May 2002
posts
AB's name
in the Credits -- Wolfhowl3,
04:16:41 05/08/02 Wed
A lot of people have been saying that last night was the
first time that AB had her name in the credits, which is
only half true.
It was the first time this season, but she had her name in
the credits for all of season 5.
Wolfie
[>
No, she wasn't. -- Raccoon, 04:39:13 05/08/02
Wed
She was credited after the opening sequence as "Amber Benson
as Tara", but she never had a spot between SMG and ASH as a
regular.
[> [>
Re: No, she wasn't. -- julia, 05:54:27 05/08/02
Wed
right, i noticed that too and was wondering if i'd been
missing something recently. amazing that we're such
sticklers for detail that AB's name as a regular causes such
a jolt.
;-)
[> [>
I just checked my tape with some season 5 eps... --
Wolfhowl3,
06:03:15 05/08/02 Wed
... and I discovered that I was wronge, AB's name was not
in the opening.
I stand humbeled before the board, awaiting my punishment!
:)
Wolfie
[> [> [>
Don't worry:) -- Raccoon, 07:55:06 05/08/02
Wed
I guess my obsession showed through, huh? *g*
[> [> [> [>
So that begs the question -- Where's the Fun?,
11:34:59 05/08/02 Wed
Why is she showing up NOW in the opening credits?? What is
the significance of that? The first time she is in the
credits - and the events of the night???
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: So that begs the question -- Amber, 12:22:04
05/08/02 Wed
Three possibilities: 1) The rumors are true and Amber will
be on Buffy next season, whether it's as a living person,
demon, ghost, vampire or something else all together is
still up for debate.
2)This could be an in-joke with the people at ME or
particularly Joss. On the season 1 DVD in Joss's commentary
of Welcome to the Hellmouth he talks about how he wanted to
put Jesse's name in the credits so that people would be
really shocked when he died. He said it was too expensive to
do so. He then goes on to say that when he made season 1 of
Angel he did put a character in the credits (Doyle
obviously) even though he planned to kill him off, he added
that it seemed to "really piss people off". So this could
just be a continuation of that.
3) It could have just been a nod to Amber Benson's acting
skills. Giving her an honorary place in the credits as a
means of saying goodbye and thanking her for her fine
performances.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: So that begs the question(spoilers) -- maddog,
15:49:14 05/08/02 Wed
Well whatever the situation was it feels like a cruel joke.
Especially as someone who knew she was about to die. Like
they were duping the audience into thinking she was becoming
a regular. If number 1 is correct then we'll notice in the
coming weeks(up to and including the finale).
[> [> [> [> [>
Going back to the beginning (Major spoiler for future
eps) -- Dichotomy, 12:22:13 05/08/02 Wed
In S1, Joss and Co. toyed with the idea of putting Xander's
friend Jesse in the credits (who was vamped and killed just
a few episodes in) to sort of mess with audience
expectations. Kind of along the lines of the small blonde
girl not being the victim of horrible monsters like in many
horror movies. I wonder if it has anything to do with that?
You know, getting the audience all excited that Tara was now
one of the featured characters, then having her apparantly
killed.
[>
Re: AB's name in the Credits -- LittleBit,
12:17:53 05/08/02 Wed
Didn't he do the same thing with David Boreanaz (either
Buffy S2 or S3 season end) and tick everybody off then,
too?
[> [>
Re: AB's name in the Credits -- matching mole,
12:56:58 05/08/02 Wed
I believe (not absolutely sure) that DB was in the opening
credit sequence of BtVS throughout S2 and S3 including the
episodes at the start of S3 when he was in the hell
dimension and only present in Buffy's dreams.
Slayer healing
(spoilers for Seeing Red , completely unfounded speculation
about the future) -- Rattletrap, 05:38:33 05/08/02
Wed
I think this is sufficiently distinct from the other threads
I'm seeing to merit starting a new one.
We've been told that Buffy has superior healing because of
her slayer powers. We've seen her mildly injured a time or
two, usually cuts or stab wounds (FFL comes to mind). I
don't recall any times when Buffy has complained of the day-
to-day, nagging aches and pains that football players,
boxers, or others involved in high contact/high impact
athletic activities usually exhibit--it is instructive to
note that boxers frequently take months between matches to
recuperate and Buffy fights the equivalent of at least one
match every night. So where am I going with this?
In "Seeing Red" we see Buffy injured slightly as she bounces
off a tombstone, and aggravated again in her fight with
Warren. This may be a one time thing--it was an
exceptionally rough evening and she took a bit more
punishment than usual. But what if it's something else?
Buffy has been the slayer for about 7 years now. We've been
led to believe that the average life-span of someone in this
line of work is much, much shorter. Could it be that her
body is burning out, aging prematurely? Could the
magic/mystical forces/whatever responsible for doling out
slayer powers get them by essentially mortgaging the girl's
future--concentrating an entire lifetime of strength and
healing power into a few short years. After all, she
probably won't live very long in a dangerous job anyway.
So, what happens when a slayer like Buffy stays around, her
healing power would diminish with time, and her slaying
would probably become less effective. This would, IMO, make
an interesting storyline for a coming season.
Thoughts?
'trap
[>
Re: Slayer healing (spoilers for Seeing Red ,
completely unfounded speculation about the future) --
Cactus Watcher, 06:07:59 05/08/02 Wed
Buffy's injuries and healing are something I just take on
faith. I admit for a second or two I was wondering how hurt
she could be. Then when she landed on her back on the side
of the tub, I for one, was convinced not only was she in
serious pain then, but had been from the begining of the
scene. Like the black-eye she got from Sunday in the first
episode of season four, sometimes you have to accept that
she sometimes bruises and feels pain, even though it seems
like she never does.
[> [>
Re: Slayer healing (spoilers for Seeing Red ,
completely unfounded speculation about the future) --
LittleBit, 07:14:11 05/08/02 Wed
It has seemed to me at times that the more emotionally
distraught she is, and the more isolated from her core
support system, the more she seems to feel the pain and the
slower she is to heal from it.
Just in the two cases already cited: Sunday got her when she
was feeling all new freshman-y, Willow and Giles were moving
on without her, she thougth Xander was still away; in SR she
believes she's alienated Xander and Willow is with Tara.
Which leads to in intriguing thought: what effect does the
lack of a support system have on the socially-isolated
slayers? Could this be part of the reason why the average
slayer life expectancy is so short?
[> [> [>
Re: Slayer healing (spoilers for Seeing Red ) --
OnM, 09:34:20 05/08/02 Wed
*** It has seemed to me at times that the more
emotionally distraught she is, and the more isolated from
her core support system, the more she seems to feel the pain
and the slower she is to heal from it. ***
I agree 100%. I conjectured quite a long time ago that
Buffy's 'reality' is largely a part of her own creation,
although she does it mostly unconsciously rather than with a
direct approach. (This is in fact being discussed elsewhere
on the board, in reference to a scene that took place in the
fall at UC Sunnydale where a professor is engaging the class
with just this subject).
So, when she is 'prepared' for battle, she can do almost
anything (Dracula refers to 'the things your body can do',
and shows off a few 'tricks' of his own in B vs. D),
even defeat a hellgod (Glory), but when she is indecisive
and unfocussed, she becomes very vulnerable and seems to
lose much of her strength.
So, one question is, just exactly what is her mental state
at the instant when Warren unexpectedly attacks her at the
episode's end?
[> [> [> [>
Re: Slayer healing (spoilers for Seeing Red and
preview for next week) -- yuri, 15:15:01 05/08/02
Wed
I agree too, and I think her mental state was definitely on
the upswing, what with Xanderhugs and her being up and
running in the preview.
"This is in fact being discussed elsewhere on the board, in
reference to a scene that took place in the fall at UC
Sunnydale where a professor is engaging the class with just
this subject."
--where would that be?
[> [> [>
Re: Slayer healing (spoilers for Seeing Red ,
completely unfounded speculation about the future) --
Dochawk, 10:58:28 05/08/02 Wed
Remember what Spike said: "A slayer with family and friends,
thats different" he also tells Buffy its why she has
survived so long.
As for Buffy powerless, wasn't that the point of the
crucinatum (or however you spell it), to show us how lost
she would be without her power (even if she did win the
battle).
The Slayer and
The Hunter (**Spoilers for ANW and possibly Fray***) --
Wisewoman, 07:03:08 05/08/02 Wed
Someone who's been around since at least last Summer, help
me out here!
I remember discussing in detail on the board the character
of The Hunter, who was originally part of a team of Slayer
and Hunter, the Hunter being the male half. Problem is, I
can't remember whether the Hunter was an idea from the
writers of Dark Alchemy, or whether it comes from Joss and
ME, possibly via Fray?
If it is from the Buffyverse, than I have to say that
Connor/Steven certainly fits the bill. He didn't hesitate to
describe himself as a hunter, in fact, seems that's about
all there was to do on Quor Toth. He also seems to have the
skills that would be expected of the male counterpart of a
vampire slayer.
And, of course, if it isn't from the Buffyverse then, hey,
they've been lurking again!
;o)
[>
It was direct from Joss -- CW, 09:45:24 05/08/02
Wed
He mentioned it in several interviews about ASH's future
last summer.
Amber, Amber,
Amber. (Spoilers for seeing Red) -- Darby, 07:21:23
05/08/02 Wed
Some idle speculation / wish list -
Season 7 - this is Buffy, dead doesn't necessarily mean
gone, and we could get Amber back without getting Tara back.
What exactly did crawl out of Joyce's grave?
Alternately, we're dealing with a Buffyverse where the Great
Beyond is accessible to magic, but "Tara the Lesbian Ghost"
- no, something isn't right there. If Amber stays (and part
of the ME misinformation campaign, wherein they usually
don't lie while they're not telling the truth, this year
asserted that she is under partial contract for next
season).
What I'm really curious about is Amber's career
beyond the show. Here is a capable actress,
attractive, but definitely way outside the Hollywood "norm."
Will she be given a chance to succeed, or follow the
frustrating path of someone like Janeane Garafalo (who, for
being one of the most talented actresses in the world,
rarely has been used well lately)?
[>
Re: Amber, Amber, Amber. (Spoilers for seeing Red)
-- Dochawk, 09:18:00 05/08/02 Wed
Well Ripper is supposed to be about Giles and ghosts and
Amber has definitely stated she would love to be on that
show. And of course a contract with ME would probably cover
any of their shows. So maybe Tara the lesbian ghost isn't
so far away. Damn. (well good that we see Tara, damn that it
won't be Buffy) This is of course wild speculation.
[> [>
Possible foreshadowing.. (more wishful thinking) -
- Darby, 09:29:50 05/08/02 Wed
Tara's always been quite the Angliophile, so it might make
sense. It might be neat to have her inhabit a character
that Giles (and we) would see as Tara while everyone saw her
as someone else...
Or something else - a new Kitty Fantastico? Nahhhh,
too Sabrina-ish....
[>
Re: Amber, Amber, Amber. (Spoilers for seeing Red)
-- Simon A., 16:53:34 05/08/02 Wed
I certainly hope she does well, but you're right Hollywood
tradition doesn't bode well. After all, when for plot
purposes they need a homely girl on a TV show, she's usually
played by a smoking hot brunett.
That scene ...
(SPOILERs for "Seeing Red") -- verdantheart,
07:59:34 05/08/02 Wed
OK, trying to write this really fast because I have a
meeting coming up. I probably should think this through
further before writing, but I want to get it out.
First, let me say I certainly do not advocate rape. But let
me go on to say that when it is not a clear case of a
stranger forcing himself upon some poor woman, when it is a
case of "date-rape" -- particularly when sex, more
particularly when rough sex has occurred previously
between the people involved, particularly when "no" has
sometimes meant "yes" during the relationship, the issues
become clouded and there arises the problem of the
intentions and expectations of the participants. That is why
rape cases are so difficult to prosecute when the victim
knows the perpetrator.
For my part, I found the scene heart-rending and felt for
both characters. Of course Spike should have listened to
Buffy and stopped immediately.
But my belief is that Spike didn't want sex. He wanted Buffy
to listen to him. He comes in with a "we need to talk" and
goes on with "it isn't just about you." I think he wanted to
talk about Dawn. But we don't get to find out because as
usual Buffy doesn't want to listen, she just cuts him off
and argues. He wants to hold her down and make her listen,
but his venting his frustration at her not listening leads
to a venting of his frustration at her not loving him back
and finally, in his desperation (she responded when we were
having sex) tried to force himself on her. This does not
make what he did right. It does, however, make it
understandable.
When he realized what was happening, of course it was too
late. Way too late and he realized what he had done was
unforgiveable. And as the episode progressed it seemed to me
that Spike was more profoundly affected (completely
disgusted and appalled by himself) than was Buffy (whose
feelings I in no way minimize). He did something completely
repugnant to him -- hurt Buffy.
Spike seems to think that if he gets the chip out of his
head, his "true" vampire nature can reassert itself and he
can go back to hating Buffy. I think he will be
disappointed.
First impressions. May have more to say when I have a chance
to take another look.
[>
Re: That scene ... (SPOILERs for "Seeing
Red") -- Traveler, 11:38:14 05/08/02 Wed
And as the episode progressed it seemed to me that Spike
was more profoundly affected (completely disgusted and
appalled by himself) than was Buffy (whose feelings I in no
way minimize).
I generally agree with what you have to say, but I'm not so
sure about this statement. It seemed to me that Buffy was
extremely upset, for whatever reason.
[>
Re: That scene ... (SPOILERs for "Seeing
Red") -- Lyonors, 12:49:53 05/08/02 Wed
I am so glad someone else was feeling the way I was about
this. As a recent victim of date rape, I was surprised that
my reaction to this scene wasn't even more emotional than it
was. Don't get me wrong, but when I was watching it over
breakfast this morning, I was crying like a freakshow, but I
was more crying from the memory of what happened to me than
the fact that Spike, who I personally feel truely loves
Buffy nearly hurt her in that violating of a way. I think
most of my lack of anger towards Spike are the the reasons
outlined by verdantheart:
>>But my belief is that Spike didn't want sex. He wanted
Buffy to listen to him. He comes in with a "we need to talk"
and goes on with "it isn't just about you." I think he
wanted to talk about Dawn. But we don't get to find out
because as usual Buffy doesn't want to listen, she just cuts
him off and argues. He wants to hold her down and make her
listen, but his venting his frustration at her not listening
leads to a venting of his frustration at her not loving him
back and finally, in his desperation (she responded when we
were having sex) tried to force himself on her. This does
not make what he did right. It does, however, make it
understandable.<<
just my musings....
Ly
[> [>
I am so sorry that happened to you. I am a victim of
(non-violent) date rape also -- Spike Lover, 13:50:42
05/08/02 Wed
[> [>
no, what he did is not understandable! He tried to rape
her!!!!!!!! -- gabby, 14:13:58 05/08/02 Wed
[> [> [>
Re: no, what he did is not understandable! He tried to
rape her!!!!!!!! -- Lyonors, 20:17:26 05/08/02
Wed
Clearly I am not condoning his actions here! No one really
is, we are just commiserating with the situation and how it
transpired. I'm not exactly self-effacing for what happened
to me with my date-rape situation, but I know exactly where
I went wrong, just like Buffy did, something to the effect
of "I should have stopped you a long time ago" (forgive my
paraphrase, no transcripts I could find yet)
Ly
[> [>
Re: That scene ... (SPOILERs for "Seeing
Red") -- Anneth, 00:07:42 05/09/02 Thu
>>But my belief is that Spike didn't want sex. He wanted
Buffy to listen to him. He comes in with a "we need to talk"
and goes on with "it isn't just about you." I think he
wanted to talk about Dawn. But we don't get to find out
because as usual Buffy doesn't want to listen, she just cuts
him off and argues. He wants to hold her down and make her
listen, but his venting his frustration at her not listening
leads to a venting of his frustration at her not loving him
back and finally, in his desperation (she responded when we
were having sex) tried to force himself on her. This does
not make what he did right. It does, however, make it
understandable.<<
I'm sure this has been said elsewhere, but rape isn't about
sex. It's about power, about control. The bathroom scene
epitomized their entire relationship, on every level.
(Hurrah for sweeping generalizations!) Even since Spike's
very first appearance, way back in S2, S and B have been
jockying for control of their multi-facted relationship.
Buffy has had the upper hand pretty much since s2 - until
OMwF. And Smashed, in my opinion, was about leveling the
playing field - literally. It complicated their already
complicated relationship enormously, leaving both feeling
totally out of control (or themselves, of each other, of
it)and trying desperatly to get the upper hand - pysically,
emotionally, sexually.
Buffy managed to maintain it, for the most part, until the
bathroom scene. She used the fact that he loves her as a
shield; as Anya inadvertantly pointed out to her in Entropy,
Spike was the only man she'd ever been with who hadn't
"ripped her heart out" - yet. She claimed over and over
again that she didn't love him because she couldn't trust
him - so why didn't she go slayer on him until after begging
him to stop? It seems to me that Buffy still trusted that
Spike's love for her would overrule his evil tendencies;
that she could reason with him human to human rather than
having to deal with him on the Slayer/Demon level.
Sadly for the die-hard and (previously) unashamed Spuffer
in me, Spike destroyed every ounce of credibility he had in
two fell swoops - Anya, (forgivable), and the attempted rape
(unforgivable). I don't care to speculate about how I'll
feel about Spike, once he returns. It would be as
unsatisfying for me if he were to go totally evil and be
killed, at her hand or someone elses, as it would for him to
be re-souled and have all forgiven, a la Angel.
Anyway, I guess that got a little ranty towards the end...
sorry.
[>
How did we all recognize it as rape long before Spike
did make it understandable?(SPOILERs for "SR")
-- JBone, 21:12:00 05/08/02 Wed
[> [>
Re: How did we all recognize it as rape long before
Spike did make it understandable?(SPOILERs ) -- Anneth,
00:12:34 05/09/02 Thu
Juxtaposition of Spike, covered head to foot in black, with
Buffy, vunerable and nearly naked in her bathrobe. (compare
with his nudity and her clothed-ness in earlier episodes.)
He was clearly an intruder in and a violation of that clean
white bathroom, long before he tried to force himself upon
her.
Menage a Troika
(spoilers for Seeing Red) -- Sophist, 10:19:13
05/08/02 Wed
I've now read most of the posts on this episode and haven't
seen this topic raised. If I missed it, sorry for starting a
new thread, but the topic seems very relevant in light of
MayaPapaya's outstanding post and the thoughtful replies she
received.
Last week on Entropy, Andrew's reaction to the Spankya sex
was to comment on how "hot" Spike was. He covered quickly to
include Anya, but did it in such a way that we were (IMHO)
clearly intended to see that he is gay.
At the end of Seeing Red, Andrew's statements at the jail
about Warren even more clearly indicated a same-sex
relationship between the two of them.
My question is, what is the purpose of this? I'm not asking
for spoilers here. What I mean is, what plot purpose is
served by including these comments in the show? Does
Andrew's sexual orientation (and maybe Warren's) have some
meaning that I have missed?
[>
Re: Menage a Troika (spoilers for Seeing Red and
Villains promo)) -- Darby, 10:44:02 05/08/02 Wed
Could it be a mitigating factor in Andrew's willingness to
submit to Warren? On the evil scale, Andrew is definitely
worse than Jonathan, but maybe not by much if he was just
trying to act like the object of his affection and not
really getting off on the actions. He's maybe more pitiful
than evil. It might justify punishing Warren much more than
either of the others - and it look like that's what's
coming.
Just a guess.
Or maybe, since the troika often has represented the
writers, there's an interesting dynamic playing out at ME?
Staffers often say that every episode contains "in"-
jokes.
[>
Re: Menage a Troika (spoilers for Seeing Red) --
matching mole, 10:57:19 05/08/02 Wed
Speculation (I'm spoiler free) - it could conceivably have
some future meaning if Andrew and Jonathan don't stay in
jail and Warren doesn't end up splattered all over the back
side of the cosmos by an enraged Willow.
Assuming that this is the end of Andrew as far as we're
concerned I offer two possible interpretations.
1) It is an explanation as to why Andrew went along with
Warren so willingly. This hardly seems necessary as Andrew
was presented as being spineless and easily lead from day
one.
2) It is an ironic comment on Warren's obviously immense
sexual insecurity. The Troika obviously exist in the
mindset which I am all to familiar with from my high school
days. Being gay or being thought to be gay is probably
Warren's worst fear. Now matter where he actually falls on
the sexual orientation scale I would guess that he is
acutely homophobic. Success with women is a huge issue with
him and Seeing Red is full of imagery and language that
stresses Warren's need to be seen as a real man. Just think
of the source of his power - a couple spheres strapped to
his waist. His defeat is a none too subtle castration by
Buffy (with Jonathon's assistance). While Warren is quite
willing to manipulate Andrew if he actually knew the reason
for Andrew's loyalty and aquiescence he would be
repulsed.
Interestingly I can't think of any other point at which
Andrew displays any sort of real emotion (towards a real
person rather than a fictional character) besides his
despair at being abandoned by Warren.
That's my take on it anyway.
[> [>
Forgot the last part -- matching mole, 11:43:37
05/08/02 Wed
The irony being that Warren, who is obsessed with
attracting/controlling women is able to attract the genuine
affection and loyalty of only one person - a gay man.
[> [> [>
Your suggestion no. 2 makes sense. -- Sophist,
12:43:09 05/08/02 Wed
[> [> [> [>
The eye of the beholder. -- Hauptman, 16:18:54
05/08/02 Wed
I would have to say that Andrew is clearly gay and that
Warren is very likely not. I have actually been in this
situation, in love with a straight man. It's interesting. In
fact, now that I think about it, there have been several
straight men in my life who have a) not been freaked out by
my sexuality and b) took advantage of my great affection
through small manipulations (that I was always aware of and
amused by...I hope). One in particular comes to mind. He
was a little overweight, but desperate to have a wife. He
had issues. When I told him that he was very attractive, he
was extrealy flattered and warmed to me, but not in a sexual
way. My cousin insists that I should have jumped his bones
right there, that I had a big fat green light, but I think
that is bull. Straight guys, especially those with image or
other issues, will take affirmation wherever they can get
it. It doesn't mean they are ready to "switch teams". I can
also understand how Warren could have unconsciously seduced
Andrew. Men can be very seductive with each
other...especially when they are plotting together.
Somewhere else in the forum there was talk about how we
create our own reality and how that has ben a theme of the
show this year. I think Andrew's torrid love for Warren is
mostly in his own head. But maybe I don't want Warren to be
gay. Ick. And, if Andrew and Warren were shagging like evil
bunnies, I think Johnathan would have known about it-- and
Andrew would not have been even slightly tolerant of
Warren's attempts at scoring with the ladies. We would have
seen a hissy fit of monumental proportions at the club in
"Seeing Red".
And, on another note, is Buffy now the television series
with the most dead homosexuals? I think they are up to
three now. Assuming the worst, of course.
[>
Reminded me of the Leopold and Loeb case -- The
Last Jack, 11:05:06 05/08/02 Wed
For those of you not familiar with this case, Leopold and
Loeb were two teenagers with genius IQs who murdered a boy
just to see if they could get away with it (Murder by
Numbers, starring Sandra Bullock, is based on this 1920s
case). One of them ( I forget which) allowed the other to
dominate him, partly because he felt a homoerotic love for
the other, but also mainly because he felt he was worthless
and not as great without the other in his life.
I don't think Warren is gay, and Andrew might just be
sexually confused (I think I remember him lusting after
girls in earlier episodes), but their relationship is almost
exactly like Leopold and Loeb. They are both brilliant
outsiders, but Warren is clearly the stronger of the two,
and Andrew, who doesn't feel as "cool" as Warren has allowed
him to dominate him (did you notice how Andrew had picked up
the habit of mocking Jonathan and others). Being with Warren
made him feel powerful and self assured, which is why his
betrayl and abandonment hurt so much.
[> [>
Sounds like Hitchcock's "Rope" (1948) --
warped, 21:01:35 05/08/02 Wed
Does anyone know if this movie is based on the Leopold and
Loeb case? The movie is uncannily similar to it. In the
film, two brilliant college students strangle a man, hide
him, then proceed to have a dinner party in the same room.
Just to see if they can pull it off. Homoerotic subtext
abounds! Philip clearly lets Brendan, the leader/planner,
dominate him in the same way Andrew lets Warren.
[> [> [>
Re: Sounds like Hitchcock's "Rope" (1948)
-- kev314, 21:06:23 05/08/02 Wed
Yes, "Rope" was based on the Leopold & Loeb case. There's
another movie called "Compulsion" with Orson Welles and a
young Dean Stockwell, also based on that case. It has
fascinated people for years and years.
[>
Reminded me of the Leopold and Loeb case -- The
Last Jack, 11:06:58 05/08/02 Wed
For those of you not familiar with this case, Leopold and
Loeb were two teenagers with genius IQs who murdered a boy
just to see if they could get away with it (Murder by
Numbers, starring Sandra Bullock, is based on this 1920s
case). One of them ( I forget which) allowed the other to
dominate him, partly because he felt a homoerotic love for
the other, but also mainly because he felt he was worthless
and not as great without the other in his life.
I don't think Warren is gay, and Andrew might just be
sexually confused (I think I remember him lusting after
girls in earlier episodes), but their relationship is almost
exactly like Leopold and Loeb. They are both brilliant
outsiders, but Warren is clearly the stronger of the two,
and Andrew, who doesn't feel as "cool" as Warren has allowed
him to dominate him (did you notice how Andrew had picked up
the habit of mocking Jonathan and others). Being with Warren
made him feel powerful and self assured, which is why his
betrayl and abandonment hurt so much.
[>
Re: Menage a Troika (spoilers for Seeing Red) --
Arethusa, 11:10:04 05/08/02 Wed
Why would weak Andrew ally himself with Warren, not
Johnathan, when Warren becomes crazed with power and
malevolence? How does Warren control Andrew, when Johnathan
has slipped so far away from the others that they are
willing to set him up for their crimes? ME has Warren
dangles the hope of a romantic/sexual relationship in front
of Andrew, thereby ensuring his obedience and assistance.
Andrew's characterization, which is the sketchest of the
trio, is also embellished. Warren is also revealed as
someone who will do *anything* to get what he wants.
Someone who is willing to use another person sexually to
further his ends is even creepier than the average criminal
mastermind.
[> [>
Re: Menage a Troika (spoilers for Seeing Red) --
Amber, 12:01:13 05/08/02 Wed
I'd have to disagree about Warren doing *anything* to
manipulate Andrew. I don't think Warren even knows how
Andrew feels. Warren's egocentric, he thinks Andrew follows
him because its the right thing to do, in his head he's the
good guy, the Scoobies are the bad guys. I think if Warren
and Andrew were actually having a relationship or if Warren
was using sex/romance to manipulate Andrew we'd have seen
some hint of it by this late in the season. After all, if it
were true it would be the perfect parallel to this season's
Buffy/Spike pairing.
Andrew isn't following Warren because Warren's dangling the
hope for a sexual/romantic relationship. Perhaps if he knew
about Andrew's feelings he would, but like one of the other
posters above I tend to think Warren is too homophobic for
that. Also, Andrew's comments in the jail, seemed to be
speaking more about betrayal by someone he thought he could
trust. Of course they left no doubt that Andrew has more
than friendly feelings towards Warren.
Right now we can see Andrew has a crush on Warren. He
admires Warren's scheming, power, and just generally thinks
Warren is cool. Add in the fact that Andrew probably didn't
have that many friends in high school (no one even remembers
him!) and the fact that he doesn't seem to have a backbone
and that's probably all the motivation he needs to be
following Warren's every command.
Plus from Andrew's point of view, what's to gain from
leaving/standing up to Warren? Andrew clearly doesn't care
too much about right and wrong. That's Jonathon's concern
and possibly his path to redemption. If Andrew were to leave
Warren then he'd probably have Warren trying to kill him
(because he knows too much) and the Slayer trying to do
whatever Buffy plans to do to stop these guys. At least by
sticking with Warren Andrew is safe from the Slayer, and he
seems pretty afraid of her from what we've seen.
[> [> [>
Re: Menage a Troika (spoilers for Seeing Red) --
Arethusa, 12:41:02 05/08/02 Wed
I agree that Andrew would probably think he has nothing to
gain by leaving Warren, but I think the dialogue makes it
clear what Andrew felt and what Warren was doing. The
following quotes are from my videotape of SR:
Andrew and Johnathan are handcuffed and being taken into the
police station.
Andrew: He left me. He flew away and left me. (Crying)
How could he do this to me? He promised me we'd be
together, but he was just using me. He never really
loved...hanging out with us.
I doubt Warren and Andrew had a physical relationship, but I
think it's clear promises were made. Also, I don't think
Warren is gay-as others have said, homophobic "banter" seems
to be common amoung some young men. He has a fundamental
inability to relate to women as people-something I've seen
in men who spent very little time around women when they
grew up, and/or in men who hate their mothers.
[> [> [> [>
Re: Menage a Troika (spoilers for Seeing Red) --
yuri, 14:45:53 05/08/02 Wed
I think that the "He promised me we'd be together" line is
probably Andrew making an idealized exaggeration of what
actually happened. I'm sure any speculation for the future
Warren might have made could be taken as a promise to a
confused, repressed Andrew.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Menage a Troika (spoilers for Seeing Red) --
Hauptman, 16:26:14 05/08/02 Wed
I agree, Yuri.
[>
Re: And maybe... (spoilers for Seeing Red) --
LittleBit, 11:55:05 05/08/02 Wed
ME is finally giving us a teeny tiny potential
insight into Andrew's background and motivations? Andrew the
Enigma. Andrew the Who's He? Andrew-who-summoned-flying-
monkeys-to-attack-the-school-play-and-none-of-the-Scoobies-
noticed?
Other than his movie and comic habits, and his action
figures, the only other things I can recall are Tucker's
brother and highlighted Jonathon's book.
[>
I don't think he is. -- yez, 12:11:28 05/08/02
Wed
As someone already mentioned, defending your straight male-
ness, and conversely, using "you homo" to insult someone, is
pretty common among young men, at least in my experience.
Previously on Buffy, we've seen these 3 young men do this
kind of thing, even indirectly in the way they snicker,
before.
Andrew actually says Spike is "so cool," I believe -- he
refers to Anya as "hot" to compensate for what might
possibly be misconstrued as being a "gay thing" to say,
IMHO.
As to "Seeing Red," I think it's supposed to be a joke that
Andrew finds himself repeating a typical movie-of-the-week-
type line ("I can't believe he left me... after all I did
for him..."), and seems surprised to find that the "logical"
ending to that line is "maybe he never really loved me" or
whatever he says, just like he delivers a stereotypical
villain speech before trying to jetpack off.
In other words, it's not that he was admitting he was gay
(which he might be, who knows), but he's just so steeped in
TV and film, that he can't even express his emotions without
using "TV-speak" -- coupled with this obsession with sex and
not being seen as gay.
Anyway, that's what I'm hoping, because for ME to present
*both* a lesbian relationship that ends tragically and a
homicidal/psychopathic homosexual in one episode would mean
I could never watch this show again.
yez
[> [>
Re: I don't think he is. -- yuri, 14:56:43
05/08/02 Wed
I personally find those comments to be pretty unambiguous in
their intent to portray andrew as gay, if not for their
actual words (though I could hardly see a totally
heterosexual guy of his socio-cultural status saying
something like "He never really loved...") for the
discomfort he shows. The Spike is so cool line doesn't seem
weird at all at first, guys typically praise other guys who
get around, but the fact that he got so uncomfortable and
tried to make up for it when the other two didn't even blink
- that is the most telling.
Don't lose hope yet! I've resolved not to. In some ways,
even though it is a negative portrayal of a gay guy, it is
honest in the painful repression you see, and the need
Andrew has to latch on to something. I wish he had been
given more depth and a chance for empathy.
[> [> [>
Re: I don't think he is. -- leslie,
15:18:54 05/08/02 Wed
I'm not sure this is so much a negative portrayal of a gay
guy (though I think that homosexuals have the right to be
just as evil as heterosexuals, don't get me wrong!) as a
portrayal of what happens when you try to *suppress* your
sexual identity. It seems to me that if Andrew is gay, he is
just beginning to realize it, and it's the Freudian slips
that have been coming out of him ever since he and Warren
allied themselves against Jonathan that seem to indicate
that the realization is slowly surfacing. Not understanding
his sexuality has led him to acquiesce in murder and other
criminal activities in order to gain the approval of his
(sociopathic) love object.
[>
Re: Menage a Troika (spoilers for Seeing Red) --
lele, 12:20:36 05/08/02 Wed
I thought the most telling comments were andrew saying "I
thought he loved...working with us" and "Do you think he'll
come back for us" IMO Warren just managed to manipulate the
other members of the group in whichever way he needed to.
He sensed Andrew's homosexuality/loneliness and probably
seduced him in some way, just as he sensed jonathon's
reticence in going along with covering up katrina's death
and isolated him in the house they rented and planned on
making him the scapegoat for their later actions.
[>
Re: Menage a Troika (spoilers for Seeing Red) --
anom, 22:53:16 05/08/02 Wed
First, love the subject line, Sophist!
"Last week on Entropy, Andrew's reaction to the Spankya sex
was to comment on how 'hot' Spike was. He covered quickly to
include Anya, but did it in such a way that we were (IMHO)
clearly intended to see that he is gay."
Actually, he says Spike is "so cool." Which could have been
seen as him identifying w/Spike (or wanting to), who's cool
because he's having sex w/Anya...except that he follows by
saying "the girl is hot too." If he hadn't felt the
need to cover, he wouldn't have given anything away.
matching mole says below: "Being gay or being thought to be
gay is probably Warren's worst fear. Now matter where he
actually falls on the sexual orientation scale I would guess
that he is acutely homophobic."
I'm not so sure. He's the one who says (in Life Serial, I
think), when the 3 are supposed to hold hands to do a spell,
"You know what homophobia really means about you, don't
you?" But it wouldn't surprise me if he were the type who
has no problem w/homosexuality "in principle" but would be
acutely uncomfortable having another man be attracted to
him.
[>
Re: Menage a Troika (spoilers for Seeing Red) --
Anneth, 23:46:03 05/08/02 Wed
"My question is, what is the purpose of this? I'm not asking
for spoilers here. What I mean is, what plot purpose is
served by including these comments in the show? Does
Andrew's sexual orientation (and maybe Warren's) have some
meaning that I have missed?"
In the first part of the 20th century, and even earlier,
mild homoeroticism (usually between men) in literature was
used to portray exactly what people have commented on in
their replies to this post. A biographer of the novelist
Dorothy L. Sayers writes about the apparent acceptance that
such pseudo-sexual power relationships enjoyed in society;
Sayers herself believed that all young women experience
"Schwarmerisch" in their late teens and early twenties.
This term, as she used it, meant that young women develop
crushes on older, stronger women. The young women conflate
their urges to idolize with their sexual urges, but
"outgrow" these impulses as they become older and more
experienced themselves.
I mention Sayers because she actually used Schwarmerish as a
device in one of her novels; a very intelligent, attractive
woman in her early thirties exploited the adoration of a
younger, naive woman in order to commit a murder for
personal gain. (The novel is Unnatural Death. It may not
bode well for Andrew that the young woman ends up dead,
too...) I'm a big fan of early 20th century mystery novels,
and I seem to recall the same sort of power-relationship
being exploited by male characters on many occasions.
Neither character is necessarily homosexual; it's more of a
conflation, or sublimation maybe, of the lust for power and
plain ol' lust. What's going on between Andrew and Warren
could just be ME utilizing a genre standard. Maybe - I
don't actually know anything about this, outside of what
I've read in mysteries and biographies.
Hope that makes sense.
Psychopathology
in Sunnydale (spoilerish to Seeing Red) -- Cecilia,
10:24:16 05/08/02 Wed
I was discussing last night’s episode with my son and he
referred to Warren as a psychopath. I disagreed with him
and explained that I felt Warren was really more of a
sociopathic personality. I thought I saw a topic along
those lines posted here but I searched and couldn't find it,
so my apologies if I'm restating what has already been
said.
I looked up the "definition" of sociopath and I found some
other things quite by random that I think apply to some of
our Sunnydale friends.
Warren-Sociopathic/Antisocial Personality Disorder
Defined by three main characteristics/behaviours;
1. Egocentricity
2. Unable to empathize with others
3. Incapable of remorse or guilt
I see in Warren the beginnings of a serial killer. In fact
I have no problem visualizing Warren and Andrew on a killing
spree a la The Hillside Stranglers. To him the entire
adventure (of the Troika) is all about personal power, a
service to fulfill his needs. When he burst through into
Buffy’s backyard he screams “How could you do this to ME?
You had no right to take this away from ME!” The Scoobies
thought April was all about a pathetic loner attempting to
make a girlfriend because he couldn't get a girlfriend on
his own, or as Xander so eloquently put it "a sexbot".
Really April was a fledgling power maniac's attempt to
assert control over another and bend their will to serve
him. He would eventually find the ideal in Andrew, someone
willing to serve him and his needs totally without question.
I know they have hinted at Andrew's homosexuality and
attraction to Warren but for Warren Andrew's love/attraction
to him is a means to an end that he is only too willing to
exploit.
Buffy-Schizophrenia
Obviously referenced during the episode "Normal Again" and I
do not mean to suggest that Buffy is clinically
schizophrenic but that she may be metaphorically
schizophrenic. Schizophrenia has many symptoms that include
(but are not limited to):
1. Perceptual Difficulties
2. Social withdrawal/Deterioration of social
relationships
3. Inability to cope with minor problems.
Since Buffy was resurrected she has been withdrawn from her
family and friends. She perceives this world as “hard” as
compared to the euphoric existence of Heaven. She is
struggling to regain her momentum and reconnect with those
around her. Her “relationship” with Spike may be seen as
her attempt to connect to an emotional state, regardless of
the emotions involved (passion, revulsion, self-hatred,
etc). She demonstrates the greatest difficulty in dealing
with the (relatively) minor day-to-day problems of life
(paying the bills, parenting Dawn).
Dawn-Kleptomania
This one is fairly obvious and was the thing that caught my
eye as I explored behaviour disorders to find a clear
definition of sociopathology. I do want to note that
kleptomania is defined as an impulse disorder that usually
manifests itself in woman and that stresses (like loss) may
precipitate the behavioural periods. As Dawn felt further
and further estranged from Buffy her kleptomania increased.
Spike-Simple Obsessional Stalking Behaviour
This type of stalker usually has had a relationship with his
victim and his stalking is a campaign to rectify the schism
in the relationship or to seek some kind of retribution.
Spike has often waffled between trying to get Buffy back and
punishing her for not loving him.
Xander-Avoidant Personality Disorder
Characterized by unwillingness to get involved unless
certain of outcome, hypersensitivity to negative evaluation
and unwilling to take personal risks. He has always been
sensitive to criticism. He needs constant reassurance. By
leaving Anya at the altar he demonstrated his inability to
take what some might view as the ultimate personal risk. By
not telling the others of his engagement to Anya he was
showing his fear of criticism from the others (especially
Willow-who has never been fond of Anya).
Willow-Addiction
While I know everyone has debated this issue to death and we
are likely to see Willow “fall off the wagon” in the
aftermath of Tara’s death, there is one thing I thought was
interesting to note that addiction recovery is synonymous
with self-empowerment. Willow has always used magic to
supplant personal power and to hide her insecurities much as
addicts use narcotics and alcohol for the same purposes. In
the beginning of the series Willow was shown to be socially
insecure but found strength in her mind, in her ability to
do well in school. Magic for her augmented her mental
functions and her function of “go to girl” within the group.
Meanwhile her social insecurity remains, she feels she has
very little to offer outside of these two abilities.
I’m sure there is much more to be said on this subject and I
admit I am woefully ill equipped to do so. I have always
been intrigued by the use of metaphor on various and
multiple levels throughout the series. I don’t claim to
always understand them but I do like to investigate them. I
also don’t think I have stated anything new but perhaps
chose to look at it from a new perspective.
Please be kind, this is my first attempt at analysis, but I
look forward to your thoughts and opinions.
[>
A little bit o' knowledge... ;-) -- The Second
Evil, 10:57:42 05/08/02 Wed
Buffy-Schizophrenia
Obviously referenced during the episode "Normal Again" and I
do not mean to suggest that Buffy is clinically
schizophrenic but that she may be metaphorically
schizophrenic. Schizophrenia has many symptoms that include
(but are not limited to):
1. Perceptual Difficulties
2. Social withdrawal/Deterioration of social
relationships
3. Inability to cope with minor problems.
Since Buffy was resurrected she has been withdrawn from her
family and friends. She perceives this world as “hard” as
compared to the euphoric existence of Heaven. She is
struggling to regain her momentum and reconnect with those
around her. Her “relationship” with Spike may be seen as her
attempt to connect to an emotional state, regardless of the
emotions involved (passion, revulsion, self-hatred, etc).
She demonstrates the greatest difficulty in dealing with the
(relatively) minor day-to-day problems of life (paying the
bills, parenting Dawn).
Yes, but as I understand it, schizophrenia is a severe and
debilitating illness that cuts one off from common reality
(IOW, shared reality). Given Buffy's strange and confused
behavior, her disinterest, self-loathing, and bevy of
should'ves and could'ves, I've considered her just your good
old garden-variety severely depressed. Every attribute you
list above is also a sign of depression, including
perceptual difficulties (but not to the degree of
schizophrenia, which I could only argue applies to Buffy by
saying that everyone else is in on it - it's not like she's
the only one seeing all the demons, vampires, etc) in terms
of priorities, values. IOW, her value system and priorities
are out of whack, and she frequently misinterpretes others'
actions or words or gives them less or more creedence, out
of sync with the usual expected reaction. Social withdrawal,
low frustration threshold, aggression, despondancy,
avoidance - all signs of severe depression.
And no, it's no easier in real life to recover from
depression than it is on BtVS. One of the hallmarks of
depression is that non-sufferers seem to frequently expect
the sufferer to just "snap out of it," and I've seen
numerous fans arguing that Buffy do the same. One week she
seems to make progress, then another step back, then a step
forward - Joss has carefully and clearly tracked the
difficult process of recovering from depression. It's not
much fun to watch, but less fun to go through firsthand. At
least we still get witticisms and intrigue at the same
time.
[> [>
Re: A little bit o' knowledge... ;-) -- LittleBit,
12:04:46 05/08/02 Wed
I agree. I've always seen Buffy this season as clinically
depressed. And everyone else in denial about it.
[> [> [>
Re: A little bit o' knowledge... ;-) -- Wynn,
12:30:09 05/08/02 Wed
I also agree that Buffy has been clinically depressed this
season. Her jump from Glory's tower in the Gift, to me at
least, was part suicide and part sacrifice. She wanted to
save the world and protect Dawn, but she also wanted
everything to end. Life and its troubles, possibly
symbolized by Glory and her constant pressure on Buffy in
her search for the Key, wore Buffy down to the point where
it had become too much. And her depression this season may
be thought of depression after a failed suicide attempt.
[> [> [> [>
Re: A little bit o' knowledge... ;-) psychiatric
daignoses -- Dochawk, 13:07:55 05/08/02 Wed
Before I became a specialist in hormones, I was studying to
be a psychiatrist. Making psychiatric diagnoses is
difficult and judging the criteria necessary is sometimes
splitting hairs. With that said, I agree Buffy is
clinically depressed and has been. Another poster (here or
on anotehr board) pointed out that Spike is psychotic. I
dont think he is, but I do think he has a "chip" induced
schizophrenia, which I hope to write an essay about once I
am over mourning for Tara.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: A little bit o' knowledge... ;-) psychiatric
daignoses... and hair splitting -- Kitt, 15:59:10
05/08/02 Wed
I second Dochawk - as a FP who sees depressed patients every
day, and majored in Psych undergrad, it has been obvious to
me all season that Buffy is clinically depressed. Remember
when I kept suggesting Prozac?
As for Spike, he's depressed now too, although with him it
may be less a clinical depression and more an adjustment
disorder (technically, to be clinically depressed it has to
have been going on for 6 or more months, like Buffy has.
Spike has only recently become suicidal/depressed ["You
should have let him kill me."] so he doesn't meet criteria
yet) He's not psychotic - no halluciations, and no more
delusional than your average over-ego-ed male. And to be
MEDICALLY schizophrenic you've got to have that plus some
disconection from reality, which he doesn't. Now, if you
are useing the term 'schizophrenia' to talk about someone
who seems 'split' and in severe conflict with themselves,
that's common usage and applies... but it's not techincally
correct
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: A little bit o' knowledge... ;-) psychiatric
daignoses... and hair splitting -- Anneth, 23:22:48
05/08/02 Wed
"As for Spike, he's depressed now too, although with him it
may be less a clinical depression and more an adjustment
disorder (technically, to be clinically depressed it has to
have been going on for 6 or more months, like Buffy has.
Spike has only recently become suicidal/depressed ["You
should have let him kill me."] so he doesn't meet criteria
yet)"
I don't entirely agree. Recall, in the S5 dream where he
realizes he loves her, he says (approximately): "Go ahead
and kill me. I don't want to live in a world that has you
in it," and rips open his shirt, exposing his heart. For a
vampire to be in love with a slayer is tantamount to...
well, perhaps not suicide, because love isn't a conscious
decision, but a case could be made that it's a suicidal
reaction. Also, in S4, there was the scene where he tried
to stake himself. Although I think at the time it was
mostly played for laughs, it was still a suicide attempt,
foiled only by X's and W's timely intervention.
So Spike's lust for life, oft mentioned on this board, has
been tempered with a quiet but lingering death-wish for as
long as he's realized that the chip is there to stay.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: A little bit o' knowledge... ;-) psychiatric
daignoses -- Rufus, 16:26:02 05/08/02 Wed
I'm waiting for that one. The hard part with Spike is that
his sociopathic nature is the norm for the demon he is, but
best explains his behavior around humans. He is able to shut
out any pangs of guilt, enjoying killing, feeling no pain
when he does kill. The chip has taken him to a new place
where his has been in a long cooldown phase where he has
become conflicted about what he is. He is right he is not
all monster and can't be a man...leaving him in a state
where he has to resolve his problem by either becoming one
or the other, so the chip has to go. I agree about splitting
hairs in diagnosing any mental illness as we have to take
into consideration more than the identified patient.
[> [>
Re: A little bit o' knowledge... ;-) -- Caroline,
12:10:54 05/08/02 Wed
Agreed. And just because someone has symptoms of a certain
type of illness, does not necessarily mean that one can
apply a serious clinical diagnosis like schizophrenia or OCD
or kleptomania. But it's certainly useful to understand what
they are doing in order to understand why.
[>
Ok, so what/who is a psychopath? -- Spike Lover,
13:39:56 05/08/02 Wed
Dawn's Joy ,
Hands, & more thoughts - spoilers for SR --
Solitude1056, 10:34:25 05/08/02 Wed
Gotta say - since I've not seen anyone else mention this -
was I the only one who considered Dawn's excitement to be
the high point of an otherwise dark & fast-paced episode?
Her excitement when Tara appeared, wrapped in a sheet, had
me laughing out loud, especially when she did that little
twist and leap as she turned to go downstairs so Tara/Willow
would have more privacy.
I recall when Tara/Willow were first becoming a couple, and
there was some fussing about the whole "lesbian" question...
which seemed to evolve into a question of "why don't Tara &
Willow get as much sex/affection screen time as, say, Riley
& Buffy?" - so it was especially nice to see that Dawn (who
whines, but is hardly stupid) was so gleeful that her
"foster-parents" (or "aunts"?) were back together... and
that Willow & Tara were happily unashamed to be almost
bedroom-affectionate around Buffy & Dawn. Here's to all
those times Riley & Buffy were all over each other in front
of the Scoobies, eh?
Just figure Joss would do that (along with putting Tara in
the credits) just before he lets Tara die. At least we got
to see that they reconciled, and that Dawn is capable of
showing the good side of a 15-yr-old - the ebulliance -
rather than just the cranky selfcenteredness. About that
credit bit: my suspicious side thinks Joss had Amber sign
for next year "just in case" he killed off someone else
instead (because actors' schedules can, and do, change, and
Emma Caulfield's been vocal about the fact that she's got a
real life on hold as a pyschologist while waiting for her
run to finish out on BtVS). Such a maneuver might've allowed
ME to both make sure Amber would be around if the storyline
were changed radically, as well as provide fodder for the
fans who didn't know who to believe. *sigh*
As for someone mentioning that Dawn & Spike are Buffy's
hands, and parallel each other in each story... it's
remarkable that this metaphor still holds up. Dawn, in SR,
is positively walking on clouds now that Willow & Dawn are
back, while Spike's sinking deeper into desperate
depression. The first scene those two have had together in a
number of episodes, and Dawn doesn't even enter past the
threshold, while Spike keeps his face away from her for the
majority of the scene. I was especially struck by the fact
that he didn't have a new name for her - season 5 was marked
by his constant variations on pet names for her.
But anyway... ;-)
How the heck are
we going to get from here to light hearted (spoilers) --
The Last Jack, 10:44:49 05/08/02 Wed
Okay, lets recap:
Spike seems to have regressed back to wanting to be a big
bad again, Buffy is still struggling to come to terms with
being yanked out of heaven, Anya is a vengence demon again,
Tara is dead, and Willow is about to have a Dark Phoenix
moment.
The season finale is going to have to be something special
for me to believe that any of these characters are going to
be feeling light hearted ever again.
[>
Re: How the heck are we going to get from here to light
hearted (spoilers) -- pr10n, 10:58:47 05/08/02
Wed
>The season finale is going to have to be something special
From your mouth to Joss' (-esses?) ear!
[>
Re: How the heck are we going to get from here to light
hearted (spoilers) -- pr10n, 11:00:21 05/08/02
Wed
>The season finale is going to have to be something special
From your mouth to Joss' (-esses?) ear!
[> [>
Re: How the heck are we going to get from here to light
hearted (spoilers) -- alynn, 11:36:04 05/08/02
Wed
that would be Joss's [ear] add the 's even if the word ends
in 's'
Just doing my part to prevent the extinction of grammar on
the internet.
[> [> [>
Or... -- Darby, 15:13:19 05/08/02 Wed
The tagging of "s" endings with "'s" is an option
rule - ya pays yer money and yer takes yer choice. I'd
generally opt for it, since most people pronounce it that
way, but it's a judgment (or house style) call.
Still trying to figure out why the house style here is often
British grammar variants...
[>
Re: How the heck are we going to get from here to light
hearted (spoilers) -- Purple Tulip, 12:00:04 05/08/02
Wed
It is always darkest before the dawn- they have to hit rock-
bottom before they can come back up for air.
[>
Good question... -- Traveler, 12:57:46 05/08/02
Wed
[>
I've heard 2 versions of hte season finale
(spoilery) -- vampire hunter D, 14:02:40 05/08/02
Wed
In one version, things get worse for Buffyand Dawn. This is
tragic, and would be really hard to watch, but sounds like
the better plotted of the two.
In the second, Everything turns out find and Buffy and Dawn
are left with a new feeling of hope. Unfortunatly, this
kinda sounds lame.
So, a lame but happy ending, or a good but sad endiung. I
don't know which one I like better.
[> [>
A happy Ending? (spoilery only in a weird way) --
Dochawk, 15:31:36 05/08/02 Wed
How can they have a happy ending, no matter what happens, if
Tara dies? She has been extremely close to both Buffy and
Dawn, no matter what else happens if Tara dies, they better
be mourning the death of their friend (and in Buffy's case
she may have some guilt as well, about not doing enough to
stop Warren earlier).
[> [> [>
Re: A happy Ending? (spoilery only in a weird way)
-- maddog, 21:00:12 05/08/02 Wed
That's what I've said in like 3 threads. Willow getting
over losing Tara so tragically in one full season is pushing
it. Doesn't make much sense does it?
[>
Re: How the heck are we going to get from here to light
hearted (spoilers) -- maddog, 17:37:41 05/08/02
Wed
My thoughts exactly. especially on Willow's end.
Goodbye to
you... why I loved Tara (Spoilers thru SR) -- Wynn,
10:58:07 05/08/02 Wed
Tara is one of my favorite characters on the show, and I am
extremely saddened by her apparent death (as we know in the
Buffyverse, nothing is certain until you're dead and buried,
and even then it's questionable). I just wanted to list a
few examples on why I loved Tara the character and AB the
actress so much:
Of all the characters on the show, she is the most open
minded. Being a Wicca and a lesbian and an all around
loving person allowed her to accept all sorts of beings,
whether they are Slayers, neutered vampires, mystical glowy
Key thingy, ex-vengance demons, or ordinary humans. I will
miss her maturity and compassion.
Favorite Tara moments:
"Willow, you are using too much magic. What do you want me
to do, just-just sit back and keep my mouth shut?"
"Well, that'd be a good start."
"If I didn't love you so damn much, I would." Tara and
Willow in All the Way (Go Tara! Standing up for
yourself!)
"A muscle cramp? In your... pants?" to Spike in OAFA
"It's just... I wanted you to know that... my moving out had
nothing to do with you, and I-I will never stop loving you."
to Dawn in Smashed
"Um, I'm not sure you should say 'sex poodle' in your vows."
to Anya in Hells Bells
With Joyce gone and Giles in England, Tara was the
compassionate, objective part of the SG. I will miss her
and Amber Benson's lovely and touching portrayl.
[>
Re: Goodbye to you... why I loved Tara (Spoilers thru
SR) -- Metron,
11:56:28 05/08/02 Wed
=sighs=
I've had Tara's song from OMWF, I'm under your spell, stuck
in my head all day. If she's gone for good, I'm going to
miss her dearly. I completely agree with you there, she
seemed, to me, the mature one.
Met
[> [>
Re: Goodbye to you... why I loved Tara (Spoilers thru
SR) -- Wendx, 13:37:50 05/08/02 Wed
I read in a chat room today that Amber Benson has another
year on her contract with the show--a ghost for next season?
The only thing that will be able to stop Willow's rampage
this season? She is definitely the sweetest character on
the show--
[>
Re: Goodbye to you... why I loved Tara (Spoilers thru
SR) -- MaeveRigan, 15:45:13 05/08/02 Wed
So many wonderful things about Tara, and I'm still not
*quite* ready to believe we've seen the last of her.
Thanks for mentioning those great moments. Thanks, whoever
it was (Etrangere?), if you read this, for reminding us that
Tara is the goddess of compassion.
And on a more earthly note, let us appreciate Tara for being
the only Scooby who dares not to look like a toothpick!
(Yes, all right, Xander's not so sylph-like lately, but you
know what I mean...)
Seriously, the Scoobies would have been sunk this season
without Tara. I hope they know it.
Dante's
Purgatory and Wesley -- jpc,
11:59:01 05/08/02 Wed
Lilah gave Welsey the Inferno, but the correct metaphor is
purgatory. In Dante's cosmology, Wesley wouldn't go to Hell,
see he made his mistake out of good intentions. He was,
after all, trying to protect Angel.
But Dante would put Wesley in Purgatory, which is where the
show has also put him. He is suffering and atoning and so
forth.
Also, both Wesley and Dante have been driven from their
friends and are forced to live in exile. Both contemplate
how cruel the world is. (It is to explain life's cruelty
that Virgil visits Dante and takes him to see the
afterlife.) The only difference is there is no Beatice. I
would hesitate to say Fred is Wesley's Beatrice - I don't
think he's that infatuated with her.
[>
Re: Dante's Purgatory and Wesley -- LittleBit,
12:28:22 05/08/02 Wed
Lilah gave him precisely the one she intended. Regardless of
where Dante would have placed Wes (and I agree with
purgatory) Lilah wants Wes to place himself in the Inferno,
she wants him to see himself as the lowest of the low. It;s
a part of the seduction of Wesley's soul.
Rantings about
Seeing Red -- Spike Lover, 13:33:24 05/08/02 Wed
I apologize for starting a new post, but I wanted to express
my views of yesterday's ep w/o being influenced too much by
everyone else's view point -and y'all do influence, after
all.
As I was watching that bathroom scene, I was thinking - what
have the writers done? In a million years, I could not see
Spike doing what they had him doing. And I accused the
writers of BtVS of doing the unspeakable, and what I have
NEVER accused them of doing before: BAD WRITING -by
definition, needing the plot to go a certain way and then
making the characters, whether it was in their nature or
not, go along with it.
As I watched that scene play out, I rationalized that
perhaps Spike might do this in a response to mixed messages.
In the past, Buffy has said 'no' and meant 'yes'. Why
should he think 'no' means 'no' now? (I get on my soapbox
about women then.)
Mixed messages is all he has gotten. I think more than
anything else, it was when Clem showed up and said that
Buffy was nice but crazy. I am not even certain she was
nice.
Mixed messages are all we have gotten as well. Spike is
evil. Spike is good. Spike is redeemable. Buffy is
strong. Buffy is a hero who lives by some heroic code and
can do no wrong. She is morally and physically and mentally
superior. Buffy is extraordinary even for a Slayer. There
are no consequences to Buffy's actions- and should not be
because she saves the world and was resurrected against her
will. She never makes mistakes. Willow is smart and
powerful witch. She may be addicted to magic use. She has
the best intentions. She wishes she were Buffy. Xander is
an average joe who puts loyalty to his friends above
everything else. His heart is always in the right place.
He wishes he were dating Buffy. Dawn is just a teenager
with average teenage problems. All she needs is just a
little attention. She really does not need supervision; she
can raise herself. With everything she has had to deal
with, she deserves plenty of slack. -ok, I digress.
Spike is desperate in that scene, not for sex or power, but
for the truth. He wants Buffy to admit she feels something
for him, (I think he choses sex because that is the only
time when she even acts likes she likes him,) but she won't
admit anything. (I am reminded in CRUSH that when he had her
chained to the wall he asked her for hope, and she would
neither give him a yes or no.)
Re: Dawn telling Spike that if he wanted to hurt Buffy, he
had succeeded. He should have told her to go to Hell. (I
did.) What he had just finished telling Dawn was that what
happened w/ Anya just happened. He was not in love with
Anya, and he was not doing it to get back at anyone. But
she did not hear him.
The whole episode was -surreal- with the way it was shot.
The brightness of the bathroom scene, w/ Spike in his solid
black and Buffy in a pale bathrobe. The 'bar scene' where
the trio show up -for what purpose? Just to show off and
start a bar fight? The J. Bond jet packs? Robbing an
amusement park? This is like some child's dream-
Then the unthinkable happened. What could not have
happened. -Spike left. The man who would not leave, did.
Buffy has managed to drive away the only man left.
(Perhaps the writers do intend a X/B pairing. I won't
support it, but whatever. I don't think Buffy is ready for
a relationship. Maybe she can just die an old maid. Or
better yet, maybe she can just die.)
I know that the characters are suffering growing pangs, but
we the audience really are. There have been next to no
consequences for the actions of Willow, X, Dawn, Buffy, or
the trio. Spike and Anya have been suffering though.
Finally, the gun scene. Brilliant! That Warren would do
something that desperate (foiling Spike's desperate actions)
and something as mundane or simple- without planning or
strategy or magic weapons or anything - but simply a gun-
something hardly ever seen on Buffy is brilliant. I really
liked how they showed the blood splattering on Willow.
Once again they are foiling Spike against everyone: Buffy
has spoiled both Warren & Spike's plans, but Warren returns
w/ deadly force. (Also Evil Angelus & current Spike.)
I really don't like Buffy, not that the writers care. Last
year when Spike started pursuing Buffy and she treated him
badly -everyone said that deep down she liked him, or the
attention, or maybe had feelings for him. I suspected that
it was as she said: she felt nothing and had no qualms with
using him or treating him badly (or this year-playing with
his feelings.) Why should I like Buffy? Why should I
continue to watch someone I so completely don't respect. -
Course, I don't respect Xander or Willow or Dawn either. -I
respected Giles.
[>
Re: Rantings about Seeing Red -- pr10n, 13:56:03
05/08/02 Wed
>...they showed the blood splattering on Willow.
The blood, like the fawn's blood, except Tara's. So NOW is
the price paid, the sacrifice made, can Buffy come back now
finally please? Hello, Willow, price check.
[> [>
Good point! -- Spike Lover, 14:01:40 05/08/02
Wed
[> [>
Re: LOL! price check -- Valhalla, 16:49:07
05/08/02 Wed
[>
"OW!", begging, sneakers/robes, lesbian love,
etc. -- more rants on Seeing Red -- yez, 13:58:15
05/08/02 Wed
I'm piggybacking this post here -- hope that's OK. Trying to
avoid starting another thread, and this is also something of
a rant.
Let me start by saying I thought the episode was well done.
High drama, action, emotional rollercoaster... "the deluxe
package," as Warren would put it. Also, I'm deeply saddened
by what appears to be the loss of Tara (even though I wasn't
looking forward to more Tara/Willow baby talk, yuck).
Now let me say that I'm also a bit pissed off. Following are
some things that I thought were lame, confusing, contrived
or manipulative, in no specific order.
I think the bathroom/attempted rape scene was handled well
in the sense that the filming was very harsh, gritty, real
and set the proper mood. I also like that it's not played
out as a B&W thing, cut and dried. We're left with questions
as to meanings, intentions, motives, culpability, etc.
HOWEVER...
I don't know why I keep thinking about this, but I found it
very interesting that one of the things Buffy says (along
with the no's which have never meant no's before) is that
she's injured. I think this is after they fall down, right?
It's like "No, I don't want to have rough sex play with you
right now because I'm hurt." This makes me wonder whether if
she wasn't hurt, she would have gone along with it, like she
always did. It isn't until she realizes that Spike isn't
stopping even though she really means no this time, that she
seriously starts fighting him off, but by that point, she's
under him and at a disadvantage.
To think that Spike could have actually violated Buffy is
pretty close to preposterous, IMHO. Regardless of his
intent, how could he possibly do it? We're talking about
power-kick, head-butt, steel-fists Buffy. It wasn't as if
his penis was going to unleash itself, for crying out loud -
- the minute he let go of one of her arms, that was going to
be it for him.
And yet we have to watch our hero whimper and struggle and
nearly be violated? Since when does Buffy cry, beg and yell
"ow" when she's being attacked by anything?
And how injured could Buffy be, anyway, when she's fighting
Warren without a limp or wince a short time later?
And that makes me wonder why, if Spike's intent really is to
take her with or without her permission, they didn't have
Buffy hit her head on the way down? That would easily create
a dazed slayer who would more believably be crying and
begging instead of fighting. Why do they have it play out
the way it played out?
And:
Who takes off their clothes and leaves their sneakers on
with their robe? I found this very puzzling and distracting.
Sure, there are a lot of people in the house, but is
athelete's foot a serious threat to the Scoobies?
Why wait until now to show a passionate scene between Tara
and Willow? If it's OK to show "girl-on-girl action" on
BtVS, then why has there only been a relatively chaste
comfort kiss, fully-clothed body contact, and the
*insinuation* of oral sex before now? This makes me feel it
was only done to increase the sense of loss, and that really
bugs me.
Is there any kind of scientific reason why someone who has
just been seriously wounded would lose the ability to blink
-- other than to try to fool viewers into thinking he/she is
dead? This same stupid "trick" was played on Angel recently
with Wesley and it seemed unbelievable enough then.
If this was a big "no means no" episode, then ME is
*screwed* up. Since when have Buffy's "no's" to Spike ever
meant no? In the Bronze several eps. ago, Buffy says "Stop,"
Spike says "Make me" and Buffy lets him continue. This has
been the pattern of their relationship. To never have Buffy
analyze her own role in how the bathroom situation developed
is irresponsible, IMHO. That's exactly why people who do
engage in those kinds of sex games take precautions, like
setting safe words, etc. I do believe that "no means no." I
also believe that when you've consistently said no and then
done yes, it's a little understandable that the other party
might get confused. Don't get me wrong, I do think Spike
went beyond confused.
Why the hell do we have to dilute Willow/Tara's experience
with Buffy getting shot? Yeah, I know she's the title
character, but give us a break and give other characters
their due.
If Tara isn't brought back somehow, how can Amber Benson's
name with the regulars in the credits be anything other than
cruel? Is it possible it benefits Benson as an actress
somehow, to be able to say, maybe, that she was a regular
(if only for one ep.)?
After all the trouble the trio went to, all it took was a
gun to bring the slayer down?! A f-ing gun?! I bet Warren,
not to mention a host of other demons are really kicking
themselves right now for all the time and energy they wasted
with big schemes and battles when all they had to do was
march down to the local Wal-Mart and buy a pistol.
Was that a Xena action figure that Buffy picks up and makes
a disgusted face at in the Trio's lair? If so, very ironic,
considering death also ended that other lesbian TV
relationship (if you were of the mind that the couple was
having a romantic relationship).
yez
[> [>
Interesting points -- Spike Lover, 14:15:22
05/08/02 Wed
Your comments have given me some pause: 1) Buffy's "Ow"
comments and begging. If she really is afraid that he is
trying to rape her, why does she beg rather than resist
using force against him? (Who knows what 'sex games' they
played with those handcuffs?)
2) I thought they went overboard on the w/t smoochies too.
Ok, get out of bed already. -I completely did not see the
eminent death coming.
3) What would be the purpose to having the slayer
shot?...
spoiler?
How about having her live? You know she is no longer human?
Perhaps Willow's spell made her immortal/invulnerable? THat
would develop the plot, though it is unlikely.
[> [>
If Joss could read these reactions, he would be
incredibly happy.... -- Caroline, 14:35:59 05/08/02
Wed
because he's done what he set out to do - piss everyone
off!
[> [> [>
If Joss set out to piss us off for no real reason then
he sucks..... -- Glorfindel, 18:30:11 05/08/02
Wed
If thats all it was, just to show he could do it, then to
hell with him. If not, then not to hell with him, but I'm
starting think ME pulled a terrence and phillip and that it
will backfire on them.
[> [> [> [>
What is a terrence and a phillip? -- Caroline,
06:51:51 05/09/02 Thu
Sorry for the ignorance, so please enlighten me.
Also, if you go into the archives you will see reference to
an interview of Joss by Wanda where he states that he wants
people to be disturbed and discomfited - if everyone just
agrees with him, they'll just get bored and stop watching.
At least you care enough to keep watching, get angry and
engage in ad hominem attacks on the writers. If any of the
writers are lurking on any of the Buffy boards, I think
they'll be extremely happy.
We've been through situations in previous seasons where
Buffy fans get really pissed off, attack the writers and
threaten to stop watching but it doesn't seem to affect any
of the ratings - they're holding up.
[> [>
In defense of SR (spoilers) -- Traveler,
15:21:51 05/08/02 Wed
"As I was watching that bathroom scene, I was thinking -
what have the writers done? In a million years, I could not
see Spike doing what they had him doing . . . He wants Buffy
to admit she feels something for him."
I think you answered your own question here.
"Mixed messages are all we have gotten as well."
Yes, this is the season of the moral gray. I kinda like
it.
"Re: Dawn telling Spike that if he wanted to hurt Buffy,
he had succeeded. He should have told her to go to Hell.
"
Keep in mind that Dawn didn't know of all the nasty things
Buffy did to Spike. She only knew that Buffy cared about
Spike and he did something to hurt her.
"The whole episode was -surreal- with the way it was
shot. The brightness of the bathroom scene, w/ Spike in his
solid black and Buffy in a pale bathrobe."
Yes, and I really liked it. It was fraught with symbolism.
I'm still trying to figure out what it all means.
"The 'bar scene' where the trio show up -for what
purpose? Just to show off and start a bar fight? The J. Bond
jet packs? Robbing an amusement park? This is like some
child's dream-"
These scenes were to show Warren's motivations and how
immature he and the rest of the trio are. The final battle
takes place in an amusement park because they all acted like
children, using other people as toys. They treat evil as a
fantasy game, not seeing the people they hurt as being
real.
"Then the unthinkable happened. What could not have
happened. -Spike left. The man who would not leave, did.
Buffy has managed to drive away the only man left."
Yeah, but he'll be back...
"I know that the characters are suffering growing pangs,
but we the audience really are. "
Joss would be very glad you feel that way.
"There have been next to no consequences for the actions
of Willow, X, Dawn, Buffy, or the trio. "
I would hardly say no consequences. Willow is going off the
deep end. Xander has lost Anya, maybe forever. Buffy has
lost Spike and her own self respect. The trio is broken and
Warren is about to find himself in a world of pain.
"Finally, the gun scene. Brilliant!"
I absolutely agree.
"No, I don't want to have rough sex play with you right
now because I'm hurt."
Women who are being raped will say all kinds of things to
try to stop their attackers. For example, some women claim
to be having their period, etc. I think Buffy was just
appealing to Spike's "good" side. It isn't just about sex
and power; it's also about physical pain.
"To think that Spike could have actually violated Buffy
is pretty close to preposterous, IMHO."
As other's have mentioned, Buffy was surprised and hurt,
both physically and emotionally. Reacting like a victem was
unusual for her, but understandable under the
circumstances.
"Is there any kind of scientific reason why someone who
has just been seriously wounded would lose the ability to
blink "
Buffy blinked, just not very often. That IS constant with
seriously injured people.
"If this was a big "no means no" episode, then ME is
*screwed* up."
No, there was a HELL of a lot more to this episode then
that. If that's all you saw, then I respectfully suggest
that you watch it again.
"Why the hell do we have to dilute Willow/Tara's
experience with Buffy getting shot?"
Why do we have to dilute the experience of Buffy getting
shot with Tara getting shot? I think both events are pretty
important.
"If Tara isn't brought back somehow, how can Amber
Benson's name with the regulars in the credits be anything
other than cruel?"
I agree with this. Darn that sinister ME and their evil
plots.
"Was that a Xena action figure that Buffy picks up and
makes a disgusted face at in the Trio's lair? "
I'm not sure, but I think it was a Vampirella figurine. Sort
of goes along with the evil as fantasy motiff.
[> [> [>
definitely vampirella--not touching the rest for
now -- anom, 21:23:57 05/08/02 Wed
[> [> [>
I agree with some of your points -- Spike Lover,
07:37:21 05/09/02 Thu
Re: consequences- no I would say that there has not nearly
been enough consequences that I have seen. (Not that there
were not any.) For instance, the trio has not really
suffered for killing Katrina. Buffy has not suffered for
lying to X or W or anyone else about Spike. (Not that she
would have.) She did not suffer for trying to kill them.
There were no reprecussions for what she did to the social
worker. Dawn should have been fingerprinted and sent to ju-
vi for her thefts, and it should have been the last straw
for the social workers who are supposedly investigating. I
don't think Buffy even punished her. There was nothing said
for all the times she stayed out when she shouldn't have.
And she is still allowed to go to Janice's after the lying
incident at Halloween?
Willow did lose Tara, but not for good. Tara came back. In
such a brief amount of time, often people don't learn
anything when the consequences are that minor.
"Buffy lost Spike". That is hardly a consequence since she
did not value him. It was certainly a loss for me (and
Spike), but that was all.
[> [> [>
Vampirella -- Darby, 16:50:58 05/09/02 Thu
I've run across a fake photo of SMG "on" a Vampirella body -
I expect that led to the in-joke, and it's probably one of
the few web fakes that anyone would feel comfortable showing
her...
[> [>
Re: "OW!", begging, sneakers/robes, lesbian
love, etc. -- more rants on Seeing Red -- vandalia,
21:30:08 05/08/02 Wed
Was that a Xena action figure that Buffy picks up and
makes a disgusted face at in the Trio's lair? If so, very
ironic, considering death also ended that other lesbian TV
relationship (if you were of the mind that the couple was
having a romantic relationship).
No, it was Vampirella (stereotypical vampiress from comic
books who wears hardly a thing -- we used to call them
'dental floss bikinis')
[> [> [>
and also.... -- Adio, 14:51:27 05/10/02 Fri
Buffy was not wearing sneakers in the bathroom. She had on
slippers that matched the robe.
Also, after she was shot, she was in shock, but her eyes did
blink. Watch again.
[> [>
Actually -- Eric, 21:48:10 05/11/02 Sat
The show was pretty realistic about shooting. People that
get shot through the torso don't normally speak or blink
since they're trying to get over the shock.
Other bads have attempted to take Buffy out with fire arms.
Notably Darla, with her brace of nickel plated nines, and
Spike with a shotgun.
Wal Mart doesn't sell pistols.
Also, the action figure Buffy picks up is Vampirella, a
cheesy comic book vampiress. Not a Xena figure. Speaking
of Xena, by the end of that series, the relationship was
definitely clarified as lesbian.
[>
Re: Rantings about Seeing Red -- leslie,
14:33:22 05/08/02 Wed
"As I was watching that bathroom scene, I was thinking -
what have the writers done? In a million years, I could not
see Spike doing what they had him doing. And I accused the
writers of BtVS of doing the unspeakable, and what I have
NEVER accused them of doing before: BAD WRITING -by
definition, needing the plot to go a certain way and then
making the characters, whether it was in their nature or
not, go along with it."
Actually, I thought this was good writing, structurally.
There's a really nice (in the artistic, not the real world
sense) parallel between Willow and Spike here, I think:
Spike comes back to Sunnydale
Oz leaves Willow
Willow is despondant
Spike gets chipped in a clinically bright, sterile
laboratory
Spike attempts to "rape" Willow
....(fast forward a couple of seasons)....
Spike attempts to rape Buffy in a brightly lit bathroom
Spike decides to do something about the chip
Spike leaves Sunnydale
Tara is shot ("leaves" Willow)
Willow is vengefully despondant
The two scenarios are mirror images of each other. The thing
is, the first time is more or less played for laughs, the
second time is serious and tragic. In this light, the
vengence Willow seems to be taking in the preview for next
week looks like the mirror image of her "my will be done"
spell. Anyway, I don't think this is "forcing" the
characters into necessary actions but moving them back to a
previous point (closing a circle or a fork in the road?) and
sending them off down another path.
[> [>
Re: Rantings about Seeing Red -- LittleBit,
14:46:05 05/08/02 Wed
Yes. I was thinking it was incredibly appropriate that
Something Blue is on FX tonight.
[> [>
Not Quite... -- Belladonna, 14:00:36 05/09/02
Thu
Spike didn't try to "rape" Willow. He tried to bite her.
Yes, biting has been portrayed as sexual in some instances,
and yes, that sexual undertone was played for laughs in that
scene, but it was metaphorical. In SR, Spike literally
tried to literally rape Buffy. That's completely different
from the scene when he tries to bite Willow. I've seen
people in other posts try to say those two scenes are alike,
and I just don't see it.
I also don't think it was good writing. I just don't see it
in Spike's character to try to rape her.
Just my two cents.
[>
Spikelover, give your head a shake.......... --
Rufus, 15:13:25 05/08/02 Wed
(Perhaps the writers do intend a X/B pairing. I won't
support it, but whatever. I don't think Buffy is ready for a
relationship. Maybe she can just die an old maid. Or better
yet, maybe she can just die.)
When I see statements like this I discount the rest of what
you say in defence of Spike. Buffy is the Hero, but she does
admit to being wrong. Spike is not perfection, he has spent
most of his unlife as a scummy killer. Hardly sexy in my
books. When people condone his behavior and condemn Buffy I
can't believe it. He has been around for over a century and
has been a waste of space, Buffy had saved the world. If
Spike finds a way to redemption I will be thrilled but I'm
practical enough to realize that with his past behavior he
could just revert back to what has been natural for
him..which is evil.
[> [>
Err... free passes all around? -- Traveler,
15:31:35 05/08/02 Wed
If SpikeLover is guilty of overgeneralization and character
bashing, then you are too in this post. Both have done some
really heroic things. Both have done some really nasty
things. One's a vampire, the other's a vampire slayer. How
do you add all this up to get a Spike/Buffy ratio of
morality? Regardless, I can see the potential for great
good, and great evil in both of them.
[> [> [>
Re: Err... free passes all around? -- Rufus,
15:49:06 05/08/02 Wed
I agree with part of what you say. I don't go on to wish the
death of either character. But do a balance sheet, add up
what Buffy has done in 21 years and what Spike has done in
over one hundred and they speak for themselves. I believe
that Spike can be redeemed but never, ever, forget what he
has been. Remember he has murdered his way through many
countries, enjoyed the fear and hurt he has caused in his
victims. I believe that Spike has a greater potential for
evil because that is what his track record indicates, not so
for Buffy. If Spike is transformed by his exposure to the
slayer it will be a miracle that would thrill me. But he is
at this time still evil, still struggling to find the
clarity of being able to do evil things without guilt. If he
changes it will be part chip and part Buffy that has started
him in that direction.
[> [> [> [>
Spike -- Forsaken, 16:22:35 05/08/02 Wed
Buffy has enjoyed the fear and pain of her victims every bit
as much as Spike has. It just happens that her victims were
monsters, so that's for some reason ok. That's the real
reason Kendra was taught to look down on emotions, because
if you start to enjoy your work too much, you might start to
work on people as well (Faith). Spike really wasn't much
into the fear anyway as I remember, he was into the combat.
He liked the fighting, the more difficult the better (not
that a good one sided slaughter didn't have any appeal, of
course).
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike -- Rufus, 16:30:24 05/08/02 Wed
I don't get that impression that Buffy enjoys just the
killing, she does get off on surviving a battle. If vampires
were no threat to humanity, Buffy wouldn't exist as a
slayer. Vampires are a direct threat to the living, Buffy as
the slayer a protective response. She has made it clear that
she would prefer to be a normal girl with normal problems.
If Buffy didn't get off on survival she would have been gone
long ago. You can't compare the murder the vampire does for
the thrill of it and the plus of food, to the actions of the
Slayer that have been to protect the world. Buffy can't
retire, Spike and the other vampires have that choice of
finding another food source and stop killing people.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Buffy -- Traveler, 20:55:16 05/08/02 Wed
"I don't get that impression that Buffy enjoys just the
killing, she does get off on surviving a battle."
Oh, I think you are wrong here. If she doesn't get off on
killing the vamps, why does she taunt them before she kills
them? That isn't necessary for survival or protection. That
is the act of a bully. Also, there have been several very
deliberate scenes in several different seasons that clearly
illustrate that Buffy does enjoy slaying at least
sometimes. Also, in at least one case she killed a vamp, not
to protect humanity or herself, but out of cold blooded
revenge. Remember the vamp hooker Riley was with? This is
not to say that Buffy isn't usually justified in killing the
vamps she does, but that doesn't make her an angel
either.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Buffy -- Rufus, 21:38:37 05/08/02 Wed
I don't remember saying Buffy was an angel, her actions even
scare her sometimes. But all in all Buffy is a very
different character than Spike. They are in a
transformational relationship where we don't know who will
be better for it. You mention the Vamp Hooker, on kill I
went on for quite a bit about, but one vamp hooker doesn't
even begin to touch the countless victims of Spike. If you
see Buffy as a Bully how do you see Spike? His behavior is
clearly that of a bully, where once he gets physical power
he quickly learns to use it to dominate others. I don't see
where going after Buffy for a few actions makes Spike look
better. This season has shown both characters to be
conflicted, both acting against norm. Buffy is growing up,
and maybe Spike will as well.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Well, ok. That's hard to argue with. -- Traveler,
21:51:01 05/08/02 Wed
"I don't remember saying Buffy was an angel."
No, but you did say that she doesn't get off on killing
vamps.
"If you see Buffy as a Bully how do you see Spike?"
And I never said that Spike is an angel :P
"This season has shown both characters to be conflicted,
both acting against norm. Buffy is growing up, and maybe
Spike will as well."
I guess this is my overall point. So we actually agree? Who
would have thunk it?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
I think you are comparing apples and oranges --
Spike Lover, 08:00:05 05/09/02 Thu
You can compare Kendra, Buffy and Faith. You can compare
Angelus, Darla, Dru and Spike. But you can't really compare
Spike and Buffy. I am not certain it is fair to compare
Angel (w/ soul) and Spike.
Speaking of Angel (and his attempting to kill Wesley in the
hospital for revenge) and Spike who still has not acted out
in revenge.
Spike is guilty of being self-interested. He "betrayed" the
scoobies 2 seasons ago by throwing in w/ Adam, not because
he hated the scoobies, but because Adam promised he would
remove his chip.
As far as the killings Spike has done for centuries, I can't
make a statement on that because we have not been told what
exactly he has done (besides kill 2 slayers). To my
knowledge, he did not even kill his family (or his mother).
And before he killed those slayers, I think he was Angel's
whipping boy in the 4 vamp group (before Angel was re-
souled). Spike has always been depicted as a tough guy with
"a bad boy reputation" with crazy schemes who has been
devoted to the woman he loves. Is he opportunistic? Yes,
but aren't most living things that don't have a 'Christian'
or 'higher power' belief system?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: I think you are comparing apples and oranges --
Rufus, 13:22:01 05/09/02 Thu
Spike has killed enough people to make him dangerous to be
around without the chip or a soul. In some ways you are
right to not be able to compare Buffy and Spike because he
looks bad next to a girl who has been out there to fight
chaos and him out there to create it. She is the hero and he
even said it himself. He is someone who may end up very
different from how you know him in the past and now, but
he's no hero.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike -- Miss Edith, 17:12:19 05/11/02
Sat
I would have to disagree with your statement that Buffy
doesn't enjoy slaying and it is just a job to her. In The
Prom she specifically says to Giles "kicking ass is comfort
food". In other words it does help her feel better about her
life to work out her aggressions. In Bad Girls we see that
if she let herself she could be just as wild a killer as
Faith as both are seen killing vampires in daylight making
mocking remarks about being their "wake-up calls". And we
saw just how much Buffy did relish the slaying with Faith
when she goes wild in the Bronze afterwards. She even
responds to Faith's question about whether she enjoys
slaying with a naughty grin and a "didn't suck". Therefore
Buffy could under the right conditions be an unrestrained
killer just as much as Faith. The first slayer was an
uncivilised example about what being the slayer really
means. The real difference between Faith and Buffy is that
Buffy had come from a secure background and had guidelines
on how to behave, similarly to Kendra and the restrictions
placed on her by the watchers council. Kendra was almost the
opposite of the first slayer as she was so restrained but
clearly that didn't help her slaying as she was killed off
fairly easily at the hands of Dru whilst Buffy and Faith
could go wild and take out many vamps when they were working
together. Faith is an example of a true slayer with no
restraints imposed on her from society.
And in later seasons it is again emhasized that Buffy
considers slaying a rush. In The i in Team Buffy gets
sexually turned on from slaying and sleeps with Riley. The
scene is easy to interpret as the fighting and sex are
intercut. And in BuffyvsDracula Buffy cannot sleep until she
takes out a few vamps. She admits to Giles that she is
hunting them, rather than slaying as part of her duty. Look
at her mocking attitude with Dracula in the beginning when
she is goading him to "step up for some overtime" and
clearly relishes a good battle. Not unlike Spike's attitude
to slayers and getting to dance with them. Angelous relished
torture and is perhaps a better example of the classic evil
vampire. Spike was interested in fights with equal opponets
and found violence a rush. He encourages Angelous to unleash
his wild side "all fist and fangs". He is not interested in
torture in the way Angel and Dru were as he says in Whats My
Line "never been much for the preshow" when Dru suggests
torturing Angel. When Angel later goads him in the same
episode rather than inflicting torture on him Spike grabs a
stake and plans to kill him off straightaway. Hurting him
doesn't Angel doesn't even seem to occur to him. I am not
suggesting this is out of any moral concerns, just that
torture doesn't seem to be a natural part of Spike's
personality. The only time we see Spike torturing someone is
when he wants the ring in the Angel episode In The Dark.
Just as Buffy practically goes about torture in When She Was
Bad because she needed information on her friends
whereabouts.
Spike and Dru do indulge in kinky sex but it is suggested
that Dru loses interest precisely because Spike doesn't have
it in him to hurt her as much as daddy does. He is not demon
enough for the likes of her.
I just don't think Buffy and Spike are as different as you
might like to think. Their goals are different as they
fought on different sides but I have always seen their basic
personalities as the same. In School Hard during their first
fight we see the two of them are pretty similiar as they
both drop their weapons and are interested in a hard, equal
fight. Buffy doesn't just slay vampires as it is her
responsibility to save the world. It is a part of how she is
and I would be interested in seeing the primal nature of
slayers explored personally.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike -- Rufus, 20:18:51 05/11/02 Sat
I just don't think Buffy and Spike are as different as
you might like to think.
I don't know why you are making that statement, so explain
what I have said that makes you believe that.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike -- Miss Edith, 21:27:44 05/11/02
Sat
Sorry if you feel I misrepresented you. I was refering to
your comment "Buffy is a very different character than
Spike" and the comments you were making about Buffy being a
hero and Spike having been a scummy killer. In many ways
that is obviously true but I do see a certain similarity in
their core personalities. I feel this comes out strongly in
their similiar views of fighting for instance as both
characters do seem to share a love of violence.
I wasn't responding to your post specifically, just picking
up on a few of your points and then going off on my own
little ramble (I do that a lot). I haven't been on the board
long so please don't think I was critisizing you or making
any assumptions about your stance. That was certainly not my
intention.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike -- Rufus, 22:20:29 05/11/02 Sat
I was just checking. The fact that Spike has been human and
is still part human gives him some similarity to Buffy. Then
you add in the fact that they are the flip sides to each
other. Spike is a vampire and Buffy the slayer of such.
Their adversarial relationship will bring out some of their
similarities as slayers were created to hunt out and battle
vampires. The big difference is which side you are on, a
human will perceive Spike as a scummy killer, as that is
what he does, Buffy will be seen as the hero as she is the
protector of humanity. Of course evil demons (you notice her
reaction to the harmless Clem) will have a different
oppinion of her. They both love violence because it is part
of what they are, they battle each other, the big difference
is that Buffy can feel compassion for others and up to a
very short time ago, Spike could care less. This ability to
care in any way for a human has caused a conflict that will
have to be resolved.
[> [> [> [>
How to defeat me in a Spike debate. -- Traveler,
20:40:04 05/08/02 Wed
Firstly, I will restate my belief that you can't create a
fast and easy tally sheet for morality. How many points do
you give murder? How many for torture? How do extenuating
circumstances effect the scores? Furthermore, how does time
effect the score? Is something that you did 50 years ago
worth the same as something you did yesterday? What about
relative maturity level and life experience? When I was in
elementary school, I started several fights and hit people.
How would you rate me then, and how many points would you
give me for the same thing now? If everybody on this board
created such a "moral tally system," they would all be
different. So, when I do my tallies, Buffy and Spike come up
just about equal. You are free to disagree, but you won't
convince me that I'm wrong by waving your balance sheet at
me.
I believe that Spike wants to be evil, but I'm not
totally convinced that he is evil. If you want to
convince me of that, you will have to limit the discussion
to recent history, say the past year or two. Why don't I
care about all his past misdeeds? Because I believe that
people can change, and thus you will have to show me that he
hasn't changed, that he is still the same person who
committed the wrongs that weigh so heavily on your tally
sheet. Or alternatively, you could argue that he did change,
but that change was recently reversed. Either way, give me
specific examples and anticipate counter arguments. Be sure
to compare him to other members of the scooby gang and show
how his recent behavior is significently worse/less moral
than theirs.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: How to defeat me in a Spike debate. -- Rufus,
21:44:06 05/08/02 Wed
So, you want me to discount the type of man Spike was as a
person in William. To judge Spike you have to look that the
total picture. I feel it's unfair to just use the past few
years to judge Spike, he has evolved just as Buffy has. He
was a good man, if you want to have hope he can be one again
you have to look at what he once was, what he became, and
what he may become. The difference between Buffy and Spike
is that Buffy has acted numerous times to save the world,
Spike has been more or less a parasite, but one with a past
that indicates there may be more to him. If you discount
everything past a few years ago then you lose any redeeming
qualities that William had and are just stuck with a guy
that stopped killing a few years ago, not because he wanted
to, but because he was forced to.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
OK, so you found another way to beat me. --
Traveler, 22:23:04 05/08/02 Wed
You can say things I can't argue with while undermining my
points with your examples.
"To judge Spike you have to look that the total picture.
"
Yes, I absolutely agree, but to paraphrase Spike, "where you
started isn't necessarily where you'll end up." With the
"balance sheets" you were describing before, Spike is evil
by fiat. He once did lots of evil things, therefore he must
be evil now. That's the logic I don't buy. Also, I don't buy
the, "she saved the world so she must be good" argument
either. Even the most evil son-of-a-bitch of all time would
save the world if he had a chance. After all, he's standing
on it! Speaking of which, how many times has Spike
helped Buffy save the world? Two out of three
apocolypses so far, I think. Also, Spike was not a parasite
at all before he got the chip. He just worked for the other
team, so to speak. Ever since then, he has been doing more
and more to help the scoobies, even though most of them
won't have anything to do with him.
"If you discount everything past a few years ago then you
lose any redeeming qualities that William had and are just
stuck with a guy that stopped killing a few years ago, not
because he wanted to, but because he was forced to."
Spike was only forced to stop killing directly. There was
nothing that stopped him from doing things to cause
death. Also, the chip never forced him to do good
things. I think there is a lot more to his behavior in the
past couple seasons than the chip and his love for Buffy.
Certainly, knowing about William helps us to understand
Spike, but he can't redeem Spike. William is dead. Spike
must redeem himself. When the chip is gone, we truly will
find out whether he is a man or a monster.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Not a parasite? -- AngelVSAngelus, 22:54:01
05/08/02 Wed
I had been under the impression that Rufus was here using
parasite as an analogy for evil-vampness itself. The fact
that Spike, as you said, was "playing for the other team"
was what made him a parasite, as I understood him to mean.
And the Spike helping Buffy avert the apocalypse tally is
three out of six, I think, assuming you count stopping
Angelus' scheme involving Acathla. But should that really
count as Spike's altruisticly aiding the slayer in stopping
the end of the world? The guy did what he came there for,
punched Angelus, grabbed his girlfriend, and bailed with a
shrug at the sight of Buffy on the verge of being killed by
Angelus. If her death had of come to pass, by the way, the
world STILL would have ended.
I believe that people can change, too. But I'd thought
that it had been established in the past of the series that
that was the special case for souled beings. Spike said it
himself not that long ago, in reply to Angel (the vampire
with a soul) saying that things change. "Not us! Not
demons!" Faith kills a man, and turns her self in later, she
can be redeemed eventually. Darla kills thousands of people,
her redemption lies in the special circumstance of being
'infected' by her human son's soul, and her subsequent
death. That's the way it used to work with demons, and many
love the ambiguity of changing that, but that doesn't work
for me because of the original mission statement of the
show, and even its very genre and source material. Last time
I checked, demons were representative metaphors for our
WORST qualities. Something that we could use to separate
said qualities from ourselves and scrutinize, criticize, or
destroy.
Why am I having an anti-demon-redemption argument again?
I always find my way into these somehow...
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Not a parasite? -- alcibiades, 23:31:55
05/08/02 Wed
"Last time I checked, demons were representative metaphors
for our WORST qualities. Something that we could use to
separate said qualities from ourselves and scrutinize,
criticize, or destroy. "
Clem for example, or Lorne, or Cordelia don't seem metaphors
for our worst qualities. Like Buffy's bathrobe in Seeing
Red, the Buffyverse has greyed. Black and white morality
was for back in high school.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
I think the show has evolved away from the original
premise -- Spike Lover, 08:11:46 05/09/02 Thu
Remember when they were not certain that there would be a
Season 2? That was when X asked Giles if Vamps could ever
be redeemed or good (regarding Jesse).
After a season or two of worrying about vampires, they
branched out to demons. and then hell gods. Would you say
that all gods are evil or self-centered? (I hope not.)
Then you have the show Angel, in which there is a LOT of
gray. You have evil lawyers, and monsters. And nice
monsters. Did you see the episode where Gunn's old street
gang was killing demons indescrimately- because they were
demons. It was a show about prejudices.
This is where we are now on both shows. I can't help it if
it does not coincide with what was said in season 1 or
2.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Maybe about demons, but not about vampires --
Dochawk, 14:45:54 05/09/02 Thu
From Loyalty (angel season 3, psyche's shooting script):
Angel: "When somebody becomes a vampire there is no turning
back. (Wes looks over at Angel) No matter how much you want
to believe there is some part of him you can save, all
that's left is an evil thing."
I think its pretty clear that there may be demons who are
"good" (skip, clem, doyle, cordy etc), but vampires without
souls have no chance.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
[>
Re: Maybe about demons, but not about vampires --
Simone, 00:47:15 05/10/02 Fri
>>I think its pretty clear that there may be demons who are
"good" (skip, clem, doyle, cordy etc), but vampires without
souls have no chance.<<
Really? 'Cause what I've seen this season is a vampire
without a soul who was never really GIVEN a chance. Maybe he
would've blown it anyway. Maybe not. I guess we'll never
know now.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
You would think I was trying to beat you up......;)
-- Rufus, 02:24:11 05/09/02 Thu
If you want to debate redemption you better remember I've
been doing that for quite awhile. I'm also practical about
it. Spike as a vampire is a parasite created to turn man
against himself. He is William with an alias created to make
him feel more manly. If it weren't for that poet, Spike
would never have considered Buffy anything more than another
notch on his belt. But what he once was informs all he
became. All the hurts and emotions of William are there,
making me ask what is a person, a body or a mind? Vampires
are hybrids both human and demon. The demon infection didn't
completely replace who the man was, it only took away the
pesky constraints of a conscience. Drinking blood has been
compared to drinking an alcoholic beverage, the more you get
the more you want and the more outrageous you act. The chip
stopped Spike from directly attacking a person, but he still
tried to compensate by killing by proxy...then he found out
he was in love...was that the chip? He blamed all his
feelings on a chip that does nothing more than zap him when
he misbehaves. I believe the chip started a process that
will transform Spike into either the monster he felt
comfortable being or to be someone that Buffy could trust to
love.
What I object to is the bashing of Buffy to the betterment
of Spike. Both parties have acted in good an bad ways
towards each other, they can't kill each other, and Buffy
knows that she may someday have to kill Spike if the chip is
out. Redemption may have to come via a soul for Spike so he
doesn't act out in a way that negates anything he has done
the past while that is good. Xander never forgot what Spike
is, Buffy can't either, and they are smart. Spikes best
intentions won't save him from his impulsive actions. If he
ever got the taste of human blood fresh from a kill he would
never be able to make it better, and that is why Buffy can't
love him, can't ever really trust him. So, what do you think
will happen?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Yes, but... (spoilers for SR) -- Traveler,
07:23:31 05/09/02 Thu
"Spike as a vampire is a parasite created to turn man
against himself."
Or you could say that vampires are predators, hunters of
man.
"But what he once was informs all he became."
Yes, but Spike is not the same man as William. I am trying
to suggest that we consider Spike as a whole person, not
pick parts of him to discuss, (i.e., William and the Big
Bad).
"What I object to is the bashing of Buffy to the
betterment of Spike."
And I object to the bashing of Spike to the betterment of
Buffy. Comparison's are fine, but they should be balanced
and as objective as possible. Simply saying Spike=evil or
Buff=bitch removes all of the layers of complexity that make
the show interesting.
"Xander never forgot what Spike is, Buffy can't either,
and they are smart. "
Was it really smart? I have a chicken or the egg question
for you. Did Spike try to rape Buffy because he was
untrustworthy, or did he try to rape her because she never
trusted him? You know, I think that this scene was
everything that Buffy feared about Spike. She has been
waiting for him to do something, fearing it, but unable to
stop caring for him. A case can be made that she has been
pushing him to do something like this, to confirm her
fears.
"Spikes best intentions won't save him from his impulsive
actions."
Not always, but it is hard to argue that they don't matter
at all.
"So, what do you think will happen?"
I have no idea.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
The other shoe to drop -- Spike Lover, 08:18:53
05/09/02 Thu
I don't think he was consciously intending to rape her. I
don't think she was consciously trying to force him to mess
up.--But you make a interesting point that she
subconsciously has been waiting for the other shoe to drop
this entire time. -This again goes back to Angel...
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: The other shoe to drop.....spoilers for end of
season -- Rufus, 13:10:03 05/09/02 Thu
I've left you a very big hint about what is going to happen
at the end of the year and next season....there are a few
options and if you listen to what Xander said in Seeing Red
and Buffy's reaction to Spike you will hear the writers
telling you that Spike may be redeemed, but it won't be
without a soul, something else will have to happen. They are
sticking along the lines of the soul being the only way for
a vampire to be all good would be the restoration of the
soul or perhaps becoming human. I base this upon what the
show and the definition of the soul according to Joss is.
Spike has done some amazing things considering the
circumstances, but he attempted to attack a human when he
thought the chip was malfunctioning, Buff may be safe from
him (he could have ended his problem by biting her any of
the times he had a chance). There have also been a few other
hints noteably the "Jiminy Cricket" reference that was in
the closed captioning but not in the show. If they don't
give him a soul or make him human they will have him revert
back to evil, that's how I see it, like it or not.
[> [> [> [>
Ok; if you want to compare moral compasses... --
Spike Lover, 07:47:33 05/09/02 Thu
Compare Warren and Spike. The writers want us to afterall.
Admittedly Spike is over a hundred, and Warren is barely 20,
but whereas a vampire (being soulless and his food source
seems to be humans) may have a predisposition for killing
humans. What is Warren's excuse? He is ready to kill
everyone, now that the first one is out of the way.
Neither W or S show remorse for the killing they have done.
S at least is sorry that he hurt the woman he thinks he
loves. It was never his intention to rape Buffy, although
if he had not stopped (or if she had not kicked him against
the wall) it would have been daterape. Warren however fully
intended to daterape Katrina and when she told him that was
what it was, he fully intended to reset the mind control
machine and continue with his plans. I think that if Buffy
had told Spike (if she had been able to find the words),
that he was about to rape her- I fully believe he would have
stopped immediately. (Because the William in him NEVER
would have done that.) Later in his crypt, that is exactly
what he realizes. He nearly raped her, and that was vile in
his opinion. --Hmmm- does not seem very evil to me.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Ok; if you want to compare moral compasses... -
- Rufus, 13:15:51 05/09/02 Thu
The soul has never been held up as a guarantee of goodness
only the predisposition to prefer good. If you were paying
attention you would have seen some of the more obvious hints
as to where the character Spike was heading. They must keep
a certain amount of canon consistant with Angel the Series,
a vampire being good without a soul brings into question the
unique nature of the soul in the Buffyverse, so they are
going to have to stick with it. Spike has done some very
good things from season five to now, but as an alcoholic can
fall of a wagon (remember Angel refering to being drunk on
his sons blood) Spike could fall back into killing people.
So, for Spike to be safe to be around they are going to have
to restore the soul or make him human...you may not like it
but it's what I see from watching both shows and interviews
with the writers.
[> [> [> [> [>
Daterape? (SPOILERS for Seeing Red) -- Robert,
00:52:33 05/13/02 Mon
>> "... although if he had not stopped (or if she had not
kicked him against the wall) it would have been
daterape."
Why would it be daterape? Please provide a definition of
daterape?
My confusion comes from the fact that Spike attacked Buffy
in her own home after entering without her permission and
they were not on a date.
[> [> [>
What really heroic thing? -- Dochawk, 16:05:15
05/08/02 Wed
Exactly what really heroic thing has Spike done? I am
continually vexed by this question, because I think action
done because you are trying to get into someone's pants
aren't all that heroic no matter what the action. the one
thing I do think he did without that motivation, taking that
beating to protect Dawn's identity got him closer to his
goal than anything else he ever did. helping the Scoobies
kill vamps over the summer was mostly Spike getting his
jollies off. (he still loves mayhem).
And exactly what evil thing has Buffy done? She has made
mistakes, pushed some things too far, but evil? On the grey
scale of good/evil Buffy is somewhere about an 8, prechip
Spike about a 2 and postchip Spike about a 4.
[> [> [> [>
Well, since you asked... -- Traveler, 20:48:02
05/08/02 Wed
"I think action done because you are trying to get into
someone's pants aren't all that heroic no matter what the
action."
If you don't believe that Spike ever loved Buffy, then we
are about to get into a really really long argument. If you
accept the fact that he did love her, then you can't
invalidate his actions without also dimissing everything
that Buffy has done. Yes, that's right. Every truly
noble deed that Buffy has done was in order to protect
someone that she loved. In fact, the first slayer said that
love was Buffy's source of strength.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Well, since you asked... -- Spike Lover,
11:53:42 05/09/02 Thu
I think one thing that was truly noble that he did
was...
making the deal w/ Buffy back in Season 2 to save Dru. He
tried to save Dru from herself and her own wacky plans, and
he did it by essentially going to the enemy -although he
must have known that she would be mad at him, that she would
not understand, and that it would cause a rift between
them.
He actually did sort of the same thing for Buffy, when he
thought for certain she was going to throw her life away by
confessing to a killing that was confusing and doubtful at
best. You may not admire him for his reasons or his
thinking, but it was noble. I certainly would not have
endured a beating for anyone. I'd say- to hell with it- go
ahead and throw your life away.
But since these examples are for the woman that he loved,
they may not count in your opinion. Has the greater good of
the world ever been a concern of his? I don't think so. I
don't think it is one of my concerns either, to be honest.
But again, if you look at Buffy, it has not been one of her
concerns either, you could argue. Last year's season final,
Giles tells her that if the blood letting starts, for the
greater good, Buffy has to kill Dawn. Buffy flatly refuses.
Of course, she came up w/ a nice, tidy solution, but that is
another story. Also, she should have killed Glory's human
half, but she allows him to live for his sake- not the
world's. It is Giles who usually has consideration for the
world and the greater good.
[>
thoughts on ranting (spoilers through SR) -- tim,
20:34:07 05/08/02 Wed
I've been looking for a little while for a chance to post
these thoughts; I think there's plenty here that it will
serve nicely as a case-in-point, but please don't think I'm
trying to single this topic out in any way. It's just the
debate of the moment.
I believe this argument, like so many others of the past
year, says a good deal more about the posters than it does
about the show. I'm probably the last person frequenting
these boards to read that Joss' theme for the season is,
"Oh, grow up!" Still, there it is--a simple succinct
statement about where we are and where we're going.
The point is, he's talking to all of them. Spike. Buffy.
Xander. Anya. Willow. Dawn. With the exception of Tara, who
has been external to the group for much of the season, every
single major character on the show has done stupid, immature
things that have ended up hurting the people they cared
about most.
So yes, Buffy has been abusive of Spike, both physically and
emotionally, and she's driven her friends away by concealing
their relationship. And yes, Spike has been equally abusive
emotionally and tried to control her even after she tried to
calmly and respectfully break off their relationship (As You
Were). (Incidentally, for a much better discussion of Spike
and control, see Shadowkat's excellent essay below.) Yes,
Xander was the worst form of cad by waiting until his
wedding day to inform Anya that he was scared of what their
marriage would become. And yes, Anya effectively "got him
back" (albeit unintentionally) by sleeping with Spike.
I could go on, but I think the point is made. Stupidity and
immaturity has hit Sunnydale like a plague this year, and ME
has been very careful to make sure there's plenty of it to
go around to everyone. Where you place the blame, then, is
really about your biases and preconceptions, not about the
show itself. So was the rape scene out of character for him?
How highly did you think of Spike beforehand? Who deserves
more of the blame for the great Spuffy wreck? Which
character did you like more going into the season? How
should the blame be divided for the Anya/Xander dissolution?
Who were you rooting for the night "Becoming" first
aired?
The whole point of the Troika being this season's big bad,
IMO, is to show us just how fractured the SG is. The
scoobies are people who only a few months ago took on a god.
And won. The pathetic little boys of the Troika, were the SG
members operating like the adults they were last season,
would have been dealt with before breakfast. It is only the
immaturity, the stupidity, the bad choices of EVERYONE IN
THE GROUP that makes these dorks formidable opponents, and
only because it's hard to fight anyone when you're already
fighting yourself. All of which is, I'm sure, obvious to
everyone, but it's not been said recently, and it needs to
be.
I doubt that this semi-coherent diatribe will dissuade
anyone from supporting their favorite character, and I'd be
disappointed if it did. Hopefully, though, if people try to
bear in mind that ME really appears to want everyone to look
bad this time around, there'll be a little more forgiveness
for those hurting the one you love. And the "Buffy should
die"s and "Anya is such a bitca"s will not be so quick in
coming.
(The ending to this came out a lot more "feel the love" than
I had intended. What can I say? It's late, and I've been up
since 5 AM.)
--th
"Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained
by incompetence." --Hanlon's Razor
[> [>
kudos - very well said. -- Solitude1056,
20:56:07 05/08/02 Wed
[> [>
Can't you feel the love tonight? -- Traveler,
21:43:19 05/08/02 Wed
"I believe this argument, like so many others of the past
year, says a good deal more about the posters than it does
about the show."
I absolutely agree with everything you've written. But if we
gave everybody equal shares of credit and blame then there
wouldn't be nearly as much to argue about, would there?
:P
[>
Rose Tinted Glasses -- Corwin of Amber, 20:43:08
05/08/02 Wed
I'm getting really tired of people romanticizing Spike. Can
you honestly see Spike in a 'I can't believe it's not
butter' commercial, running through a field to sweep Buffy
into his arms?
You can't picture Spike trying to rape someone? SPIKE? He
got his nickname, which he bears proudly, by torturing
victims with railroad spikes.
Have you forgotten the Buffybot? Spikes little sex toy,
made for him by Warren. Remember him slapping Harmony
around and having her dress up like Buffy? Awww, that's so
cute, he's just SO in love with Buffy....
Please. See Spike for what he is.
[> [>
What show are you watching? He did not mistreat the
Buffybot -- Spike Lover, 11:50:37 05/09/02 Thu
[> [> [>
Again Spikelover, give your head a shake...there has
been mutual mistreatment. -- Rufus, 13:18:57 05/09/02
Thu
I may like the character of Spike but I know what I see
before my eyes. Spike attempted to rape the woman he loves.
He was a slimy killer before getting the chip. Like an
alcoholic he could at any time find that the chip is not
working and slip back into the addiction of killing people,
the Scooby Gang would be nuts not to worry about that.
[> [> [> [>
Since when has killing people been an addiction? --
Traveler, 16:28:42 05/09/02 Thu
Other than Angel's one comment about Connor's drugged
blood, I don't know where you get this idea that vampires
are addicted to killing people. No future spoilers please.
What you've already said is close enough. Also, as for the
scooby gang being nuts not to worry about it, maybe. Angel
could go evil too, but his crew doesn't treat him nearly as
badly as the scooby gang has treated Spike. I'm not saying
their reactions aren't understandable to some extent, but
that doesn't make it right.
Also, please stop telling SpikeLover to shake his/her head.
I don't know what that means exactly, but it sounds pretty
insulting. I like this board, and I don't want to see any
personal attacks on it.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Since when has killing people been an
addiction? -- Rufus, 16:51:54 05/09/02 Thu
Also, please stop telling SpikeLover to shake his/her
head. I don't know what that means exactly, but it sounds
pretty insulting. I like this board, and I don't want to see
any personal attacks on it.
(Perhaps the writers do intend a X/B pairing. I won't
support it, but whatever. I don't think Buffy is ready for a
relationship. Maybe she can just die an old maid. Or better
yet, maybe she can just die.)
I consider the above remark a personal attack. The writers
are taking the Spike character in a definate direction, but
to blame Buffy or the others makes no sense to me.
I think that if Buffy had told Spike (if she had been
able to find the words), that he was about to rape her- I
fully believe he would have stopped immediately. (Because
the William in him NEVER would have done that.) Later in his
crypt, that is exactly what he realizes. He nearly raped
her, and that was vile in his opinion. --Hmmm- does not seem
very evil to me.
To put the onus on the victim in the rape situation is just
crazy to me. Buffy being stronger than Spike is no defence
for what he tried to do. There has always been that longing
in Spike to go back to what he knows best, what feels good
to him, but he has changed.....and there are many times
where the writers have suggested what is going to happen.
When comments like "she could just die" are thrown out it
negates any arguement the person may have. That also is a
signal for me to tell someone to give their head a shake. Or
get real. The Buffyverse may be gray, but there are some
rules, and Spike as a vampire and Buffy as a sexually
involved couple are over. His actions the reason behind it.
Buffy can't trust him and he knows why. Why do you think he
is on his way out of town.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Hotbutton issues -- Traveler, 18:34:03 05/09/02
Thu
"(Perhaps the writers do intend a X/B pairing. I won't
support it, but whatever. I don't think Buffy is ready for a
relationship. Maybe she can just die an old maid. Or better
yet, maybe she can just die.)"
I don't think this was a personal attack against you.
As much as you may sympathize with Buffy the character, she
is not you, so please do not take comments about her as
being directed at you.
"To put the onus on the victim in the rape situation is
just crazy to me..."
I agree, but you aren't really talking to me, are you?
"When comments like "she could just die" are thrown out
it negates any arguement the person may have."
I don't like character bashing any more than you do, but it
is never cool to tell someone that their opinions are
worthless, whatever the reason for it. If I'm that
underwhelmed by someone's argument, I simply don't respond.
That way, the flame wars don't continue and people's
feelings don't get hurt. The whole idea of this board is to
promote discussion, not stifle it.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Hotbutton issues -- Rufus, 19:12:39 05/09/02
Thu
I don't think I'm stifling discussion by objecting to
obvious bashing of writers or characters. If nothing is said
then others think it's a great idea to continue on in the
bashing and then there is less discussion and more name
calling.
You are right, I'm not talking about you....I stand by my
comment on rape victims.
I never said anything about a post being worthless, but
comments made by a poster can make people reading forget
about a valid point when all they notice is an obvious bash.
It's hard to take a post seriously when they are using terms
like Buffy or any other character or writer, is a bitch, or
some other insult.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Spike Lover Shaking Head -- Spike Lover,
08:28:35 05/10/02 Fri
Ok- Let me see if I can respond to some of this.
1) When I said that if Buffy had been able to tell (like
Katrina had been able to tell) Spike that this was about to
be rape, he would have stopped, I am not blaming Buffy for
not doing that. I am simply making a speculation that IF
she had, I think it would be consistent w/ Spike's character
to have stopped immediately. Since you see Spike so
different, Rufus, you obviously do not believe that he would
have.
2) I am blaming Buffy for many other things - and I have
that right because -she is just a character (not real) and
second, the writers have written her gray and they want the
audience to have mixed feelings about the
characters/hero.
3) Everytime someone says that "Spike is Evil, or
EEEVVVIILLL, or soulless and therefore incapable of doing
good," that is an assault against him. It may be true, but
by your definition, it is 'character bashing'. Afterall,
Buffy is often written and portrayed as a primaddona bitch.
Is it character bashing or simply stating how the audience
sees it?
Also saying that Spike is absolutely evil is not really fair
because not many are saying that Warren is evil (because he
has a soul). Or Glory is evil (who was all soul)? etc?
4) Next, the writers plans for the future. I have no idea
on this one. The few times I have tried to guess what
happens next I have been completely wrong. I can't buy your
take on Spike getting his soul back, though it would be
cool, or him turning back into William. I think if they
wanted Spike to have his soul back, the scooby gang could
restore it as they restored Angel's, but there is a reason
they don't go in that direction.
**The main reason I don't think that will happen is that by
having him turn good by restoring Spike's soul or something
similar, it is basically saying that no one can truly change
without the intervention of a higher power. Joss is a
declared atheist whose mantra is that a person is self-
sufficient to save himself and his surrounding world on his
own. It is pretty ironic when you consider as many crosses
as the show has in it, since the SG does not put one iota of
thought into Christianity or what it means.
I probably should not stop here, but as I am certain I am
already in plenty of hot water, I will. But I do appreciate
everyone's comments and thoughts.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike Lover Shaking Head -- Rufus, 15:55:42
05/10/02 Fri
Since you see Spike so different, Rufus, you obviously do
not believe that he would have.
You will have to clarify this because long before you ever
started posting here, I was dealing with Spike in a very pro-
redemption way. I do that without calling writers, or
characters Bitches, or blaming them for things Spike clearly
has done. I also have pointed out where Spike clearly has
done good. Based upon the scripts and writers comments I
have to say that the only way they will "redeem" this
character is through him becoming human, or getting a soul
back. Either you have read none of my past posts or you have
decided that I'm an enemy because I'm telling as I see it. I
call you on bashing of characters or writers. So, tell me,
how do I feel about Spike, as you have decided you know how
I feel.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Empirical Evidence -- Malandanza, 07:05:03
05/11/02 Sat
"long before you ever started posting here, I was dealing
with Spike in a very pro-redemption way"
In fact, I blame Rufus for starting all this redemptionista
talk. Here's her post from December 2000 that began the
"Can Spike be redeemed" debate:
Due to mounting evidence I have to question the mostly
accepted fact that a vampire/demon can only be evil as
he/she has no soul.
Season one was so simple. Vampires/demons were evil period.
Made it so easy to contemplate genocide because they were a
direct threat to human existance. One question I have is if
vampires/demons were meant to be wiped off the face of the
earth why have only ONE slayer?
As the seasons have progressed we got Angel vampire with a
soul. That was easy he was good because of the presence of
his soul. Then Mr Whedon started evolving the accepted
facts. There were demons who were never evil and some demons
chose to be good directly going against their nature. The
best example being the Prio Motu demon known to be a demon
bred to maim and massacre(got that bit from this site).
We have been shown that vampires can adhere to a set of
rules that include not killing humans(vamp hookers)in an
effort to escape detection.
Spike is evolving as a person and I don't know where it will
end for him. He is in the camp of demon hunters now (even if
it is just thrill killing).
If the human race can evolve their behavior why can't the
vamps have a few members that evolve past their nature to
kill? Is the notion that vampires can only be evil just be
another form of prejudice?
As I can't say what a soul is for sure how can I judge
beings that do not have one?
If the presence of a soul was the only indicator that a
being is good why does humanity commit so many evil acts?
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Empirical Evidence -- Rufus, 13:53:38
05/11/02 Sat
I haven't stopped talking about redemption, but when I get
evidence of a direction the writers are going may conflict
with what I may be thinking, I have to address it. BTW I
started earlier than that date you noted;) The quote Joss
said about the soul made sense and allowed the vampire to
act along a spectrum of behavior that gave them more options
how to act. The problem with it though is we also have to
remember their compass does give them the preference for
chaos/evil. I think that vampires are capable of good, but
their preference is evil and that could lead to actions that
would negate of the good. Buffy understands this, as she
said in AYW....
BUFFY: And I'm not here to bust your chops about your
stupid scheme, either. That's just you. I should have
remembered.
She may have feelings for him but has made it clear that she
can't trust him to always do the right thing. But remember I
clearly see vampirism as a form of a curse, so redemption
may be removing the monster from the man, or placing a soul
in him. ME has left the door open for Spike to come back
after Buffy to kill her, or win her affections. It's going
to be along summer.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Spike Lover Shaking Head -- Ronia, 12:00:12
05/13/02 Mon
I find it not so much ironic as distracting from what I
really enjoy most about the show, the character study. The
power behind these symbols is never explained...what is the
power off the cross if there is no Christ? I have been
wondering for years why they feel the need to backup the
plot with bits and pieces from existing religions, and doing
it badly. With the exception of Wicca, no religion has been
accurately portrayed to any degree...why use them? This is
a fictional universe where you have the opportunity to make
things up as you go along, I say take advantage.
[> [> [> [>
Wrong -- Spike Lover, 08:53:04 05/10/02 Fri
He was there initially for answers and maybe to get a
confession out of her. -Look, she can't tell the truth
about anything- not even that she has his lighter in her
pocket!
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Wrong -- Rufus, 15:58:18 05/10/02 Fri
Oh, so I guess that excuses Spike for entering her home
uninvited, walking into her bathroom, uninvited, attempting
to rape her.....all because Buffy can't tell the truth over
a lighter........I don't think you get it.
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Wrong -- Earl Allison,
17:30:16 05/10/02 Fri
Rufus,
I think you're bashing your head against a wall here.
Anyone who wants to either maintain an open mind, or at
least TRY to listen to a differing viewpoint
understands.
Unfortunately, this incident from "Seeing Red" has seriously
polarized things, and there are certain posters (here and at
other boards) doing the posting eqivalent of sticking their
fingers in their ears and going "la la la I can't HEAR you"
over and over.
For what it's worth, I value your posts and opinions -- they
are always interesting, and you always show a willingness to
discuss and listen.
Take it and run.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Thanks -- Rufus, 18:24:33 05/10/02 Fri
After the disemboweling post all I can think of is running
with someones innards...;)
You are right...I've gone through the whole thing stem to
stern, shooting script to interview and have come to some
conclusions that some people won't like. I like the
character of Spike but also are willing to say when he is
wrong and not blame everyone around him. I'm a fan of the
show not just one actor. Some people excuse anything because
of actor preference, refusing to see the obvious. So running
now.....cause ME is sticking by their basic soul canon, like
it or not.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: Thanks -- Earl Allison,
19:33:22 05/10/02 Fri
No problem, glad to help!
Sorry the disemboweling image is stuck with you :) I'll not
use it again.
Take it and run.
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
I'll run,no guts or bowels included.....;) --
Rufus, 20:19:55 05/10/02 Fri
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Rufus has a long history of thoughtful posts, and IMO
they have even improved over the past year -- gds,
09:44:58 05/11/02 Sat
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Mucho Rufus quotage on my site! -- Masq,
10:56:37 05/12/02 Sun
I look for succinct posts that get to the heart of the
matter and cover the important issues and find I end up with
Rufus posts a lot!
[> [>
Re: We have no evidence that Spike tortured anyone
-- Miss Edith, 18:03:43 05/11/02 Sat
I'm sorry but that simply doesn't fit the character that
I've been watching. Yes the watchers council did suggest
Spike got his nickname from torturing victims with railroad
spikes. But did they not also suggest he was a little under
200 years old and Dru had been killed in a violent mob? I
would therefore question the accuracy of their
information.
Perhaps Spike did get his nickname from torture as it is
implied in Fool For Love that he may have tortured the party
guests who mocked him. But there is no real evidence that he
has tortured on a regular basis or that he has a real
interest in torture. Did Dru not leave him becasue she
wasn't satisfied with his treatment of her? He wasn't demon
enough for the likes of her, she missed daddy and his
cruelty. And please tell me when Spike slapped Harmony
around. He certainly disrespected her and often shouted in
her face but in what episode specifically did he slap her?
And why is roleplaying mistreatment? Did he force Harmony to
dress as Buffy? It seemed to me she was the one desperate
for his attention and the one willing to suggest playing
sexual games.
And how did he mistreat the Buffybot (which by the way was a
machine and therefore unable to feel pain anyway). You might
as well say Spike mistreated his toaster.
[> [> [>
Re: We have no evidence that Spike tortured anyone
-- Corwin of Amber, 23:49:43 05/11/02 Sat
>And how did he mistreat the Buffybot (which by the way was
a machine and therefore unable to feel pain anyway).
I did not say that he mistreated the Buffybot. The Buffybot
is a symptom of his obsession with Buffy. He did mistreat
Harmony though...by using her as a Buffybot.
>And why is roleplaying mistreatment? Did he force Harmony
to dress as Buffy? It seemed to me she was the one desperate
for his attention and the one willing to suggest playing
sexual games.
I guess it's just my opinion on this one. I think it's
incredibly disrespectful to have your lover dress up as
someone else so you can pretend to be unfaithful. Especially
when you both know the other person... I also dislike
physical violence during sex, you're supposed to NICE to
each other. :)
>I'm sorry but that simply doesn't fit the character that
I've been watching.
We really don't have much to discuss then. Spike is a
pretty vile being, in my opinion, and I wouldn't put
anything beyond him.
I'm not saying i don't like the character though.
[> [> [>
When did Spike ever hit Harmony? How about ... --
Earl Allison,
11:13:04 05/12/02 Sun
"Harsh Light of Day," Spike not only slams Harmony against a
wall when she whines about wanting to go out, but, because
he's annoyed with her prattling, STAKES her -- it's only
then, because she doesn't explode into dust, that he
realizes she has the Gem of Amara.
Sure, Harmony turned the rough play into the prelude to sex,
but it was SPIKE that slammed her against the wall.
Remember her sobbing about loving him, and that she would
have happily given Spike the gem -- had he merely ASKED?
This is also the same Spike that came crawling back to her
and wormed his way into her good graces with sex (implied)
after he was chipped -- because he couldn't fend for
himself.
And frankly, the character was changed once Joss and the
others decided he'd be a recurring character from Season
Four onwards -- they HAD to alter him somewhat simply to
keep him from being staked -- something they should have
done at the close of Season Four anyway.
As for the Council's comments -- they seem very much in
character with someone who proclaims that they are going to
torture someone they allegedly love until they love them
back ... I would more question your comments than
theirs.
Sorry if this seems confrontational -- it just seems like
everyone has their own view of Spike. Mine may be off, too,
but he certainly treated Harmony poorly -- like I've said
before, not to excuse Buffy, but maybe his torment now is
karmic reward for his shoddy treatment of Harmony.
At any rate, to me, it makes him a tad less sympathetic than
others see him.
Take it and run.
[>
Nonranty (Huh!) Thoughts on SR, "that scene,"
character development -- Dyna, 21:54:46 05/08/02
Wed
*I hope I don't repeat what others have said--I wrote this
off-line and I don't have time to catch up on all the
threads before bedtime. But I have a feeling we'll be
debating this one for a while! :) *
I think what I realized the other day is that, if you look
at the bathroom scene as if it's all about Buffy, it's not
easy to see what the purpose is. If you accept (as I think
many of us here do) that a big part of the work Buffy needs
to do is related to her issues of repression and shame,
avoidance, emotional confusion, disconnection, etc.--issues
that her relationship with Spike, for better or worse,
forced into the open--this confrontation would seem to lead
away from that. For myself, I worried that the writers were
dropping the thread. By bringing the relationship to
crisis in such a loaded way, contriving an injury to put
Buffy into a position of vulnerability, it seemed possible
that the result would feel like a cop-out: Buffy made into
a victim, all the badness of the relationship pushed off on
the "badness" of Spike, Buffy's justifiable rage used as a
device to shift her abruptly out of her confused spiral and
back into the determined certainty of Slayer kill-mode.
Enraged Buffy is not introspective Buffy. It would have
been an easy thing, to have this be the catalyst for Buffy
to rise up clear-eyed and angry, her "old self" again. It
might have been a relief, even, to fans who have grown tired
of Buffy's endless circling and want to see her embrace
something, anything, unequivocally.
But the writers didn't do that, and I confess they surprised
me. We don't know what Buffy's reaction will be over time,
and it's not easy to divine her emotions even in this
episode. But she doesn't go into outraged Slayer mode, and
she stops Xander from going after Spike. It may be this is
just more of Buffy being emotionally shut down, or maybe
not. Buffy's been so wrapped up in her own suffering this
season, she hasn't really understood Spike's pain and
confusion, or seen his isolation and loneliness. It would
be interesting if this were the moment when she finally
registers his desperation, that she's not the only one torn
between an unattainable desire--for her the peace of heaven,
for him to be loved as a man--and an inescapable reality--
slayer and vampire. It would be an irony worthy of ME for
an unforgiveable act to become the catalyst for the
reawakening of Buffy's compassion and forgiveness. At
least, I'd consider it a worthwhile and (because so
surprising) very satisfying development.
It occurred to me the other day, and I think it was borne
out in the episode, that the bathroom scene makes the most
sense, and seems most to serve character development, if we
look at it as being mostly about Spike. For Spike, the
scene makes sense--and I say this not in the sense of "it
makes sense because he's eeeeeevil!" but in the sense that
something had to happen to force him to deal with his pain
and confusion and uncertainty, everything in his unlife that
isn't working and can't stay the way it is. All season
we've seen him caught, no longer knowing who or what he is,
stuck in this orbit around Buffy and unable to move past it.
Something had to break the stalemate and make him realize
that he can't go on this way. I thought it would be
something Buffy did to definitively push him away, but this
way actually makes more sense. (For one thing, Buffy hasn't
hit on anything yet that he couldn't manage to forgive her
for.) Someone, I wish I could remember who, pointed out
recently that one of the recurring themes this season seems
to be the characters discovering that they're capable of
much worse things than they previously believed (Buffy,
"using" someone for sexual gratification, sex with her
former enemy, deceiving friends, the beating in DT; Willow,
using magic to brainwipe people, conjuring a monster,
hurting Dawn; Xander, imaginary future spousal abuse,
leaving Anya at the altar; Dawn, not sure--stealing?
accessory to murder of old guy on Halloween?) Spike
believed he would never hurt Buffy, then learns from Dawn
that he's hurt her deeply with his actions in "Entropy,"
then literally "hurts" her, all without conscious intent to
cause her harm. Spike is the last of the major characters
to fall in this way, and unlike the Scoobies, he lacks a
belief in his own basic "goodness" to cushion the blow when
he realizes what he's done. But as with the others, there's
a positive aspect to having your own actions be the force
that drives you to reevaluate what the hell you're doing.
Change has to come from within, and can't be dictated by
what others want, or how we want them to receive us. Self-
disgust, while painful, is a powerful force for moving us
out of the place we're stuck in, for better or worse. I'm
very interested to see what it will be in Spike's case.
[> [>
Re: Nonranty (Huh!) Thoughts on SR, "that
scene," character development -- Anneth,
23:11:53 05/08/02 Wed
That was beautifully put.
[> [>
Re: Nonranty (Huh!) Thoughts on SR, "that
scene," character development -- lurae, 23:51:01
05/08/02 Wed
I got the exact same sense that it was more about Spike. I
don't doubt Buffy will be seriously affected and have to
work out issues about vulnerability and trust, but it was
more of a crisis for Spike--not emotionally, it was
definitely more traumatic for Buffy--but in that it will
have more of an effect on Spike's character development.
I haven't read most of the rants about the attempted
rape...actually I read this one b/c it was labeled non-ranty
:), so I'm not sure if anyone else has mentioned this, but I
found the juxtaposition of Spike's attempt to rape Buffy and
Warren's attempt to pick up the girl in the bar interesting.
Not that Warren did anything nearly so horrible to that
girl, but I got the feeling he would have gone after her if
Jonathan had stopped him. Warren's treatment of the girl as
object and possession, and the same way he treats pretty
much any female we've seen him in contact with, disturbs me
even more than the bathroom scene. I'm not trying to excuse
Spike by picking on Warren...more like we were shown two
very different examples of men beginning or attempting to
force themselves on women. The motives and attitudes of the
men were different, and while I don't think that makes spike
any better, it does make him more sympathetic. When Warren
used the Men in Black style flashy thing to get his ex to be
his sex slave it was about possessing her again, while Spike
says that if Buffy feels him inside her she'll want him
again. Can one motive for rape be nobler than another?
Both did have to be stopped, by Buffy's kick or Jonathan's
intervention, but Spike's reaction was to stop completely
and leave, disturbed enough to leave his duster. Jonathan
had to tempt Warren away with a planned robbery. Both men
were guilty and wrong, but I think we see a little regret
and recognition of the wrong from spike, the vampire, that
we don't see in the human warren.
These scenes struck me as a very subtle investigation into
the shades of grey surrounding a very touchy subject, and I
really enjoyed it. I'm still musing about the comparison
between spike and warren, and who I consider to be worse,
and if that's even a valid question. Warren's emotionless
pursuit of an unknown girl compared to Spike very emotional
and twisted pursuit of Buffy...Spike's actions were far
worse, but at the same time his attitude struck me as more
understandable. Warren's actions were impersonal and icky,
spike's were personal and scary, yet I saw more of a
possibility for redemption for spike. (not that I'm
suggesting he will necessarily be redeemed, I wouldn't be
surprised at all if he returns to kill buffy.) I'm not sure
exactly what to make of all this; it's just been rolling
around in my head so I thought I'd toss it out there.
[> [> [>
Re: Nonranty (Huh!) Thoughts on SR, "that
scene," character development -- Ronia, 12:23:01
05/13/02 Mon
In regards to the suggestion that he may return to kill
Buffy (Spike not Warren) I must admit I am on the fence with
this one as well. The thing that sticks out in my mind is
when Angel told Spike that to kill this girl you have to
love her. Well, he does love her. She though has used him
like a thing, like a toaster, since they began having sex,
before they "Got groiny" there really was a nearly palpable
sense of respect and affection between the two of them. For
me this is really poingant, almost more so than her other
"relationships", because something that had the potential to
be very sweet and redeeming for both of them, was shattered
beyond hope by some bad decisions, that led to bad behavior
patterns etc. etc. To me that was the meaning for spuffy in
wrecked. They smashed it, now it's wrecked haha
[> [>
Very Interesting (And Hopeful) -- Spike Lover,
12:00:16 05/09/02 Thu
[> [>
Thanks; some good points there -- vh, 12:26:37
05/10/02 Fri
[> [>
Re: Nonranty (Huh!) Thoughts on SR, "that
scene," character development -- Caroline,
13:26:19 05/10/02 Fri
Very good points. I think it's also interesting to juxtapose
the bathroom scene with the Buffy beating Spike scene at the
end of Dead Things. In that scene, it's all about Buffy.
She's actually talking to herself, berating herself as she
berates and hurts Spike. I got the same sense when Spike
attacked her. He was so involved in what was going on in his
own head that he didn't realize how far he had gone and was
horrified, in the same way that Buffy was horrified in Dead
Things when she beat Spike's face to a bloody pulp.
This show is just too good!
[> [>
I agree -- ravenhair, 15:38:53 05/10/02 Fri
"It would be an irony worthy of ME for an unforgiveable act
to become the catalyst for the reawakening of Buffy's
compassion and forgiveness."
It would certainly be a twisted spin on the Christian
mantra, Love the sinner and hate the sin.
I competely agree with Buffy's need to forgive and I don't
believe Spike is beyond forgiveness. Buffy has supported
Willow through her magic addiction; forgiven Xander for
abandoning Anya; reconnected with her sister after finding
out about Dawn's shoplifting. The Scoobies in turn are
trying to understand Buffy's affair with Spike and continue
to support her. Will Buffy follow the first Slayer's advise
to forgive? Will Spike want forgiveness when he returns to
Sunnydale? Will he even think himself worthy of
forgiveness?
[> [>
Re: Nonranty (Huh!) Thoughts on SR, "that
scene," character development -- Serina,
00:39:05 05/13/02 Mon
I have never posted here before so I apologize ahead of time
if I don’t do this quite right. I had to leave the board I
usually post on because some of the posters there are simply
too young to discuss a very complex subject. After five days
and pages and pages of notes, I finally came to a solid
conclusion that I like and finally got a coherent thought
written when I ran across this thread and realized how
similar some of the thoughts are to my own:
I don't blame Buffy......well not exactly. What she did to
Spike was wrong from the beginning. He had asked her not to
start something she could not finish (the musical). She was
selfish to do it anyway. He had hoped beyond hope that it
could be more. She handed him dignity and respect and took
it away as she pleased. She changed the rules to suit her
whims and it hurt him many times. One does not do that to
another person. But to her Spike is still an evil, dead,
soulless thing- “Whisper in a dead man’s ear, doesn’t make
it real.” It was one of the things that was tearing her up,
that she needed for him to be evil for her own actions to be
justified.
I cannot blame Buffy for Spike's lack of control, even
though she did help to bring them there. Watching it for the
millionth time I have to say the story appears to be set up
to purposely try to make her physically weaker at that
moment. It is the only reason for the graveyard scene and an
attempt to make her stronger status less ambiguous (I would
hope) for that scene. I also think maybe she was surprised
and shocked when he ultimately was not stopping.
Consent given once is not consent given forever and while
they played a dangerous game, Spike knew this as well. We
see it in the look of confusion afterwards when he realized
that he missed all the cues in his own desperation. Would he
have continued? It’s hard to say. She stopped him. But then,
I expect she could never have not stopped him. She is still
the Slayer after all. Had he realized that she really was
weaker he may well not have misinterpreted things so. He may
well have regained control on his own. We can only
speculate. Does it excuse him? No. Does he need to be
excused? No.
They used a topic that all women face to some degree at one
time or another. It hits home. They have given us an
extremely interesting and likeable character and had him do
not an unlikable thing, but an unforgivable thing. Date rape
is committed not by monsters but by people we know, people
we like, people we love. That’s the horrible thing about
date rape- there is often no one to call evil and simply
flat out hate for it. It makes it all the more unforgivable.
And it makes it a very human thing.
After being angry, disturbed, and disappointed, but not
completely surprised that the writers would choose to do
this; after reviewing the scenes countless times; after
scribbling down a million thoughts on the whole thing; and
after having read what some other people have written, I
have come to the realization that the writers may indeed be
brilliant.
At first I thought they would need a way out of the scene-
go back in time; have the chip be doing weird things to
Spike; have it be an alternate reality created either by a
wish someone made to Anya, or by Buffy’s weird bout with the
“insanity monster”. But that is not what Spike needed. Spike
needed a turning point and the potential to continue to grow
as a man.
He’s been at bottom before. In season 2 he was crippled for
months and had to suffer at the hands of Angelus. Things got
worse in season 3 when he lost Dru and came to Sunnydale a
lost shell of a vampire who thought he was nothing without
her. In season 4 he found that he had still not hit bottom
when he got to the point of trying to commit suicide.
From there he began the slow climb, not back to monster but
to man. In this season the man gained a conscience. In
Entropy Buffy told him that he lies, cheats, steals, and
manipulates. We already know he kills- because it’s what
vampires do. These things are old news to the audience. We
love him anyway. We forgive him. And while Spike is
sometimes embarrassed to admit he does these things because
he knows they are wrong and that Buffy disapproves, he does
not think they are such terrible unconscionable acts.
At the end of Entropy Spike hits bottom again, flying right
past simply suicidal, to needing Xander to stake him because
he knew he deserved it. But there is always further human
beings (yes, meant to say that) can go after they think
they’ve hit bottom.
In Entropy Spike said he could never hurt Buffy. In fact the
chip does not work on her and he still won’t hurt her-
physically. Then Dawn, with the best of intentions, tells
Spike he has hurt Buffy after all. The thing he thought he
could not do. And then to be berated for it by the one
person (Dawn) who showed Spike what compassion is, probably
the only one who ever showed real compassion towards him.
For his own peace of mind he needed to apologize. He went
there not to be forgiven, because he knew it was already
unforgivable that he would hurt her, but to try to lessen
her hurt as well as his own.
He did not ever intend to try to rape Buffy. But lack of
intent will never make it okay, it is where he ended up. He
lost control and realized it only afterwards. For the
audience it is the most inexcusable thing he could do. For
Buffy it was the most inexcusable thing he could do. For
himself it was horrific and unforgivable. It is the thing
that could hurt him the most, to have hurt Buffy yet again,
and to have hurt her in a way that was so completely out of
character for himself- to have gone somewhere he thought he
was incapable of going. That might be the most important
thing. When we love someone it is because in their
reflection we like ourselves better. Spike hates himself
now. Quite a place to be when one has no soul.
Compassion is something Spike only recently learned from
Dawn. Forgiveness might be his next lesson. And forgiving
himself might be the impossible thing but it gives him more
soul than many people have. And it gives us the possibility
still, and more than ever, for his redemption.
[> [> [>
Re: Nonranty (Huh!) Thoughts on SR, "that
scene," character development -- tost, 09:41:33
05/13/02 Mon
great post serina
I sometimes forget that the soul is not a singel unit but a
quantity which can be added to (spike) or taken from
(warren)
thanks
[> [> [>
Great thoughts, Serena, and welcome! -- Dyna,
09:51:46 05/13/02 Mon
[> [> [>
Great post! (NT) -- Doug The Bloody, 19:13:57
05/13/02 Mon
What happened? -
Spoilers for Seeing Red -- Liz, 16:24:16 05/08/02
Wed
Well the stupid computer connection broke down and I hadn't
been able to get online until now. I know the discussion is
half over, but there are just things I need to say,
somewhere.
Things they did well:
The talk between Dawn and Spike. The dialogue was mostly
good, the gestures and camera angles were great. I love
that Dawn has her own feelings and her own business, and
that she is going to miss Spike despite all the weirdness
that everyone else is going through. I liked that they
addressed that. Yet another male figure lets her down. Yet
another leaves with no thought for her.
Things they did badly:
I'm going to rant here. I am going to rant a whole lot
because this episode upset me very much. And not because of
the things that happened: I had read the wildfeed and I
knew all of what was going to happen. And I knew that it
was possible for them to play it well. They've taken
ludicrous things and played them well in the past. But not
only did they NOT play them well, they played it even worse
than I thought they would.
The Scene: Everything before the commercial break was Ok.
It played out understandably. Buffy was already hurt (and
by the way how did a dusty vampire kick her so hard?
Really, that was a bad choice and could so easily have been
done better--he kicks her as she kicks him into a tree
branch, or something), and Spike was being sort of in
character at first. He threw her against the tub and that
must have hurt, and she says, "OW" in a surprised and
annoyed way. "Spike, that HURTS." Still annoyed. And then
the look on Spike's face right before the commercial break--
that was interesting. A look like he realized suddenly that
he was hurting her and he suddenly wanted to. That's
interpretation, though. It didn't have to mean that.
Still, that look was interesting.
But everything after the commercial break had no cohesion
and as a scene it just sucked. Buffy crying and pleading
made little sense, Spike's continued hynotic trance didn't
make sense after that look before the commercial, and his
line "I know you feel it when I'm inside you" played OK when
I read the wildfeed but just didn't work in the scene.
Nothing really worked in the scene. It was bizarre to
watch.
And then, the line: "I didn't--" "Because I stopped you."
That I had heard in the wildfeed. But not the follow-up
line: "Something I should have done a long time ago." I
see. So it was all just like this, was it? Not only is
this intended to make us dislike Spike and not mourn their
breakup, but the entire relationship is, in retrospect, all
this scene. Buffy was weak and didn't resist him. And
honestly, there's some truth to that. She was never happy
in that relationship. She was only in it because she was
dying inside. But that is not Spike's fault. She was in
fact using him and treating him badly. But Spike is an
Evil, Soulless Thing. He's evil, and this was here to
emphasize that. All of the complexity of both characters
and their strange relationship is all shoved to the
background because of this scene, which is to me something
utterly new. It has nothing to do with the previous mess,
but the previous mess is now ignorable because of this new
event. Some say it's a Get Out of Jail Free card for Buffy,
and I guess I don't disagree. Except I wasn't expecting her
to have to PAY, really. I'm not on anyone's side enough for
that. But it is certainly a Get Out of Jail Free card for
the writers, and for the audience as well (or the portion of
the audience who didn't want complexity).
Other things that went badly:
Every word out of Warren's mouth. Is he losing brain cells?
And then Buffy destroys his power balls and kicks him across
the street, and when he is now just Warren again she says
you're nothing but a little boy, and it's time you grow up
and take responsibility for what you've done. JUST IN CASE
YOU HADN'T CAUGHT THE THEME OF THE SEASON, HERE IT IS, I
KNOW THE SLEDGEHAMMER HURTS BUT YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO BE
INTERPRETING ANYTHING FOR YOURSELF, WOULD YOU? I mean, what
kind of line is that for that moment? Does it even make
sense to say that? But anyways I don't want to get into all
that. I have had problems with the theme all season long.
I think it's been structured badly.
And by the way, are the editors asleep? So many lines just
did not work right. Maybe it was the director, I don't
know. But Spike's lines, "Right. Things change. If you
make them." Did not flow. The first half was barely
audible with him still looking down in dismay, and then he
turns with this evil grin and delivers the second bit, and
it made no sense. Or when he drives away on the motorcycle,
stopping briefly to say, "I'll be back, and when I do..." I
know that's nit-picking, but isn't somebody supposed to
notice such things? The actor (who was probably on his nth
take and didn't know what he was saying by then) or the
editor or somebody?
Willow and Tara. Yes, I'm glad they're back together. Yes,
I'm glad we get some love scenes. However it was all
totally gratuitous. Gratuitous love so that we would be all
the more devastated when Tara died. They really wanted to
hammer home how much these two were MADLY in love, so it
would be all the more devastating. One episode is not
enough time to build that up, but they sure as hell tried to
pack it all into one episode. Tara's return at the end of
last time was well-played, and I can believe that they would
jump right in and restart their relationship. But they just
plain overdid it, with lines that were pretty bad and public
caresses that were out of character for both of them. I
like Tara's sultry half-smile, but every time she was on
screen? It was just too much. It did not draw me into
their relationship, it distanced me. And I'm pissed that
they were trying so hard to just hurt the audience.
Joss said in a recent interview that many fans are upset
about season 6, and he certainly is listening. But, as he
has done before, "I'm not giving them what they want, I'm
giving them what they need. They need to have their hearts
broken."
No.
That is a good way to describe the end of season 2. Or many
other moments in the series. There are moments that make me
cry every time I watch them, and I treasure those moments as
works of art.
This is not like that. Pushing people's buttons and
upsetting them is not breaking their hearts. Pissing off
the audience is not all right if the REASON you're pissing
them off is your destruction of a thing they liked, the show
itself.
Most of this season I've felt like I'm looking at fairly
decent fan fiction. You know, stuff that rates in the top
75% but not the top 95%. But it's getting worse. These are
stories I would have chalked into the fan fiction pile of
"Bad writer--doesn't understand the characters--is too self-
referential to the show" and I wouldn't have finished it.
What really bothers me is this: This show, for five
seasons, was moving and subtle and it really grabbed me. I
don't like much fiction anymore because it seems I've seen
it all before. But this show was powerful and meaningful
and it was SO WELL WRITTEN. It was so subtle and
understated most of the time. How is all of that gone? If
some of the writers are still the same old writers, and if
Joss is still constructing the arc and if he is still
approving of the final shows, then how is all of it gone?
All of the metaphor is gone--is that how it all happened?
It's certainly a big loss. The real-life situation is now
right in your face instead of being subtext, and oddly that
makes it less understandable. Why is that? Joss used to
give intelligent interviews about why the horror genre was
rich, and why some things were easier to understand when
enclosed in metaphor. Does he no longer believe that? What
the hell happened? That's what I don't understand. I'd say
he was rolling in his grave but he's not dead, he's not even
that far from the work of the show. So what happened?
[>
Re: What happened? -Spoilers for Seeing Red -- The
Second Evil, 16:56:35 05/08/02 Wed
I may get flamed for this one, but I watched the show again
this afternoon, and, uh. Hmmm. I dunno. I do know
somethings, though, that your post kinda crystallized for
me.
I know of a lawsuit a few years back, where a woman tried to
sue a man for (date) rape. Turns out they'd been involved in
S/M games. No biggie, that's not a hotbutton for me. Problem
is, their games involved using a "safe word," so that "no"
could mean "yes," because something else, like
"carrots" or "vacuum cleaner" meant "no." So everytime they
played, the woman (who happened to be the sub in this
particular relationship) could freely say "no!" as part of
the fantasy... but this time, she said "no," meant "no," and
he'd gotten so used to "no" meaning "yes, keep going!" that
he took what she said at face value, based on previous
interactions, and kept going. I'd call this a clear case of
miscommunication. Judge thought so too, since the case was
dismissed. The majority of my friends in the BDSM scene were
rather disgusted that the woman didn't use their agreed-upon
safeword as well as saying "no" - the whole point of
such a thing is that it's easy to say and remember so even
in the midst of a bad situation, a person can still remember
and say it. Ignoring the question of Spike's goodness or
evilness, we have had previous instances of Buffy saying no
quite clearly and meaning yes, most definitely. "Do you
trust me," Spike asks, holding up the cuffs, and Buffy says,
"never." Then in the next scene, she's rubbing her chafed
wrists. The implication was clearly that she was saying no
and meaning yes. At what point does a person become a mind
reader to know that this time, no really does mean no?
I'm reminded of someone's post a few days ago that spoke of
"respect" - not in the sense of honor and integrity, but
respect for one's adversary as well as one's self. Buffy
forgot to respect the power of words, and that they can -
and will - be taken at face value. Her saying no in the
bathroom could've been taken as one more crying wolf. I'm
not saying it makes her bad, or worse, or worthy of such
treatment. Nor am I saying it absolves Spike, or makes him
more or less of what/who he is... just that it's one more
layer to the complexity in the situation. At least, it's a
layer that occurs to me, I suppose.
As for Warren? Right on with every single one of your
comments. The writing for him has been getting a bit more,
uh, erratic. He had some good lines, but he seemed kinda
cliched this time. Not enough to bother me, but enough to
make me want to fast-forward over scenes where before his
sarcasm and complete disinterest in moralizing "right and
wrong" were one of the better parts of each episode.
About Willow and Tara, I wouldn't have agreed after first
watching, but after second watching, I do think you're
right. By the third time they were in bed, I'm thinking...
okay, you two! Up and out of there! I suppose the last
scene, with them both dressed, was supposed to indicate
their willingness to set aside the bedroom time and rejoin
the world as a couple... but it was aggravating. We've
waited this long for equal lovey time, like Buffy's had with
each of her lovers, and Xanya's had for two seasons now, and
it's all got to be squeezed into a single episode?
I guess while I still love the episode overall (hell, it's
better than AYW, at least), I was disappointed that it was
so blatantly obvious where ME was trying to manipulate our
reactions. But still, I trust in Joss. I'll hang in there
and see what happens - besides, Evil!Willow. Can't wait. If
she puts on tight leather pants, though, I'll probably pass
out from happiness and y'll won't have to deal with my crazy
posts for a few days while I recover. ;-)
[> [>
Re: What happened? -Spoilers for Seeing Red --
Purple Tulip, 20:04:55 05/08/02 Wed
I guess my main grievance that makes me so mad at the
character of Buffy, is that she keeps saying over and over
that she can't trust Spike, and this is the reason that she
can't love him. I'm sorry, but I just don't buy it. Othan
than that disturbing momentary loss of sanity last night on
the part of Spike, what exactly has he done (recently,
anyway) to make her not trust him? It seems that he's
trustworthy enough to watch Dawn and protect her, to help
Buffy and her friends out when demons are attacking, save
her life countless times, etc. She trusts him enough not to
bite her, especially when they're having sex and he would be
most likely to in the heat of the moment. Like was
previously mentioned, she trusted him with the handcuffs.
So, when exactly does she not trust him? Is this just a
major cop out on her part? She tries to tell him that she
can never love him because she doesn't trust him, when all
she's done in that past year or two proves that she does
trust him with her life and the lives of those closest to
her. I just don't think that's fair, and I'm VERY irritated
that ME used that attempted rape scene to show just how much
Buffy can't trust Spike, and thus, never love him, when
their relationship IMHO anyway, hasn't really centered
around the issue of trust, but of Buffy being dead. And
Spike had nothing to do with her dying or being brought back
from the dead! All he's done is love her and help her when
no one else could, and that's why this whole scene just
seemed so uncharacteristic of him and the whole
relationship. To me, it came completely out of the blue,
and I think that they just felt desperate to remind us all
just how "evil" he is, kind of like saying, "Spike's done
bad things! You can't forget, forgive or move on!!!" I
Don't know- it just bothers me- sorry for ranting---this
really didn't start out that way!
What I'm hoping for, is that they use this awful incident as
a catalyst for whatever Spike is going to return as next
season---guess we'll just have to wait and see!!!!
[> [> [>
You know, ME is tricky (spoilers for SR) --
Traveler, 21:24:53 05/08/02 Wed
"I just don't think that's fair, and I'm VERY irritated that
ME used that attempted rape scene to show just how much
Buffy can't trust Spike,"
You can't always take what ME writes at face value. I think
that the problems you are talking about are just the first
layer of meaning to this scene. Remember, just because a
character says something doesn't mean that the writers
believe it too. Xander said, "the chip is just a leash
holding him back." Of course, he also said, "Spike must have
been the one who planted that camera." Xander isn't always
right.
Do I think Buffy really did trust him, but just couldn't
admit it? Probably. Do I think that Spike broke Buffy's
trust? Definitely. He screwed up in that shower scene. Don't
tell me he mistook her reactions. He would have to be deaf
and blind not to notice that she really didn't like
what he was doing. He was trying to force her to love
him just as he did in "Crush." Thus, his actions, while
understandable, were still inexcuseable. This is a moment of
crisis for Spike. What he does after he comes back from his
trip will define him and any future he might have with
Buffy.
However, consider this; Spike really did have an edge on
Buffy in that fight. She was battered both physically and
emotionally. They were in an enclosed room with no weapons
for Buffy to use against him. After Buffy kicked him off,
Spike chose to leave. He didn't have to; he could
have continued attacking her, and he would have had a decent
chance of success. If he were truly evil, why would he stop?
That's a question he asks himself near the end. "Why did I
stop? It's the bloody chip in my head..." Yet, it can't be
the chip; it doesn't stop him from hurting Buffy,
remember?
[> [> [> [>
Re: You know, ME is tricky (spoilers for SR) --
Solitude1056, 22:01:56 05/08/02 Wed
That was my point in another post - that Spike is just
singing the chorus to Buffy's song from earlier this season:
"this can't be me, it must be ____'s fault" - either the
resurrection (Buffy's verse) or the chip (Spike's verse).
Either way, both are seeking something external to blame for
their actions/choices.
[> [> [> [>
I agree Traveler! (How quickly we have forgotten about
Spike's chip.) -- Joie (d V), 06:20:10 05/09/02
Thu
Traveler said:
"If he were truly evil, why would he stop? That's a question
he asks himself near the end. 'Why did I stop? It's the
bloody chip in my head...' Yet, it can't be the chip; it
doesn't stop him from hurting Buffy, remember?"
Bless you Traveler! I too have been thinking about the fact
that the chip doesn't work on Buffy. (Somehow I had
forgotten this along the way.) I couldn't decide where to
post these thoughts, so I started a new thread. (It turns
out you had posted a similar comment half an hour before I
did!...I wish I'd caught that.)
I'd like to join you in this line of thinking. Here's what
I posted last night...
~Joie (d V)
***********************************************************<
BR>
Date Posted: 22:05:47 05/08/02 Wed
Author: Joie (d V)
Subject: Have we forgotten that Spike's chip doesn't work
when...? (Season 6--PRE-Seeing Red--Spoilers)
Have we forgotten that Spike's chip doesn't work on Buffy?
Spike seems to have forgotten this too. He's blaming the
chip in Seeing Red. (I won't give this away in case people
that haven't seen Seeing Red yet want to comment.) He blames
the chip, yet the chip (which Warren confirmed is up and
running) doesn't activate when it comes to matters of Buffy.
It seems like this has been overlooked and no posters have
been talking about this recently. I'm wondering what this
means (particularly in regards to Seeing Red). It seems to
me that this fact could be very important.
When it comes to Buffy, Spike is free to be evil. He could
(with chip intact) have continued his great tradition of
Slayer killing. And to those of you who you argue that he
loves her too much to kill her, I would ask...wouldn't all
of his problems be solved if he just sired Buffy and made
her a vampire too? He could continue to love her and she
would be his exclusively. This seems just the kind of
selfish decision a "souless, evil thing" (albeit in love
with Buffy)would make.
The point is, things are not as simple as many of us have
been thinking. This is not just a matter of evil-Spike
versus chip-in-head-Spike. When it comes to Buffy we have a
Spike that CAN be evil while the chip is in his head.
I'm intrigued to hear people's thoughts on this...
P.S. For those of you that comment with regard to Seeing
Red, please don't forget to indicate that its a SR-spoiler
in your subject heading. Judging from some of the headings
I've seen today, I imagine there are some spoiler free
posters that aren't so free anymore.
*******************************************************
Current
board
| More May 2002