May 2003 posts
"Touched" Revisited (Spoilers).
-- Darby, 14:56:33 05/12/03 Mon
4th Try. Grrr, arrgh!
I'd be way happier if we had some exposition on why Sunnydale
residents think leaving town en masse is a good idea. What would
have to happen for you and all of your neighbors to pick up and
leave home and job? And why don't Xander, Dawn, and Giles feel
it?
Buffy wanders into a stray house, beds down, and is found many
hours later by Spike. We assume she hasn't been sleeping, and
with no power she hasn't been watching daytime tv. If she has
been laying through the daytime, awake, a brief flash showing
that would have been useful.
The Bringers wander around town without eyes, find and kill potentials
without obvious supervision, isn't it reasonable to expect the
First (and/or Caleb) to be controlling and aware of their every
move? Well, maybe not, since what the First can and can't do seems
to change from show to show.
Both Buffy and Faith have decided that the Seal is no longer critical
- this after Buffy's Vision of Ubervamp army. Kennedy suggests
watching the thing - probably a good idea.
Caleb's guys are mining the Slayer weapon out of solid rock under
the vineyard (and it's under - below foundation level). It seems
like more and more ME has decided that Sunnydale is Slayer central,
even though Buffy is the first Slayer we know of to live there.
Now the First wants Caleb to kill Buffy and the rest - so why
not walk him over to the house and get it over with? This is worse
than the classic villain with the hero in the trap going on and
on about the plan so the hero can escape.
Kennedy was acting disgruntled to draw Bringers to her - say what?
The script is much clearer (and funnier) about Translator Dawn.
Spike vs Faith smackdown was interesting and all, but what was
the sense? Is Spike really supposed to be that dense?
So has anybody figured out why Giles sliced and diced the Bringer?
It might have been to stop him from undermining the participants,
or to cut the link to the First. Or could Giles be...EVIL???
How does Spike know what Buffy decided about the vineyard after
he left on his mission?
Interesting that the way the First describes its workings is a
clear parallel to vampires - the First and the dead person, both.
But hey, it gave the Mayor a reappearance!
Sorry, but I see Buffy gaining validation from a boyfriend (and
an older man, as pointed out by Spike here) to set her back on
her feet. And disconnected Buffy is much more a creation of the
last two seasons than the first five, but no one seems to be addressing
that.
Every time someone cuddles up to a vampire, I can't help but think,
"Room temperature - colder than the coldest feet you ever
shuddered from!"
Is it significant that every time someone emphatically tells the
First to go away, it does? Isn't that how Buffy dealt with it
in Amends?
In the script, Faith is supposed to be nuder and W/K is supposed
to be more covered and suggested. And the tongue stud is expressly
mentioned. Just sayin'. But didn't all of the exchanges, except
for Anya and Xander, seem unbalanced?
At this point, shouldn't Willow be more frightened of Kennedy
becoming a casualty than of what an orgasm will do to her powers?
The Warren faceage has been addressed, but what brought out Dark
Willow in the first place is looming large. If the First wants
Willow on the Shady side, it needs to target Kennedy.
So the First is tapped into all of the groininess. Huh? It hasn't
shown this sort of linkage to the principals before, and I hope
the implication here isn't that sex is so evil that it lets the
First into your experience. What would pure Evil be envious of?
Man, would somebody just get Caleb to Shut the Hell up?
How is Caleb "the only man strong enough" to be the
"vessel" of the First? What the heck is he - other than
annoying beyond measure.
Shouldn't Buffy have closed the blinds before she left Spike?
Okay, the First isn't tepped into Buffy, but shouldn't it have
known one of its Bringers was being pummeled before it tumbled
down the stairs? You can't have All-Knowing, All-Seeing, All-Connected
and surprised together...
I've already criticized Buffy's plan - avoiding being touched
by Caleb (whose speed and reflexes she really doesn't know) and
the twenty Bringers that were in that basement last time while
she searches the place. All of her plans are now based upon her
being the hero of a tv show who has to win out in the end - the
writers know which plans will work, so why do they have to be
good plans? What kind of meta is that?
The First spent last episode setting Buffy up for some last step
of the Grand Plan. This week, it's, "Fine. Go. Kill"
to Caleb. Guess it's been reading the scripts too.
Oh, I get it - the show is now about empowering the Potentials,
not Buffy at all. Nah, that doesn't seem right.
Did anyone else think from the intercutting that when Buffy goes
through the trapdoor, Faith is reacting to the sound of her drop
and they're headed for the same place?
How many bombs are hanging around Sunnydale waiting for someone
to open a locked box?
This was another getting from here to there show with a
few questionable tidbits thrown in. Feh.
[> Re: "Touched"
Revisited (Spoilers). -- Rendyl, 15:51:44 05/12/03 Mon
Cough...Darby, have you been talking to my Mom? ;)
The longer the season runs the more upset she gets with the show.
She is convinced Joss is angry with Sarah for leaving and is putting
poor Buffy through hell on earth as punishment. I tend to disagree
with her but she made some of your points too.
Like why is it always a man who tells her to believe in herself?
(an exception being Joyce in NA)
Or maybe the writers are just tired?
I keep seeing this warped Odin parallel with Xander but my mind
bends in odd places. And the question of what did he get in exchange
is still there. It would have to be more than just "oh, I
have knowledge of how it feels to get my eye poked out."
Ren
[> Re: "Touched"
Revisited (Spoilers). -- Cactus Watcher, 16:58:00 05/12/03
Mon
When I look back on "Touched" I have to say it was just
one of those pre-finale episodes that doesn't quite make anyone
happy. Just as in season four we kept hearing "Honest, we've
gotta do something about Adam, sometime," this year it's
"Gee, we know nothing about the FE, let's kick it in the
shins and see what happens." Hate to say it, but the Buffy
story really has run its course, and it's time for everyone to
walk away before Spike has to get back on the bike to jump the
shark tank. The good news is I firmly believe there is enough
story left for a bang-up pair of final episodes, unlike last year,
which had about 30 minutes of story for 80 odd minutes of run
time. Also encouraging is that "Touched" was more entertaining
than "Go Fish" or "Choices;" and had more
action than "Weight of the World;" which filled similar
points in their seasons.
Spike vs Faith smackdown was interesting and all, but what
was the sense? Is Spike really supposed to be that dense?
Can you say 'filler?'
How is Caleb "the only man strong enough" to be the
"vessel" of the First? What the heck is he - other than
annoying beyond measure.
I get the feeling Caleb was created late in the thought processes
about the story arc, otherwise we would have seen someone filling
that role at least in cameos since the begining of the season.
It feels like kind of a realization
that Buffy really needed something she could kick, punch, and
swing axes at or she was just going to have to talk the FE to
death. Like anything done at the last minute Caleb is mostly cut-and-paste
villain (Big bad talker, and 'impossible' to defeat, yada, yada)
it's no wonder he's mostly annoying.
[> "To Know Her is
to Morph Her" .(Spoilers/Touched)) -- WickedBuffy, 17:54:57
05/12/03 Mon
Spike vs Faith smackdown was interesting and all, but what
was the sense? Is Spike really supposed to be that dense?
Spike loves to standup for Buffy. He knows she doesn't like Faith
(as emphasized in several of Buffys later comments). He was being
a showoff AND showing everyone that Faith was NOT his leader.
It's Buffy.
How is Caleb "the only man strong enough" to be the
"vessel" of the First? What the heck is he - other than
annoying beyond measure.
He sure came out of nowhere - seems the writers would clear that
up... Caleb is the descendant of "such and such", Caleb
won the "Mr. Evil Personality" competition on FOX, Caleb
is Buffys parallel from another dimension or even: Caleb is FEs
corporeal son (hey! that other Guy did it!)
I'd be way happier if we had some exposition on why Sunnydale
residents think leaving town en masse is a good idea. What would
have to happen for you and all of your neighbors to pick up and
leave home and job? And why don't Xander, Dawn, and Giles feel
it?
Especially since all these years, the Summers home seems to be
in a neighborhood of lived in houses. After all that has gone
on in and around the house, why would they stay? Or, why wouldn't
they join up and demand the Summers move out? It's not even mentioned
at PTA meetings, where all the kids in town, including that neighborhood,
go to school. I've never seen anyone come knocking at the door
complaining "Hey, it was kind of noisy last night and I found
a couple dead, scary looking critters in my hedge. What's going
on?"
... but mostly I wonder
1) why Caleb purposely knocked over the one wine barrel
that was hiding the entrance to the open trapdoor
2) why the FE has changed from not wanting anything to do with
the mortal coil to wanting to be like "them" (humans)
and feel. Sex and necksnapping seemed to top off its list. I think
the FE is envious of Buffy, wants to actually *be* Buffy - not
just a morph of her. Makes you wonder how different the scenerio
might have been if Buffy had swallowed the demon dust.
Maybe too much close contact has tainted the FE's anti-mortal
purity.
[> [> The Many Moods
of the First Evil -- Finn Mac Cool, 20:57:04 05/12/03 Mon
When the First Evil said "I'm done with the mortal coil",
it was in the form of Cassie. When it expressed a desire to feel
(admittedly in the sense that it wanted to kill people itself),
it was in the form of Buffy. Now consider what it said while in
the form of the Mayor: "No one's ever explained to you how
this works, have they? I am part of the First, as you kids call
it. But I'm also me: Richard Wilkins the Third, former mayor and
founder of the town of Sunnydale."
If we accept what the First said as the Mayor to be true, then
things are cleared up.
Cassie was very accepting of her impending death; she knew she
was going to die and, while she regretted that, she was more concerned
with enjoying the time she had left. This fits in with the First
Evil as Cassie saying that it was done with the mortal coil and
wanting to go out with a bang.
Meanwhile, for the past two or three years, Buffy's chief fear
has been that being the Slayer has made her unable to feel (this
was especially the case when she died in "The Gift",
which would probably be when the First Evil got access to her
form). As such, it makes good sense that the First as Buffy envies
people's ability to feel.
While the First Evil may seem to be flipping its position, this
fits in quite well if you accept the theory that, when the First
takes the form of a dead person, it is also imbued with certain
aspects of their personality.
[> [> [> Re: The Many
Moods of the First Evil -- Fidhle, 21:11:14 05/12/03 Mon
Good point, Finn. Also, have you noticed that the FE seems to
articulate each persons innermost fears and concerns to the people
the FE converses with. Faith not being accepted by Buffy and Buffy
thinking her a killer, for example. Very effective way of spreading
negative emotions around.
[> [> [> Which came
first? The FE in us or us in the FE? -- WickedBuffy, 21:31:32
05/12/03 Mon
ahhhh, thank you Finn - I didn't realize that link between what
FE said as Cassie and Cassie herself. Sounds plausible. I wish
I had saved that tape, so I could go back and look at the scenes
from that perspective. (ah well, reruns! or that nifty place on
the IRC where you can get all the ...err I never said that last
part.)
I did keep noticing how much FE/Buffymorph was acting out more
and more of Buffys "shadow" side. Catty remarks to Caleb,
envy, impatience - it was reminding me of early season Buffy.
So then, do we have abit of the FE in each of us or was the FE
created from a compilation of the evil bits in each of us? (Is
that a chicken and egg type question?)
Which came from which?
[> [> [> [> I'm
sorry - Spoilers thru Touched in above post. -- WickedBuffy,
21:35:10 05/12/03 Mon
[> my answers (Spoilers
for Touched and Tales of the Slayers) -- Robert, 01:28:46
05/13/03 Tue
>>> I'd be way happier if we had some exposition on
why Sunnydale residents think leaving town en masse is a good
idea.
My guess is that they don't have a clear idea of what is really
happening. They don't know that if the First Evil wins, then it
is truly "game over". On the other hand, you have to
figure that the Sunnydale residents must be really spooked. After
all, they never left for the myriad previous apocalyses.
>>> And why don't Xander, Dawn, and Giles feel it?
They do feel it, but they also know the score. If they don't make
a stand in Sunnydale, then running away will do not good.
>>> If she has been laying through the daytime, awake,
a brief flash showing that would have been useful.
Useful for what? I feel that we have been given plenty of scenes
which show Buffy slowing coming apart at the scenes, coupled with
her statements of being so tired. Intelligent viewers can infer
that she might not be sleeping very well, and why this might be
the case.
>>> The Bringers wander around town without eyes,
find and kill potentials without obvious supervision, isn't it
reasonable to expect the First (and/or Caleb) to be controlling
and aware of their every move?
I assumed that the First Evil did know about the captured Bringer,
and that the First Evil used the Bringer to set up Faith and the
gang. Do you assume otherwise? If so, why?
>>> Well, maybe not, since what the First can and
can't do seems to change from show to show.
Please expand upon this with examples.
>>> Both Buffy and Faith have decided that the Seal
is no longer critical - this after Buffy's Vision of Ubervamp
army. Kennedy suggests watching the thing - probably a good idea.
I believe that you have misinterpreted what you are seeing. The
Seal is critical. However it is less critical than dealing with
Caleb and the ax thing. My interpretation is that if Caleb and
the First Evil are stopped, then the Seal is irrelevant. If they
are not stopped, then there is little that Buffy and the rest
can do about the Seal, and that which is behind it.
>>> It seems like more and more ME has decided that
Sunnydale is Slayer central, ...
I agree. It was obvious that Sunnydale was Slayer central when
the shamans referred to Buffy as the last guardian of the hellmouth.
>>> ... even though Buffy is the first Slayer we know
of to live there.
If you read the comic book Tales of the Slayers, then you
will see that your statement is not true. Since this book was
written under the auspices of Joss Whedon, I feel justified in
considering it part of the BtVS canon.
The story The Glittering World, written by David Fury,
presents Naayee'neizghani, who was a Navajo slayer. She lived
in the general area that would later become Sunnydale.
>>> Now the First wants Caleb to kill Buffy and the
rest - so why not walk him over to the house and get it over with?
This is worse than the classic villain with the hero in the trap
going on and on about the plan so the hero can escape.
Now you are being silly. This is one of the conventions in thriller
TV shows, and it is a very tricky thing to avoid the convention
without making it contrived. The situation here is not nearly
as bad as you so melodramatically described it.
>>> Kennedy was acting disgruntled to draw Bringers
to her - say what?
Could you please explain? I don't understand your scenario. When
did Kennedy act disgruntled? I saw her acting frightened and alone,
to draw the Bringers in.
>>> Spike vs Faith smackdown was interesting and all,
but what was the sense? Is Spike really supposed to be that dense?
What do you mean? Spike wasn't dense. He was emotional. He's always
emotional. He envisioned the betrayal of his love, and he struck
out at what he perceived to be the center of the betrayal. I don't
believe that Spike thought he could take Faith down. I don't believe
that Spike was thinking clearly at that point about anything.
He just wanted to inflict a little punishment. Any physical pain
he should suffer as a result was irrelevant.
>>> How does Spike know what Buffy decided about the
vineyard after he left on his mission?
Can you please be more specific? What do you think that Spike
knows? All we were shown was that Buffy left Spike a letter before
she went off to battle Caleb.
>>> Sorry, but I see Buffy gaining validation from
a boyfriend (and an older man, as pointed out by Spike here) to
set her back on her feet.
She didn't need Spike's validation, though I'm sure she appreciated
any that he was willing to give her. She needed a good restful
night's sleep. She needed the momentary release of her overwhelming
responsibilities to have a chance to rest and to think.
>>> And disconnected Buffy is much more a creation
of the last two seasons than the first five, but no one seems
to be addressing that.
Yes, I agree! What specifically do you think needs addressing?
Buffy has always (even back in the first season) had some
problem of disconnecting herself from her support network. For
instance, she might have revealed her slayer nature to Joyce much
sooner, and been spared three years of the high jinks of keeping
her secret. These high jinks are another example of a TV convention,
which can be excruciatingly irritating if you don't buy in to
it.
However, as you pointed out, the problem is much worse since Buffy's
forced resurrection more than 1 and 1/2 years ago. I believe that
this is completely intentional and understandable. Buffy's resurrection
was, in a sense, an ultimate betrayal by her closest friends.
>>> Every time someone cuddles up to a vampire, I
can't help but think, "Room temperature - colder than the
coldest feet you ever shuddered from!"
Yes, and this would apply to Buffy and Angel. I would consider
this a BtVS convention -- something that we must accept, or not.
Did you similarly complain about the cuddle scenes between Buffy
and Angel in season 2?
>>> But didn't all of the exchanges, except for Anya
and Xander, seem unbalanced?
In what way? Can you be more specific?
>>> So the First is tapped into all of the groininess.
Huh? It hasn't shown this sort of linkage to the principals before,
and I hope the implication here isn't that sex is so evil that
it lets the First into your experience.
The episodes throughout this season have progressively shown that
the First has better intelligence on the gang than it should.
Nearly each episode revealed more about the First Evil. I do not
see that yet another discovery should come as such a surprise.
And, I think that your conclusions regarding sex and evil is taking
the most cynical interpretation possible from these scenes.
>>> What would pure Evil be envious of?
I believe that the First Evil stated that it wanted a corporial
existence, so that it could feel -- it could touch. It
wanted to feel the neck of its victim snap in its hands. Do you
read more into this scene?
>>> Man, would somebody just get Caleb to Shut the
Hell up?
What has Caleb said that causes you to make such a boorish statement?
Is this an honest critique, or merely complaining?
>>> How is Caleb "the only man strong enough"
to be the "vessel" of the First? What the heck is he
- other than annoying beyond measure.
I enjoy Caleb as an arch villain. He is the most malevalent, disgusting
villian yet on this show. Whenever he speaks, it sends chills
up and down my spine. I don't understand your annoyance.
>>> Shouldn't Buffy have closed the blinds before
she left Spike?
I didn't see any direct sunlight in the room with Spike. How do
you know that she did not close the blinds?
>>> Okay, the First isn't tepped into Buffy, but shouldn't
it have known one of its Bringers was being pummeled before it
tumbled down the stairs? You can't have All-Knowing, All-Seeing,
All- Connected and surprised together...
The First Evil did know! Buffy (I surmise) smacked the
Bringer once, launching it down the stairs. Thus, the First Evil
found out about it momentarily before Caleb and the rest of us
found out about it. And yes, the First Evil was surprised. I believe
the surprise came from not expecting Buffy to come alone, after
being so humiliatingly defeated two weeks previously.
>>> I've already criticized Buffy's plan - avoiding
being touched by Caleb (whose speed and reflexes she really doesn't
know) and the twenty Bringers that were in that basement last
time while she searches the place.
It is a convention of BtVS that when Buffy is at peace with herself,
her intuition serves her well. Here her intuition told her that
she could not duke it out with Caleb, and survive. It is true
that Buffy didn't know Caleb's capabilities, but she had to try
something different. Buffy has shown us this before. If one thing
doesn't work, try something different.
However, in her battle with Caleb at the end of Touched,
there was no one else in the basement. There were no Bringers
there to avoid. Why do you think that there were twenty Bringers
in the basement during this battle?
>>> All of her plans are now based upon her being
the hero of a tv show who has to win out in the end - the writers
know which plans will work, so why do they have to be good plans?
What kind of meta is that?
If you hate the show so much, just say it. This sarcasm is becoming
far more tedious than anything of which you have complained about.
>>> The First spent last episode setting Buffy up
for some last step of the Grand Plan. This week, it's, "Fine.
Go. Kill" to Caleb. Guess it's been reading the scripts too.
More tedious sarcasm?
>>> Did anyone else think from the intercutting that
when Buffy goes through the trapdoor, Faith is reacting to the
sound of her drop and they're headed for the same place?
Yes, at the time I momentarily thought so also. It might have
been an interesting development, but I liked the episode more
the way it turned out.
>>> How many bombs are hanging around Sunnydale waiting
for someone to open a locked box?
Assuming that you are asking an honest question (and not dishonoring
me with sarcasm), I suspect that there was only the one bomb.
It seems likely to me that the First Evil set up the scenario
of having all the potentials and Faith in the tunnels with the
bomb. I don't believe that such bomb were merely left here and
there, like a huge land mines.
>>> This was another getting from here to there show
with a few questionable tidbits thrown in. Feh.
Except for the first and last episodes, nearly all the episodes
serve the purpose of getting us from here to there. Whether
the episode serves primarily to build upon one or more characters,
or serves to advance to overall plot, it still moves us from
here to there. If none of the episodes moved us from here
to there, then the show would merely be a collection of otherwise
disconnected episodes, sort of like The Twilight Zone.
Now, The Twilight Zone was a great show, but it I enjoy
novels even more than short stories. Joss Whedon chose to give
us novels, and for that I am glad.
[> [> A couple responses
to your responses. -- Finn Mac Cool, 04:48:49 05/13/03
Tue
"How does Spike know what Buffy decided about the vineyard
after he left on his mission?"
I believe Darby was referring to how Spike said that Buffy was
right: Caleb had something of hers at the vineyard. I've seen
the complaint posted before that Spike couldn't have known about
this since he wasn't around in "Empty Places". However,
as per my reply to those posts, Spike was probably referring back
to "Dirty Girls", when Buffy took them all to the vineyard
because Caleb said he had something of hers.
"So the First is tapped into all of the groininess. Huh?
It hasn't shown this sort of linkage to the principals before,
and I hope the implication here isn't that sex is so evil that
it lets the First into your experience."
'The episodes throughout this season have progressively shown
that the First has better intelligence on the gang than it should.
Nearly each episode revealed more about the First Evil. I do not
see that yet another discovery should come as such a surprise.
And, I think that your conclusions regarding sex and evil is taking
the most cynical interpretation possible from these scenes. "
Many comments have been made over the months speculating how the
First Evil gets its info. And I will reiterate what I have said
before: the First can just walk into the Summers house to find
out whatever it wants. We know it can become any dead person it
wants, including that of a teenage girl who, among the large number
of potentials, no one would probably notice as someone they hadn't
seen before. Also, as far as we know, the First doesn't have to
take a form at all, but can make itself invisible. So, when it
started talking about events in the Summers house, I just assumed
it had teleported in for a quick peek at what was going on.
[> [> Re: my answers
(Spoilers for Touched and Tales of the Slayers) -- Darby,
06:27:16 05/13/03 Tue
There is no indication that the human Summers house residents
feel what the Sunnydale residents feel, you're making that assumption.
But the writers have those characters available to explain what's
going on much better than they have, and it would take just a
couple of lines. A general "bad feeling" makes no sense
(would you pack up and leave for a bad feeling?) - the most logical
source would be terrible dreams that leave the dreamer with a
conviction of impending doom, and we know the First can do that
(it did it with Jonathan and Andrew in Mexico to bring them back).
A couple of lines of folks comiserating about nightmares could
clear things up, and it's needed, since the town has always been
totally unaware (if not oblivious) to the beasties among 'em.
The arc of the plot for weeks was that Buffy couldn't sleep, what
with all of the responsibility. Then she is relieved by mutiny
of all that and finds a place to sleep - yay, rested Buffy! But
she doesn't really sleep until Spike comes along, hours later,
to empower her. A transition shot of her lying awake in the daylit
house would have underscored that, even "set free,"
she wasn't ready to rest yet.
The point about kidnapping the Bringer is that it was a silly
plan, and at least Willow (telepathy-girl) and Giles, and even
sci-fi geeks Andrew and Xander should have seen the possibility,
if not the inevitability, of the First knowing exactly what they
were doing.
What the First is aware of and what it isn't changes according
to what the writers want it to know. It sends Bringers after Amanda
/ Dawn at the school, although Amanda has lived her whole life
in Sunnydale and the Bringers have been there for months or years.
It finds some Potentials but not others (and if Caleb was running
that operation, why didn't he kill the girls???), knows some plans
but never seems to know when a group of Potentials has been left
defenseless (or taken out into the desert). And a couple of dozen
folks living for months in the same house, with the possibility
that a strange face represents an infiltrator, would not easily
miss a random dead girl wandering about (why have we not been
shown a standard contact-greeting for every encounter? Who with
half a brain wouldn't institute such an easy precaution?). And
Finn's explanation of invisibility is possible, but has never
been shown to be a consideration - the First has always been visible
to at least one person in the room. This week, it's tied into
all of the nookie, all at once, apparently - two new abilities,
that we hadn't seen before the sex ensued. It all could be explained
by a mole (I vote Kennedy), but I have a feeling that it won't
be. The "is sex supposed to be evil?" thing is a bit
of a cynical observation, more of a treatise on what the writers
are suggesting whether they knew it or not, but by no means a
radical interpretation of the text. I'll give you that if the
entity really was the evil in hearts and minds, it would be able
to do this - but if it's really that entity, this is about as
bad a way to deal with it, writing-wise, as one could imagine:
a Satan-vs-Heroine story that is metaphorically car chases and
explosions.
The shaman comment about the hellmouth represented a major retcon
then, too. The Fury story is a one-time-only visit by someone
that wouldn't be (and wasn't) very welcome in an actual town,
so I don't really count it. If this is the Hellmouth, closed
by the First Slayer (who certainly didn't look Native American),
and the main seat of demonic evil, why would the guardians / Slayers
be randomly selected from all over the world for millenia? Wait,
never mind, I can probably answer that. But Giles had no records
of previous Slayers in Sunnydale - and such a thing would have
come up. All we know is that the Master (who was trapped) knew
of Buffy's predescessor.
Your comment on the Seal makes sense, but Kennedy's recon suggestion
does too. By leaving it unguarded, they multiply the possible
number of near-unbeatable foes.
Spike refers to Buffy's plan that led to the mutiny (or I thought
so; Finn may have convinced me otherwise).
My comment on the envy of pure Evil was to consider what it would
be reasonable for it to want - it's supposedly inside all of these
corporeal mortals, but it prefers first-hand? I keep hoping for
a layered Buffyverse villain, but these two are anything but.
Caleb continues to be a one-note bad guy - he could have fit into
Bonanza in terms of his lines and attitude (within the
limits of that time) and been nothing special. Just because his
bile can push folks' buttons, he still isn't a good villain. And
reviving the Mayor makes that even more obvious - he had more
personality in a single scene than the Big Bads have had all season.
The room behind Spike was sunlit. It makes sense - it shows the
viewer that Spike can't easily follow Buffy on her mission. But
I'm just sayin'...
The First looked up at the smack sound that drove the Bringer
down the stairs. Maybe Buffy snuck in (although the vineyard is
supposedly patroled) and caught the Bringer from behind...maybe...
I don't hate the show, but it is quickly descending into a pit
of bad planning and bad writing (and it's getting harder to revisit
the shows), and huge inconsistencies, almost to the level of all
of the other shows out there. I'm trying to point this out, and
I'll admit to being a bit sarcastic about it - it's the Buffy
way.
As far as getting from here to there, think of the episodes embedded
in the Angel-Angelus arc, or the Initiative, or the Glory story,
that advanced the arc more than "she finds a nifty axe,"
but were brilliant stand-alones - have we had any since Conversations?
Cactus Watcher's observation on shows this close to the end is
well taken, but it just seems like there have been a bunch of
shows like it. Not all of them, but too many. And too many details
have been forgotten, or altered without explanation, or run up
against the basic mythology of the show, and there's only so much
trust I can extend that it will all be clear in the end.
Did anyone notice that in the James Marsters interview linked
to last week, he mentioned that Joss had been spending most of
his time on Angel? Would that surprise anybody?
[> [> [> Oops, missed
one - sex and balance. -- Darby, 08:02:11 05/13/03 Tue
I was just wondering that in a season where balance is a theme,
whether the lack of balance in the sinemax scenes meant anything.
In Willow-Kennedy, Kennedy is definitely the aggressor, even if
it's in the guise of giving support. If this was a heterosexual
relationship and the new boyfriend acted like Kennedy, would this
type of pursuit have even made it past the plotting stage? I almost
used the word "predator" rather than "aggressor,"
and I'm still not sure if it isn't more accurate.
In Faith-Wood, it's the aftermath that makes it All About Faith.
Wood was a relaxation device.
Buffy-Spike, since it's not a sex scene, doesn't have to figure
it into it, but I'm unsure of the balance here. I'm inclined to
say that the cuddle is a mutual validation, even if the scene
leading into it shows Spike having more control of the situation.
But unlike the other situations, the balance has recently shifted
here - Buffy has lost power, if that's the right word.
And Anya-Xander seemed balanced, very mutual, unlike their last
such scene, where Anya held more power to decide the implications.
[> [> [> [> Kennedy
a predator? I don't understand your statements. -- WickedBuffy
(spoiler/Touched), 09:41:23 05/13/03 Tue
"In Willow-Kennedy, Kennedy is definitely the aggressor,
even if it's in the guise of giving support. If this was a heterosexual
relationship and the new boyfriend acted like Kennedy, would this
type of pursuit have even made it past the plotting stage? I almost
used the word "predator" rather than "aggressor,"
and I'm still not sure if it isn't more accurate."
I'm not clear on what your'e saying. How is Kennedy a "predator"?
What is the definition of "predator" in this context?
Are you referring to just the "Touched" bedroom scene
or the whole Kennedy storyline? And why do you think that Kennedys
support of Willow is not genuine and is some type of guise?
By "plotting stage" did you mean plotting by the writers
or plotting as in Kennedy plotting something?
I understood the rest of your post, but not this point. Would
you clarify?
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Kennedy a predator? I don't understand your statements.
-- Darby, 10:42:14 05/13/03 Tue
Say Oz hadn't left, Willow had never become gay (she's a character
who can do that, I'm not trying to start a debate about how it
works in real folks), Oz had died, etc.
And Kennedy was a guy, maybe Wood or another male added to the
mix. And he arranged the sleepers to have access to Willow, and
lied to Giles to get her to himself, and took her out to get her
a bit drunk (even telling her so), and kept pressing, and pressing,
and pressing, and then cleared out a room and declared "it
was time" for Willow to have sex with him. All during Willow's
vulnerable post-Tara, post-Evil phase. I think the writers plotting
that would have taken another tack pretty fast.
Maybe this partly explains why folks have trouble with Kennedy
- we interpret the mating dance in ways we're familiar with, and
the stuff Kennedy does seems awfully presumptuous.
Is "predator" too strong? Maybe, but it seemed to fit.
Or maybe it's just me. Wouldn't be the first time.
Jeez, it's getting annoying trying to post over and over and over...
One from-scratch rewrite and 3 tries later...
[> [> [> [> [>
[> ahh, I see... but from over here... -- WickedbutfromthisPOV,
11:19:15 05/13/03 Tue
Isn't that devaluing Willow as an adult, though? She went along
with each step you mentioned, willingly. She could have stopped
it at any point, even the very first one.
Now, if Kennedy had continued on with those steps, after Willow
said rejected those advances, from a male or a female, then yes,
I would completely agree that it was overly-aggressive. (Not as
far as predator, though, unless you know stuff I don't about the
next two shows.)
Even in high school, Willow knew how to say "no". It
seems a huge stretch (and disservice) to assume she's still in
such mourning over Tara that her boundaries are non-existent,
if they ever were non-existent.
Do you think Kennedy is just after sex with Willow? (Now I'm referring
to the "guise" part of your post.) And that was her
big goal all along? I don't, so that colors my interpretation,
also.
"Maybe this partly explains why folks have trouble with Kennedy
- we interpret the mating dance in ways we're familiar with, and
the stuff Kennedy does seems awfully presumptuous. "
I can see why W/T 'shippers have problems with Kennedy and understand
their perspective. But wouldn't it make for stronger arguments
if Tara's qualities were emphasized more and Kennedys actions
weren't having so much negativity read into them?
I'm just guessing, but I think there are more folks than just
myself who are familiar with this mating dance and it isn't so
negative. It's just a matter of perspective and experience.
If the writers had wanted to have a male wooing Willow, they might
not have chosen the same steps. (Plotwise, from the start, the
sleeping arrangement step you mentioned wouldn't have worked)
::notmentioningSpike&Buffyinthebathroom::
And if they didn't want Willow to be with that person, they would
have had Willow clrify her boundaries.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Re: ahh, I see... but from over here... --
Darby, 12:34:10 05/13/03 Tue
Good points - maybe I am being overprotective of the character,
but she has been at a particularly weak and vulnerable point,
looking for validation, and if she were my friend I would have
been wary of this new person moving in, literally. I can't deny
that Willow should be able to decide what's right and what's wrong,
what's acceptable and what isn't, and if she were my friend the
most I might do is express reservations about Kennedy's motives
(I still don't see the emotional connection, Kennedy seems supportive
but mostly when it's convenient for her), and whether Kennedy
was the right person at the right time. I'm not sure Willow is
really the good guy here, either, but I'm on her side.
But I see Kennedy as a variation of Parker, which is pretty ironic
considering how Willow saw through Parker.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> ::taking horses vital signs:: ok, not quite
dead yet. ;> -- WickedInquisitive, 08:55:00 05/14/03
Wed
How is Kennedy a variation of Holden? I can see why you would
view Kennedy as more predator-like if she was.
(I'm trying to understand why you see her that way.)
[> [> [> [> [>
[> Musings on Kennedy, spoilers Touched -- Shiraz, 12:37:04
05/13/03 Tue
I agree with much of what Darby says here, in fact I was making
this very same point RIGHT HERE several months ago, and was gruesomely
shot down for posting it.
But I'm not bitter...
(Sarcasm, It's what's for dinner!)
In any case, I found that Kennedy was much more tolerable in "Touched"
than she has been in any previous episode. This is because for
once she was acting as a PART of the team rather than ABOVE it.
For example, I couln't imagine the Kennedy of "Get it Done"
volunteering to be bait, she would have demanded some 'maggot'
take that role. Likewise the Kennedy of "Showtime" would
never have admitted to being scared by the whole 'being the bait'
experience. (I was imagining something like "I've been used
as a lure to capture foul souless minions of evil since I was
four!")
Also, I was less disturbed by this Kennedy/Willow scene than previous
ones; largely because there is a huge difference between setting
aside some alone time for you and your girlfriend of three months
and jumping into the bed of somebody you just met yesterday.
-Shiraz
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Maybe this apocalypse is forcing some people ::koffkennedykoff::
to grow up, fast! -- WIckedBuffy, 21:44:42 05/13/03 Tue
[> [> [> Spec on Whedon
(Spoilers for Touched and Tales of the Slayers) -- s'kat,
08:05:48 05/13/03 Tue
Did anyone notice that in the James Marsters interview linked
to last week, he mentioned that Joss had been spending most of
his time on Angel? Would that surprise anybody?
I did. And this links with some other information I've heard.
The reason Drew Goddard's first episode Selfless went so well
is he hung out with Whedon on the set of Firefly and wrote it
with him. According to SMG's interview in EW - she hadn't talked
to Whedon since Lessons and he was no longer available on the
set like he'd been in S1-5.
Marti was. Also Whedon came into the writers room in Dirty Girls
and wiped their ideas off the board - telling them to make the
episode about Faith not some mystery. How does Faith affect each
character? According to Espenson, RKK, and Greenberg at Succubus
Club - Whedon had pitched the emotional story-arc and the end
of the season to them over the summer, he laid out Buffy's arc
and the characters directly affecting her, told them to go back
to the high school for early episodes, and left the rest to them.
Angel on the other hand - worried Whedon according to early interviews,
b/c they had lost David Simikins and Greenwalt.
Minear was executive producing Firefly with Whedon. So who to
put on Angel? They went with fairly new rising star writer Jeff
Bell, but were uncertain. Simikins left due to story-arc problems
- it got too dark for him. Simikins said in one interview that
he'd asked Whedon if they really wanted to take the character
that far? (Probably was talking about Cordelia and Connor, although
at the time I'd assumed it was Wes or Angel.) This left Whedon
without an established producer in charge of Angel. And Angel
is the show that is in the middle of it's story. He probably felt
Buffy was in capable hands and went to Angel to give it additional
support?
OTOH - is this really true? I'm not sure if we're reading stuff
in that's not there. Beginning to learn to take a lot of the stuff
I read on the net and elsewhere with a grain of salt - let's face
it humans are gossip-mongers by nature. We can't help it. ;-)
Lots of people insist Whedon wasn't involved in s6, yet I've heard
from the writers that Whedon pitched Dead Things, Seeing Red,
Grave, and the whole Willow arc. He had planned Willow's flip
since S3. And
knew her lover, whomever it was would die. In fact according to
SMG in her interview, he was planning on it happening a year before
it did, but fell in love with W/T relationship and extended it.
Also the Bronze Beta scene in Dead Things - was all Whedon. Just
as the falling down house in Smashed was. And Buffy beating Spike
in Dead Things was. The invisible Buffy playing with Spike in
Gone?
Again Whedon. The only episodes that weren't were Wrecked, OAFA,
All The Way from what I've read. Also he wrote Xander's speech
in Grave.
This year - same thing. Whedon has stated in interviews that he
was blocking out the last five episodes of the season. He took
the idea for LMPTM from a pitch JE made. DF makes it clear this
is the story Whedon wanted to tell.
Whedon also was heavily involved in CWDP - he wrote the song and
the Holden/Buffy scenes. He wrote the song for Selfless. He may
have been less involved in BoTN - Killer in Me, but he was definitely
on board for First Date and
Get it Done.
So I'm not sure we can really say that Whedon wasn't around this
season. He may not have been on the set, but he was with the writers
and in the editing room. Marsters comment had more to do with
their weekend Shakespear outtings - which Whedon clearly had to
give up in order to work on Angel and deal with Firefly. Marsters
didn't seem too upset about it - since he was doing his band on
off time.
sk
PS: Saving my critical hat for after 7.22
[> [> [> Artificial
plot devices -- Sophist, 10:05:29 05/13/03 Tue
I like S7 quite a bit so far. While there are some legitimate
criticisms to be made, I'm reserving judgment on most until the
end. I doubt any criticism of S7 would be as significant to the
season arc as MagiCrack was to S6.
I don't have any problem with most of the issues you've raised.
The points either don't bother me or I find solutions (more accurately,
others find them: Finn is quite good at that). In any case, I
think you're forgetting some of the more obvious artificial plot
devices from earlier seasons:
Faith kills the professor in GD 1, providing the key clue to defeating
the Mayor.
Jonathan learns Adam's weakness during the spell in Superstar.
Olaf's hammer becomes the "hammer of the Gods".
Buffy dies of drowning rather than blood loss in PG.
Kendra shows up with a sword "blessed by the knight who slew
Acathla" in Becoming 1.
I could easily name many others. If you were willing to suspend
disbelief for these, I don't see any reason why you wouldn't grant
the show the same suspension in S7.
[> [> [> [> Re:
Artificial plot devices -- Darby, 10:55:11 05/13/03 Tue
Many of the earlier ones the writers at least tried to explain
-
The professor was a target because the Mayor feared someone finding
what he knew. No, wait a minute, who would he tell? Never mind.
There were so many ways that Adam's weakness could have been found,
I don't worry about that one.
The "Troll God" would have been nice with an explanation
- Olaf could have been quite the upwardly-mobile troll, though,
before he was crystalbound.
Um, the Master was in a hurry? They've never been consistent with
the reactions to vamp-bites, but at least they're consistently
inconsistent.
Kendra had some idea why she was coming - her Watcher had had
the sword FedExed to him. Or something. But she had been sent,
and someone out there had an inkling of why.
My problem is the sheer weight of shifts and changes and apparently
contradictory events, all important but unaddressed when they
don't have to be - and they would have been addressed, mostly,
in years past. Part of building an effective mythological world
is that the little stuff should hold together as well as the big
stuff, and although it has never been ME's strongest point, it's
distractingly off this year. When even my son is going, "Wait
a minute!" something's off.
[> [> [> [> [>
I think you're suffering from"good ol' days" syndrome
-- Sophist, 13:20:58 05/13/03 Tue
[> [> [> [> [>
[> Re: "good ol' days" syndrome and audience good-will
(SPOILERS thru 7.20) -- mundusmundi, 15:25:44 05/13/03
Tue
Sophist's point is well-taken about previous season plot devices.
I guess my stance is closer to Darby's, however, because of the
difference between character-driven arcs vs. plot-driven arcs.
This is a debatable point (and has been debated, but feel
free to have it again), but I think that plot devices are less
noticeable and more easily forgivable when the characters are
the main focal-point and are compelling and winning enough to
earn our attention -- as they were in the "character-driven"
seasons 1, 2 and 3 though not, IMO, 6. The "Initiative Season,"
aka season 4, was the first where I was overly conscious of the
plot taking center stage, but it worked for me more than most
and the characters had earned enough good-will from the past three
years that I was willing to give them and ME the benefit of the
doubt. With season 5, OTOH, an even more plot-heavy season, I
started becoming more aware of what I took for gaping plot holes,
such as the already mentioned troll-hammer and Buffy's blood.
Following last year's honorable (though again, in my opinion,
failed) experiment at returning to the characters, we are concluding
with the most plot-happy season yet, and I'm afraid that I find
myself in the camp who has found it all frenetic but uninteresting,
the camp who has lost their good-will. This is because, as said
by others, that ME has largely lost the characters we have loved
and cared about for so long, and without that focus I'm finding
myself increasingly distracted by the creaks in the plot's machinery.
-mm
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Fair point. -- Sophist, 16:24:07 05/13/03
Tue
[> [> Careful, Rob
-- Cactus Watcher, 08:24:35 05/13/03 Tue
While Darby's collection of thoughts this week has a negative
tone to it, remember he has as much right to his opinions as you
do. Sarcasm is something I, too, use a lot, but it's part of who
I am, just as much as your effervesence about 90% of everything
in the Buffy world is part of yours. It's clear ME has had a lot
of problems this year. It's clear that a lot of people aren't
as satisfied with ME's product as they were a few years ago. Personally
I like this year's season of Buffy, even with it's flaws. And
I've made no secret of the fact, I think this season of Angel
was a pile of crap, despite a few good points. One of the themes
I keep bringing up over and over since the beginning posting here
is that unless fans are demanding the product we see on TV will
deteriorate. While I don't necessarily agree with everything Darbv
has said this time, I absolutely believe they are all concerns
ME needs to hear about their productions.
We sit back and enjoy your cheerleading. Please sit back and enjoy
our griping. We're just tryuing to make things better for everyone.
[> [> [> Shit! So
sorry Rob! This was Robert's post -- CW, 08:31:06 05/13/03
Tue
Forget the cheerleading but, the rest is true.
[> [> [> [> That's
okay. Glad you realized just so... -- Rob (the one without
the "ert" at the end ;o) ), 09:34:20 05/13/03 Tue
...you wouldn't be irritated at me!
Rob
[> [> [> [> [>
I couldn't figure out... -- CW, 09:46:39 05/13/03 Tue
what you were so mad at. Then I noticed my mistake!
Robert is a lot more demanding of our criticism than most people,
and he has a right to be. But, sometimes it is bothersome.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> If that post were mine, it would be quite a personality
change for me, wouldn't it? ;o) -- Rob, 10:19:22 05/13/03
Tue
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Don't worry. We'd know if you were possessed by
the First Robert. -- mundus, 13:08:43 05/13/03 Tue
[> [> [> I do make
a distinction ... -- Robert, 16:00:24 05/13/03 Tue
between griping and the biting sarcasm which I am seeing more
of this season.
I have no problem when someone says that an episode doesn't work
for them or that it is even bad. Expression of their honest opinion
is what I am looking for. There is a big difference however between
a critical analysis and a sarcastic cheap shot.
It is possible to discuss and debate critical analysis and honest
opinions. But, biting sarcastic one-liners do not permit any civil
discussion. They deprive the reader of his honor and they are
hurtful.
If this board is fair enough to permit truly diverse messages
and opinions, then it should also be fair enough to permit me
to complain when I believe a line of civility has been crossed.
In the thread below, I Spit On Your Grave, opinions were
expressed by KdS and Rahael, with which I certainly do not agree.
But I don't have a problem with this. KdS and Rahael were able
to express their honest opinions without resorting to condescending
sarcasm. This leaves room for the courteous discussion between
fellow participants on this board.
The use of sarcasm in this thread was discourteous, because any
dissenting opinion I might have is automatically ridiculed and
demeaned. This is what I meant when I wrote that I was dishonored.
I know that this use of sarcasm is a regular feature in the Usenet
and the WWW boards. I catch myself sometimes using it in inappropriate
ways. I believe that we should all endeavor to curb its use whenever
possible.
Cactus Watcher wrote this in his reply;
>>> We sit back and enjoy your cheerleading. Please
sit back and enjoy our griping. We're just tryuing to make things
better for everyone.
I am glad you enjoy my cheerleading, though I had not thought
of it as such. It is not secret that I enjoy BtVS tremendously.
In all 7 seasons, I have identified only one episode that I consider
trulyunwatchable ... a total failure of execution. This episode
is Where the Wild Things Are from the 4th season.
If I didn't love BtVS, then I would not be here. I have followed
and participated in only one other forum, rec.arts.startrek, back
in 1989-1990 when ST:TNG was the only sci-fi on television. I
am here to read the analysis and opinions of other people who
also love this show, and to express some opinions of my own. When
opinions different from my own are expressed, I am motivated to
argue my point of view. When my point of view is a priori ridiculed
through sarcasm, then I am am hurt and angered.
[> [> [> [> Nope,
sorry... -- Darby, 17:07:25 05/13/03 Tue
You need to make a distinction between sarcasm directed at a poster
and sarcasm as part of a critical discussion. First, bad, second,
fine (my opinion, at least). As I said, sarcasm is the Buffy way.
I do my best to twist my criticisms in an entertaining way, but
I know it won't be everyone's cuppa.
Anybody else want to express an opinion on sarcasm placement?
[> [> [> [> [>
Well, okay -- dream, 11:07:00 05/14/03 Wed
I frequently find the "sarcasm" of some of the posts
very off-putting. I often skip a post because it is titled "a
rant" - I appreciate the effort to warn, but have no interest
in people's rants. I've noticed that there's great respect on
the net for a person's right to "vent." I don't understand
this, exactly. Why should feeling emotional about something give
you the right to be rude about it? Isn't the just the time when
the danger of being rude is the highest?
That said, the anonymity of the net does tend to bring out the
worst in people, myself included. There's one poster here I have
a hard time being at all polite to - s/he is sarcastic, and I
get sarcastic right back. I shouldn't, but I do. I don't have
much of an excuse, though I will say that I am not pre-emptively
sarcastic, and I think have managed to limit my sarcasm to this
one situation.
As for sarcasm being the Buffy way - not really. Irony, yes. Whimsy,
most certainly. Buffy's own sense of humor tends toward the quirky,
as is Willow's. Oz's is surreal. Xander and Cordelia are the most
sarcastic and (Xander at least, don't know about Cordelia) mostly
in the earlier years. He grows out of it. And thank goodness,
because he would be pretty unpleasant if he still relied so heavily
on sarcasm at his current age.
Now after all of that - I don't really see any point in getting
upset about sarcasm online. It's rampant. It's not going to change.
Ignore it if it bothers you. Don't read the post, or don't bother
to respond to it. Start a new thread on the same topic. Move on.
Life's way too short to be worried about that sort of thing.
Anyone know
any good Fray websites? -- Masq, 19:00:24 05/12/03 Mon
Either fan sites or an official site--something that explains
basic facts about the story and characters in the comic book?
[> Re: Anyone know any good
Fray websites? -- Rufus, 19:18:36 05/12/03 Mon
One of the better ones is....
www.inner-moppet.net/versi/
Plus I have all 7 issues...you want to know anything just ask.
[> [> Re: Anyone know
any good Fray websites? -- Rufus, 19:20:06 05/12/03 Mon
Forgot to mention...the last issue of Fray will be out near the
end of June. I have 7 out of the 8....right by the computer....I
also have a scanner........;)
[> [> [> First three
issues? -- mamcu, 20:20:20 05/12/03 Mon
So 1,2, 3 are out of print? Any thoughts on where to buy them?
[> [> [> [> Buy
them on eBay, and good luck! -- Robert, 22:54:40 05/12/03
Mon
[> [> [> [> I just
bought Fray 1-7, preordered 8 online -- WIckedBuffy, 23:34:39
05/12/03 Mon
at TFAW.com
(Things From Another World)
total for the 8 was about $25 with shipping.
[> [> [> [> [>
TFAW is where I get my comics too.... -- Rufus, 00:36:27
05/13/03 Tue
And after 8 has been out for a while there will be a compilation
of all the issues...I'll get that too.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> yes, I do see that magnetic Leo pattern now. :D --
WickedBuffy, 09:53:46 05/13/03 Tue
[> [> [> [> [>
[> my local startrader reckons he's ordered all back copies
-- MsGiles, 11:42:37 05/13/03 Tue
[> [> [> [> [>
They're back--but they weren't there earlier -- mamcu,
05:38:58 05/13/03 Tue
When I bought 4-7, the first ones were out-of-print. Guess they
were reissued. Thanks, WickedBuyer.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> lol! yer welcome, mamcu. And thank the heavens for Google!
-- WickedBuyer, 09:46:21 05/13/03 Tue
[> [> [> [> Compilation
is forthcoming. -- skyMatrix, 00:08:33 05/13/03 Tue
I ended up paying too much for #4 (or 5?) online, and then heard
later that the plan was to release all eight in one "graphic
novel" sometime in the future (apparently #8 comes out in
June, so after then anyway) so anyone here who doesn't have them
all already would be better off waiting for the compilation, I'd
imagine!
[> [> [> [> [>
Thanks for the tip -- Scroll, 00:17:04 05/13/03 Tue
I'm thinking of expanding my media consumption to comics, and
getting Fray will further that end and help me with
my Buffy withdrawal : )
So are graphic novels just a series of comic books bound together?
What about the Sandman graphic novels? I always thought they were
actual novels, but now I'm guessing they're really comics... Only
they're all compiled together in one book?
[> [> [> [> [>
[> Big confusion -- KdS, 03:22:14 05/13/03 Tue
Technically, a "graphic novel" was originally a long
work designed to be sold in one piece (such as Spiegelman's Maus,
which I believe was first published in long form), and a "trade
paperback" was a compilation of several issues of a comic.
When "graphic novels" became fashionable in the late-80s
early 90s, some companies started referring to trade paperbacks
as graphic novels for publicity reasons and to claim a certain
level of artistic pretension. However, there are several borderline
cases - there are comics like Sandman and Preacher
which were conceived as finite serialised works, and so some people
are more willing to consider compilations of those as graphic
novels than they are compilations of open-ended comics. Similarly,
really significant definable storylines in open-ended comics are
sometimes compiled into trade paperbacks when the comic usually
isn't (such as the compilation of the famous "Dark Phoenix"
storyline in X-Men which is currently on sale), and some
people consider these to deserve "graphic novel" status.
Probably best to accept a certain level of doubt and uncertainty.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> Another recommendation -- skyMatrix, 13:17:27
05/13/03 Tue
I'm glad KdS cleared up the definition of the graphic novel as
I never got much deeper into comics than the TV tie-in ones! :P
But if you are checking out comics, definitely get a copy of Tales
of the Slayer if it is still available. You've probably heard
of it... stories about various slayers from almost all the current
writers including Joss plus one by Amber Benson! Definitely worth
it.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> I agree! And it's much better than the prose "Tales
of the Slayer" compilations. -- Rob, 14:00:11 05/13/03
Tue
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> ok! Just go it. Any other quality suggestions?
Lost Slayer Series or sumpin? -- WickedBuffy, 21:52:24
05/13/03 Tue
[> [> [> [> [>
Great! Then I could keep my individual issues all pristine
and have this book for re-reads. -- Rob, 07:33:22 05/13/03
Tue
Small observation
about Home (AtS 4.22 spoilers) -- Jay, 19:52:04 05/12/03
Mon
I apologize if this has already been mentioned, I just haven't
been able to keep up with the waves of posts. But I finally re-watched
the season finale of Angel, and I saw something that I thought
tied directly into the season four premiere, Deep Down.
In DD, Angel hallucinated about "family" gatherings
around the dinner table, and Home ended with Connor living out
a fantasy family dinner gathering. It seems that Angel is giving
Connor his own personal fantasy. Nice Touch.
I'd love to speculate on this, but with three or four months until
the next new episode, I'm not even going to try. But with Fred's
final words of the episodes, "who's Connor?", it's pretty
obvious that the history of Connor has been re-written in everyone's
memory except for Angel and Lilah's. Very Interesting. Even for
Minear thinking. (that was a joke quoted from a Joss post after
the cancelation of Firefly.)
[> Re: Small observation
about Home (AtS 4.22 spoilers) -- Angel, 01:09:01 05/13/03
Tue
Personally?
I think the way they did that was a cheat. Sincerely.
My analysis
of "Touched" is up -- Masquerade, 20:41:41 05/12/03
Mon
Here.
Setting us up for an exciting finish!
[> Brilliant as always,
Philosophy Goddess! Just one thing.... -- Rob, 22:16:03
05/12/03 Mon
Since I'm feeling very helpful tonight, I did notice a few typos
in this analysis that you might want to fix if you're as anal
about things like that as I am!
"Giles and Xander locate a subterrrean space large
enough to house an armory."
"She worked out, with some input from the otehrs,
a reasonable enough plan."
"Why try to divde the Slayers if they are already
divided?"
Rob
[> [> *Ack* -- Masq,
06:10:49 05/13/03 Tue
I meant to spell-check before I uploaded, but I got so eager to
get the damned thing up, that I forgot....
Thanks!
[> comments (spoilers for
"touched") -- anom, 22:55:46 05/12/03 Mon
"...Andrew is briefly brought into this group mind."
That hadn't occurred to me. The spell used Andrew as the Harbinger's
(Harbingers'?) mouthpiece, but did the connection go both ways?
If it did, could Andrew have some residual memory of the collective
knowledge of the hive mind? Could it be useful? On the one hand,
they seemed to find out pretty quickly which "edge
of town" the arsenal is located on; on the other, the connection
obviously didn't clue them in about the bomb.
"... Buffy's death in Prophecy Girl allowed the First to
take the form of the living Slayer, to know what she knows, and
to understand her vulnerabilities."
There was some discussion earlier in this season about how much
the FE knows about Buffy--does it have access to all her present
knowledge & recent memories because she has died, or only
up to her most recent death because she no longer is dead?
It may be able to stay up to date w/what vampires know/remember
because of their ongoing undead state, but the same may not apply
to Buffy, who was brought back to actual life.
Some things about language:
A scythe may be popularly associated w/Death, but its original
purpose was as a tool for harvesting grain--a function linked
to sustaining life ("Grim Reaper," right? as
in reaping the harvest). And the 1st time we heard someone referred
to on BtVS as a "vessel," it was Luke in...The Harvest!
Back to the beginning, yup! Whether & how that connection is made
on the show we'll have to wait (not much longer!) & see.
As for the scepter, I associate it more w/earthly rulers than
w/divine ones. The gods in the myths I'm (or I used to be...)
familiar with seemed more likely to wield weapons than symbols
of authority--anyone wanna refute that, feel free! Either way,
I agree w/Rufus that it fits in w/Buffy's being the law, at least
in her own domain.
[> [> Re: comments (spoilers
for "touched") -- Rufus, 00:41:36 05/13/03 Tue
It's in Fray that the character Urkonn tells the Slayer Melaka
Fray that he has a gift for her.....he then says the line about
it being her "sword and sceptre", so I just referenced
that back to Buffy and all our debates about authority, and figured
that the Scythe is Buffy's "sword and sceptre" her weapon
and the weapon itself a symbol of her authority to dispense absolute
justice as the Slayer.
[> [> [> Good thing
about my analyses... -- Masq, 05:47:14 05/13/03 Tue
I can always change them if things turn out differently than I
said. But I included that quote on the Scythe and authority because
it does resonate with this season's themes about the Slayer and
authority, and it might turn out to be right.
At the very least, the Slayer has the authority to kill vampires
and demons, to make those judgment calls, if not the authority
to tell her human friends what to do.
[> [> [> Re: comments
(spoilers for "touched") -- MaeveRigan, 09:06:21
05/13/03 Tue
Symbolically, all of this makes sense. Visually, the implement
in the stone looks nothing like any scythe I've ever seen depicted
or in reality, so I'm just taking Jane and Rufus's word that it's
a scythe. Maybe when Buffy pulls it out of the stone--evoking
massive Arthurian echoes--it will look more scythe-y. I'm just
saying.
[> What kind of vessel is
Caleb? (spoiler/Touched) -- WickedBuffy, 10:02:47 05/13/03
Tue
When I first heard FE tell Caleb he was its "vessel",
I thought it meant FE had filled Caleb up with all the essence
of evil a human could hold. And Caleb was the human who could
hold the most and survive. Based on a dictionary definition:
"Fig.: A person regarded as receiving or containing something;
esp. (Script.), one into whom something is conceived as poured,
or in whom something is stored for use; as, vessels of wrath or
mercy."
(from Touched shooting script)
"CALEB
And you're in me. Gave me strength no man can have.
BUFFY/FIRST
You're the only man strong enough to be my vessel."
Then Masqs analysis mentioned Luke in "Harvest" in reference
to the word vessel and shifted my perception of Calebs bigger
role:
"Caleb states that the First Evil gave him his extraordinary
strength. In return, the First calls Caleb "his vessel".
A "vessel" is a means of traveling or operating in the
world--in the First's case, the world of physical beings. The
First's desire to "feel" and "grab" suggests
that It wants to be corporeal and intends to use, or is already
using Caleb as Its means of doing that. What does it hope to achieve
through Its vessel?"
Luke was the Vessel:
(from Harvest script)
"Master: On this... most hallowed night... we are as one.
Luke is the Vessel!
Darla's smile widens.
Master: Every soul he takes will feed me. And their souls will
grant me the strength to free myself. Tonight I shall walk the
Earth, and the stars themselves will hide!"
Master: My blood is your blood. My soul is your soul.
Luke: My body is your instrument."
and another explanation of what kind of vessel Luke was:
"Giles: It comes once in a century, on this night. The
Master can draw power from one of his minions while it feeds.
Enough power to break free and open the portal. The minion is
called the Vessel, and he bears this symbol."
What kind of vessel is Caleb, then? Is FE getting something,
being fed something, it also needs to open the portal, through
Caleb, something that makes FE stronger? Is Caleb simply a higher
IQ UberVamp replacement the FE is using, since the original UberVamp
didn't fare too well? or is he more than just the FEs fists? Will
FE become corporeal in Calebs form?
And who came first? The Bringers or Caleb? Caleb calls the Bringers
"his boys", but I thought it was the Bringers who ritually
call forth the First Evil. And FE is the one who filled Caleb
with power. Yet who called forth the Bringers? Caleb?
::running around in circles, creating small tornado::
[> [> Oooh, I like that
-- Masq, 11:38:23 05/13/03 Tue
My analysis *didn't* mention Luke as the vessel, which I totally
forgot about, but I did link to Jasmine's body as the vessel of
a PTB. My speculation was perhaps that the FE would use Caleb's
body (possession, perhaps) as a way to become corporeal.
But I think the Luke-vessel idea is much closer to what is actually
happening, that the FE is using Caleb to destroy the Potentials
and Faith and Buffy. Caleb is the FE's hand in accomplishing Its
goals. The FE enjoys it vicariously and never becomes corporeal
itself.....
Or will only become corporeal when Caleb has finished the job....
[> [> [> My bad! I
was mindreading the forgetful part of your brain of that Luke
info. :D -- WickedSeer, 21:19:34 05/13/03 Tue
[> [> [> End of Days
gives more info (spoilers for EoD) -- MaeveRigan, 13:49:16
05/14/03 Wed
This dialogue between FE and Caleb clarifies things slightly,
I think:
FE/Buffy: FACE IT. YOUR STRENGTH IS WANING. IT HAS BEEN
QUITE SOME TIME SINCE WE'VE...MERGED.
Caleb: MAYBE YOU'RE RIGHT. OK, LET'S DO IT.
FE/Buffy: BOY, YOU SURE KNOW HOW TO ROMANCE A GIRL. NO FLOWERS,
NO DINNER, NO TOUR OF THE RECTORY. JUST, "OK, I'M READY.
LET'S DO IT." HELP ME. MY KNEES ARE WEAK.
Caleb: WATCH WHAT YOU SAY NOW. YOU'RE STARTING TO SOUND LIKE HER.
THIS IS A SACRED EXPERIENCE FOR ME.
FE/Buffy: [bored] AND FOR ME AS WELL. [less bored] LOOK, WHEN
THIS IS ALL OVER, AND OUR ARMIES SPRING FORTH, AND OUR WILL
SWEEPS THE WORLD, I WILL BE ABLE TO ENTER EVERY MAN, WOMAN,
AND CHILD ON THIS EARTH, JUST AS I ENTER YOU.
Caleb: ARE YOU TRYING TO MAKE ME JEALOUS?
FE/Buffy: I'M TRYING TO MAKE YOU A GOD.
Caleb: I AM THY HUMBLE SERVANT. AND I AM READY TO SERVE THEE.
All right then! It would seem that the First has been empowering
Caleb beyond mere mortals, even beyond Slayer superpowers, by
"merging" with him at intervals, and thus in a sense
they are a dual entity--the incorporeal and the corporeal ("our
armies...our will"), although I suspect that Caleb doesn't
know everything that FE has in mind. No one who makes deals with
Evil ever does.
[> [> "My boys"
-- KdS, 05:45:59 05/14/03 Wed
I think Caleb was just talking proprietally in terms of command
- not claiming he created the Brongers.
[> [> [> What order
do you think they were summoned in? -- WIckedBuffy, 08:45:47
05/14/03 Wed
[> Comments, questions (spoilers
for "Touched" -- MaeveRigan, 10:51:17 05/13/03
Tue
"The invitation to vampires: Buffy enters a Sunnydale
house to find a place to rest. A man still lives there. She tells
him to leave town like everyone else. He does. But he will never
be able to return to that house. He will never be able to return
to this town. The First Evil has claimed Sunnydale. So although
the man is still alive, Spike is able to enter what used to be
the man's house without an invitation."
First, let me comment that Buffy's casual eviction of the householder
was one of the most disturbing things I've seen her do, the clearest
evidence of her loss of "mission" and of her own sense
of self. Even season 6 Buffy who was simply "going through
the motions" would never have done this.
As for why a vampire is able to enter the house without an invitation,
Masq's interpretation makes sense, but how do we know the unfortunate
homeowner hasn't been killed? On the whole, I'd rather believe
he escaped unharmed and voluntarily abandoned all claim to the
house (because that reflects more positively on Buffy), thus mystically
releasing the anti-vampire barriers, but we can't really know
that, can we?
Evicting Mr. Householder may have been the true low point of Buffy's
career as Slayer.
[> [> Why?!? ("Touched"
spoilers) -- Rob, 13:48:12 05/13/03 Tue
"First, let me comment that Buffy's casual eviction of the
householder was one of the most disturbing things I've seen her
do, the clearest evidence of her loss of "mission" and
of her own sense of self. Even season 6 Buffy who was simply "going
through the motions" would never have done this."
I could maybe see your point if the EVERYONE besides this man
(and the SG, Potentials, Caleb, First, and Bringers, of course)
hadn't already vacated the town. She didn't use force, she didn't
scare him away. She laid it out for him plain and simple. Look
around you, see what's going on, and get out of here while you
still can. She did this man a favor.
"As for why a vampire is able to enter the house without
an invitation, Masq's interpretation makes sense, but how do we
know the unfortunate homeowner hasn't been killed?"
I guess we don't know, but the implication seems to be what Masq
said and Spike said, that with all of Sunnydale being abandoned,
people no longer have claims of ownerships on what used to be
their town. The text implied strongly that the man, like everyone
else in Sunnydale, got in his car and drove the hell out of there.
Which, again, is the wisest thing to do at this point. Far too
much symbolism would be lost if we chalk the "no invitation"
thing up to the owner dying.
Rob
[> [> [> When a Vampire
Knocks on the Door... -- WickedBuffy, 10:23:22 05/14/03
Wed
"As for why a vampire is able to enter the house without
an invitation, Masq's interpretation makes sense, but how do we
know the unfortunate homeowner hasn't been killed?"
If the houseowner is killed, does that mean a vampire still can't
come in uninvited?
[> [> [> [> No,
it means open house -- KdS, 11:21:41 05/14/03 Wed
There's a blackly comic demonstration of this in the AtS ep, Untouched,
when Angel and Gunn break into the home of a (very nasty) human
character who's critically ill in a hospital. Angel is actually
leaning on the mystical barrier that stops him passing over the
threshold, when it suddenly vanishes and he falls in a heap on
the floor. He and Gunn immediately realise that the guy's died.
What if "Joyce's"
prophecy already came true? (spoilers, CWDP -"Touched")
-- HonorH (cogitating), 21:04:35 05/12/03 Mon
Joyce told Dawn that when things got bad, Buffy wouldn't be there
for her--that Buffy wouldn't *choose* her. Hasn't that already
happened? Since the battle with the First started heating up,
Buffy hasn't been there for Dawn. She's been choosing everything
but her. And just recently, Buffy and Dawn found themselves on
opposite sides of the leadership argument. In other words, we
may not be looking for one dramatic decision; we may need to look
at a pattern of behavior.
Whaddya think?
[> Re: What if "Joyce's"
prophecy already came true? (spoilers, CWDP -"Touched")
-- Masamune, 21:48:01 05/12/03 Mon
Hmm, I see where that could be, but I would think that Joss would
be more about making sure that we knew that it had happened.
My whole take on "Joyce's" prophecy is that maybe it's
a good thing. Perhaps Buffy will have to choose who will die in
some future situation, and Dawn will be among them, yet Buffy
chooses someone else. Being "chosen" isn't always something
positive. Just look at Buffy.
Article on
Salon.com about BtVS -- lakrids,
01:35:06 05/13/03 Tue
Salon.com has an article about BtVS and in particularly Spike.
The writer expresses much of what I have thought that has been
wrong in season 7, not that there have not been some very good
episodes this season. But it has been a hard season, to watch
through for my self.
Use the day card pass to watch the article. Warning for some it
will read as an article, that is all about Spike bashing.
www.salon.com/ent/feature...ex_np.html
[> Very good, but a little
misleading on Spike fans -- KdS, 06:03:12 05/13/03 Tue
My personal impression is that Spike fans like him because of
what they believe to be the redeemable, sensitive and poetic ex-geek
underneath, not because of the black leather-clad bad boy image.
[> [> i agree--spike
was an outcast as well -- gillie, 06:43:41 05/13/03 Tue
spike is very typical of what the authot stated
was the heart of the show--socially inept, looking
for love, and no matter how long he's lived (or
unlived) or what he's become, everything still
goes back to the geeky poet cecily said was
beneath her. the same goes for willow in her journey,
first with oz, then with tara, and of course, with
her magic (won't even touch the kennedy thing, which
i really don't buy into at all). or with xander who
is less afraid of his demon girls than his monstrous
family e.g. no matter how far he gets from his family
he's still terrified of turning into his father.
and i do agree with the author--there are a lot of
places season seven could have gone--and probably
should have gone--opportunities that were missed.
the assessment that the scoobies really didn't have
an arc that was meaningful is dead-on. but it's not
the fault of spike. rather, i think the writers were
lost this season, and now that they know where they
want to go, we're getting a very rushed series finale
after an oddly paced season that seemed to be going
nowhere fast. but to blame it on spike? that's a cop
out as well.
[> [> [> Agree it
is a critical Cop-out -- sk, 07:02:04 05/13/03 Tue
and i do agree with the author--there are a lot of
places season seven could have gone--and probably
should have gone--opportunities that were missed.
the assessment that the scoobies really didn't have
an arc that was meaningful is dead-on. but it's not
the fault of spike. rather, i think the writers were
lost this season, and now that they know where they
want to go, we're getting a very rushed series finale
after an oddly paced season that seemed to be going
nowhere fast. but to blame it on spike? that's a cop
out as well.
YES! It is not the fault of a character or an actor or fans, those
three components don't write the show. Look back on S4 - which
many fans disliked, Spike was barely in it, had maybe four lines
if that in many episodes, while in S5 which is ranked among many
fans favorite all time seasons, Spike was featured. Or S2 which
had quite a bit of Spike in it and is listed amongst fans favorite.
S7 did not completely focus on Spike. Unless of course you somehow
managed to skip Lessons, Same Time Same Place, Storyteller, First
Date, Selfless, Him, Bring on The Night, Potential, Killer in
Me,
Empty Places, Showtime, Dirty Girls - which were actually more
focused on other characters if I recall. In fact Spike was barely
in several of these episodes. He was a component, but hardly the
focus.
Once the season is over, I'll put on my critical hat - b/c I think
this season needs to be looked as a whole not in parts. And there
are places I believe that the writers dropped the ball - but I
blame the writers not the components. But until then, I agree
blaming a character is a cop-out. There were many posters who
hated Ats Season 4 but they did not blame Cordelia for it or Connor.
OTOH there are many who do blame Connor for their inability to
enjoy Ats S4. I loved S4 Ats and even if I didn't, I'd say this
is a cop-out. Just as it was a cop-out for the critics who disliked
S4 to blame Riley for it. Instead of digging deeper and figuring
out what was weak about the season they went for the scape-goat.
That is just bad criticism in my humble opinion. It's okay to
hate a character - believe me, I have my personal dislikes, but
to write a critical article stating that character ruined the
show? Is well a tad self-serving. It would be like me writing
how Andrew and Wood and Kennedy runined S7 Btvs. Characters who
were
also featured more often than our regulars. Heck Storyteller was
ALL ABOUT ANDREW, and while that may annoy me, I do not believe
Andrew ruined the episode for me.
It's when critics sink to this level that unnecessary character
bashing occurs and it becomes difficult to take their opinion
seriously.
[> [> [> [> Critical
Cop-out of Season 7 -- Rina, 08:03:50 05/13/03 Tue
Everyone keeps saying that Season 7 dropped the ball in writing.
Or that the writing was weak. But instead of reading specifics,
all I'm reading are vague criticisms. The only criticism that
isn't vague is the one focusing upon the Scooby Gang, and it's
lack of a story arc for Willow, Xander and Anya.
And quite frankly, I have no problem with this. It's about time
Buffy starts drifting away from the Scooby Gang. She's an adult.
They're all adults. In a way, they're all too old to be hanging
with the high school gang. I think too many of the fans had expected
the relationship between Buffy and the SG to return to the way
it used to be, following Season 6. No one wants to accept the
fact that you can't go back, but only forward.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Critical Cop-out of Season 7 -- s'kat, 08:11:38
05/13/03 Tue
I'm waiting until after 7.22 to discuss my criticisms of the season,
which overall? I actually really like. There were some amazing
episodes this season.
But until then? IMHO They dropped the ball on the character of
Anya whose story completely slipped away from them after Selfless.
They admit this in the Succubus Club interview.
It's a shame, because of all the characters - in many ways Anya's
story could have been used to heighten Buffy's.
But they lost her after Selfless. In some ways she feels
younger than Dawn, which makes 0 sense. But I'm waiting until
after 7.22 to really get into this. Since I believe this season
is structured more like a novel than any of the seasons prior
to it.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> Rid of Anya -- Rina, 08:44:44 05/13/03 Tue
If Anya was a problem, Whedon should have gotten rid of Anya,
back in "Selfless".
[> [> [> [> [>
[> This is one of the few season 7 criticisms I agree with
completely... -- Rob, 10:05:32 05/13/03 Tue
...since Anya is my favorite character, and I think she was done
a great disservice this year. In "Lessons," "Beneath
You," and "Same Time, Same Place," I thought they
were doing some very interesting things with her character, paralelling
her emotional arc with that of Buffy and Willow. And up until
"Selfless," her story was very satisfying. After that,
she was back to being given "comic relief" delegation,
which is unfair because she had outgrown being just comic relief.
This is where the writers really dropped the ball, IMO. At moments
here and there I felt like they were about to start up with her
character arc again, little glimmers like her going with Spike
to the Bronze at the start of "Get It Done," but they
never went anywhere. I really hope there is time for her to have
some satisfying character moments in the next 2 episodes. I would
gladly give up the whole season's worth of Wood and Kennedy for
more time on Anya's story.
Rob
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Exactly... -- s'kat, 10:54:42 05/13/03 Tue
I would gladly give up the whole season's worth of Wood and
Kennedy for more time on Anya's story.
So would I. Heck I'd give up a season's worth of Andrew for more
Anya. ;-)
Anya was one of my favorite characters up to Bring on The Night
- which is the episode that they began to lose her.
There were glimmers of her coming back in First Date and
Get it Done, she was great in those episodes...but then oops gone.
I really wish they had considered pursueing the Willow/Anya relationship
or the Spike/Anya relationship or even, gasp the Giles/Anya relationship
(even though it apparently squicked the unsquickable Noxon) instead
of attempting to focus on the characters of Wood and Kennedy which
never really appeared to take off or got well-developed beyond
being plot devices.
Oh it is tempting to go into more depth on this, but I want to
wait and see what they do in tonight's episode and the last one,
before I do so. I want to give the writers the benefit of the
doubt just for a little while longer. After 7.22, expect a lengthy
criticism. ;-)
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Re: This is one of the few season 7 criticisms
I agree with completely... -- Rina, 11:59:42 05/13/03 Tue
I like Anya, but if other main characters like Riley, Angel, and
Tara could leave, so should she - if nothing could be done with
her. After all, the show is called BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER, not
ANYA, THE FORMER VENGEANCE DEMON.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> Personally, I wish that Buffy would get a
prescription for some antidepressants... -- Rhys, 13:29:46
05/13/03 Tue
In season 6, she spent most of the season being depressed and
angry. In season 7, she's spent most of the season being more
aggressively angry, frustrated and depressed. I keep looking at
her and thinking that she's suffering from unipolar depression.
(That's a form of manic-depression, with extraordinarily black,
bleak, mind-numbing, soul-crushing depressions and extremely mild
highs that can best be described as, "Wow, I don't feel as
depressed as usual today! I feel almost...not bad. Hope it lasts
a day or two.")
I miss the old Buffy. The Buffy that could laugh and joke and
love the world and hug and talk to her friends. That Buffy was
much more life-affirming. The one that has been around since "Bargaining,
Part 1" seems to be suffering from battle fatigue.
Perhaps that is why I liked Anya. She was an outsider to the Scoobs
and to Sunnydale and she made a place for herself. She was funny
and blunt and, like the old Buffy, was good at thinking outside
the box when she had to. She was capable of love and concern.
She even offered to sacrifice herself to save Xander from the
wrath of her ex-boyfriend, Olaf the Troll.
And all this, mind you, from a woman who has spent her tenure
on BtVS as an ex-demon and as a demon. Not too shabby, that love
of life.
I suspect that the writers stopped writing about Anya because
Anya was a much more vivid character than Season 6 Buffy. The
fact that a secondary character had the potential to be more interesting
than Buffy herself most likely told the writing staff that a serious
problem existed.
Since Buffy's depression/anger didn't change or lessen after "Selfless,"
I'm forced to conclude that the writers did the only thing they
could--they eliminated the competition, reducing Anya to a "clown/comic
relief" role, even though she had clearly gone far beyond
that. I also suspect that Anya's screen time was cut; she was
less visible and less vocal than before.
Did cutting Anya's role help make the episodes better? Did it
improve the Buffy or Anya storylines? No. It simply forced the
audience to focus its attention on Buffy. And I can understand
the writers doing this.
But oh, how I wish that they had risen to the occasion and made
Buffy a less depressing and more compelling character, someone
who had worked her way through the shock and disillusionment of
being yanked from heaven and resurrected, and who had found some
sort of strength or serenity or love to hold onto. A fiery, stubborn
Buffy who had nevertheless learned something from the experience.
**That** Buffy would not have needed to have Anya's role diminished.
Ah well. How does the poem go?
"The saddest words of tongue or pen
Are simply these: "It might have been." "
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> Maybe before... ("Touched"
spoilers) -- Rob, 13:39:23 05/13/03 Tue
...the last act of "Touched." But from the decidedly
happy look on her face as she battled Caleb and reached the Scythe,
I believe the pay-off for us will be worth the depression that
preceded it.
Rob
[> [> [> [> [>
[> How the heck do you "lose" a main character?
-- cjl, 10:34:45 05/13/03 Tue
What pisses me off is that Espenson herself gave the writers a
perfect set-up for a solid S7 arc for Anya in "Same Time,
Same Place" and they completely missed it. When Willow and
Anya did the "sexy" spell to locate demonic energy around
Sunnydale, I went: "Cool! Anya's going to do the 'apprentice'
thing with Willow! Ties in with Willow's Harry Potter shout-out
in 'Lessons'..."
When Anya was re-humanized in "Selfless," I imagined
she'd be devastated for a few episodes, then slowly start re-building
her original abilities, cementing a close (vaguely slash-y) personal
friendship with Willow, and use her vast storehouse of knowledge
about the demon world to help the Scoobs. (I thought we'd even
re-visit "Triangle"
with the sexual and interpersonal vectors reversed!) Anya and
Xander would both grow up and see each other in a different light.
The new Willow/Anya friendship would test, then reinforce the
eternal W/X friendship. Wouldn't need sex. Wouldn't need Kennedy.
The whole W/X/A plotline would've fit in quite well with the symbolic
structure of the Buffyverse (Anya and Willow as avatars of Spirit);
we'd get Alyson, Emma and Nic more fully involved in the season's
doings and create a nice counterpoint to all the B/S angst.
Why didn't they do it? You're asking the wrong guy. Just listening
to Jane E. casually mention that ME "lost" Anya infuriates
me no end. Come on, Jane--what the heck does Joss pay you guys
for?!
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Re: How the heck do you "lose" a main
character? -- yez, 11:49:28 05/13/03 Tue
Well, I think they "needed" Kennedy to confirm Willow's
sexuality after inadvertently tripping the "lesbianism invariably
leads to a tragic death" circuit when they killed Tara to
send Willow off on her Dark Willow arc...
I'm not sure if you were insinuating that Willow and Anya couple
up -- someone else did, I think -- but it could've worked. Anya
just always seemed sexually opportunistic -- or at least uninhibited.
Though, I'm not sure this would help the W/X friendship...
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> I said my version of a W/A relationship would
have been "vaguely slash-y" -- cjl, 12:12:01
05/13/03 Tue
No actual sex, but hints of eroticism--kind of like early W/T
or Buffy/Faith in S3 without the violence.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> Nice, but might've been seen as a step
backward. -- yez, 12:36:00 05/13/03 Tue
Thanks for clarifying.
I think ME was feeling pressure to show that they didn't mean
to reinforce the lesbianism = death = evil theme -- maybe especially
after having Willow go dark -- or at least that they didn't mean
to back off the boldness of Willow's sexuality and make it readable
as just experimentation. So I think bringing in a new love interest
was almost a requirement.
As a viewer who happens to be a lesbian, I have to admit that
going from watching a fully-acknowledged, well-developed (well,
except for the physical aspects) lesbian relationship to women
sharing only "vague eroticism" would've seemed like
a real step back.
Not that it wouldn't have been interesting. But vague eroticism
has been pretty much all there'd been for so long, and ME had
made so many inroads.
yez
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> [> Re: Nice, but might've been seen
as a step backward. -- leslie, 13:07:59 05/13/03 Tue
Actually, what would have been really interesting in developing
a relationship of any kind between Willow and Anya would have
been how it affected the "best friends forever" relationship
between Willow and Buffy. Tara was an outsider who Willow brought
into the Scooby circle, and who Buffy ended up trusting, but Anya
is already established there and she and Buffy really have never
been pals, despite the "then why did you sleep with my friend?"
business and the bridesmaid duty. While Buffy and Willow do seem
to be growing apart, perhaps terminally (unlike S4 when they ended
up reaffirming their friendship), Buffy has pretty much ignored
the Willow/Kennedy relationship once it got started; if something
had developed between Willow and Anya, I think she would have
been seriously threatened, and much sooner.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Nice, but might've
been seen as a step backward. -- yez, 13:58:44 05/13/03
Tue
Yeah... Though I don't think it would've surprised me if Buffy
had just pulled away from Willow even further.
Man, this just makes me realize how much I've missed seeing the
"core four" having meaningful interactions. That scene
with Willow comforting Xander at the hospital was such a gem not
only because it was played so well, but also because we've been
starved for that. At least I have.
Not too long ago, I read someone here wondering if the Buffy and
the Scoobies actually still were friends at all. It's amazing
how now that they've all been living in the same house, they seem
to have grown even further apart in a lot of ways.
I don't know... I'm depressed about the approaching finale. Sigh.
yez
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> Don't be so cautious, cjl. I think
a W/A/X menage a trois would have been great. Slash away!
-- Sophist, 12:47:22 05/13/03 Tue
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> [> Yup, agree heartily. But I think
Xander might've had heart FAILURE. -- yez, 12:56:07 05/13/03
Tue
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> [> [> LOL (and gaaaak!) --
cjl (whose overheated imagination leads to cardiac stress), 13:31:58
05/13/03 Tue
Reading all these wonderful ideas from Leslie, Soph and yez, I'm
wondering what happened during those ME story meetings in June/July
2002. You're telling me they didn't think of ANY of these plotlines?
Were they so awed by Joss and Drew G.'s outline for "Selfless"
that they simply forgot to sketch out Anya's arc for the rest
of the year?
FURY: Thanks for lunch, Joss.
PETRIE: That chow mein was great. We've got to order more egg
rolls next time.
JOSS: Definitely. And more roast duck. [Murmured assent.]
JANE: Where were we? [Much head scratching.]
JOSS: Eh. Couldn't have been that important. Getting back to Buffy--I
think around episode 14....
I would have loved to have seen Anya's Journey of Self Discovery!
Imagine Anya bumping into a certain bubble-brained blonde vampiress
in a commune on the New Mexico border; or a certain laconic werewolf
while hiking in the Nevada desert; or an evil-handed ex-attorney
in a self-actualization seminar in San Francisco; or...you get
the idea.
And as for the WAX menage a trois....
OK, you've locked my visual cortex and libido into a continuous
loop for the next two years. Thanks a lot.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Depending on the
final eps, perhaps Anya can still go on that spiritual journey
in fan fic! -- Rob (who smells a new summer writing project!),
13:55:27 05/13/03 Tue
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> To many oranges, makes the pomegranate get lost
-- fresne, 11:58:49 05/13/03 Tue
Yes, I do feel a bit sorry for post Selfless Anya.
And the imagination is full of what ifs. I rather like your scenario.
Of course I just wish Anya'd gone on a road trip in a red convertible.
Then again, I want to send everyone on a road trip in a red convertible.
Well, except for Spike, but we're talking about Anya here.
Have a scene every few episodes of Anya comically trying all the
things that you are supposed to do to find yourself: Anya doing
yoga in Marin, Anya attempts to find the sublime in nature, etc.
And then typical Anya epiphany, this is stupid, she heads off
to go find the all seeing eye oracle and we spend the next few
episodes wondering how long it will take to her to get back to
Sunnydale and tell everyone what she found out.
Dally with the magics again. Find the fuzzy in bunny. Evolve new
relationships.
But pure comic relief after the heart wrenching of Selfless felt
like if Xander had gone back to pizza delivery after his Replacement
epiphany. Then again, post Zeppo stands as a contrary example.
Otherwise, I've quite enjoyed S7. This close to the resolution,
I can only trust in Joss for the necessary resound for the conclusion.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> Yes! -- PartlyCloudy, 13:52:11 05/13/03
Tue
When I read this post, I got a little pang for an alternate universe,
one where we could go back & see this storyline. I love this idea,
especially being that it gives (ok, would have given) Anya something
to do to work on the problem of the First in a way that doesn't
depend on waiting for instructions from Buffy. (Anya & Willow
put their heads together to find out how to keep things like Willow's
locator spell from giving the First an outlet, etc)
Plus, I think it would have worked very well for Willow too, in
that as teacher, she could have developed more confidence in her
own abilities. You never know how your own mastery (or limitations)
in a subject until you have to teach someone else how to do it.
She asserts control over her magic, she gains confidence in being
able to do that, she broadens and strengthens the abilities of
the group. Then before you know it, she combines her magic, her
brain, her empathy and her patience and becomes Willow the Wiccan-Watcher,
training young witches and helping all sorts of wayward folk who've
gone 'round the magical bend. Or not.
In any case, I applaud the thought behind the missed opportunities
here.
(btw, I'm new here, though I've lurked and lingered on this board
for longer than I care to admit... so if this is wacky and you
need to say so, ease me into it, please?)
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> Not wacky. Was thinking earlier about spin-off
possibilities with Willow... -- yez, 14:35:49 05/13/03
Tue
... and I realized that while I initially thought a Faith spin-off
would be cool, I'd much rather see a story centered around Xander
and Willow -- and even adding Anya, Andrew and Dawn -- trying
to piece their lives together after whatever's going to befall
them all at the end of the season. They seem like likely candidates
for trying to start up some kind of Watcher's Council again and
helping to guide the new slayer or slayers, just as you suggested.
I think there'd be a lot of great stuff to explore there along
with some great crossover opportunities with Wesley and Giles,
former Watchers. Hell, they could open a Sunnydale branch of Angel,
Inc., now that those guys have gone all corporate.
yez
[> [> [> [> [>
[> [> [> [> Re: Not wacky. Was thinking earlier
about spin-off possibilities with Willow... -- O'Cailleagh,
15:27:20 05/13/03 Tue
Kind of tangenty, but I always hoped Lindsay would set up his
own law firm in Sunnydale...ok...now that I see that in print
its becoming 'Lindsay McBeal' in my head!.....which could possibly
work......
O'Cailleagh
[> [> [> [> [>
A few specifics -- Malandanza, 17:02:41 05/13/03 Tue
"Everyone keeps saying that Season 7 dropped the ball
in writing. Or that the writing was weak. But instead of reading
specifics, all I'm reading are vague criticisms"
First, let me say that I think the first part of the season was
great -- we had Buffy happy and healthy after her season long
journey out the underworld. She had a real job. She, Xander and
Dawn looked like a real family. She had a good summer. Then Spike
and Willow returned and everything fell apart.
The Willow arc looked promising -- we had Dawn wondering if anyone
was ever going to blame Willow and we had Anya telling Willow
she is responsible (after Willow said she felt responsible).
It looked like they were going to address Warren's murder at some
point -- or at least show some measure of contrition by Willow.
Instead, even with Andrew around as a constant reminder that she
had murdered someone, all we got from her was "I killed him
for a reason," Willow objecting to her murderous rampage
being compared to Anya's, and Willow forgiving Buffy for daring
to think that she would skin a person alive. I would have preferred
a couple of episodes where Willow feels guilty (or at least an
acknowledged that she had something to feel guilty about) to all
those boring W/K scenes.
With Spike, I liked the initial interaction between Spike and
Buffy. I am one of the posters who believes that the soul does
make a difference -- that Angel is not responsible for the things
Angelus does, so I don't have the same problems with Spike that
I had in previous seasons. It is also in keeping with Buffy's
character that she would blame herself for the mess Spike has
made of himself. I liked Buffy's "skittishness" when
Spike came to close to her and the get-away-from-me body language
when he invaded her personal space. I agree that Buffy made the
right decisions when she found out Spike (controlled by the first)
was killing people. But suddenly ME switched gears. No longer
skittish, we see Buffy straddling Spike in the cemetery after
a training exercise as she checked his washboard abs for injuries.
We see Buffy dabbing his face with water while he's chained in
the basement. In the previous episode, she even jokes with Spike
that he doesn't know the meaning of the word "no" and
that season six was her fault for not letting him connect to her
emotionally. Where was the transition?
As for Spike and redemption -- I do believe that he need not atone
for the crimes he committed without a soul (or while controlled).
However, a little empathy for the victims might be in order. In
the early episodes we heard him weeping about the people he remembers
killing (especially the girls) -- yet he still wears the trophy
jacket (another dropped ball -- ME made it clear the jacket was
a trophy and Anya talked about murderers keeping trophies, like
necklaces of teeth). If he believes that the old Spike was a completely
different person, why does he blame Buffy for things she did to
that person (things the old Spike let her do and encouraged her
to do)? He has it both ways -- he didn't do anything wrong, the
other Spike did. But other people have injured poor other Spike
and he feels hurt as a result -- so he accuses Buffy of using
him, but absolves himself of any blame in Nikki's death.
Then there are the problems with the First (evil at its most inept)
and its absurd minion, Caleb (whose misogyny had to be sufficiently
over the top to outdo all of Spike's speeches last season -- lest
viewers start thinking Caleb is the hero and start talking about
his journey).
Even with the lost opportunities, there have still been excellent
moments -- Buffy burying the dead Potential alone, Andrew playing
with the snake skin, the mutiny, Faith telling Kennedy to shut
up, Dawn's disappointment about not being called, Faith vs the
Vulcan, Wood getting hooked by the First, the look on Willow's
face when Spike asked her how long she'd been rehearsing her speech,
Amy zapping Kennedy away -- and, of course, the look on Buffy's
face when she spotted the slayer weapon.
[> [> [> [> Re:
Agree it is a critical Cop-out -- shambleau, 13:28:59 05/13/03
Tue
But in criticizing Spike, the Salon writer IS criticising the
writing, not the character. And your assertion that fans disliked
S4, when Spike wasn't featured much and liked S5, when he was,
can be the reason why he was featured so much in S6 and S7-fan
reaction.
The fans do affect this show. Kennedy is the writers attempt,
however inept, to deal with the reaction of a very vocal subset
of Buffy fans. Keeping Spike on the show and enlarging his role
is another. The Fonze got more and more time on Happy Days because
of fan reaction. To absolve the fans of any responsibility in
the direction of the show seems disingenuous. Do you think, if
there had been more seasons, that the writers would have ever
returned to the self-destructive darkness of S6 after the negative
fan reaction? I know you loved it and I did, too, although I had
problems with its execution. But we weren't the majority of fans.
One could assert that it's still the writers fault, since they
don't have to kowtow to the fans, but if the writers ignored the
fans, they'd get it in the neck, too.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Agree it is a critical Cop-out -- s'kat, 15:09:09
05/13/03 Tue
To absolve the fans of any responsibility in the direction
of the show seems disingenuous. Do you think, if there had been
more seasons, that the writers would have ever returned to the
self-destructive darkness of S6 after the negative fan reaction?
I know you loved it and I did, too, although I had problems with
its execution. But we weren't the majority of fans. One could
assert that it's still the writers fault, since they don't have
to kowtow to the fans, but if the writers ignored the fans, they'd
get it in the neck, too.
Really? The writers write the show, not the fans. They make a
choice whether to go with what the fans think or not. If the fans
had nearly as much power as you seem to believe they do, do you
think that ME would have killed Tara?
Had Spike attempt to rape Buffy? Kill Angel in S2 and have him
leave in S3? Bring in Riley? Or turn Willow evil?
Whedon has gone out of his way not to give the fans what they
want. And to appease these fans? He'd have to do back-flips. Believe
me, I've lurked on another fan centric boards to know that ME
has not in any way catered to their fans. The Spike fans are pissed
that he got too soft. The Spuffy fans pissed that there's no Spuffy.
The B/A fans pissed that there's not enough B/A. The W/T fans
pissed that they killed Tara. Whedon makes fun of them occassionally
through Andrew and duck jokes.
Whedon decided to bring back Spike, not the fans. The fans did
not create the character. Fans reacte to the script.
But the writers create it.
Yes, fan reaction did have an effect on Spike's involvement in
the story. But not the degree this critic believes.
If the fans had nearly the effect people believe they do, Cordelia
would never have turned evil on Angel. Wes wouldn't have gone
dark. Xander and Anya would have gotten married. Angel and Buffy
would be happy ever after.
Happy Days? The extended Fonze's role on the show because the
actor had the best charisma and was actually the most interesting
character. They also ruined that character.
They did not ruine Spike. Spike remains interesting IMHO.
Again, a better criticism of this season would be to look at the
episodes that didn't work, which ironically and again in my humble
opinion didn't focus on Spike but on extraneous characters who
were introduced this year or just last year.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Agree it is a critical Cop-out -- Dandy, 16:16:53
05/13/03 Tue
To me it seems that ME backed off the Season 6 arc with Spike
and Buffy which really did not end comfortably and neatly with
the end of Season 6.
Fan reaction to Season's 6 darkness and some miscommunication
between writers and audience made them back off. We weren't putting
evil at the top of the list for the gorgeous-emotionally available-naked-blond-evil
guy.
('God, who knew our viewers were such sluts? We are supposed to
be able to bomabard them with this fantasy like array of male
qualities and male nudity bordering on pornography geared towards
heterosexual women and have them remain stoic, unmoved, Buffylike
in thier rejection and condemnation of him.')
Hey, y'know, all well and good-she got to shag him.
We were all left panting.
Anyway, it felt to me that there should have been a natural continuation
of that story. The writers were lost and figured they could just
make the whole snarky mess go away by sticking it in the basement.
No go. And there were all those spin off possibilities to set
up. A different one every week.
Then,('Nah, we don't wanna do that. Y'know what? I am just so
sick of trompsing to locations, let's just stay home. It's overlit
and overused but we can just use everybody we ever knew as the
villian and we won't have to come up with a new original one.
All those casting sessions, so tiring................')
I thought they went for the cheap shot cancelling Anya's and Xander's
wedding. ME has always said no couples can be happy, all couples
have to break up or it gets boring but I think they shot themselves
in the foot on this one. There would have been a lot more dramatic
material, ways of relating to explore with a bad marriage. Bad
marriages can be fascinating, like train wrecks. They just broke
them apart and then really nothing,or not much, not what the character
and actors deserved.
I agree that the moments in the hospital with Willow and Xander
were some of the most heartfelt this season. I wish it had been
longer. And Xander's losing his eye just made me realize the tenderness
and love and humanity of this character. A brilliant move on ME's
part I thought, to bring me to that place emotionally.
ME writers sometimes plan arcs ahead for years with amazing and
meticulous care. At others it seems like they get all manic and
obsessed with the big idea. Let's kill all of Wolfram and Hart
in one fell swoop! Let's have a sister appear and be the key!
Let's do Prelude to a Kiss and break up Xandr and Anya's wedding!
And they don't think past thier own glee in the destruction of
the fabric of thier own universe.
('Oops, now what? Don't step there honey, there's a hole in the
story. Go around that part.')
Oops myself, too long post and want to not miss a minute of tonight's
episode of course. Much as I crank I do love this show. Oh, yeah,
and this board , too.
Rant over.
[> [> [> [> [>
From the mouth of Joss Whedon -- s'kat, 23:07:06 05/13/03
Tue
This is from Joss Whedon's exit interview at the Buffy Wrap party
- located on
http://www.eonline.com/Features/Features/Buffy2003/Qa/whedon2.html
How different would the show be if you hadn't been so in touch
with the fans?
I don't know. I definitely gauge their reactions to things, and
it's important--but at the same time, you go your own way.
If you do things by consensus, it's not art. It has definitely
been a factor, and they have a voice, but I can't say how different
it would've been.
Enuff said.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> Re: From the mouth of Joss Whedon -- shambleau, 23:16:13
05/13/03 Tue
Well, I'd highlight the first half of the last sentence of Joss's,
because that's all I was saying, but yeah, let it go.
[> [> Re: Very good,
but a little misleading on Spike fans -- dream, 06:51:15
05/13/03 Tue
I think that's true. I wouldn't call myself a Spike fan exactly
- I love him, but no more than any of the core characters. Well,
more than Dawn probably or Anya, yes. But not more than Buffy,
Xander, Giles, or Willow. But I think you're right on about the
appeal. Just as we love empowered Willow (please, god, let her
take out Caleb by calling on a series of goddesses!), competent
Xander, Buffy who both gets covered in ink from her pen and can
take down a god - we love the dorky poet who tries to hide behind
machismo. He's an inverted Giles (which is part, no doubt, of
why Giles loathes him so) and very much like Willow. I've known
a lot of people who follow that pattern - they're so geeky in
their early years that they spend a long, long time making up
for it with a devotion to a "cool" image. Ultimately,
it's unhealthy - but that's the point, isn't it? That Spike needs
to grow up in all sorts of ways?
Yes, his story has gotten far more play this year than the other
characters. That shouldn't have happened. But I don't feel like
Spike took the space that should have been devoted to Willow,
Xander, and Giles. I feel like the bevy of SITs, Kennedy, and
Andrew took that space. Also Faith, though I do believe that was
a good choice.
Just an aside, part of why I have never been able to relate to
Angel is that he was never a geek. He was a 19th century version
of a frat boy type, then a sadistic vampire, then a brooding man
in an elegant mansion. For a short time, he was a brooding down
and out. (I'm just working off Angel from BtVS here.) But never
a social loser, never awkward, never geeky. That's fine, not all
characters need to be Willow. But I don't have any sort of relationship
to him.
[> Spike is the only reason
why I watch sometimes... -- CaptainPugwash, 07:50:40 05/13/03
Tue
The Spike/Buffy thing has taken up a lot of S7 (and S6), but other
storylines have sort of burnt out (W/X/A/G all had their limelight
in S6). There was W/X/A/G stuff to develop, but the real flaw
of this season has been the SiT; the arrival of Faith manage to
breathe life into this crud storyline...
Oh, I like Spike because he is the only character that isn't bound
by any dramatic rules; Buffy etc. have to be Buffy, but Spike
can be anything he bloody wants to be. Furthermore, the essential
honesty of self interested/amoral characters is always likeable;
you could never accuse Spike of being pretentious.
[> [> Ah Spike...what
to say...debating Spike -- s'kat, 11:35:37 05/13/03 Tue
Tried posting on this before, but voy ate my post. It's been doing
that a lot today.
I agree CaptainP, hence the reason I'm replying here, - I've often
found myself watching the show this year and last year mainly
because of Spike. And the last three years? I've found Spike's
character arc to be the most fascinating. I also loved Anya (who
they inexplicably lost this year), Willow's arcs. Xander seemed
to get lost somewhere in S5. I don't blame Spike for that, I blame
the writers who couldn't figure out what to do with him. Put the
blame where it belongs, people! They could have done a wonderful
Xander/Spike friendship/relationship -but chose not to. It is
after all Buffy's show.
Why do I like him? Well not because he's a bad boy. If that was
the case I would have loved him in S2-S4. And while I liked him
well enough - I wasn't any more into him than say Willow or Xander
or Giles. I became most interested in the character in S5 - where
his story really took off and is amongst many fans favorites.
What interested me is I couldn't predict what they would do with
him next, he did the opposite of what I expected but it always
made logical sense. He became for me at least the most unpredictable
character on TV, I could pretty much predict everyone else.
And the character arc? Wow. He went from two-dimensional villain
to comic villian to reluctant hero to romantic foil (although
I think he was always Buff's shadow, and the fatal). To pull off
a 180 degree character arc is an incredibly difficult thing to
do as a writer. Also the actor and writers portrayal of Spike
has been so naked it's riveted me.
There have been Spike moments that literally had my mouth hanging
open in shocked glee. The fact that they were brave enough to
put their heroine with the villain in a romantic tryst astonished
me - I've never seen anyone come close to doing this on TV. And
the things it said about relationships and attraction was fascinating
- heck I got five essays out of it. For a writer - watching Spike's
character arc develop onscreen is a rare privilege, to see a writer
explore a supporting character's facets and keep that characters
ambiguity is just a treat.
But it is a painful thing being a Spike fan, particularly online,
because Spike as a character for some reason brings out the monster
in perfectly nice posters. (Spikehaters and Spikeshippers alike
). I've seen perfectly nice people go ballastic while discussing
this character - taking it as a personal affront when someone
either likes or hates him.
They seem to experience the character on a deep guttural level.
Now when you can feel that emotional about a character - the writer
has done his/her job. So has the actor. But it can be painful
to enter debates on. I've found that I often have to avoid certain
people's posts - who'd I read on any other topic - because I know
they'll push my buttons when it comes to Spike. And I don't reacte
well when my buttons get pushed. So I do us all a favor and don't
read. The article discussed above pushed my buttons, because for
some reason people who despise Spike can't keep from making it
personal, this is what makes likeing the character or admitting
that you like him a painful experience. Likewise it can be painful
to admit you despise him - because people will feel an overwhelming
need to hurt you back. And believe me - they can. Human beings
can be vindictive. So much better to keep away from the whole
hate/love debate.
The other reason it is painful to love Spike - is he is a supporting
player whose sole purpose is to enhance Buffy's story. And unlike
Angel, who was Buffy's one true love and whom Buffy would save
no matter what and the writers would never destroy completely...Spike,
poor sap, doesn't have this reassurance. If anything Spike acts
like her last obstacle, the last thing she must handle before
reaching her goal.
This means and I'm completely unspoiled on this, that manwitch
may be correct in his speculation, that Spike will die horribly
in order for Buffy to reach that next stage.
And being a Spike fan? That's going to make the finale almost
too painful to watch. It's a tough thing when you are more invested
in the supporting players journey than the heroines - you know
you will be hurt.
At any rate, (And this is not in any way directed to CaptainP,
who I agree with, but in general) I've found it's best not to
make assumptions regarding others likes or dislikes. Chances are?
You're wrong or projecting your own issues on to them. Also it's
best not to assume just because you despise a character that everyone
who loves it is well insane. They aren't. And you can bet your
bottom dollar they probably hate a character you love. Let's face
it we'll never come to a consensus on these characters...the fact
we all like the same show? Is interesting enough. ;-)
[> [> [> Interesting...
-- CaptainPugwash, 13:25:47 05/13/03 Tue
Oh, the (pointless) arguments I have had about Spike...
There seems to be a ongoing row between fans who wanted Spike
to remain static (S2-S4) and fans like myself who have found Spike's
evolution extremely interesting.
However, I have now learnt not to scream when I see another 'they
ruined Spike's character' comment.
(ditto for Buffy; the girl lets her hair down, enjoys a bit of
rough, and suddenly everyone becomes a puritan...)
[> [> [> [> Ditto:Yep...best
just to sit calmly back and smile ;-) -- s'kat, 14:57:42
05/13/03 Tue
There seems to be a ongoing row between fans who wanted Spike
to remain static (S2-S4) and fans like myself who have found Spike's
evolution extremely interesting.
However, I have now learnt not to scream when I see another 'they
ruined Spike's character' comment.
Ditto - am the same way.
We had one on-going row on this board last year, I think it lasted
for two months before we finally all agreed to disagree. One group
made a very strong case for the fact that they preferred EVIL!Spike
from Season 2 and felt ME ruined the character in S3 and S5. And
Another group made a very strong case for how the character become
far more interesting in S3-whenever last episode was at the time
and was nothing more than two dimensional in S2. Then there was
the third group that got upset and argued Spike had never been
two-dimensional and was cool from S2-whatever last episode was.
Sigh. We had a stalemate and whether than breaking the board.
Quit. But as new posters come to the board, the row starts up
again and again and again...LOL!
I've long since learned just to ignore the Spike rants.
Unless of course I can hijack one to talk about something else
like I did above. Tee Hee. ;-)
[> [> [> skat, I (mostly)
agree -- dms, 15:42:39 05/13/03 Tue
** But it is a painful thing being a Spike fan, particularly online,
because Spike as a character for some reason brings out the monster
in perfectly nice posters. (Spikehaters and Spikeshippers alike
) **
Heh. So true. One of the reasons I started posting here is because
of the "Spike is the messiah" vs. "No, Spike is
responsible for SARS, WWII and world hunger" posts that took
over my home board. This place is a refuge from the Spike fan-wars.
** The other reason it is painful to love Spike - is he is a supporting
player whose sole purpose is to enhance Buffy's story. And unlike
Angel, who was Buffy's one true love and whom Buffy would save
no matter what and the writers would never destroy completely...Spike,
poor sap, doesn't have this reassurance. If anything Spike acts
like her last obstacle, the last thing she must handle before
reaching her goal. This means and I'm completely unspoiled on
this, that manwitch may be correct in his speculation, that Spike
will die horribly in order for Buffy to reach that next stage.
And being a Spike fan? That's going to make the finale almost
too painful to watch. It's a tough thing when you are more invested
in the supporting players journey than the heroines - you know
you will be hurt. **
This season, unlike 5 and 6, I don't think Spike's sole purpose
has been to serve Buffy's journey. In fact, I feel he's had the
most interesting arc of the season, and at times it's come at
the expense of Buffy's story (e.g., the "what does Buffy
feel for the souled vampire" fence-sitting that ME has engaged
in).
That said, I definitely agree with you that he's someone she has
to 'deal with' before she can 'grow up' and it's going to be really
painful to watch. With all the Christ imagery that's been surrounding
Spike this season, I'm also speculating that he's going to die
in an effort to "give Buffy what she deserves". If this
is the case, thank goodness for AtS Season 5.
I think one reason that Spike has continued to be a rich character
is that the writers continue to take risks with him. He seems
to be the one character on BtVS who the writers do not feel the
need to "protect", if that makes sense. Having Buffy's
feelings for him continue to be ambivalent, and probably never
fully explained or dealt with, has been frustrating (and I say
this as non-shipper). However, I think it's allowed the character
to develop in very interesting ways and become more than a plot
device for Buffy's story.
I think ME is very good at deconstructing characters (e.g., Willow,
Cordelia, Connor and by the end of the season I might add Buffy
to the list), but not so great at rebuilding them. IMO, Spike
is one of the exceptions (others are Wesley and Faith) and therein
lies much of the appeal for me. Layers on layers have been added
because each time he seems down for the count, he emerges in a
new form, while still retaining traces of his old self.
I just wish others had received the same treatment. My hope for
this season was to see Spike, Willow and Anya have parallel redemption
stories.
[> [> [> [> Hmmm
agree, very well said -- s'kat, 15:59:13 05/13/03 Tue
This season, unlike 5 and 6, I don't think Spike's sole purpose
has been to serve Buffy's journey. In fact, I feel he's had the
most interesting arc of the season, and at times it's come at
the expense of Buffy's story (e.g., the "what does Buffy
feel for the souled vampire" fence-sitting that ME has engaged
in).
I think you may be right, I may have spoken too hastily when I
said his sole purpose was for her story - I think somewhere along
the line the writers got fascinated in his in lieu of or despite
Buffy, which may explain some of the rancor we see on some boards.
This happens to writers by the way, you get half-way through a
story - know it's all about this one character - but whoa...where'd
that guy come from? The little pip-squeak in the corner who is
suddenly jumping through the subtext of your subsconscious and
insisting you pay attention to him. Suddenly you find yourself
fascinated by him or her as the case may be, and often more so
than the heroine, who you've lived with for five years and are
growing tired of. I can see that happening to some extent here.
I also agree with this statement:
I think ME is very good at deconstructing characters (e.g.,
Willow, Cordelia, Connor and by the end of the season I might
add Buffy to the list), but not so great at rebuilding them. IMO,
Spike is one of the exceptions (others are Wesley and Faith) and
therein lies much of the appeal for me. Layers on layers have
been added because each time he seems down for the count, he emerges
in a new form, while still retaining traces of his old self.
I just wish others had received the same treatment. My hope for
this season was to see Spike, Willow and Anya have parallel redemption
stories.
Me too. I continue to be disappointed on how they short-changed
us on Anya and Willow's redemption stories. Both were welcomed
back into the group far too quickly. I would have liked to see
a Willow/Spike scene regarding torture.
OR better yet a Willow/Faith scene - in some ways I wish they'd
examined Willow/Faith or Willow/anya over Willow/Kennedy, although
I can sort of understand why they didn't.
At any rate, I think you may be right on Spike's extended role
this season. So I concede to your better argument.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Hmmm agree, very well said (spoilers for next season's
Angel) -- leslie, 16:40:58 05/13/03 Tue
This is my secret suspicion about what has been going on this
season: the uncertainty for so long about whether it was the last
season left the writers in something of a hole because, even though
Joss always goes on about viewing each season as potentially It,
it's really hard to write something without at least a temporary
sense of where you are going. The end may change as you write,
but unless you have some sense of where you're going at the
moment, you end up just flailing around. I think it's significant
that all of this depended upon SMG's decisions, and Buffy is the
one who seems to have been the focus of the flailing--where the
hell is she going?
Into this vacuum steps Spike, the character who always grabs center
stage when you don't know where you're going because he's a Trickster
and therefore capable of infinite reinvention. He's a character
who ended the last season with a lot of open questions just begging
to be explored. Plus, as it began to seem more likely that SMG
would not return, one of the possible options for continuing was
apparently a Spike and Faith pairing--well, hey, think the writers,
now we have a possible endpoint to guide us: we need to focus
on Spike because he's the one who will be staying with us! Thus,
I think, that great scene in the basement between Spike and Faith
was laying groundwork.
But then Eliza Dushku bows out. Where the hell is the endpoint
now? Where do we go from here?
Who is the character from BtVS who is going to be a regular on
Angel? Spike. We don't know how seriously they sounded out anyone
else about moving over, but I don't think it's a coincidence that
Spike was the focus from the start. They've invested so much time
and effort in him, and they've raised so many possible storylines,
that they can't let go of him.
The moral of the story is: Never let a Trickster anywhere near
your narrative vacuum if you want to retain an iron grip on your
plotline.
[> [> [> [> [>
[> LMAO! Completely agree leslie. Well said. -- s'kat,
20:12:23 05/13/03 Tue
[> Re: Article on Salon.com
about BtVS -- Rina, 07:53:01 05/13/03 Tue
Since I've enjoyed Season 7, I'm not going to bother reading the
article.
[> Salon's editors are such
sweeties and I'm a letter-writing crank! -- ponygirl, 07:53:33
05/13/03 Tue
I wrote a pre-caffeine email to Salon this morning, grumpily wondering
why they had a freelancer writing on Buffy when they had writers
like Stephanie Zacharek and Laura Miller on staff who had written
brilliantly on BtVS in the past. Within an hour (!) I received
this reply:
Actually, both Laura and Stephanie will be writing pieces about
Buffy for us. We're looking forward to them!
Best,
Suzy
Suzy Hansen
Associate Editor
Salon
[> I think one of the reasons
why so many people like Spike... -- Vash the Stampede, 08:30:18
05/13/03 Tue
is because he is a kind of wish fullfillment for scifi fans. He's
a former geek who is now cool and a major badass. Of course he
was popular before we all found this out (that was all James'
doing), but I think after we saw his orgins, former high school
geeks like myself were like, "Hey, maybe there is hope for
me."
Of course, maybe that's just me, which makes me even sadder than
I thought LOL
[> [> Actually I think
you've hit on one of the big themes this season -- ponygirl,
08:50:26 05/13/03 Tue
What does happen when the former outcasts are suddenly on the
inside? When the powerless have all the power? At the start of
the season we saw the high school rebuilt and we also saw what
had become of our former lovable outsiders - Xander, the loser,
the Zeppo now the successful businessman, Willow the geek now
the most powerful witch in the West, and Buffy the girl who just
wanted to fit in, now the sometime leader of an army and defender
of the world. How do they deal with that power? How do they lead
when their previous role had been to challenge authority?
I think the article is right in saying that the show isn't about
outcasts anymore, but I think that's intentional. Characters like
Holden, Andrew, and the SiTs show us that from a different perspective
the Scoobies are the cool kids, the in-crowd... and that there's
always someone beneath waiting for their chance to rise up.
[> [> Re: I think one
of the reasons why so many people like Spike... -- Abracapocus, 09:39:16
05/13/03 Tue
Vash said:
is because he is a kind of wish fullfillment for scifi fans.
He's a former geek who is now cool and a major badass. Of course
he was popular before we all found this out (that was all James'
doing), but I think after we saw his orgins, former high school
geeks like myself were like, "Hey, maybe there is hope for
me."
To that, I have to say: um, ick? People *want* to be like the
cruel, sneering bad-ass Spike? They think that's cool? I know,
I've seen a lot of fan responses like that, and it bothers me.
Maybe I eat too much granola, or something (actually, it's been
a while for me on the granola, but YKWIM).
I never liked the swaggering, bravado-saturated Spike very much,
and I was saddened this season (7) when he thought Buffy needed
him to posture like that again--or that he himself needed to posture
like that again (literally taking up the mantle of his former
life) in order to fight.
In the old days he got some great lines, the writers used him
as a wonderful foil for the Scoobs (esp. in S4), and he had an
intriguingly sick emotional dependence on his lady love that made
the later revelation of his human geekdom not so much of a surprise
in hindsight. But I didn't want to know him particularly until
"Fool for Love", when we found out about those roots.
At that point, though, I became, um, obsessed with the layers
in his character, and with the bewildered, conflicted journey
he all so humanly began as he wrestled with his obsession (yes!
obsession!) with Buffy that slowly became a more pure devotion
that began to turn him beyond Buffy and toward a world of heroism,
self-sacrifice, and right and wrong (I have an unfinished alternate-universe
fanfic at home to prove it).
I love geeks (even married one--it'll be 16 years at the end of
June!). I celebrate their creativity, their eye for detail (ahem),
and their tenderness of spirit. It has grieved me for a long time
that Willow rejects her geeky self. Embrace it, Willow! It's beautiful!
:) But, no: she is still learning to be who she is (heck, she's
only 22!). Most of us don't have the power to try to destroy the
world when our self-rejection is turned outward on the world in
response to great loss. It made me so sad to hear her speak dismissively
of her younger self as Dark Willow (of course, she was speaking
prettty derisively of all the Scoobies, but the most potent venom
was directed at herself).
I know geeks of all ages can get a lot of abuse from the "cool
kids", and we certainly saw that in Willow's High School
days. But the sad part is buying into the abuse, and believing
it. Verbal and physical abuse has a way of doing that to the psyche
of the victim, and the multi-layered, long-term effects are heartbreaking.
So, all you geeks out there who think you want to be "cool":
don't do it! It's a trick! You *are* cool! You're the coolest
ever! Embrace your inner nerd, for s/he is Good! Lay off the peroxide,
the hair gel, and the black leather coats that symbolize the brutality
you're capable of, and joyously explore every bit of the (equally
powerful) corny, smart, generous sweetness your personhoods are
blessed with!
OK, I'll go eat some granola now. :)
--Ab
[> [> [> Amen
-- lakrids, 09:49:57 05/13/03 Tue
[> [> [> Well...
-- Vash the Stampede, 11:52:17 05/13/03 Tue
As I said, on my part, its kind of like wish fullfillment. In
daydreams its fun to imagine your a wisecracking, badass warrior.
In real life, though, your right. I doubt my friends would stay
my friends if I acted like Spike. He is, after all, more of a
lone wolf with acquiantences rather than friends, and while that
may seem cool in fiction or daydreams, in real life I am sure
its kind of lonely. I would much rather be normal with friends
that care about me, than cool and super powered with no real friends
to speak of.
[> [> [> Re: I think
one of the reasons why so many people like Spike... -- shambleau,
13:59:27 05/13/03 Tue
This is probably TMI, but I had a girlfriend who was attacked
by a guy very much like Spike. He crushed her skull with a tire-iron.
I saw her at the hospital. Her head was as big as a pumpkin. I
barely recognized her.
I also saw the guy who did it, at the trial. He had the looks,
the charisma, the dangerous cool, all of that. He had no remorse.
But, according to the defense, he had issues from his youth that
led him down this path. My girlfriend actually got calls from
his girlfriend and his mother, saying that he was trying to redeem
himself and couldn't she find it in herself to forgive and not
give witness against him.
So, I have issues with Spike. I see him and I think of the little
girl in the coalbin. I think of The Body, and the unbearable pain
the Scoobies faced over Joyce's sudden death, and that Spike had
caused that same pain to thousands of families.
I cannot go into rhapsodies over his redemption, or his sensitivity,
or the kindnesses he has done occasionally in the past two seasons,
or even over his complexity. The people whose lives he snuffed
out were complex and surprising, too.
I know this is fiction and that I am bringing issues from real
life into the show in the same way people are who couldn't take
the AR or Tara's death. I am not saying the writers shouldn't
have gone there, however. I actually have enjoyed Spike's character.
But, his victims hold equal weight with me, for obvious reasons,
and I would never watch the show just for him. I really wish the
last season had been about the Scoobs more.
[> [> [> [> Re:
I think one of the reasons why so many people like Spike...
-- Caroline, 14:07:32 05/13/03 Tue
If you don't want to answer this (or if I'm being too nosy) please
just ignore. But I would sincerely like to know and hope you'll
respond. Do you have the same issues with Angel as you do with
Spike? I guess I want to know if your experiences with your girlfriend's
assailant have just affected how you view Spike in particular
or all soulled, trying-to-be-redeemed vamps in general.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: I think one of the reasons why so many people like Spike...
-- shambleau, 14:54:49 05/13/03 Tue
Yes, actually, I do. I've been with the show from the beginning.
Since they started with Angel as a good guy, and only gradually
revealed what he had done as Angelus, I didn't have those issues
at first. But, when Buffy killed him, I was for it, even though
I thought it was a wonderful romance. I was more conflicted though,
since I'd seen mostly Angel and not Angelus.
Once they started showing the actual details of what he had done,on
AtS, from murdering his sister, probably raping Drusilla after
he'd driven her insane, raping Holtz's wife (I infer) and vamping
Holtz's child and leaving her for him to find, it started to overwhelm
my remaining affection for Angel. Then, when they revealed that
he'd killed "bad" people while trying to insinuate himself
back into Darla's good graces, while now having a soul, I started
to lose all sympathy for him. The murders-by-omission of the Hyperion
residents and the lawyers of W&H finished the process.
I'm not one of the PTB, so I can't balance out all of this on
some cosmic scale and say that the good he's done in saving the
world several times outweighs the horrors he's committed. Since
I've SEEN those horrors, while the good deeds in the more general
sense of saving the world are more abstract, I'm more affected
by those, because of my personal history.
I've seen him do good too, of course, for many individuals on
the show. But, for me, if I knew someone who from time to time
committed horrific deeds, while in general doing good, the bad
would weigh on me more. And doesn't the show take the same stance,
at least in regards to Jasmine?
So, neither Spike nor Angel can ever connect to me the way Buffy
does, for example. Personal experience, plus my own moral stance,
affects my reactions, but it doesn't mean that I don't find the
characters interesting.
[> [> [> [> In
fiction, redemption is easier to believe in, I think -- Vash
the Stampede, 14:40:25 05/13/03 Tue
I am really sorry for what happened to your girlfriend. You help
bring up another good point though; can you believe in redemption
in real life as much as you can in fiction? Spike is a fictional
character, played by an actor, so its easy for us to think he
can be redemned. After all, the crimes are imaginary and we as
Americans are suckers for a good redemption story. Real life is
another story. For example, I recently saw a documentary on the
Son of Sam, and they showed him now, all remorseful and praying
to God everyday. All I could think of watching this was, "Yeah,
right. You're still going to hell, pal."
As I stated before, being like Spike (the souled/anti-hero version)
is basically a daydream fantasy, something that is cool to imagine,
but something I wouldn't really want to do/be. I doubt I could
live with myself if I ever got innocent blood on my hands.
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: In fiction, redemption is easier to believe in, I think
-- shambleau, 15:21:40 05/13/03 Tue
Thanks. It happened many years ago, though. And, irony of ironies,
my (ex)girlfriend is a huge Spike fan. She's able to separate
fiction from real life better than I can. Although, since these
shows are realer to me than most of what happens at work, for
example, maybe it makes sense that it's hard to get the proper
perspective.
[> [> [> It's not
neccesarily about "cool" . . . -- Finn Mac Cool,
16:20:40 05/13/03 Tue
But it is, to a certain extent, wish fulfillment. For instance,
in real life, if somebody provoked me, I wouldn't kill them because
of morality. However, in fictional mediums, it's nice to have
a character who isn't contrained by morals so that you can vicariously
live out all the stuff you feel the urge to do but don't because
it would be wrong. As the writers at stomptokyo.com said, they
believe the reason there are fans of Godzilla movies is that people
enjoy the idea of pretending they're the one in the rubber suit,
that they're the one destroying a city. It's a chance to vicariously
indulge your dark side. And that's the role Evil!Spike fulfills
excellently; whether or not he's considered "cool",
he's certainly a great catharsis for the id.
[> Spike's implied importance
-- yez, 08:52:06 05/13/03 Tue
Thanks for pointing out the article.
I agree with others who've pointed out the weaknesses in the author's
article and shallow interpretation of Spike as cool guy, period
(though I found the Fonze comparison pretty funny -- I'm really
surprised he didn't bring up the whole jumping the shark thing
while he was at it).
But I do agree with him about Spike getting a lot of attention
this season -- not that I'm complaining, because I really enjoy
the exploration of Spike's journey.
While Spike may not have been featured in every ep., I think his
character HAS been given a lot of weight, and it's even heavier
because this is the last season and they're running out of time.
But all along, I thought we were being led to believe that this
was for a reason -- that somehow, Spike was a very important figure
to the FE.
Like Shadowkat, I have to reserve my opinion of this season's
writing until it's over. Because if the writers come through on
their implied promise to show us how/why Spike was so important
and why so much time was spent showing his story, talking about
him, etc., then some of the choices this season will make more
sense, I think.
On the other hand, if they don't, it's going to be pretty disappointing.
And I have to admit I'm getting pretty nervous about their ability
to wrap it all up in a cohesive way in 2 more hours.
I also agree with the author that the other characters have gotten
shortchanged, though I can appreciate how hard it must be to try
to give everyone their due when you have this kind of deadline
you're up against and there is a distinct story you're trying
to tell.
yez
[> [> Re: Spike's implied
importance -- Rina, 12:09:05 05/13/03 Tue
Or it is possible that Spike is a more important element to Buffy's
development at this stage of the story than the Scoobies are.
[> [> [> Exactly.
-- yez, 12:47:11 05/13/03 Tue
[> Strange -- lakrids,
09:55:31 05/13/03 Tue
How strange that fictional character can be interpreted so diverse
of different people. I don't know if I should congratulate the
writers or blame them, on the characterization of Spike.
I have seen some BtVS fans saying that the only reason that the
only reasons that they watch Buffy is because of Spike, which
is a perfectly valid reasons as anything, for watching BtVS. I
have also seen some old Buffy fans, which migrated to Ats because
of the storyline and Spike, which is also ok, as nobody is forced
to watch BtVS.
I think much of the diversion in fan community, if one accepts
that there is a diversion. Comes from the fact that BtVS is old
show, with a core group who have watched more or less from the
start. Who has some expectation of the story structure of the
show. This structure changed in season six, some would say that
the show had to change to keep its viewer. Other fans where not
so positive of the changed structure, but wanted to give the show,
that they loved, a chance to convince them of the rightness of
these change (my self included). Some just gave up on the show,
and new viewer came to, that liked the new story line.
What like with this board, is there are a diverse groups of interoperation
of the characters. Which help me, to see new viewpoints of the
characters and interoperations of the episodes. So thanks to all
you who has written about the show some in essays length, even
if I not always have agreed. You have been a big reason for why
I am still is watching Buffy.
Sorry about my English.
[> The author employs a
double-standard (warning; ranty) -- Anneth, 14:21:19 05/13/03
Tue
NB: I don't mean to harp on Giles here; I'm only using him as
an example.
Something's been bugging me all morning about the author's claims
in the article, and I finally figured out what - his implied double-standard.
He writes:
It would be less of a problem if Spike were getting brilliantly
fascinating stories, but he isn't, despite the potential inherent
in the story of an evil creature trying to reform. At every turn,
the "Buffy" staff has copped out on Spike's story, whitewashing
his past (a flashback in a recent episode shows that even when
he was turned into a vampire, he wasn't initially a vicious killer
-- something that contradicts all the previous vampire mythology
on the show) and making no attempt to show that having a soul
has changed him one way or the other. By the evidence of this
season's episodes, Spike is still a wisecracking punk who likes
to hit women (he's hit Buffy, Anya and Faith so far this year)
and isolate Buffy from her friends, yet we're still somehow supposed
to sympathize with him, because ... why? Because he got a soul
in the hope that Buffy would forgive his attempt to rape her and
sleep with him again. Except for a couple of throwaway lines,
Spike has never been made to seek redemption for his crimes; he
doesn't even apologize to Principal Wood for having murdered his
mother. The assumption appears to be that Spike doesn't need to
atone because having a soul makes him a different and better person.
Now above and beyond the factual errors included above, what gets
to me is the author's obvious anger that so much screen time is
devoted to an attempted rapist (whom he perceives as acting without
remorse for his crimes) instead of those whom he refers to as
the "core four." While it's true that none of the original
Scoobies are attempted rapists (Xander's turn as a hyena aside,
for obvious reasons), neither Buffy nor Willow nor Giles have
crime-free pasts. Buffy tried to kill Faith, which is attempted
first degree murder. And both Giles and Willow have actually committed
first degree murder - the willful, deliberate and premeditated
taking of a human life.
Moving beyond them, there is, of course Faith, who's rapsheet
would include voluntary manslaughter, first degree murder, conspiracy,
assault, battery, sexual assault, and attempted first degree murder.
Then, in the realm of humans-with-souls-but-acting-without-freedom-of-choice,
there's Dawn, who shoved someone down a flight of stairs while
under a love-spell and Xander who attempted to rape Buffy while
possessed by an evil hyena.
And if Spike's actions as an unsouled-demon annoys this author,
why don't Angel's; after all, he's got a hundred-year head-start
on Spike in the remorseless-crime-spree department. Or Anya, who's
got an 800 year lead over both!
Angel, Faith, and Willow have attempted to atone for their sins.
But has Giles? Has the thought of his crime ever furroughed his
brow? The answer is, we don't know. ME removed the only reference
to Giles' act, ever, in the final cut of Lies.
If the author is so irritated by his conclusion that Spike doesn't
need to atone for the attempted rape because he has a soul, (a
conclusion which is arguable in and of itself), why isn't he equally
upset that an actual murderer, (who, lest we forget, murdered
while in full possession of his own soul), apparently doesn't
need to atone at all because - why? He's not a hero? The needs
of the many outweighed Ben's need to live? There was no assurance
that Glory wouldn't reemerge and try it all again? The fact of
the matter is that Giles, an ordinary human being, killed another
human in cold blood, and ME hasn't so much as.. well, you get
the point. If the author's going to be pissy about Spike, he ought
to be pissy about every other example of sin-without-atonement
in the show.
I'm not going to posit that the author is wrong in everything
he says. But the posts above do point out the many respects where
his argument fails. (eg, Spike's screen-time hasn't eaten into
the Scoobies' so much as Andrew's, Kennedy's, and Woods'.) This
is just my contribution; sorry it's ranty.
[> [> No Remorse For
Nikki Wood? -- Rina, 15:33:31 05/13/03 Tue
AGAIN . . . Everyone is paying more attention to what Spike said
about Nikki Wood, instead of noticing the fact that Spike had
spared Robin Wood's life, because he had killed Nikki. Are these
critics trying to say that Spike's actions is not a sign of remorse?
He has to express it out loud, instead? In my opinion, actions
speak louder than words.
[> [> Re: The author
employs a double-standard (warning; ranty) -- s'kat, 15:36:50
05/13/03 Tue
Not that ranty, actually. The author is paying for the comments
by the way. Other boards went nuts and fired off tons of letters.
I think Salon may get overwhelmed. Now that's ranty. LOL!
Okay, wasn't to comment but something in your rant above bugged
me and that is that people actually don't believe he atoned for
the attempted rape?? What?? Excuse me, I saw as much atonement
from Spike on this if not more as I saw from Xander on what he
did as a hyena, Dawn on how she injured the boy while under the
spell, Giles on Ben, Buffy on attempting to kill Faith, Faith
on attempting to rape and kill Xander, and Angel on killing Jenny,
biting Faith, and biting Lilah -apparently how you define remorse
depends on who your favorite character is? I saw Spike show his
atonement for the attempted Rape in Beneath You, Help, Selfless,
Same Time Same Place, Never Leave ME and Sleeper. What the heck
do people want?
Spike has apologized more for the AR scene than Angel did for
killing Jenny or Buffy did for almost killing Faith or Xander
for attacking Buffy as a hyena or Giles for Ben or Dawn for hurting
the football player. (Angel only apologized for it in Amends.)
Also when Spike hit Anya - she was a vengeance demon and could
fight back, not a weakling. He knew she was a vengeance demon.
ie not human! Same with Faith - a slayer - with supernatural powers.
Both of whom sent him flying across the room and appeared to be
winning. Also he was an emotional wreck both times. In the BY
scene he was literally bonkers. Ugh.
I've read some good character criticism of Spike and some excellent
criticism of this show and this article doesn't come close. If
you want to read some good criticism? Check the archives.
For the critical Spike crowd? Check for Malandaza, Dochawk, Finn
Macool, KdS, and Rufus - they blow this guy out of the water.
For the pro Spike crowd? Check for Caroline, leslie, Sophist,
Rufus (who can do both sides and objectively),
[> [> [> My point
exactly. -- Anneth, 16:24:45 05/13/03 Tue
[> Aaaayyyy, sit on it,
Mr C. Spike is sooooo Fonz -- Jay, 16:59:08 05/13/03 Tue
And the speculation of Spike joining Angel, smacks of the Fonz
going on Joanie Loves Chachi, or Laverne and Shirley, or Mork
and Mindy... How many spinoffs did this Happy Days have?
[> [> Wasn't there a
cartoon too...? -- O'Cailleagh, 18:32:47 05/13/03 Tue
With a spaceship/time machine? Or is this a flashback or something?
O'Cailleagh
[> [> [> Yep, your
right -- Vash the Stampede, 19:57:09 05/13/03 Tue
There was once a cartoon staring Fonzie, Richie, and Ralph (not
sure if Potsie was there or not), along with Fonzie's dog, Mr.
Cool, and some girl from the future whose name escapes me. It
was her time machine/spaceship they flew around in, having adventures.
The thing was it was broken, so they couldn't go home. Not the
greatest cartoon ever, but I have seen worse, and at times it
was pretty funny. At least they weren't bossed around by a talking
pig in an army uniform ;)
Vash
PS: Henry Wrinkler, Ron Howard, and the rest supplied the voices
for their cartoon counterparts.
[> [> [> [> WooHoo!!
-- O'Cailleagh, 20:19:15 05/13/03 Tue
Sometimes, just sometimes, I say crazy things that turn out to
be real....I love it when I'm not insane and remembering things
that never happened!
Cheers Vash!
O'Cailleagh
Current board
| More May 2003