it's nope
saw all the eps and or read the books and it's not mentioned again anywhere...
Thanks!
[>
Re: "The order of Aurelius"...question? -- Masq, 12:02:01 03/01/02 Fri
It was mentioned in the first season episode "Never kill a boy on the first date". A group
of vampires came into town with distinctive rings that meant they were from this order and ready to
do the Master's bidding in 1997 Sunnydale
[>
Also... -- Masq, 12:03:48 03/01/02 Fri
It is an order or "family" of vampires that descend down from the Master, who is very old
(we are never told how old). This "family" includes the vampires sired by the Master and
vampires sired by those vampires. So it would include Darla, Angelus, Drusilla, and
Spike.
[> [>
Thankyou!...This helps! -- Teri, 13:00:54 03/01/02 Fri
Are necromancer's born with
their powers picked like a slayer is or do they have clans? -- zombie1, 12:11:16 03/01/02
Fri
My ramblings on Mary Sue
(spoilers for AYW) -- Belladonna, 12:34:56 03/01/02 Fri
When I finished watching As You Were, I was reminded of something I read on another site a few
weeks ago, after I saw the episode, Superstar, for the first time on Fx.
Afterwards, I went to the Sunnydale Slayers site to read their review (I'm a big fan of their reviews).
In it, they identified Jonathon as a Mary Sue (a label I was unfamiliar with prior to this). To explain
what a Mary Sue is, here's some quotes from Perri's review:
A Mary Sue is, "everyone's favorite Ensign/computer hacker/Immortal/vampire/insert cool
person here... For those of you not familiar with the concept, a Mary Sue is the writer's perfect
character -- everyone loves him/her, s/he is perfect at everything s/he does, s/he is the center of the
universe, with all other characters subordinate to the coolness that is Mary Sue." Or, in this
case, Riley and Sam.
That (among other things) is what bothered me about this episode. Riley and Sam were too perfect.
Whereas in Superstar, the writers were poking fun at the Mary Sue idea, thus making it less
irritating, in AYW, they expect us to accept them like that. I suppose you could say this was from
Buffy's perspective, but I don't buy that. Um...I'm aware that I'm supposed to have all sorts of
erudite arguments as to why I don't buy that, but I don't. Sorry.
The main issue with Mary Sue that Perri pointed out (and I think can be applied to this ep) is:
"the fatal flaw of that type of character (besides the fact that they're damned annoying)"
is "to make [Riley and Sam] the best, everyone else had to be made smaller, given flaws and
weakness or simply made less than what they were."
In AYW, Buffy was definitely flawed and weak. Look at her behavior when Riley first showed up at
work. She couldn't even speak coherently. Then, when they were fighting the demon, she got
knocked around like a rag doll. (Hello? Super Powers?) But Sam comes in, and manages to kick a
little ass. Until Buffy killed the thing, she wasn't really making herself useful. And they didn't even
*want* it killed.
Then you have Spike. Well, he just looked like an idiot all over the place. Riley pushes him around,
Buffy hits him, he whines, and he looks like a bumbling idiot when he gets caught with the eggs
unfrozen in his basement. (Although, I'm still of the belief that there's more there than meets the
eye.)
So - Buffy looks weaker, more pathetic (her life sucks, etc, compared to Riley's), less intelligent.
Spike looks more pathetic and stupid. All in comparison to the perfect Riley and Sam.
I understand that all this was to force buffy into an epiphany, so she would start to change the
direction of her life, bla, bla. I'm just not pleased with the method. I would much rather her realize
it on her own, or through interaction with the regular characters. Not from the speeches of Mary
Sues. Riley's speech to her at the end, and basically any time Sam spoke, felt forced. Fake. Like a
cue the music, Full House, Moral of the Story moment.
Okay, I've rambled quite long enough. What do you guys think?
[>
Re: Right on! -- Brian, 12:47:45 03/01/02 Fri
[>
Footnote to ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- Sophist, 12:51:18 03/01/02
Fri
Obviously I agree, given my post below.
While I can buy Darby's suggestion that the ep showed Riley through Buffy's eyes -- and exaggerated
his virtues because he was her ex -- that cannot explain the portrayal of Sam. Buffy was hardly
likely to see her through rose colored glasses. Because the idea doesn't work for Sam, I'm inclined to
discount it as an explanation for how we saw Riley.
[> [>
Re: Footnote to ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- mundusmundi, 15:11:32
03/01/02 Fri
While I can buy Darby's suggestion that the ep showed Riley through Buffy's eyes -- and
exaggerated his virtues because he was her ex -- that cannot explain the portrayal of Sam. Buffy was
hardly likely to see her through rose colored glasses.
Couldn't she? Just thinking aloud, but if Buffy's idealizing Riley, couldn't she then perhaps idealize
Riley's "perfect" mate? Given Buffy's low self-esteem of late, I took Sam to be sort of a
representation of whom Buffy might like to be, whom she would be were she still the Slayer without
Slayer responsibilities and ties to Sunnydale.
[> [> [>
I thought about that, but -- Sophist, 15:47:34 03/01/02 Fri
we also saw images of Sam in at least one situation where Buffy wasn't present, i.e., with Willow.
Riley only appeared with Buffy. Since Sam appeared to Willow as she did in other scenes, I don't
think we were seeing her just through Buffy's eyes.
[>
Hee hee. It was a Full House moment indeed! -- bienbizare, 13:08:11 03/01/02 Fri
[>
Re: My ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- Dariel, 13:09:16 03/01/02 Fri
I understand that all this was to force buffy into an epiphany, so she would start to change the
direction of her life, bla, bla. I'm just not pleased with the method. I would much rather her realize it
on her own, or through interaction with the regular characters. Not from the speeches of Mary Sues.
Riley's speech to her at the end, and basically any time Sam spoke, felt forced. Fake. Like a cue the
music, Full House, Moral of the Story moment.
I would agree with you if I thought Buffy actually had an epiphany. Haven't you ever felt down and
out and lost, and then an old beau shows up happy, married, and so over you? It's easy to see them
as perfect when your feelings are all over the place and theirs seem so, calm. So of course everything
they say gains in importance. They feel good, they look good, so they must know what they're
doing.
I didn't see Riley and Sam as perfect, or even especially admirable. They were pretty boring, one-
dimensional people. Not much nuance there. They just happened to be right for each other.
Not to get down on military types (well, not too much), but identification with military values, or
anything larger than onself, can serve as an escape from one's everyday, messy humanity. I think
that's what we were seeing in Riley's return to Mr. Clandestine operations guy.
[> [>
Re: My ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- DEN, 13:22:28 03/01/02 Fri
Point taken, Daniel. But for most of human history, committing to something outside oneself,
something larger than oneself, has also been considered a positive alternative to self-referencing and
self-preoccupation. It's only recently that endlessly blowing the little tin trumpet of one's own
identity has become an acceptable "life choice" in the West.
My observation, I want to make clear, is NOT a personal snark at any poster. It's an attempt to
make a case that Riley--and Sam--may be motivated by something other than "escape."
Willow, and to a degree Xander made a similar choice a couple of years ago. Remember Willow's
speech in s3 about her college decision?
[>
Re: My ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- BigBub, 14:44:33 03/01/02 Fri
Amazing how judgemental some of you are.
[> [>
Re: My ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- Belladonna, 14:48:06 03/01/02
Fri
We're not judgemental, we're critical. I think that goes along with the quote on the top of this
message board...
"You don't sit back on the couch watching 'Buffy,' you have to sit forward and think about
it." --James Marsters
[> [> [>
Re: My ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- BigBub, 14:53:04 03/01/02 Fri
And calling Riley boring/dumb, etc isn't a judgement call? That isn't being philosphical but
trite.
[> [> [> [>
Re: My ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- Farstrider, 17:13:27 03/01/02
Fri
Trite means worn out from over use and over familiarity, like a cliche or stereotype.
Also, criticism that is unfavorable is still criticism.
[> [> [> [>
Re: My ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- Dariel, 17:44:14 03/01/02 Fri
And calling Riley boring/dumb, etc isn't a judgement call? That isn't being philosphical but
trite.
I don't claim to be a philosopher--I leave that to the people on this board who know something about
it. Psychology is my gig. Which fuels my reaction to Riley--I find him rather limited. What he
represents to Buffy is an interesting subject. What he represents overall (patriarchy) is an
interesting subject. But as a human being, he's rather closed off to new experiences. And I find that
rather dull.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: My ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- BigBub, 20:48:44 03/01/02 Fri
Yes, but you and others treat him like dirt. Many people who make those claims about Riley say he
must be unfulfilled. Riley looks pretty darn happy to me. I know people like him, they are good
people, and they are happy with who they are and what they are doing in life. And that is what
counts. Many people here come as snobs. I'd be happy as hell to have Riley as a friend or lover.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: My ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- Sarah, 08:34:05 03/02/02 Sat
Riley is a fictional character. Therefore, pretty impossible for us to treat him like dirt. A critique on
Riley isn't a critique on a person, but a critique on the way a character is written and presented.
And frankly I think there is a lot of room for criticism in how Riley was presented in this episode.
And since his character was the main plot contrivance in AYW, I think the critiques are well within
the bounds of fair debate.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: My ramblings on Mary Sue (spoilers for AYW) -- fresne, 08:42:16 03/02/02 Sat
Back creaking, I stretch. Bounding free of work, I say, well actually, I liked Riley. He and Buffy were
just, well, all wrong for each other. Watching S4 and S5 it becomes so clear. I’m not going to repeat
everyone’s litany’s.
Poor Riley, so lost without a structure. As I sit here reading A Prince of Our Discord, (well not right
now obviously, since I’m actually typing on a very sticky keyboard, but you know figuratively) I
actually think of Riley. FYI its a bio about T.E. Lawrence. Quite good. Now of course Lawrence being
not only real, but emotionally troubled, was way more complex than Riley, but anyway. I am much
taken by the fact that Lawrence, brilliant and highly individualistic, was unable to deal with a his
post WWI life. He sought to remake himself as a cog in a great machine by joining the military at the
lowest rung. Many of his friends and contemporaries thought it was a waste of his enormous talents.
But I’m inclined to think that Lawrence, who was darn introspective, knew what he needed.
Course I wouldn’t want to date either Lawrence or Riley. Cause you know Lawrence lots of ISSUES.
Riley nice guy, but had more neediness issues (as seen in S5) than I could deal with. Friendship.
Well, Lawrence was an Enabler. Overwhelmingly, people who met him discussed how he enabled
them to find strengths or talents that they didn’t know they possessed. Course he is dead. Riley, well
again a nice guy. However, since he willingly sought out a lifestyle that’s not big on the individuality
and I’m all over being the most me I can be. Hard to say. Also, not real.
Hmm, perhaps its time to re-read The Mint.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Make that a Prince of Our Disorder (NT) -- fresne, 09:12:03 03/02/02 Sat
Make that a Prince of Our Disorder
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Prince of our Disorder--Ramblings -- La Duquessa, 10:27:18 03/02/02 Sat
Lawrence was a fascinating guy, no doubt about it...and I always wondered how much of the whole
military complex was about him trying to lose himself...yeah, he had issues, complex issues and very
complex hobbies and he seemed to always be trying to create himself anew.
Interesting to bring him up in conjunction with Riley, who quite frankly, sometimes seems to me to
be a character written by people who have only the vaguest knowledge and understanding of what
the military/special forces is like. There's a stereotype that military types are black and white, follow
orders without question, etc. but that is not really accurate. As a military historian (specialty: 19th
century American) and someone who grew up surrounded by people who were veterans or in the
service or going into the service, there's a lot more gray than civilians often understand...
This is not to say that soldiers don't follow orders, because they do, mostly but you'd be surprised at
how much countermanning orders and personal opinions, etc. is going on...notwithstanding that
there are legal issues involved with blindly following orders...and it's also not to say that soldiers
aren't gung-ho and patriotic. But the battlefield is a notoriously ambiguous place...
Back to Ned: One could argue that Lawrence was in many ways the archetypical special forces
soldier--he certainly operated much like SF does today--independent and in country, with a certain
amount of autonomy. SF today thrives on that type of iconoclasm. Delta Force being a prime
example. Read "Killing Pablo" by Mark Bowden for a good description of how Delta
operates. Not a Captain Cardboard in the bunch...and no bearing on how Riley's bunch operate.
I'm kinda rambling too, here, so forgive the sorta choppy thoughts...just reacting to some of the
thoughts I've had before re: Riley (what service branch was he in? What was his rank? Where'd he
train? Who was his CO? etc...) and the feeling that ME fell into a big stereotypical trap with his
character...but okay, there he is and we have to deal with him...
Still, I did like Riley before, and I like Riley now (although I have to admit that evil Phoenix UPN
has not allowed me to see As You Were, yet, so perhaps I will change my mind this eve!), and I
thought that Buffy did a number on him....he really was trying, poor ole Riley and she didn't meet
him halfway...
So to tie all this up with the original topic: TE Lawrence was never a Mary Sue!
End of rambling, going in search of more coffee now...
Thanks for bearing with me!
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: military realism -- leslie, 11:12:12
03/02/02 Sat
While Riley may not be realistic as a military man, he does echo the same problem that Buffy
identified in Kendra--over-identification with being a "good soldier" and not questioning
orders and protocol. This is in contrast with Buffy, who questions all the time and draws her
strength from knowing when to make her own decisions--*she* is in fact the good soldier/warrior.
(And I do think we are dealing with paradigms of a warrior ethos here rather than a modern military
ethos.) Contrast Riley on the one hand with Spike on the other in their warrior-ness. Spike is too
impulsive, doesn't even stop to question, just acts. Compare his band of vamp back-ups when he first
arrives on the scene and crashed parent-teacher night--they are a motley crew who don't know what
to do until he tells them, and then screw up ("They went that way--or else that way."
Keep trying to break down the door with their hands when there is an axe right next to it.) After
that, he increasingly works alone. Riley is commander of a too-well-oiled machine. He has difficulty
functioning without the group. Again, Buffy is the best of both worlds--she knows when she needs
support and when she doesn't, when she works in a group they are relatively well coordinated, each
person brings their own strengths to the task (as opposed to both Riley and Spike's gangs, who are
functionally interchangeable even when we know them as characters).
Buffy's light. The S/B
evolution. Spoilers up to AYW -- Tillow, 12:54:35 03/01/02 Fri
So, what's to come of Spike and Buffy now? Is it truly over? I'm thinking no. But I think this portion
of the saga is, thank the PTB! I have a theory on how the rest of the season might pan out, or maybe
we could see this next season. Spike will be redeemed. Not through death but through choice and
love.
Let me explain.
As a human, William sought light. He was concerned with poetry, love, and being righteous.
from FFL
What's another word for "illuminate?" "I prefer not to think of such dark, ugly
business at all." ... "I prefer placing my energies into creating things of beauty."
"I know I'm a bad poet. But I'm a good man. All I ask is that you try to see
me..."
And what does Drusilla say to him?
"I've seen you. A man surrounded by fools who cannot see his strength. His vision. His
glory."
At his weakest hour he is pulled into the darkness. Of course, we could debate for hours about
whether she used a thrall on him, the fact that he did ask her to do it and he did see her demon
visage. But it is my opinion that William, the good man who 'preferred not to think of ugly business
at all' lost his soul because he was at his weakest moment and someone offered him acceptance. I
don't think he knew he would be damned for all eternity in the process.
So then we see Spike in Sunnydale with Drusilla, in a loving, nurturing, caretaking relationship.
Odd? The Judge thinks so. Angelus seems to muck things up pretty good when he 'comes back.' And
things never are quite the same for poor ole Spike and Dru.
I'm not going to rehash the whole thing with quotes but the question is always there: Why can Spike
love the way he does without a soul, if Angel becomes a whole new and incredibly horrible vamp
when he lost his soul?
The Judge said re: Angelus "This one can't be touched. He's clean." Yet he was ready to
torch Spike and Dru. So, it seems there is something more innately human about Spike that allows
him to love. Never really been explained. I'm just accepting it. Maybe it's just that the person he was
stayed in him and he fancied himself a Don Juan in life.
OK, so then he's chipped and falls in love with Buffy.
From ITW
RILEY
Do you actually think you've got a shot with her?
SPIKE
No, I don't. Fellow's gotta do what he can, though. Got to try.
Later, same ep
SPIKE
Sometimes I envy you so much it chokes me. And then sometimes I think I've got the better deal. To
be that close to her and not have her... To be all alone even when you're holding her, feeling her,
feeling her beneath you, surrounding you, the scent of -- no, you've got the better deal.
So, with the departure of Riley, Spike decides he will accept having Buffy any way he can get her. He
will take what Riley has settled for. Loving more than being loved. Even though it was too much for
Riley to handle. Spike is that desperate for Buffy. He is that far beneath her as she told him in FFL.
Later same ep
WILLOW
I just don't see why he couldn't have ended up with Esmerelda. They could have the wedding right
there. (a little misty) Beneath the very bell tower where he labored thanklessly for all those
years...
TARA
No, see, it can't end like that, 'cuz all of Quasimodo's actions were selfishly motivated. He had no
moral compass, no understanding of what was right. Everything he did, he did out of love for a
woman who'd never be able to love him back. Also, you can tell it's not gonna have a happy ending,
when the main guys all bumpy.
WILLOW
What do you think, Buffy?
BUFFY
The test is tomorrow. I don't have to have an opinion 'til tomorrow.
As always, Willow, just wants everything nice, Tara sees to the heart of the issue and Buffy...she'll
wait and see. Perfect little illustrative bit. Love the bumpy line.
From Crush
Spike and Buffy first talk about his 'feelings.'
SPIKE
It's not so unusual. Two people. In the workplace... Feelings develop...
BUFFY
No! Feelings do not develop. No feelings!
SPIKE
You can't deny it. There's something between us.
BUFFY
Loathing. Disgust-
SPIKE
Heat. Desire-
BUFFY
Please. You're a vampire, Spike!
SPIKE
Angel was a vampire.
BUFFY
Angel had a soul. He was good.
SPIKE
And I can be too. I've changed Buffy.
BUFFY
You mean the chip? That's not change. That's just holding you back. You're like a serial killer in
prison-
SPIKE
Women marry them all the time! (quickly/heartfelt) But I'm not. Like that. Something's happening to
me. I can't stop thinking about you. And if it means turning my back on the whole evil thing-
BUFFY
(cutting him off)
Stop. You don't mean this. You don't even know what... feelings are.
Spike clearly feels that he has changed, and later in the ep says he knows it's wrong, 'bits of her
filling him up until there is nothing left of him.' Well might that be something like, 'bits of good
filling me up until there is no evil left?' Spike feels something, he feels different. Buffy denies he is
capable of feeling anything at all and shuts him down completely.
SPIKE
You can't tell me there isn't anything there between you and me. I know you feel something.
BUFFY
It's called "revulsion." And whatever you think you're feeling... it's not love. You can't
love without a soul.
SPIKE
Just... Give me something... a crumb, the barest smidge... tell me someday, maybe, there's a
chance...
BUFFY
Spike... The only chance you had with me was when I was unconscious.
Spike is looking for that hope he tells Riley he doesn't have and Buffy doesn't give it to him. This
BTW, is exactly the type of thing you are supposed to do with a stalker. So for the selfishly motivated
would-be suitor, Buffy is rejecting him in all the right ways. I think she is missing the mark on the
"you don't know how to feel" thing but she's coming of the whole one girl in all the world
thing plus the Angel/Angelus fiasco so, of course...
Later, same ep
BUFFY
This changes everything. You're out, Spike. I want you out of this town. I want you off this planet.
You don't ever come near me, my friends and family again. Ever - understand?
SPIKE
No. It's not that easy. We have something, Buffy. It's not pretty, but it's real.
SPIKE
And there's nothing either one of us can do about it. Like it or not, I'm in your life. You can't just
shut me out.
Spike is clearly not hearing her on the whole, we have nothing bit and obviously she can shut him
out of her house, if not the rest of her life as we see in the following episodes.
From I was Made to Love You
This is just interesting.
BUFFY
"She was just... she devoted everything to making this one person happy. And then it was like,
with him gone, there wasn't any reason for her to exist any more."... "I'm not that
different from her. I've got so much more than her -- I've got this great life, all this power, all these
friends, my family, but still, every time I don't have a boyfriend, I feel like someone took away my
arms."
XANDER
You feel like that? Armless?
BUFFY
Well, kinda. I feel like something real important is missing. But it isn't. I mean, it is missing, but it
isn't that important, you know?" ... "No, see, I'm serious. I don't need a guy right now. I
need me. If someone amazing comes along, fine, but I think I'd like to get comfortable being alone
with Buffy."
Well, she never really had the time to do that with all the craziness of last year but... I think it's an
important bit. That's one of my favorite eps. The fact that she could empathize with a robot made her
all that much more of a heroine to me.
From Intervention
And then comes the turning point...
BUFFYBOT
Why did you let that Glory hurt you?
SPIKE
Buffy - the other, the not-as-pleasant Buffy. Something happened to Dawn it'd destroy her. I couldn't
live, her being in that much pain. I'd let Glory kill me first. Nearly bloody did.
BUFFY
What you did for me, and Dawn, that was real. I'll won't forget it.
Is this when the hunchback loses his selfish motivations? Or is his own desire of not wanting to live
seeing her in that much pain still a selfish motivation? Whatever it is, it's enough to win Buffy's
trust. She goes to him again and again after that. And she listens to him; takes note of his
observations....
From Tough Love
SPIKE
So, you're saying a powerful and mightily pissed-off witch was planning to go out and spill herself a
few pints of God blood until you......explained?
BUFFY
You think she'd...? No. I told Willow, fighting Glory'd be suicide...
SPIKE
I'd do it. Right person. Person I loved. I'd do it.
Love this! Not only does he remind her of the recent very 'real' beating he took from the very same
hell beasty on her behalf, he sets up that he will gladly die for her, or to protect her sister 'until the
end of the world' in the climactic season five scene where she acknowledges all their interactions and
how far they have come by inviting him back into her home. Before that, by not even remembering
that he shouldn't be able to follow.
More to come.
[>
Working without the net. The S/B evolution. Part II -- Tillow, 12:58:37 03/01/02 Fri
To recap, up through season 5 we seen Spike go from William, a good, loving, if not a little naive
human, to an evil demon, atypical in the depth to which he embraces his human side, to a neutered
vamp, who doesn't know how to exist and clings to Buffy who is in essence, a beacon of light. He is
eventually able to prove that he is capable of doing/feeling something real and she can trust him
with her/her sister's life. Not too shabby.
Story brutally interrupted by Buffy's death.
Season 6. Buffy lives!
From Afterlife
SPIKE (cont'd)
I do remember what I said. The promise. To protect her. If I'd done that ... even if I didn't make it,
you wouldn't've had to jump. I want you to know I did save you. Not when it counted, of course. But
after that. Every night after that. I'd see it all again, do something different. Faster or more clever,
you know? Dozens of times, lots of different ways ... (beat) Every night I save you.
We already knew from Bargaining (his dealings with Dawn) that he was feeling extreme guilt for not
being able to protect Dawn and by extension Buffy. But hearing him so openly and honestly express
himself to Buffy and wait for her anger, her punishment of him… was it just me or was that pretty
damn human of him?
Later, same ep
BUFFY
Spike. It's daylight and you're ...
SPIKE
Not on fire? Sun's low. IS shady enough here.
Just wanted to point out another way Spike differs from other vampires. The many times he risks
going out in the day. He actively tries to be part of Buffy’s world. Of course this is the scene she
shares her secret of being dragged out of what she thinks was heaven with Spike.
From Flooded
On Buffy overhearing Giles say he thinks she may not have come out of this OK.
SPIKE
You hear all that noise?
BUFFY
Just enough to make me feel crappy.
SPIKE
You know watcher-boy doesn't mean anything by it.
...
BUFFY
Why are you always around when I'm miserable?
SPIKE
'Cause that's when you're alone, I reckon. I'm not much for myself these days.
BUFFY
Me neither.
SPIKE
That works out nicely then.
BUFFY
So, you know anything about finances?
Buffy lets Spike in here. She has already confided her biggest secret to him. But now she takes him
as her friend, she is miserable most of the time, this being hell for her and all, and she lets him see
it. And later in LS, in a drunken slip, she admits he’s the only ‘person she can stand to be
around.’ Later, in the musical, he tells her he loves her, she makes him feel. She kisses him with that
annoying little disclaimer, "This isn’t real."
From the musical to Smashed, Spike tries to love Buffy, to court her, to tell her "A man can
change." Then Buffy falls back on the season five Crush mentality, "You’re not a
man."
Spike is hurt. He lashes out later with. "You came back wrong." This leads to the intense
emotion that leads to the word and fist sparring that ends in the consummation of their ‘dance.’ I
find the last bit particularly quote worthy.
From Smashed
SPIKE
I wasn't planning on hurting you. Much.
BUFFY
You haven't even come close to hurting me.
SPIKE
Afraid to give me the chance?
Take out the fighting and just think about this on an emotional level. Spike doesn’t usually plan on
hurting Buffy. Sometimes, he’s careless or reactive, but it usually amounts to him being a pest to
Buffy, she can take what he dishes out. And of course she's afraid to give him the chance. She's been
burned by love in the past, particularly by letting a vampire in and that one was supposed to be
good. Buffy is in such a bad place she can barely get through the day, how can she be expected to
deal with her 'vampire relationship issues' as well.
From Wrecked
SPIKE
What's the hurry, luv?
BUFFY
The hurry is, I left Dawn all night and don't call me "luv."
Spike knows this moment won't last. He had her for one night but is that all? Interesting that Buffy
immediately tells him to not call her 'luv' which he has done so many, many times in the past.
SPIKE
(stung)
Didn't seem to take issue with it last night. Or with any of the other little nasties we
whispered.
BUFFY
Can we - not? Talk?
A relationship that has been mostly about trust and Buffy confiding her pain in Spike through talk is
suddenly gone. When sex enters into the picture, Spike loses Buffy.
I think a lot of the 'evil' Spike we have seen lately is a reaction to this fact, his insecurity over the
way she has been treating him. Not trying to make Spike a fluffy puppy here, I'll explain more as I
go.
SPIKE
I just don't see why you have to run off so quick. I thought we could...
BUFFY
Not gonna happen. Last night was the end of this freak show-
SPIKE
Don't say that.
BUFFY
What do you think is going to happen, Spike? We're gonna read the paper together? Play footsie
under the... rubble?
I think it is clear from interactions here and later in Gone that Spike does 'want it all.' He goes at
Buffy through sex because it's the only avenue he has that she will allow.
BUFFY
Nothing changed. It was a mistake-
SPIKE
Bullocks. It was a bloody revelation.
This is so sad. Whether Buffy can ever love him or not is irrelevant at this point. I think these lines
were true for both of them, it was a mistake for her. It wasn't the right time, she wasn't ready, he's
not at a point where she can love him, neither is she. She's depressed, looking for an escape. She has
zero self-esteem. But for Spike, it more than likely was a revelation. Spike has changed for Buffy. He
may still have evil in him. But he is different and it's because of his love for her. It's an amazing
amount of change for someone who screamed at Angel in SH re: change "Not us. Demons don't
change." So sad that they had such a different 'morning after' perspective but completely
expected. Maybe it was their moment together that was 'Wrecked.'
From Gone
SPIKE
That was bloody stupid.
BUFFY (V.0.)
What's the matter? Ashamed to be seen with me?
BUFFY (cont'd; V.0.)
C'mon. He had no idea I was here. This is perfect.
SPIKE
Perfect for you.
BUFFY (V.0)
(beat)
Well. Picture me confused. I thought this is what you wanted.
SPIKE
What I want... (beat, then) This vanishing act's right liberating for you, in'it? Be anywhere you want.
Do anything you want. (pointedly) Or anyone.
BUFFY (V.0.)
What are you talking-
SPIKE
Only reason you're here is that You're not here.
BUFFY (V.0.)
"What? That's -- that's not..." ... "I didn't make this happen to me. I didn't ask for
this."
SPIKE
Not too put off by it though, are ya?
BUFFY (V.0.)
I... I thought we were... having fun.
SPIKE
Fun's over. Just go. Get dressed, if you can find your clothes and push off. 'Cause if I can't have all of
you, I'd rather-- "
Interesting that Spike becomes the grown up when Buffy willingly descends to his level (the
darkness—the first time she is with him in his crypt). Maybe he doesn't want her to come down to
his level at all. Maybe he wants her to take him up to hers.
From Dead Things
SPIKE
Do you even like me?
BUFFY
Sometimes.
SPIKE
But you like what I do to you.
SPIKE (cont'd)
Do you trust me?
BUFFY
Never.
Spike is trying to define exactly what kind of relationship he has with the woman he loves. It's not a
'thing.' It's not love for her. It's definitely sex. But is it trust? That's an important part of love.
Later Same Ep
SPIKE (O.S.)
You see? You try to be with them. But you always end up in the dark. With me. ... What would they
think of you? If they found out all the things you've done. ... If they knew who you really were...
Later Same Ep
BUFFY (cont'd)
You don't have a soul! There's nothing good or clean in you. That's why you can't understand!
You're dead inside! You can't feel anything real! I could never... be your girl!
I never really got upset about the bronze scene. I thought it was clear after seeing Buffy obviously
project her own fears about being 'wrong' onto Spike as she beat him that Spike was doing the
EXACT SAME THING during his little ditty in the bronze. He knows she'll never accept him, the
Scoobies will never accept him because he is no longer William. He isn't part of their world and he
can never be a part of hers.
From As You Were
INT. SPIKE'S CRYPT (LOWER) -- DAY
SPIKE
So she's back. Thought you'd be off snogging with soldier boy.
BUFFY
He's gone.
SPIKE
So, come for a little cold comfort? Bed's a bit blown up, but then that never was our
I realize cold comfort is a play on the vampire/dead thing but it's also a hint at just how hollow it all
is for Spike, too. Again the conversation with Riley in ITW, Rest In Peace, and his "If I can't
have all of you then..." bits come to mind. Spike wants the real deal and instead gets cold
comfort.
BUFFY
No. I'm not here for... and I'm not gonna bust your chops about your stupid scheme. That's just you. I
should've remembered...
SPIKE
Oh. This is worse, isn't it? This is you telling me --
BUFFY
It's over.
SPIKE
I've memorized this tune, love. I think I have the sheet music. Doesn't change what you want.
BUFFY
I know that. I do want you. Being with you... makes things simpler. For a little while.
SPIKE
I don't call five hours straight a little while.
BUFFY
I'm using you. I can't love you. I'm just being weak, and selfish --
I know the brilliant Doug Petrie more than likely wrote 'I can't love you' instead of 'I don't love you'
to be purposely ambiguous but this whole apology scene is truly harsh and condescending. It doesn't
make Buffy sympathetic to me. But it was the best thing for the character to do. I just wish she
didn't have to fall back on her self righteousness so much. Oh well. As You Were. I get it. I get it!
SPIKE
-- really not complaining here --
Again, just showing how desperately he will cling to her.
BUFFY
-- and it's killing me. I have to be strong about this.
BUFFY (cont'd)
I'm sorry, William.
The use of the name William? I dunno. It could just be that this was Doug Petrie. The very same
writing God who gave us FFL and Cecily. I think what he was going for was a reversal of "I do
see you, you're beneath me. You're nothing to me." Ouch that hurt, got him killed, damned him
for all time. Maybe this was supposed to be all compassionate Buffy "I do see you, the demon
that you are, the man that you were, William, and I can't do this to you or to myself anymore."
I have to say, I really don't think it was pulled off very well by SMG, or the directors or DP. (And I
rarely criticize SMG.) If felt to me more like another rejection, particularly with her going off into the
light and him staying behind in the dark. If that's what they were going for, then it was beautiful.
The episodes are always more clear after viewing the couple that follow.
So, the basis of my theory is that...
William is still in there, can be reached. Buffy's challenge, along with the rest of the Scoobies will be
to pull him into the light, rather than allow herself to be pulled into the shadows. To redeem him
through love, her love which burns brighter than the fire that freezes her.
I think the Willow plot has been a precursor to all of this with the key line coming from Tara, as
always, the voice of reason. "It's time to work without the net, Will." The chip
has acted as Spike's net. What happens when Spike's chip is tampered with? Warren, Mr.
UberTechnoGeek, has info on Spike's Chip??? Or it could simply malfunction. What will he do? And
what will the Scoobies do?
This brings up a huge ethical dilemma. Before they couldn't kill Spike because he was helpless. But
now he is someone who has been a part of all their lives, a friend, sworn protector, and lover. They
just kill him? I can't see Dawn allowing Spike to be 'put down' and she can be quite convincing when
she wants to be.
I really don't see him pulling an Angel and going psycho stalker. 1. Bad writing, already been done.
2. He's already able to hurt Buffy and he clearly doesn't want her to die. 3. The loss of the soul will
more than likely be different than the loss of the chip as the acquisition of it didn't affect the two the
same.
So do they banish him? No, JM has a contract! What's left? They redeem him, bring him into the
light, teach him to work without the net? Start believing his pleas that "A man can
change."
I'd love to hear feedback...
:)
[> [>
*KABOOM* (Re: Working without the net. The S/B evolution. Part II) -- vandalia,
15:08:10 03/01/02 Fri
SPIKE (O.S.)
You see? You try to be with them. But you always end up in the dark. With me. ... What would they
think of you? If they found out all the things you've done. ... If they knew
who you really were...
Later Same Ep
BUFFY (cont'd)
You don't have a soul! There's nothing good or clean in you. That's why you can't understand! You're
dead inside! You can't feel anything real! I could never... be your girl!
I never really got upset about the bronze scene. I thought it was clear after seeing Buffy obviously
project her own fears about being 'wrong' onto Spike as she beat him that
Spike was doing the EXACT SAME THING during his little ditty in the bronze. He knows she'll
never accept him, the Scoobies will never accept him because he is no longer
William. He isn't part of their world and he can never be a part of hers.
Holy crap. Big huge lightbulb going off here. I think you've nailed it perfectly, Tillow, and I didn't see
this until you pointed it out. SOMETHING was niggling away in my brain about that scene and
you've got it, as far as I'm concerned. Bravissima.
[> [> [>
Re: *KABOOM* (Re: Working without the net. The S/B evolution. Part II) -- Prancer,
18:02:21 03/01/02 Fri
What Buffy says to Spike as she was beating him in DT is almost identical to what Faith (in Buffy's
body) was saying to Buffy (in Faith's body) in the church right before they switched back. In DT, I
thought Buffy was talking about how she felt about herself, not really about Spike.
[> [> [> [>
That's exactly what Tillow is saying... -- Dariel, 18:32:03 03/01/02 Fri
In DT, I thought Buffy was talking about how she felt about herself, not really about
Spike.
Exactly, but she was projecting her feelings about herself onto Spike. Similarly, in the Bronze scene,
Spike is talking about himself--"What would they think of you if they knew the things you've
done?" That's not about Buffy, it's about Spike.
So smart, Tillow! Somehow, seeing the two scenes on paper makes it clear.
[> [> [> [> [>
Yup, yup... exactly what I meant. Thanks Dariel -- Tillow, 21:08:15 03/01/02 Fri
[> [> [>
Re: Thanks for the kaboom. *blushing* -- Tillow, 21:06:07 03/01/02 Fri
I think the writers have so carefully crafted Spike that that scene was far too blatantly "He's
EVIL!" unless you look at it from a psychosocial perspective. Glad you agree, thought that
might be the most controversial bit. :)
[>
Working without the net. The S/B evolution. Part II -- Tillow, 13:00:02 03/01/02 Fri
To recap, up through season 5 we seen Spike go from William, a good, loving, if not a little naive
human, to an evil demon, atypical in the depth to which he embraces his human side, to a neutered
vamp, who doesn't know how to exist and clings to Buffy who is in essence, a beacon of light. He is
eventually able to prove that he is capable of doing/feeling something real and she can trust him
with her/her sister's life. Not too shabby.
Story brutally interrupted by Buffy's death.
Season 6. Buffy lives!
From Afterlife
SPIKE (cont'd)
I do remember what I said. The promise. To protect her. If I'd done that ... even if I didn't make it,
you wouldn't've had to jump. I want you to know I did save you. Not when it counted, of course. But
after that. Every night after that. I'd see it all again, do something different. Faster or more clever,
you know? Dozens of times, lots of different ways ... (beat) Every night I save you.
We already knew from Bargaining (his dealings with Dawn) that he was feeling extreme guilt for not
being able to protect Dawn and by extension Buffy. But hearing him so openly and honestly express
himself to Buffy and wait for her anger, her punishment of him… was it just me or was that pretty
damn human of him?
Later, same ep
BUFFY
Spike. It's daylight and you're ...
SPIKE
Not on fire? Sun's low. IS shady enough here.
Just wanted to point out another way Spike differs from other vampires. The many times he risks
going out in the day. He actively tries to be part of Buffy’s world. Of course this is the scene she
shares her secret of being dragged out of what she thinks was heaven with Spike.
From Flooded
On Buffy overhearing Giles say he thinks she may not have come out of this OK.
SPIKE
You hear all that noise?
BUFFY
Just enough to make me feel crappy.
SPIKE
You know watcher-boy doesn't mean anything by it.
...
BUFFY
Why are you always around when I'm miserable?
SPIKE
'Cause that's when you're alone, I reckon. I'm not much for myself these days.
BUFFY
Me neither.
SPIKE
That works out nicely then.
BUFFY
So, you know anything about finances?
Buffy lets Spike in here. She has already confided her biggest secret to him. But now she takes him
as her friend, she is miserable most of the time, this being hell for her and all, and she lets him see
it. And later in LS, in a drunken slip, she admits he’s the only ‘person she can stand to be
around.’ Later, in the musical, he tells her he loves her, she makes him feel. She kisses him with that
annoying little disclaimer, "This isn’t real."
From the musical to Smashed, Spike tries to love Buffy, to court her, to tell her "A man can
change." Then Buffy falls back on the season five Crush mentality, "You’re not a
man."
Spike is hurt. He lashes out later with. "You came back wrong." This leads to the intense
emotion that leads to the word and fist sparring that ends in the consummation of their ‘dance.’ I
find the last bit particularly quote worthy.
From Smashed
SPIKE
I wasn't planning on hurting you. Much.
BUFFY
You haven't even come close to hurting me.
SPIKE
Afraid to give me the chance?
Take out the fighting and just think about this on an emotional level. Spike doesn’t usually plan on
hurting Buffy. Sometimes, he’s careless or reactive, but it usually amounts to him being a pest to
Buffy, she can take what he dishes out. And of course she's afraid to give him the chance. She's been
burned by love in the past, particularly by letting a vampire in and that one was supposed to be
good. Buffy is in such a bad place she can barely get through the day, how can she be expected to
deal with her 'vampire relationship issues' as well.
From Wrecked
SPIKE
What's the hurry, luv?
BUFFY
The hurry is, I left Dawn all night and don't call me "luv."
Spike knows this moment won't last. He had her for one night but is that all? Interesting that Buffy
immediately tells him to not call her 'luv' which he has done so many, many times in the past.
SPIKE
(stung)
Didn't seem to take issue with it last night. Or with any of the other little nasties we
whispered.
BUFFY
Can we - not? Talk?
A relationship that has been mostly about trust and Buffy confiding her pain in Spike through talk is
suddenly gone. When sex enters into the picture, Spike loses Buffy.
I think a lot of the 'evil' Spike we have seen lately is a reaction to this fact, his insecurity over the
way she has been treating him. Not trying to make Spike a fluffy puppy here, I'll explain more as I
go.
SPIKE
I just don't see why you have to run off so quick. I thought we could...
BUFFY
Not gonna happen. Last night was the end of this freak show-
SPIKE
Don't say that.
BUFFY
What do you think is going to happen, Spike? We're gonna read the paper together? Play footsie
under the... rubble?
I think it is clear from interactions here and later in Gone that Spike does 'want it all.' He goes at
Buffy through sex because it's the only avenue he has that she will allow.
BUFFY
Nothing changed. It was a mistake-
SPIKE
Bullocks. It was a bloody revelation.
This is so sad. Whether Buffy can ever love him or not is irrelevant at this point. I think these lines
were true for both of them, it was a mistake for her. It wasn't the right time, she wasn't ready, he's
not at a point where she can love him, neither is she. She's depressed, looking for an escape. She has
zero self-esteem. But for Spike, it more than likely was a revelation. Spike has changed for Buffy. He
may still have evil in him. But he is different and it's because of his love for her. It's an amazing
amount of change for someone who screamed at Angel in SH re: change "Not us. Demons don't
change." So sad that they had such a different 'morning after' perspective but completely
expected. Maybe it was their moment together that was 'Wrecked.'
From Gone
SPIKE
That was bloody stupid.
BUFFY (V.0.)
What's the matter? Ashamed to be seen with me?
BUFFY (cont'd; V.0.)
C'mon. He had no idea I was here. This is perfect.
SPIKE
Perfect for you.
BUFFY (V.0)
(beat)
Well. Picture me confused. I thought this is what you wanted.
SPIKE
What I want... (beat, then) This vanishing act's right liberating for you, in'it? Be anywhere you want.
Do anything you want. (pointedly) Or anyone.
BUFFY (V.0.)
What are you talking-
SPIKE
Only reason you're here is that You're not here.
BUFFY (V.0.)
"What? That's -- that's not..." ... "I didn't make this happen to me. I didn't ask for
this."
SPIKE
Not too put off by it though, are ya?
BUFFY (V.0.)
I... I thought we were... having fun.
SPIKE
Fun's over. Just go. Get dressed, if you can find your clothes and push off. 'Cause if I can't have all of
you, I'd rather-- "
Interesting that Spike becomes the grown up when Buffy willingly descends to his level (the
darkness—the first time she is with him in his crypt). Maybe he doesn't want her to come down to
his level at all. Maybe he wants her to take him up to hers.
From Dead Things
SPIKE
Do you even like me?
BUFFY
Sometimes.
SPIKE
But you like what I do to you.
SPIKE (cont'd)
Do you trust me?
BUFFY
Never.
Spike is trying to define exactly what kind of relationship he has with the woman he loves. It's not a
'thing.' It's not love for her. It's definitely sex. But is it trust? That's an important part of love.
Later Same Ep
SPIKE (O.S.)
You see? You try to be with them. But you always end up in the dark. With me. ... What would they
think of you? If they found out all the things you've done. ... If they knew who you really were...
Later Same Ep
BUFFY (cont'd)
You don't have a soul! There's nothing good or clean in you. That's why you can't understand!
You're dead inside! You can't feel anything real! I could never... be your girl!
I never really got upset about the bronze scene. I thought it was clear after seeing Buffy obviously
project her own fears about being 'wrong' onto Spike as she beat him that Spike was doing the
EXACT SAME THING during his little ditty in the bronze. He knows she'll never accept him, the
Scoobies will never accept him because he is no longer William. He isn't part of their world and he
can never be a part of hers.
From As You Were
INT. SPIKE'S CRYPT (LOWER) -- DAY
SPIKE
So she's back. Thought you'd be off snogging with soldier boy.
BUFFY
He's gone.
SPIKE
So, come for a little cold comfort? Bed's a bit blown up, but then that never was our
I realize cold comfort is a play on the vampire/dead thing but it's also a hint at just how hollow it all
is for Spike, too. Again the conversation with Riley in ITW, Rest In Peace, and his "If I can't
have all of you then..." bits come to mind. Spike wants the real deal and instead gets cold
comfort.
BUFFY
No. I'm not here for... and I'm not gonna bust your chops about your stupid scheme. That's just you. I
should've remembered...
SPIKE
Oh. This is worse, isn't it? This is you telling me --
BUFFY
It's over.
SPIKE
I've memorized this tune, love. I think I have the sheet music. Doesn't change what you want.
BUFFY
I know that. I do want you. Being with you... makes things simpler. For a little while.
SPIKE
I don't call five hours straight a little while.
BUFFY
I'm using you. I can't love you. I'm just being weak, and selfish --
I know the brilliant Doug Petrie more than likely wrote 'I can't love you' instead of 'I don't love you'
to be purposely ambiguous but this whole apology scene is truly harsh and condescending. It doesn't
make Buffy sympathetic to me. But it was the best thing for the character to do. I just wish she
didn't have to fall back on her self righteousness so much. Oh well. As You Were. I get it. I get it!
SPIKE
-- really not complaining here --
Again, just showing how desperately he will cling to her.
BUFFY
-- and it's killing me. I have to be strong about this.
BUFFY (cont'd)
I'm sorry, William.
The use of the name William? I dunno. It could just be that this was Doug Petrie. The very same
writing God who gave us FFL and Cecily. I think what he was going for was a reversal of "I do
see you, you're beneath me. You're nothing to me." Ouch that hurt, got him killed, damned him
for all time. Maybe this was supposed to be all compassionate Buffy "I do see you, the demon
that you are, the man that you were, William, and I can't do this to you or to myself anymore."
I have to say, I really don't think it was pulled off very well by SMG, or the directors or DP. (And I
rarely criticize SMG.) If felt to me more like another rejection, particularly with her going off into the
light and him staying behind in the dark. If that's what they were going for, then it was beautiful.
The episodes are always more clear after viewing the couple that follow.
So, the basis of my theory is that...
William is still in there, can be reached. Buffy's challenge, along with the rest of the Scoobies will be
to pull him into the light, rather than allow herself to be pulled into the shadows. To redeem him
through love, her love which burns brighter than the fire that freezes her.
I think the Willow plot has been a precursor to all of this with the key line coming from Tara, as
always, the voice of reason. "It's time to work without the net, Will." The chip
has acted as Spike's net. What happens when Spike's chip is tampered with? Warren, Mr.
UberTechnoGeek, has info on Spike's Chip??? Or it could simply malfunction. What will he do? And
what will the Scoobies do?
This brings up a huge ethical dilemma. Before they couldn't kill Spike because he was helpless. But
now he is someone who has been a part of all their lives, a friend, sworn protector, and lover. They
just kill him? I can't see Dawn allowing Spike to be 'put down' and she can be quite convincing when
she wants to be.
I really don't see him pulling an Angel and going psycho stalker. 1. Bad writing, already been done.
2. He's already able to hurt Buffy and he clearly doesn't want her to die. 3. The loss of the soul will
more than likely be different than the loss of the chip as the acquisition of it didn't affect the two the
same.
So do they banish him? No, JM has a contract! What's left? They redeem him, bring him into the
light, teach him to work without the net? Start believing his pleas that "A man can
change."
I'd love to hear feedback...
:)
[> [>
Good Observations, Tillow -- Belladonna, 14:38:14 03/01/02 Fri
That was a helpful recap and analysis of the evolution of Spike. Thanks!
[> [>
Re: Working without the net. The S/B evolution. Part II -- Traveler, 15:13:11 03/01/02
Fri
"So do they banish him? No, JM has a contract! What's left? They redeem him, bring him
into the light, teach him to work without the net? Start believing his pleas that 'A man can
change.'"
I hope you're right, and your analysis gives me some hope, but remember how tricky the ME writers
can be. To take an example from different show, Witchblade, one of the main character died during
the first episode (the movie) and reappeared every episode as a ghost. Just because JM has a
contract doesn't mean that Spike is invulnerable...
[> [> [>
Re: Working without the net. The S/B evolution. Part II -- Dichotomy, 19:53:32
03/01/02 Fri
Or maybe, because the ME writers are so tricky, Spike doesn't necessarily become Big E Evil again,
but does something inadvertantly bad or construed as evil. This would disrail his redemption, put
him at odds with Buffy and the Scoobies and lead to more ME-style pain and misery, and at the
same time allow him to continue appearing into next season.
Just wild speculation. Part of me is hoplessly hoping for his redemption too, and your analysis was
chock full of references that indicate it could happen.
I enjoyed your take on the Bronze scene, too. I was also not convinced that the things he said to
Buffy were said just to mess with her head. I felt he was somehow voicing feelings she already had
about herself. But that he was talking about himself....interesting insight.
[> [> [> [>
Re: JMs contract and other scenarios -- Tillow, 21:25:01 03/01/02 Fri
Traveler,
Ghost idea? Very interesting. I had thought they might shy away from something like that only
because they had Angel back in season 3 in her dreams but that ghost thing has potential.
I do think things will get worse before they get better. Spike has to bottom out much like Willow did
(if that was indeed her crashing). And I don't think he's even near that. So something like you've
mentioned, Dichotomy, definitely would have to happen for my little theory to work. And the
Scoobies would need to actively support him. The question is what damage/repair to their group
dynamic will he do from this point forward to influence their feelings for him.
Like I said, I think he has a loyal friend in Dawn. Maybe Willow? She's always had a soft spot for
him. She could almost act as a sponsor. At this point I'd be happy to see the addiction metaphor go
but that would round her story out nicely.
I'm just rambling now... *yawn.*
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: JMs contract and other scenarios -- Traveler, 23:52:08 03/01/02 Fri
I know this has been mentioned before, but I am really curious to see how the writers are going to
play the next big Spike/Dawn scene. I mean, hey, it has to happen eventually, so are they going to
pass off Spike's long absence from Dawn's life as being unimportant, not mention it at all, or will she
call him on his failure to "be there" for her? As for Willow... we've seen almost no
Spike/Willow interaction for years(?). Now that I think about it, that really is a shame. Spike could
have been really helpful to Willow earlier in the season, both with his insight and his familiarity
with evil. Even now, he seems to understand some of what she is going through. I would enjoy seeing
ME explore that aspect more as well. One benefit (as much as I hate it) of the Buffy/Spike break up
is that now everything doesn't have to be Buffy/Spike. Hopefully we will get to see him interact more
with other people now.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Pipe dream: Spike and Giles -- and a question about Restless -- Anne, 04:07:25 03/02/02 Sat
1. I doubt it's ever going to happen (especially given that Tony Head is mostly in England), but I'd
love to see Spike spend a few episodes working things out with Giles. They've gone out of their way
to suggest a father/son theme between the two; plus, it seems pretty clear that one of Spike's main
problems is that he keeps defining himself in terms of some woman. It apparently started with his
mother -- the "mother's waiting for me" line in FFL is certainly suggestive -- and goes on
to Cecily, Drusilla, and then Buffy. Seems to me if he makes any progress at all (and he might not: I
do think they might send him back in the direction of evil) he might have to do it vis a vis a
male figure for a change. And Giles is the obvious choice.
(Not to mention they make an absolutely fabulous duo on screen).
2. Second: what the heck does that Christ pose at the end of the Spike segment in Restless mean?
When I first saw it, I couldn't help wondering if it implied some kind of foreshadowing for Spike. But
of course, even if he were to die in some kind of sacrificial gesture, the Christ imagery wouldn't be
applicable because the whole point of Christ is that he is a perfect sacrifice, untouched by sin. So
then what does it mean? Could it be some kind of foreshadowing anyway? I checked the
archives on this site to see if they go back as far as Restless but they don't. So if anybody has any
insight, please let me know.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Sacrificial Vampires... -- La Duquessa, 10:07:44 03/02/02 Sat
I just saw Restless again and I wondered the same thing about Spike's Christ pose. It seems too
obvious to be just "vamping" for the cameras, yet I can't see how it will work in unless
Spike somehow sacrifices himself or is the sacrifice for others...and that will really bite (!!), ala Darla.
Been there, done that...IMHO.
Of course everytime I see Restless, I find new bits that make perfect sense and old bits that still
puzzle me...(Xander as whipping boy? the loaded look between Buffy and Xander when she called
him big brother...etc.) so I just chock it all up to the Genius that is Joss and try to Wait and
See.
Which is much easier said than done!
If anyone else would care to make a guess as how Spike could fit the archetype of the Dying God, I'd
be all ears...
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Sacrificial Vampires... -- leslie,
11:00:00 03/02/02 Sat
Well, you could argue that Spike, as the Dying God, is in mid-cycle--has already died and is waiting
to be resurrected.
I don't know about seeing that pose as a crucifixion, though. Perhaps it's just my own deeply non-
Christian background, but I see it as more of a general open-and-vulnerable pose ("here is my
exposed heart and my eyes are closed so I can't see what you're doing"), and in that sense it
corresponds to the increasing "nakedness" of Spike that has developed this season.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Spike "Open & Vulnerable" -- Kevin, 11:42:55 03/03/02 Sun
When I was reading your comment about Spike being open and vulnerable, it made me think about
the contrast between Buffy and Spike.
He has always allowed himself to be open to his feelings...He doesn't hide them from himself or
others. He *really* feels things. He's always naked. I think that's why he was so horrified when he
realized that he was in love with Buffy, because he knew that he wouldn't be able to deny the
feeling...his nature is to always go with his heart. "I may be love's bitch, but I'm man enough
to admit it."
Buffy on the other hand is the one who very often denies her feelings. She keeps her emotions at
arms length in her relationships, not just with Spike.
I find the fact the she's often told Spike he can't feel anything ironic since it's her not Spike who can't
feel.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Christ poses/Sacrificial Vampires... -- alcibiades, 12:07:51 03/02/02 Sat
I don't think the point is quite that Spike is supposed to be a dying God, more like it's supposed to
point to the suffering he takes on on Buffy's behalf. There's a crucifixion pose in the torture scene
with Glory, there is also one when he is singing Rest in Peace in OMWF and asking her not to play
with him, but rather to leave him alone if she has got nothing to give. And some people even believe
he is in one in the top crypt scene in Gone, although I think that is stretching it a bit.
In any case, from Spike's POV, I think one thing their relationship has been about is giving Buffy an
outlet to express her pain. This happens explicitly in the alley scene in DT, when he tells her to put
it all on him. In the screenplay, he also tells her he is willing to take the rap for her, if only she
won't give herself up. Which is pretty explicitly taking on her suffering and her sins and suffering
for them himself.
Buffy's about to re-experience the world without Spike helping to absorb her pain, and I don't think
she is going to like it much.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Christ poses/Sacrificial Vampires... -- La Duquessa, 20:27:36 03/02/02 Sat
Ahhh...yes, thank you both for such good theories...They both make very good sense to me, and even
sorta fit together...!
Muchas gracias!
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike/Dawn & Spike/Willow -- Tillow, 07:10:06 03/02/02 Sat
One of the writers, I think maybe DeKnight (sp?) said that they had a hard time giving screen time
to all the relationships now that Buffy/Spike are so prominent but we should assume that the
Spike.Dawn friendship is still in tact.
I notice that they do link the two in screen shots as often as possible. It's amazing how small it is.
Like in TR, he walk in and the next shot is Dawn's face lighting up. He falls off the counter, the next
thing we hear is Dawn's scream. In Dead Things Buffy uses Spike's line "You always hurt the
one you love" in front of the gang and the next line is Dawn "So does that mean you're
not going away then?" Almost as if the lesson Spike teaches her by taking that beating is
directly responsible for keeping Buffy with Dawn. In Wrecked Buffy fights the Demon and Spike
goes immediately to Dawn's side and then walks off with her while Buffy stays to deal with Willow.
And the added bonus that they have not shown any 'Dawn eye rolls' in his direction. I can think of
more but this is enough for now. I think this all adds up to a stable friendship.
Willow on the other hand.... absolutely. The only thing I can even think of is the fact that he was
going to stick up for her in OaFA when Anya was about to go postal but... you're right. Very little
interaction since Bargaining.
I always liked Willow's interactions with Spike. Him scavaging at the dump. "oh!
Pretty!"
Current board
| More March 2002