March 2003 posts


Previous March 2003  

More March 2003

Link to Jane Espenson interview....a few excerpts regarding romance -- Rufus, 17:06:42 03/09/03 Sun

atnzone.com


What was especially rewarding for you about "First Date?"

Jane: I felt like every scene had something interesting in it. The idea of Principal Wood's [origin] came off of something I pitched so I have proprietary feelings about it. I loved the ending and the 'thank you' to Nikki [The Subway Slayer]. I thought the stuff with Danny (Strong) and Tom (Lenk) worked really well. I got to say some stuff in that episode that I'd wanted to say about a lot of Buffy's people being murderers. I was really pointing out the murkiness of it all. And there was just the tiniest moment when Dawn says something nice to Andrew and he says 'Thank you Dawn. You're a peach.' I want to see our characters be kind to each another and I got a chance to do that in there and I was very pleased with that.


Do you have a favorite season or story arc in particular?

Jane: I really loved Faith and the Mayor even though I never wrote for Faith. I thought that was great fun. I enjoyed the Nerds - always! They were always so funny. I've been interested in Principal Wood this year. But my number one has got to be the Buffy and Spike love story. I think that is just a gorgeous story. How do you follow-up her romance with Angel? I like the romance with Spike better. I'm more interested in the heat between those two characters because I felt Buffy and Angel had romantic love. Spike and Buffy have something so much more complicated that it's got that romance and all this other stuff on top of it which makes it so interesting for me.

Some would say Angel and Buffy really had more of an idealized first love while Spike and Buffy have the more adult, messy, kind of love which is more realistic?

Jane: That's right. It's not idealized and it's just so often ugly and yet when James Marsters does stuff where you look in his face and you go 'Oh, my God, he loves her so much!' Ahh! It's just so wonderful.


Yet that story line has been polarizing too since some fans will always want Buffy and Angel together then there are those that don't think Spike can be redeemed and then there are the fans that think Spike is redeemed already. It's the perfect example of where you just have to write your story despite the feedback.

Jane:You have to write your story, exactly! If we have made both love stories compelling enough that they both have adherence, then we've done our job. Our job isn't to advocate one or the other but to present two reasonable romances with balance. I feel if it's polarizing then - great we did it!

I think Joss has been misunderstood when he talks about 'You don't give the fans what they want, you give them what they need.' People think he is antagonizing the fans. No, what he is trying to do is give you that delicious 'I want more feeling.' That little bit of dissatisfaction that keeps you from going 'I'm bored.' [Laughs] The example I always use is the first season of Big Brother on CBS. They let the viewers vote and they voted out everyone who brought any conflict to the house and then viewers felt their job was done and turned off the show! Our human impulses work towards satisfaction and against involvement and our job [as writers] is to keep you entertained and involved and not necessarily satisfied because once you are satisfied, that's it - you turn off the porn movie. [Laughs]
[> Re: Link to Jane Espenson interview....a few excerpts regarding romance -- dub ;o), 18:40:33 03/09/03 Sun

Interesting to read what the writers think about what they're down from one of them, for a change.

;o)
[> [> um..'doing' okay? not 'down'...'doing' D'oh -- dub ;o), 18:42:30 03/09/03 Sun

[> [> Spike or Angel? -- Rufus, 19:12:29 03/09/03 Sun

I have to add in the fact that Jane does love the Buffy and Spike "love" story. She doesn't put down any past ships she just tells us why she enjoys Buffy and Spike. I enjoy parts of each love story and the constant fighting over who is better or more deserving misses out on the point that we can argue away but as in real life sometimes the one we personally like the best or feel is best deserving may or may not get the girl. The battles over Spike and Angel boil down to nothing more than personal preference, and now we know Janes.
[> [> [> Oh slight clarification on my post below -- s'kat, 19:59:12 03/09/03 Sun

Exactly right...I think I screwed up in my post below.
I didn't mean to put down Angel/Buffy nor do I think Jane does. They did a wonderful job with that story. So well, the Season 2 still remains one of my all time favorites.
It was in a sense the first time I got obessesed with the show. I didn't see Angelus coming or his death. And I found the way they ended that arc in Season 3 and 4 truly touching. Angel/Buffy was one of the great romances of TV.
But so is Spike/Buffy. Each romance has it's pluses and minuses. Getting into ship wars over them is well just silly.

I think as a writer though...one is a little harder to tackle. And I think that may be what she was stating.
Writers like to push themselves, particularly after 3 years writing for the same characters.They want to go after the hard storylines and often it is far more interesting to do what is worse for the character not best...You want to see if you can walk that tight-rope. And I think that is what she's talking about here, not who or what was better with the characters. If that makes any sense whatsover, it's so hard to articulate this. sigh.

SK
[> [> [> [> Steering the 'ships -- Valheru, 00:02:21 03/10/03 Mon

Each romance has it's pluses and minuses. Getting into ship wars over them is well just silly.

Words to post by, s'kat.

I'm an equal opportunity 'shipper. Sure, at the end of the day I prefer B/A, W/O, and X/C, but ME has always gone to great lengths to present all the romantic relationships wonderfully. Every W/O scene reduced me to a puddle of heartfelt goo, but that never precluded me from feeling the palpable emotions of W/T. Hell, I even thought Parker was nice (until he wasn't). It's a testament to the writers' skills that they can continue to churn out such emotional pairings, and I prefer to revel in that than to deny myself the pleasure of seeing those other relationships because of some self-imposed allegiance to one particular 'ship.

To me, one of the most amazing things about BtVS and AtS is how 'ships build upon each other. Take Buffy, for instance. Without the failure of B/Owen, B/A wouldn't have had that extra layer of "overcoming the obstacles" that made their entire relationship so powerful. The innocence of B/Scott wouldn't have had as much an impact had B/Angel(us) not preceeded it. B/P built upon Buffy's post-Angel yearning for a "deep" romance. Without the messiness of B/A and B/P, Buffy's desire for a "normal" relationship with Riley would have seemed pretentious or forced. And finally, had Buffy not had such a relative "normal" romance with Riley, her gravitation toward Spike might not have made much sense. I always think of it this way: had B/S happened in S1, would it still work? It's the 'ships that we don't like that we should celebrate because they make the ones we do like possible.

Again, that's to the writers' credit. They have such firm understanding of the characters' emotional states that they are able to craft such meaningful relationships around them. I find it hard enough to find just one writer, telling the story of one book, who has such a grasp of his/her characters; a group of staff writers on a television show writing so masterfully for seven seasons is remarkable.
[> [> [> [> [> Agree. -- s'kat, 08:34:33 03/10/03 Mon

It's a testament to the writers' skills that they can continue to churn out such emotional pairings, and I prefer to revel in that than to deny myself the pleasure of seeing those other relationships because of some self-imposed allegiance to one particular 'ship.

Agree. I also strongly agree with your statement that:
It's the 'ships that we don't like that we should celebrate because they make the ones we do like possible.

Oddly enough, I never had any real problems with Buffy/Riley. I actually liked them in most of S4 and part of S5. No, I was never obsessed with it. But I thought it was an interesting and realistically portrayed college relationship - very similar to ones I'd seen in school. I also thought it was a good off-shoot of B/A. The precise opposite. No agnst, no tears, no overwhelming passion. It's what Dawn told Riley in S5, how much easier it was for Buffy with him. No late night crying jags, no moaning, no angst, quiet contentment. Course he didn't like that - he wanted the passion. But it was a good contrast and an amusing one to me, because it showed how you do need to constantly work on a relationship, not take it for granted, how important trust is, and that it isn't always agnst and melodrama that breaks two people up. (I find myself appreciating S4 even more each time I re-watch it, it is rapidly becoming one of my favorite seasons.) Very interesting contrast.

I also, oddly enough enjoyed B/Scott Hope, Xander/Ampata,
Cordy/Wes and their awkward first kiss, B/Parker, Spike/Harmony....Darla/Angel and Kate/Angel actually remains a favorite, Each one showed another aspect of the character, instead of being repetitive. Shows that can't move past one relationship - often risk repetitive writing.
Examples include well - Voyager, Remington Steel, Moonlighting, Cheers - the writers end up getting into ruts.
I remember a couple such as Spin City trying to do the long term relationship thing, and it not working. The only one that pulled it off had the long-term relationships at it's core: Mad About You and ThirtySomething - if the story is about the long-term relationship - then the writer can escape the rut.

I think ME may have originally planned to take X/C, W/O,
B/A much further but well actors committments got in the way. David Greenwalt came up with the idea of an Angel spinoff and convinced Whedon to take Angel and Cordelia over to it - which meant they had to write both characters off of Buffy. In some of the commentary I've read regarding S4 and 5, Marti states they'd planned at least two more years worth of B/A agnst before Greenwalt and Fox came up with the idea. OZ well he was supposed to make it until Season 5, but the actor had movie committments. So Whedon grabbed the characters of Spike and Anya to replace Angel and Cordy. And developed Tara. Very creative and imaginative of him. As a result we have two incredibly rich, multi-layered shows with intense, complicated and often messy relationships instead of just one show exploring a group of extended relationships.

Tempts me to write fan mail to Greenwalt and Seth Green, thanking them for causing this to happen. Yep, in tv as in life, we can't plan things - whatever we plan is sure to change due to the random choices and plans of others, which hey makes life more interesting.
[> [> [> [> [> [> You mean that -- lunasea, 09:08:38 03/10/03 Mon

In some of the commentary I've read regarding S4 and 5, Marti states they'd planned at least two more years worth of B/A agnst before Greenwalt and Fox came up with the idea. OZ well he was supposed to make it until Season 5, but the actor had movie committments.

You mean that high school sweethearts can grow beyond that cute innocent romance and into something deeper? I should let my in-laws and parents know that (all were high school sweethearts and have been married for over 30 years). Maybe even college sweethearts can grow beyond the frat parties and hooking up (said by someone who married her college sweetheart 9 years ago this June).

That is one thing that I think annoys me with criticisms of Buffy/Angel. Just because it started out one way doesn't mean that it was going to stay that way. If ME had plans for it at least another 2 years, I would say that Buffy wasn't going to stagnate. What matters in any relationship is the heart of the people involved, their perspectives and priorities. The relationship will grow as the characters do.

We really didn't get to see that. Instead we saw each level of relationships illustrated by a different couple. Buffy/Angel started pretty high up to begin with so who has been able to go where they could have? For example, the singlemost traumatic event in both their lives was Angel going to hell. Angel can't "blame" Buffy for this, but I am sure he has feelings about it. Could they get to a place where they could share these feelings without blame/being defensive getting in the way? What about the whole Angelus thing in general? Could they become comfortable enough with each other to discuss Angel loosing his soul and how it made them both feel? They would have to deal with the possibility that it could happen again. How would they do this? Not just the physical no-touch, but the very real fear that was in both of them about this. Angel and Buffy have some very real fears, both about themselves and their relationship. It would have been interesting seeing them handle this.

Instead they both took those fears and stuck them in a box. Those fears inform who our heroes are. I am glad we got to see AtS, but Angel/Buffy would have also been an interesting vehicle to tell the story and I wouldn't have known what I missed.

(and according to Greenwalt, the spin-off was Joss' idea. Joss came to him and said you are going to help me with this and Greenwalt said lets bring over big happy smile girl Cordy to contrast with dark broody Angel. I never got the impression that he got the heart behind the characters and in some ways I'm glad he is gone. Too bad Minear thought space cowboys were more interesting.)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: You mean that -- Miss Edith, 14:58:59 03/10/03 Mon

Actually Joss has been quoted as saying they were beginning to run out of storylines for Buffy and Angel in season 3 and he was starting to feel it dragged so the separation and spin-off wasn't a moment too soon for him.
[> [> [> Good Point -- lunasea, 07:36:51 03/10/03 Mon

I also get the impression that Joss lets the writers do more with the Spike storyline than he did with Angel/Buffy. There is more to do with it and it is easier to keep it from coming off as corny. Sometimes it is harder to convey the heart and emotion to things like Buffy/Angel than it is the energy and emotion of Spuffy. That has been my experience writing. Romance is one of the hardest things to write without making the reader want to gag.

I know that Joss did a great rewrite for the end of "Beneath You" (I believe it was at SMG's request) this season. Earlier in the series Joss was a lot more likely to have to step in. By now the writers really know the voices of the characters and have grown. Some of my favorite Buffy/Angel scenes aren't written by the writer of the episode. Marti and Joss seem to be the best at finding the heart and drama of that relationship. They are the ones with the new babies now that are in happy relationships.

Art imitating reality?
[> Thank you Rufus -- s'kat, 19:51:24 03/09/03 Sun

This backs up the last two interviews I read with Marti and the Joss Whedon commentary I've seen.

It's the perfect example of where you just have to write your story despite the feedback.

Jane:You have to write your story, exactly!

Yes, this is why I love ME they do not cater to fans desires, they write their story the way they want to. That's what true writing is all about. If I wanted the stories of fans? I'd only read fanfiction - I do read it and enjoy it, but (no offense) I prefer ME's story - I want to know what they think of these characters and where they are taking them. They create so many layers, and their story is so rich, that we need a posting board community to see them all. As a good friend told me recently:"We need more than just two people to see it all." But we also want to see their story clearly, not just the fantasy playing out in our heads.

Jane:I like the romance with Spike better. I'm more interested in the heat between those two characters because I felt Buffy and Angel had romantic love. Spike and Buffy have something so much more complicated that it's got that romance and all this other stuff on top of it which makes it so interesting for me.

It's not idealized and it's just so often ugly and yet when James Marsters does stuff where you look in his face and you go 'Oh, my God, he loves her so much!' Ahh! It's just so wonderful.

People wonder why I agree with her...okay, hmmm Lois MacMaster Bujold said it best in her afterward to Cordelia's Honor, where she discusses how she writes: "Why should I make things easy for these characters?" and "accidentally discovering ....the rule for finding plots for character-centered novels, which is to ask,"So what's the worst possible thing I can do to this guy? And then do it." That is a hard thing to do. And only the truly great fiction writers have the ability to do it. It's what I strive towards in my own writing. It's what Joss Whedon and ME have accomplished in their own. And it is the difference between writing safe and taking risks. You want safe tv? Check out ABC, NBC, CBS, WB on Tuesday nights.
Want risky, unsafe tv? Check out Btvs while you can.

To me the most interesting and challenging story to write or read or watch is the one that seems the most impossible. That is the most gut-wrenching on one level, yet beautiful on the next. What is the worst thing you can do? And can you pull it off?

The Spike/Buffy story is thrilling to me as a writer, because it is like watching a trapeze artist fly acrobatically through the air without a net. Can they pull it off? Without crashing? Angel/Buffy seemed fairly simple to me, no-brainer, predictable in some ways, while beautiful, it was never interesting to me from a pure writing, narrative structure framework (I mean I liked okay, but it didn't obsess me..)- obviously, I wasn't obsessed with the show in S1-3, not really - except when Angelus appeared and things got briefly unpredictable.
If I was a writer or an actor for that matter - B/S would scare me to death - can I pull it off? Can I explore this realistically and creatively? I don't know where this is going...very few romantic entanglements I've seen in the history of television have been so fascinating and unpredictable. Actually, off hand, can't really think of any. Is it a happy, pretty story? Not exactly. But it is a fascinating twisty-turny one.

Hope that was clear.

Thanks for the info, Rufus! Great gift.

SK
[> [> Taking Spike Seriously -- luna, 10:31:38 03/10/03 Mon

If I was a writer or an actor for that matter - B/S would scare me to death - can I pull it off? Can I explore this realistically and creatively? I don't know where this is going...very few romantic entanglements I've seen in the history of television have been so fascinating and unpredictable. Actually, off hand, can't really think of any. Is it a happy, pretty story? Not exactly. But it is a fascinating twisty-turny one.

As we go through the old seasons on FX again, I'm struck by something else about the changes in Spike. Usually the discussions here focus on whether he can be redeemed, whether his evil is too great, etc. But from a writing/directing/acting point of view, what's really interesting to me is that they've taken a character who was originally presented as a sort of buffoon and made us taken him seriously. Even in Crush, which was just two years ago, he comes off a lot like the Trio, with the pictures, Harmony pretending to be Buffy, the Buffybot (!!)-but also the way Marsters presents him. It's a real work of art to make the transition from there to something like Never Leave Me. I don't mean to imply that we never saw depths earlier, but there's definitely a powerful evolution.
[> Poor Riley! Always forgotten... : ) -- Scroll, 20:26:16 03/09/03 Sun

Thanks for the link, Rufus. I especially liked what Jane had to say about Firefly. Nice to know she wasn't as heart-broken as some over its cancellation simply because she was so used to it happening! And it's incredible to have confirmed that Joss had a vision laid out for Firefly before he even hired the actors, writers, crew, etc. And I'm with Joss -- I felt really bad for those actors, especially since from all reports, they got along so well and were really like a family, right from the get-go.

And I do agree with Jane (and you!) that the Buffy/Spike romance was fascinating. They did have a LOT of heat between them, I remember feeling a little overwhelmed the first time I saw "Smashed". (So yes, even a B/A shipper like me can appreciate B/S chemistry ;) )

I think Joss has been misunderstood when he talks about 'You don't give the fans what they want, you give them what they need.' People think he is antagonizing the fans. No, what he is trying to do is give you that delicious 'I want more feeling.' That little bit of dissatisfaction that keeps you from going 'I'm bored.'

I was glad to hear Jane defend Joss' "give them what they need" attitude. I know a lot of fans have been complaining about how Joss is too busy thumbing his nose at us fans, but I don't think that's what he's doing. And it's good to see writers show loyalty to Joss too. Despite not knowing where all this is going (I'm unspoiled) I have every confidence that they'll be able to wrap up the show brilliantly, leaving us with something precious and lasting.
[> [> At least Marc B. is getting nice acting jobs! -- WickedFlightStewardess, 16:42:36 03/10/03 Mon

[> Re: Jane Espenson interview (spoilery spec) -- Dichotomy, 17:34:21 03/10/03 Mon

Great interview! That really explains my fascination with the Buffy/Spike relationship: that it is more than a romance. Even though they're no longer physically involved, their interactions and references to each other are so well-written you can see that there's a connection between them that is almost tangible, and open to so many different possibilities.

Knowing ME, their relationship will come to some heart-wrenching conclusion by season's end, don't you think? I can't wait and dread it at the same time!
Very good EW editorial, giving SMG advice on her upcoming movie career. -- Rob, 08:25:12 03/10/03 Mon

What She to 'Doo' Next?

How Sarah Michelle Gellar can become a Hollywood star. She's leaving ''Buffy'' behind for a movie career. Jeff Jensen offers her a five-step plan to Tinseltown success

Last week, Entertainment Weekly reported the news that ''Buffy the Vampire Slayer'' fans knew was coming but hoped would never actually arrive: Sarah Michelle Gellar will leave the series at the end of the season, and the show will cease production. (A moment of silence, please.)

After seven years of the TV work-week grind, the actress says she yearns for the more luxurious pace of moviemaking. But as every Claire Danes and Jennifer Love Hewitt can tell you, converting TV superstardom into movie superstardom -- or just plain stardom -- is easier said than done. Fortunately, Gellar has a know-it-all like me to turn to for advice. So here you go, Sarah: Your five-step plan for conquering Hollywood.

1. SHOW US YOUR RANGE! Sarah, you've chosen for your first two post-''Buffy'' gigs a sequel to ''Scooby Doo'' and a quirky romantic comedy called... ''Romantic Comedy.'' The first is practically a pre-certified blockbuster; the second, directed by Joel Gallen (''Not Another Teen Movie''), sounds interesting enough to be promising. But neither project sounds like it offers a role as rich and complex as Buffy Summers, with whom you proved to be one of the more versatile actresses of your generation. My fear is that superficial, single-note characters will squander your potential. Instead, seek out great parts. Be patient; take the risk of dropping out of the public eye for a time to find them. (You can always do Broadway. They love Hollywood exiles these days.) Learn a lesson from Jennifer Aniston: skip ''Picture Perfect'' -- go straight to ''The Good Girl.''

2. DON'T BE AFRAID TO GET YOUR HANDS DIRTY We'll be honest: For a while, your "Maybe it's Maybelline" cover girl image had us wondering whether you were more interested in being a celebrity than being a serious actress. But you earned major points for begging wild man director James Toback for a part in his little seen 2001 film ''Harvard Man.'' More of that, please. Do indies. Become a Sundance staple. A shade of Parker Posey would look terrific on you. Look at what it did for Hilary Swank.

3. BECOME A DIRECTORS DARLING In the past, you've spoken to us of your admiration for Nicole Kidman. But have you noticed how she got to the top of the Hollywood heap? I mean, besides being beautiful, talented, and married to Tom Cruise? She did it by turning herself into a muse for leading auteurs like Jane Campion, Stanley Kubrick, Baz Luhrmann, and Lars Von Trier. Get to know those folks. Work with them at all costs, even if it means working for peanuts -- or in your case, chocolate-coated raisins. In the end, your chances of great parts in classic movies rests with them.

4. SHOW SOME SUPPORT Who says you have to be a leading lady right away? Your agent? Your ego? Ignore those voices. Say Yes to supporting bigger stars with colorful character roles in films large or small. Look how Lisa Kudrow has positioned herself for the long run by taking not-on-the-movie-poster parts in the likes of ''The Opposite of Sex'' and ''Analyze This.'' Or how Marisa Tomei is crawling her way back up the ladder with the likes of ''Slums of Beverly Hills'' and ''In the Bedroom.'' Winona Ryder was never better than in ''Age of Innocence'' and ''Little Women'' -- and she got Oscar nods for both. Remember: size doesn't matter. At least, not in this context.

5. DON'T BE AFRAID OF BUFFY You became a household name by starring in a geeky cult franchise. You may be tempted to see some liability in that, thinking that the genre and the fans don't flatter your image. Poppycock. It's understandable that you would want to distinguish yourself from the part that made you famous in your first few post-''Buffy'' projects. But never forget where you came from. Never forget that ''Buffy'''s hardcore fans are the same folks who drive most of the world's box office. So go to a Buffy convention once every couple years. Do the DVD commentaries. Think of it as grass-roots fan development. And if Fox ever decides to make a big budget ''Buffy'' movie -- do it! She's your Lara Croft. She's your Ripley. Own her for life. She'll only be bad for you if you make her bad for you. [Rob:Amen to that!]

Rob
[> Re: Very good EW editorial, giving SMG advice on her upcoming movie career. -- CW, 08:42:49 03/10/03 Mon

I really think #1 is important. She's said in years past that she was taking on practically anything offered to keep working. It's time she got a lot more selective. Too many people think of her (and Freddie) as that lame 'teen' from Scooby Doo and the teen horror flicks. It's time she looked into doing something more serious and closer to her mental age. Plus there were gripes from the critics about her acting in Scooby Doo. She needs to rinse that bad taste out of their mouths in a hurry or she's going to end up in B-grade stuff for the rest of her career. More serious roles (even supporting roles) would cure that for her, I honestly believe.
[> Re: Very good EW editorial, giving SMG advice on her upcoming movie career. -- maddog, 08:43:36 03/10/03 Mon

A very good article with some interesting points. The last one may be the only one she doesn't try as I've heard she doesn't want to do a film. However, depending on how Joss ends things and maybe given say 5 years I'll bet she''d reconsider.
[> [> Re: Very good EW editorial, giving SMG advice on her upcoming movie career. -- Slainey, 12:37:38 03/10/03 Mon

That was a wonderfully ironic point about Hilary Swank. She played Buffy's airheaded friend in the original movie. The who lets the vamps into the gym becasue "They're seniors." Now, of course, she a Hollywood AAW bad ass and is also married to a former teen mag star (or was I the only one with a picture of Chad Lowe in my locker) who's trying to find his nitch.
Did evil peak too soon? -- luna, 09:10:49 03/10/03 Mon

So at the end of Storyteller, the Seal is de-activated, and at the end of Salvage, the Beast is killed. I'm sure this has been discussed at length in threads I missed (turn your back on this board ffor a day!), but what does this mean for the FE? Were these extensions or tools of the FE, or is it just coincidence that they appeared at the same time? Having completely missed several Angels, I'm not even sure that FE is having its fifteen minutes of fame in LA.

At any rate, FE will presumably start up some other tools and minions--I don't think we'll make it though 9 or 10 more episodes without some monster bashing. What are the projections?
[> Re: Did evil peak too soon? -- Deeva, 09:23:13 03/10/03 Mon

Premature elimination? Possible. Feels more like a diversionary tactic to me though. Kind of the whole "give 'em hope before the slaughter" thing . Not that I think that there will be a huge body count. You know how they say that sometimes really simple mistakes are made by the overly confident? That's the vibe that I get.

I fully believe that Team Buffy and Team Angel will pull out a victory but it will be messy and as always surprising.
Wild speculations and ramblings on Xander, not to serious -- lakrids, 10:34:27 03/10/03 Mon

Warning wild speculations and ramblings and questions. Like a good conspiracy theorist, will I try to link unlink able things together, with a minimal lip service to reality, but I will try to use exclamation signs sparingly. Heavily Xander centred, because the show is all about Xander, yeah right.
Sorry about the English, hope it is readable.

I have just reread Asimov Foundation series. In the book Foundation Edge is two cultures in collusion course; the first Foundation who is build on materialism and the second Foundation on the control of the human inner universe. The two cultures seem to be master of in their own area, but they are really in manipulated into a confrontation, of a third hidden power. The third power Gaia wants to get a honest judgment of which path humanity should go, and is therefore collecting representatives from the two cultures, to let them advocate their point of views to a human "Who is never wrong, if he gets enough facts to work with". One of agents of the Gaia is kind of a sleeper agent, who is on outside is illiterate peasant woman. Who gets involved with a Second foundation leader, because he can use her simple mindset, as sounding board to detect mental manipulation in his surroundings. The irony in this, is that the simple mindset only covers for a much higher mental manipulator than the Second Foundation leader, and she is a part of collective consciences, that is Gaia.

Where am I going with this, is that like in Foundation Edge we have two opponents, in BtVS good and evil. Nothing new in that in the Buffy universe, but we have also seen a greying of the morale outlook, demons can do good and human can very well do evil. Perhaps the greying has become such a part show that the viewers are ready for a third party, that could perhaps transience the good and evil duality, perhaps humanity as the third part the can recreate as a new balance.

Xander, like the Gaia agent, has shortened his real name Alexander. In the book the shortened name of Gaia agent it symbolised, that she was not complete, only when she showed her true self to the world, did she use her full name. Will we see Xander use his full name, and is he also a sleeper agent for an unknown power!.

Why don't Xander have a date of birth on the Upn.com character bios?. Only Dawn and Anya doesn't have a date of birth. Anya is so old that she probably have forgotten her birth date or it is because she comes from a century where the calendar was not something that were used by the common people. Dawn is the key and was created a couple of years ago, so should we use her imaginary birth as a birthday, or her transformation date to a human ?. But Xander he has been with us for nearly seven seasons and why doesn't he have a birthday. In Restless does Snyder ask Xander, where he is from and where he is born, Xander gives a rather evasive answer, and what does it means that Snyder says that he is raised by mongrels. Coincidence or not, you decide.

Why does Xander have a 100 % chance of dating women, who are has or will become demonic?!. Concidence or not, you decide.

Have Xander ever been longer away from Sunnydale than Oxnard?. Cocidence or not, you decide.

Why can he survive of been hit with the magic Troll hammer, when it could hurt even a goddess. How could he survive earth destroying magic, that got send through him in Grave. How can he walk around with a stab wound in his stomach. How can he survive listening to Buffy speeches?. Cocidence or not, you decide.

Six more episodes and all will be clear, how boring.

Lakrids
[> Mange tak, lakrids. -- CW, 11:14:50 03/10/03 Mon

[> [> selv tak, CW -- lakrids, 11:18:47 03/10/03 Mon

[> [> [> Uffda! -- WickedBuffy, 16:41:08 03/10/03 Mon

[> [> [> [> Finally did I find out what "Uffda" means, I think -- lakrids, 18:00:26 03/10/03 Mon

http://venus.soci.niu.edu/~archives/TOMPAINE/july97/0166.html
Strange I have not taken notices of that word, when I have heard Norwegians talk.
[> [> [> [> [> OMG, never heard that before! -- WickedHalfViking, 18:35:11 03/10/03 Mon

It's amazing to discover the orgins of a word and realize how much its been "mutated".

Here, it is an exclaimation (often seen on bumperstickers or heard during church socials) roughly expressing, usually laughing : "Good Heavens" with some "Oh My Gosh You Don't Say" lighty doused with "...insert your favorite curse here... ".

Then again, expelling gas in direct response to something would probably get the same message across at times.

Then again, some people using it swear it's an exclamation meaning"that thought /action/event turned my head on its side and took all the wind out of me". Most likely because Uffda is a sound that might come out of you if the air was suddenly knocked out of you.

And that's what it means in my little village here on the rainforesty west coast of the US.
[> [> [> [> [> a contemporary question on this ancient expression -- anom, 20:00:20 03/10/03 Mon

"In the ancient Norse...the word 'Huluftjadatem'...referred to the ancient warring practice among Vikings of smiling pleasantly at an enemy and nodding while releasing the pent up airstuffs in the direction of the enemy.... This was usually done shortly after having eaten enormous quantities of Lutefisk--probably the most awful smelling of the Norse dishes (if you cook it in your house, you will have to either sell the house or burn it down)."

So would that make it a chemical or a biological weapon?
[> [> [> [> [> [> Lutefisk is an incredibly dangerous biological weapon. -- WickedLefse, 20:33:18 03/10/03 Mon

[> [> [> [> [> [> If prepared properly, both;) -- Haecceity, the lurking Swede, 21:16:18 03/10/03 Mon

We Northerners are all about the multi-tasking--it's a food! It's a weapon!

Now ask about the sour herring;)
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> You're forgetting that most Pythonesque Viking foodstuff stroke weapon, SPAM! -- Celebaelin, 01:15:23 03/11/03 Tue

[> [> [> [> Remember - Vi taler dansk i Danmark. Vi snakker norsk i Norge ;o) -- CW (who knows only a tiny bit of both), 18:44:18 03/10/03 Mon

[> [> [> [> [> and Jeg mangle Norsk i Oregon... -- WickedBuffy :>, 19:50:23 03/10/03 Mon

Country songs of Sunnydale -- Gyrus, 15:34:03 03/10/03 Mon

It is not commonly known that Sunnydale hosts a large country music scene. Here are some popular songs by local artists:

You May Be A Werewolf, But You Ran Off Like A Dog

If Death Is My Gift, I Want To Exchange It

Even Heroes Shouldn't Wear Leather Pants

I'd Dance On Your Grave, But You Ain't In It

My Zany, Veiny Face

They Used To Call Me Tector, But Now I'm Just Dusty

All My Hexes Are On Other Gals' Exes

You Can Rise From The Tomb, But You're Still Dead To Me

Your Momma's Ugly and Your Mummy's Worse
[> I like this -- Cactus Watcher, 15:51:26 03/10/03 Mon

A few golden oldies

Your Cheatin' Fangs Will Tell on You (So stop hoggin' the victims!)

Take This Crypt and Shove It, I ain't Sleepin' Here No More

By the Time I Get to Phoenix (She'll be slaying.)

I Fall to Pieces - as song by the Judge
[> [> LMAO...to both Gyrus and CW!! -- s'kat, 16:00:36 03/10/03 Mon

[> [> and further more.. -- neaux, 17:01:08 03/10/03 Mon

"Don't Stake my Heart my Bloody Bleedin' Heart"

"Rocky Mountain Beast'

"Buffy went down the Hellmouth"

and the Kid Rock Sheryl Crow Hit.. "I Killed your Sister Today"
[> [> [> Re: and further more.. -- LadyStarlight, 18:47:57 03/10/03 Mon

"You're Just the Dust Beneath my Boot Heels"

(not based on anything, I just thought it sounded country)
[> [> [> [> Lyrics for 'You're Just the Dust Beneath My Boot Heels.' -- CW, 20:12:25 03/10/03 Mon

You're just the dust beneath my boot heels.
You're just the ring around my tub.
You always said you'd love me only.
My stake was faster than your club.

Chorus

Oh, must it always end this way?
Why can't I love the living, straight or gay?
They always cheat and then I slay.
One more sexy vamp and one more dusty day!
[> [> [> [> [> LSHIW! -- HonorH, 20:22:02 03/10/03 Mon

That's "Laughing so hard I'm wheezing!"
[> Also on the play list: -- HonorH, 20:20:33 03/10/03 Mon

Put a Stake in Me, I'm Done

You're Killin' Me, Darlin', and I'm Already Dead

Don't Resurrect Me When He Leaves You

You Tore Out My Heart and My Liver, Too

I May Be a Demon, but You're a Witch (Let's Get Together)
[> Never gonna be a breakaway pop hit, but . . . -- Cheryl, 21:16:26 03/10/03 Mon

Not country, but some oldies, and possibly goodies, anyway:

Don't Go Staking My Heart (duet by Spike and Buffy "I couldn't if I tried" Summers)

If You Stake Me Now (Spike)

Whenever I Call You Demon (Xander & Anya duet)

Slayer Golden Hair (Spike)

Angelus of the Morning (EvilCordy)

You Don't Bring Me Magic Herbs (Willow)

Oh Dear Lord (Giles)
[> [> 'Stand by Your Vamp', a classic -- cougar, 23:12:20 03/10/03 Mon

[> Re: Country songs of Sunnydale -- Celebaelin, 23:45:31 03/10/03 Mon

Also on Radio Chip Toss, Sunnydales number 1, "Why punch a vamp. when you can punch a cow?" (We like both kinds of music, Country AND Western).

Drusilla and a Demon (and a dog Named Spike and a cat Named Angelus too) - The Judge

You Picked a Fine Time to Leave me you Heel - Anya to Xander obviously

Every Which way but Sanshus - Wesley

Rawhide - definitely Willow

D.I.E.V.A.M.P. - Buffy and the Scoobs

My Heros Have Always Been Girlies - The Potentials

A Boy Named who? - Connor

Blanket on the Ground - Spike Alight
[> LMAO - thanks all! -- Caroline, 08:55:04 03/11/03 Tue

Current board | More March 2003